Component compressed yes or no? at DVinfo.net

Ricardo Renaldi · November 12th, 2004, 03:02 PM

Come on folks, how difficult would be to asnwer just this?

Is the component out of the FX1 mpeg compressed or not?

Unfortunelly I do not have my camera yet, but some people here have received it. Please, answer this simple question.
Then, if it makes any sense to capture the component out uncompressed or not is a complete different story (there's the other huge thread with peole arguing "ad infinitum" about).
This thread is about "yes" or "no".

Tks a lot for any real info (facts) on this.

Ric

Darren Kelly · November 12th, 2004, 09:45 PM

Ricardo,

The Component Analog output must be uncompressed to play on TV's and be captured by analog capture cards.

DBK

Ricardo Renaldi · November 12th, 2004, 10:27 PM

Instead it's clear that what I'm asking is a completely different thing: Again: Is the signal already compressed in Mpeg (and then de-compressed for output at the component outs or the signal comes without this comp-decomp circle?). Now you get it?
It's that simple. Even in the big thread people do not agree. I'll refresh your memory:

there's this post by Jeff Kilgroe :
"We did plug its component out into a 34" Toshiba HD set and it looks to me like the MPEG2 artifacting is indeed there."

But Anhar Miah says that " was just wondering that sounds a bit odd that the componet output is mpeg2 and not just plain anolouge beacuse if you think about it this would mean that the DSP would not only have too do RT mpeg2 coding in the first place but also simultaenoulsy decode that mpeg2 and convert to Anolouge! thats a lot of work.."

Then Kaspar Stromme sais:
mho I think Sony would go the extra step to make sure component out was encoded to HDV specs. Uncompressed HD at $3700 would put a lot of pressure on their $50k pro cameras (even with the cheaper CCDs, fewer manual controls, etc)
btw: if the above turns out to be false and component is uncompressed, using a $3700 camera with a $10-15k capture/edit station isn't all that crazy when the alternative is a 50k lens. "

And the thread follows, but nobody brings hard evidence of one thing or the other.

Richard Maloney · November 12th, 2004, 11:53 PM

Yes, it would be good to get a definitive answer to this (without any tangents!).

Simon Wyndham · November 13th, 2004, 05:17 AM

Even if it was uncompressed through component (which I was told it is) it wouldn't cause any competition with the full blown HDCAMs.

No professional will ever use a handycam just because it is cheaper. The lens for a HDCAM camera may well cost 50k, but that is because of the quality.

I bought a broadcast spec SD lens yesterday. I managed to get it ex demo (although the box had never been opened!). But new it costs 7k UKP (around $12k). Even in the case of this SD lens, there is no way, absolutely no way that even the HDV FX1 and Z1 lenses would be as good as the optics in this SD lens.

If someone does believe that a 2-3k camera has optics that are better than even an SD lens that costs 3 times as much, they are mistaken. The HD lenses so much more because of the quality. No pro would ever stand for the difference in quality being compromised because of the cost. Most HD cameras are rented, not bought anyway.

So no, even with an uncompressed output the FX1 and Z1 would never put pressure on the full size HDCAMs.

Laszlo Bodo · November 13th, 2004, 08:10 AM

I don't want to replace a broadcast cam with a fx1 but it would be very good if the component out was an uncompressed video. It could open for new possibilities in edit and even in production.

Alex Raskin · November 13th, 2004, 06:32 PM

check out this thread for answers

Ricardo Renaldi · November 13th, 2004, 09:22 PM

Yes, I also read Mr. Cooke explanation. That's exelent news. I'll begin preparing the cpu while I'm waiting for the FX1 to arrive.

This new Asus motherboard with the 915 chipset and 8 drives is producing 240 Mb/sec sustained average in the bench.(305 peak )
We'll see how it performs in the "real" world.

Can you say no-mpeg-artifacts?

Yes!

Ric

Joonas Kiviharju · November 15th, 2004, 02:26 AM

What about the PAL model?

I believe those component outputs with RCA are an NTSC thing? There hasn't been any component outs on any PAL mini-dv camera I've seen, so is this still the case with the HDR-FX1? Usually PAL cameras have only composite video, and S-video. All the info and the pictures everywhere is mostly for the NTSC model, so I can't even see it on any pictures. My main concern here is, if it is possible to get an uncompressed analog HD output from the PAL model. Or is HDV only possible through firewire?

That would be really sad, as I already got a little excited about hooking it to an analog HD capture card and a computer for fiction work.

Joonas Kiviharju · November 16th, 2004, 02:21 AM

It seems that the PAL model also has that D shaped component out and a cable comes with the camera. This was confirmed to me by some people who already have the HDR-FX1E.

November 12th, 2004, 03:02 PM	#1
Ricardo Renaldi Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina Posts: 40	Component compressed yes or no? Come on folks, how difficult would be to asnwer just this? Is the component out of the FX1 mpeg compressed or not? Unfortunelly I do not have my camera yet, but some people here have received it. Please, answer this simple question. Then, if it makes any sense to capture the component out uncompressed or not is a complete different story (there's the other huge thread with peole arguing "ad infinitum" about). This thread is about "yes" or "no". Tks a lot for any real info (facts) on this. Ric

November 12th, 2004, 09:45 PM	#2
Darren Kelly Major Player Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver Posts: 351	Ricardo, The Component Analog output must be uncompressed to play on TV's and be captured by analog capture cards. DBK __________________ Darren Kelly

November 13th, 2004, 09:22 PM	#8
Ricardo Renaldi Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina Posts: 40	Exelent Yes, I also read Mr. Cooke explanation. That's exelent news. I'll begin preparing the cpu while I'm waiting for the FX1 to arrive. This new Asus motherboard with the 915 chipset and 8 drives is producing 240 Mb/sec sustained average in the bench.(305 peak ) We'll see how it performs in the "real" world. Can you say no-mpeg-artifacts? Yes! Ric

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

November 12th, 2004, 10:27 PM	#3
Ricardo Renaldi Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina Posts: 40	Instead it's clear that what I'm asking is a completely different thing: Again: Is the signal already compressed in Mpeg (and then de-compressed for output at the component outs or the signal comes without this comp-decomp circle?). Now you get it? It's that simple. Even in the big thread people do not agree. I'll refresh your memory: there's this post by Jeff Kilgroe : "We did plug its component out into a 34" Toshiba HD set and it looks to me like the MPEG2 artifacting is indeed there." But Anhar Miah says that " was just wondering that sounds a bit odd that the componet output is mpeg2 and not just plain anolouge beacuse if you think about it this would mean that the DSP would not only have too do RT mpeg2 coding in the first place but also simultaenoulsy decode that mpeg2 and convert to Anolouge! thats a lot of work.." Then Kaspar Stromme sais: mho I think Sony would go the extra step to make sure component out was encoded to HDV specs. Uncompressed HD at $3700 would put a lot of pressure on their $50k pro cameras (even with the cheaper CCDs, fewer manual controls, etc) btw: if the above turns out to be false and component is uncompressed, using a $3700 camera with a $10-15k capture/edit station isn't all that crazy when the alternative is a 50k lens. " And the thread follows, but nobody brings hard evidence of one thing or the other.

November 12th, 2004, 11:53 PM	#4
Richard Maloney Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Ottawa, Canada Posts: 90	Yes, it would be good to get a definitive answer to this (without any tangents!).

November 13th, 2004, 05:17 AM	#5
Simon Wyndham Trustee Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Malvern UK Posts: 1,931	Even if it was uncompressed through component (which I was told it is) it wouldn't cause any competition with the full blown HDCAMs. No professional will ever use a handycam just because it is cheaper. The lens for a HDCAM camera may well cost 50k, but that is because of the quality. I bought a broadcast spec SD lens yesterday. I managed to get it ex demo (although the box had never been opened!). But new it costs 7k UKP (around $12k). Even in the case of this SD lens, there is no way, absolutely no way that even the HDV FX1 and Z1 lenses would be as good as the optics in this SD lens. If someone does believe that a 2-3k camera has optics that are better than even an SD lens that costs 3 times as much, they are mistaken. The HD lenses so much more because of the quality. No pro would ever stand for the difference in quality being compromised because of the cost. Most HD cameras are rented, not bought anyway. So no, even with an uncompressed output the FX1 and Z1 would never put pressure on the full size HDCAMs.

November 13th, 2004, 08:10 AM	#6
Laszlo Bodo New Boot Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Norway Posts: 20	I don't want to replace a broadcast cam with a fx1 but it would be very good if the component out was an uncompressed video. It could open for new possibilities in edit and even in production.

November 13th, 2004, 06:32 PM	#7
Alex Raskin Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,435	check out this thread for answers

November 15th, 2004, 02:26 AM	#9
Joonas Kiviharju Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Helsinki, Finland Posts: 52	What about the PAL model? I believe those component outputs with RCA are an NTSC thing? There hasn't been any component outs on any PAL mini-dv camera I've seen, so is this still the case with the HDR-FX1? Usually PAL cameras have only composite video, and S-video. All the info and the pictures everywhere is mostly for the NTSC model, so I can't even see it on any pictures. My main concern here is, if it is possible to get an uncompressed analog HD output from the PAL model. Or is HDV only possible through firewire? That would be really sad, as I already got a little excited about hooking it to an analog HD capture card and a computer for fiction work.

November 16th, 2004, 02:21 AM	#10
Joonas Kiviharju Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Helsinki, Finland Posts: 52	It seems that the PAL model also has that D shaped component out and a cable comes with the camera. This was confirmed to me by some people who already have the HDR-FX1E.