Heartwarming Philly Story/ advice on new Video Camera
Author: Claude Balls
Ok check this out guys...was in Mobile Alabama last week filming and shooting stills for our Friend Bitonti's websight draftdaddy.com, I get on the chinatown bus thursday morning at 9:30 and put my bag under the bus, get on, and head back to new york. When I get to new york dude opens the compartment under the bus and my bag is gone. Looks like a friendly man or woman who frequents the corner of 11th and arch decided to take my bag for themselves before the retarded bus driver closed the compartment under the bus. I had my computer, hard drive on my person so they are ok, But I had a lot of gear which I couldn't all cary around my neck, so i put my video camera and my canon 20d along with 2 lenses in my bigger bag so they are gone. ya, know at this point in my life I understand that getting upset and or depressed is futile and in fact a waste of time, so i am not really upset, but i will need to get another video camera soon which brings me to the second part of my post. I was due to upgrade cameras anyway, I had a Panasonic pv gs400 which was cool but i have been craving a really nice 24p camera for a while. So i have been scoping out cameras and this is the one I have my eye set out on. Maybe someone can tell me if this camera is good or sucks. its the Sony XH A1:
http://www.canondv.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=175&modelid=14061
Its an HD camera and although I dont really have an immediate need to be shooting in HD i feel like i would be kind of stupid to to not get an hd camera. Really, what I am most concered with is rich color and getting really nice 24p video , that is to say really filmic looking video, or at least the most filmic 24p video I can get for spending about 3 grand on a camera. Anyone know anything about this camera or have any suggestions about others? Also, now that I think about it, I shoot a lot of low light video, and my old camera got mega grainy as soon as the lighting got dim. I guess it would be nice to have a camera that could hold it together a little more in low light, you know not loose al its richness and look really thin. Anyway I guess I have laid out my case, if anyone can lend a little info and let me kow if I am on the wrong or right track with the Sony XH A1 I would be seriously appreciative. Thanks all and if you ever take the china town bus DO NOT PUT YOUR SHIT UNDER THE BUS...haha peace
Shit, that situation is balls man -- total balls... I take Le Autobus Chinois almost weekly, always with my AC kit or audio gear, and I'm a mess of nerves when I chuck my stuff underneath. Not only is theft a problem, but since the company transports a lot of foodstuffs for restaurants etc., there's always a danger of spillage (my buddy Grommett Starp once witnessed a case of homemade duck sauce blanket all the luggage in the compartment...). Anyway, I guess its time to go Greyhound, they're not too much more pricey.
Well, I've definitely got a review of the Sony jawn (pun intended) for you, but I've just been notified by the other humanoids in the room that I've gotta get off the f*n innerweb and watch some 'Holy Mountain', but I'll post some thought tomorrow...
Dude, that sucks...
I feel for you.
It is the Canon XH A1, not the Sony.
Canon makes a good product.
There are some things to like.
"Console" the camera control software
(Canon sells extra) is something
sorely missing from other manufactures...
which is really surprising considering what
it allows you to do in terms of tweeking
settings, saving those settings and allow
capture storage. Sadly not yet available to
MAC users unless you run a PC OS as well.
My only big gripe with Canon's
present offering (from HV20 to XL HD's)
is that, to my knowledge, their entire HD line
of cameras are all built on 1080i imagers.
Interlaced capture is an inferior way to capture images. This is a sort of a deal breaker for me.
I'm all about the nativeProgressive imaging which is much closer to replicating the temporal look of film capture. It is more efficient and
allows more flexibility in post.
The HVX-200 is still one of the better cameras
out there, in term of flexibility and P2 media has dropped considerably in price. I think we're up to 32GB cards. The form factor is a little clunky and dated. I expect something more elegant and smarter designed from either Sony or Panasonic.
Keep in mind some general limitations with under $10k HD cameras. They are very light-hungry and
do not perform well in low / available light
situations. Many are not true 1080i/p imagers, there is some degree of up-converting or optical unsqueezing going on. Read the specs and
reviews carefully.
...but they're getting better everyday.
I'm waiting to see Sony's HVR-S270U and smaller HVR-Z7U. IC media, interchangeable lenses and a true focus ring and aperture control are back on
the barrel of the lens where they belong.
Supposed be available next month.
What's your budget for a camera anyway?
do have any special needs (heh, heh)?
Apparently I have especial needs, because
I just reread your post and realized that you
answered both questions with , $3k and 24p.
I would suggest looking at finding a second
hand Panasonic HVX200 or seeing if a place
like Broadway Camera or other
Grey Market retailer can hook you
up with minimal bullshit.
I cringe even admitting this, but to be purely honest and if you are soley after "the 24p look" most interlaced cameras of this calibre have a fake "cine" or "24p" filmlook. It won't give you clean progressive image or the advantages one, but it does approximate the look of 24p.
Just a heads up -- there's an XH A1 on Craigslist Philly (in the photo/video section) listed for $2600. You may be able to get a deal on this one if you're really leaning towards this model.
G, good review, astute as always. Though I'm not a fan of interlaced video (who is?) I loves me some Canon, and think that you could do worse for the price... Keep us up to date with your choice, and be sure to post a review after you've gotten some hours in with whatever you go with.
For those interested, here's a link to a good breakdown of the new Sony's with interchangeable
lenses and pro focus and iris control
Techthoughts HVR Line
doesn't hdv suck tho?
... only in as much as DV is said to "suck".
I remember how many pro shooters shrugged
off the idea of shooting DV (some still do) in
it's early days. If it's lit well and you learn the
rules of what looks good and bad on a given format, you can yield great results. I can't stress enough how important good quality glass (the lens) is. Almost always, this is more important than the recording format to yielding good results.
Almost every format now has some form of compression or loss and this will only continue
as more information is squeezed into smaller data space and recording medium.
HDV is either 720p or 1080i.
The 1080p variant is essentially a 1080i stream with progressive frames buried and flagged in the signal.
Yes, there are some limitations in how HDV is compressed. A thorough explanation of Chroma Sub-sampling and HDV compression is available
on WIKI (search "HDV"). Ultimately the real test is,
how does it look and function for you - the artist,
filmmaker... whatever. How good can it be made to look, how easy is it to post and how does it hold up in post.
From my perspective these are not always
easy questions to answer.There is always some
form or trade-off, esp with limitations on your
equipment budget.
In the price range we're talking about, pretty much everything is based on HDV (or consumer MPEG-4 AVCHD which is more lossy) for the time being.
The exception being, if you can get a hold
of a Panasonic HVX-200 on the cheap and
record 4:2:2 footage to P2 cards in one of the
DVC-Pro HD codecs. You could also opt for a
cheap solution (like the Aiptek A-HD) for the
time being, until the next of quality emerges.
The other way to ensure HQ from HDV is build your
edit system (or use a capable post house) around the more high-end HD/SDI interfaces with the appropriate storage capacity, bandwidth and processor speed. Then use a convertor box that takes the HDV firewire and up-converts to HD/SDI capturing at 4:2:2 or 4:4:4 instead of the stock HDV 4:2:0 sampling rate. So your going to spend money for quality, whether in Production, Post or both.
Wow a lot to think about for someone with ADHD. Yea the Panasonic HVX200 is really awesome. My friend has it and i am very impressed with the image it produces. What do you think are the major differences between it and the Canon XH A1? Monkey are you saying that this canon wont capture in a true 24p, and or that the 24p setting will still in some way be interlaced? If this is the case it is kind of crappy. I mean i'm not so concerned with getting the perfect camera on paper but as i am with getting something in the 3 to 3.5 grand price range that will have great color and have a smooth filmish look. Don't get me wrong, I understand that even if i were to spend 12 grand, the video will still read as video. i am a photographer by training and a firm believer that video will never achieve the look of film. (The argument is silly because they are different entities and i think what film purists really dislike about digital photography and digital video is the lack of unpredictability and "happy accidents". There is something great in sort of fighting to get a great negative and still not exactly knowing whats going to happen in the development process. There is something very alluring about that unpredictability and i think a lot of people who come from backgrounds shooting film scoff at digital because in their eyes its just too easy and too perfect in a sense... Well i feel that way too but fuck it. Money talks and digital is so cheap and easy that one would have to be a complete mongrel to avoid it. And i think it can yield some cool unpredictabilities of its own. it also has a cool crudeness, its different than the crudeness of film alas it can be crude. Case in Point Inland Empire).
yea so back to what i was trying to say, I understand that what I am going to purchase will yield me a less than perfect video result, I just want a really nice and rich looking result. And I would really prefer a true 24p image but if you are saying that this cannon captures interlaced even in its 24p mode than that is bogus.
Also I am a little weary of purchasing a used digital video camera. i have been told that unlike film cameras, digital video cameras may only have like a healthy operational lifetime of like 3 years and after that its not uncommon for them to get sick and putter out. Just what Ive been told. Thanks a lot for all the input. Really appreciate it.
wow cool story about the duck sauce. I love Holy Mountain but i think Santa Sangre is my favorite Jodorowsky film. Not quite as surreal as Holy Mountain but i feel like the narrative in Santa Sangre is really powerful and reflects the human condition in a way which is a little less sensational. Amazing ending and Jodorowsky's performance in it is off the hook. Kind of reminiscent of Clint Eastwood in High Planes Drifter but with nostalgic, adolescent rumbelings. Peep it its great and while its not on Netflix I know they have it at TLA.
Hey Ock...
(from a related earlier email exchange we had)
I may stand corrected as I just just read something that states that the HV20's 24F mode is progressive HD
(as it's a single CMOS imager). Where as the XL-H1 and XH-A1 use 3 interlaced CCD's. So the little Canon HV20 ($1k street price) may be a Canon option that offers progressive capture.
I'll have to confirm this, cause it's news to me.
CBalls- the HV20 doesn't offer the all of the
manual control you might want, but it's small,
reasonably priced and possibly progressive.
I've used it and it takes a nice image.
BTW, for clarity and my sanity, let's stop calling these contemporary digital cameras "Video".
Video is really an analog term. "Video" can
be output to an SD monitor from a digital cam-
but it's not an all inclusive term anymore.
Digital motion capture or (if we must) "digital video"- but not "DV" (which is specific to Standard Def DV 4:1:1 or 25mbs). Sorry to nitpick, but from
a technical standpoint, clarity is important.
[I know I am the-geek-of-the-moment]
I understand your hesitation at buying a used
HVX, but consider the benefits. There are few moving parts in the HD part of this camera. The thing that always goes or needs service after heavy use is the tape transport. The P2 cards are not subject to this type of wear. You can also consider
buying from a reputable place like B&H's used dept or, again -Grey Market retailers (but u need to know the camera and accs well to not get jacked).
Also owner-operators and production companies tend to resell their gear through reputable consignment resellers. Do some hunting online. Consider purchases from Delaware or Oregon to save on the sales tax, which can be significant on a few grand. I got more to say, but I'm sort of done for the moment.
claude, for a little bit i was looking at the canon hv20. if you do a youtube search for "hv20" you can see some examples. same thing with google, of course.
but one thing that really caught my eye with the hv20, aside from the 24p edits i saw, was the 35mm modification/hack.
http://www.hv20.com/showthread.php?t=2825
and google "hv20 35mm"
monkey -- re: "hdv sucks?"...as a compression algorithm, i just wasnt sure if there was anything else available. h264 is kindof the new hot shit as far as the video compression i do (web + consumer) and i really like the results it produces. just wasnt sure with HDD becoming more common in consumer cameras whether a shift was happening away from hdv?
regarding a "shift" ... well yeah, to AVCHD (
which is a form of MPEG4/ H.264)
in consumer HD cameras. [Be aware that
there is another professional format,
stupidly called AVC-I which is a higher end HD codec and has nothing to do with AVCHD]
AVCHD is newer and is said to be more efficient codec , but more compressed. The specs suggest it could compress to bit rates similar to HDV, but with better quality.
HDV is still considered a notch above AVCHD- but largely because of the newness of AVCHD and the existing user base of HDV. All the prosumer / industrial HD gear is largely based on HDV.
With any of these newer formats, you need to
think ahead to ingesting and editing your footage
and the software / hardware requirement to do so.
My 3yrd Powerbook plays most 720 DvcPro HD with little or no hiccups than smaller sized MPEG4 /H.264. The processor has to do more work
playing back the more compressed H.264 format.
Also, It's sort of disappointing, given the increasing popularity of consumer HDD (Hard Drive cameras)
that there isn't an option to shoot less compressed footage, but I guess the general public doesn't need this.
Another thing to think about is that most cameras do take a very nice 4:4:4 (uncompressed) image off the chip(s) and then it gets compressed right before it gets recorded to whatever media. The aging but
popular Panasonic DVX-100 camera actually
has a 1540x990 progressive HD imager inside,
but only uses an SD-sized chunk of the imaging surface, compressed to DV bandwidth.
The clever Andomeda mod you can get allows HD / 4:4:4 out of this
SD DV camera. Neat, though not super practical-
without a laptop.
Some low to midrange cams allow you to output HDMI or analog HD component before the signal gets compressed, allowing a higher end signal (great for integrating into material shot on high end cameras or for clean compositing and keying). The
Black Magic Intensity PCI card is a good example of an inexpensive capture card based on HDMI from smaller cams. Of course you have to be in a studio location and tethered to a DT machine.
yea, we were sent some black magic stuff once that i had to edit. it was easy enough to pickup the codec. but we didnt have (or need, really) the hardware solution to capture.
as far as higher compression vs results: i'm not really against it? these modern codecs are really well designed, in most cases. mpeg2, for example, is a burdensome beast: it's very rigid in its requirements, the files sizes are huge but you get some nice output at 480p.
but in comparission to h264, i can encode something at a lower bitrate with a higher resolution, do maybe a 2-pass encode, and get superior results. that's because, as i understand it, that is how the codec was created. it's similiar to say flac vs wav or aif: flac is a "lossless" codec but delivers smaller file sizes.
but word: i would definitely want something that captures the full resolution & bitrate and then compress/downgrade from there.
claude, i would suggest getting something truly progressive for that price range (as opposed to interlaced). sounds like you may have to hold out a bit longer, tho. from what monkey is saying, it sounds like everything is in a paradigm shift as far as standards and such.
Here is a little blurb about AVCHD
one of the good things about PCs are there are programs for anything you can think of. for example, one time i wanted to rip the music and the videos directly off a PS1 game without capturing them. sure enough, there was a small program someone made just for the task.
my point being, i'm sure someone's made programs to capture or at least play avchd. and from the looks of the bottom part of that article, official software has been released for both platforms.
so monkey: in your opinion, hdv is the way to go?
HDV can be made to work and it's inexpensive.
If keeping a tape original (library) is important to you then HDV might be right for you. You might need to do some practical trials with the format to see how you personally feel about the quality and your ability to post it - DOES IT DO WHAT YOU NEED TO DO?
I think removable lenses and quality glass go a long way in making great pixtures. If these new Sony HDV cameras deliver- they're worth investigating.
Personally, If I had to get something today, I would still go for the HVX-200 and as big a pair of P2 cards you can afford. You can always accessorize the camera as you see fit. The difference in quality and flexibility of the multi-format DVCPro HD is worth the step up. I just regret that there isn't a a slimed down, data only HVX P2 camera yet (no DV tape transport) and the even lower light sensitive capabilities that would now be in such a camera.
I'm guessing by Q2 something like that will be available as well. Panasonic needs a simplified, lightweight, inexpensive HD P2 camera if the
format is going have some longevity. If you can't wait, hunt for an HVX used, lease or Grey Market.