What 1080p camera's are available?

[D*I*S_Frontman]

As for HDV, the compression is horrible for any type of fast motion shooting. If you leave the camera sitting on on a tripod, shooting a landscape, you will get awesome images, shoot a bunch of kids running around at a birthday party and its artifact city.

You are right though fluidedge, I shoot with an HVX200 so I am a bit spoiled in that sense.

HDV is a great compromise--for some things. Easy to edit, dirt-cheap media, nice picture quality (as long as it's locked down).

For indie filmmaking, though, I would think it would suck big-time. Barely any color space for tweaking in post, and, as you said, "artifact city" when the screen is busy with action.

The only compromise that one makes with the Panasonic HVX200 (as opposed to big $ pro units) is that the imager is 1/3", which is pretty small, making depth of field a lot harder to get (about the same as 8mm film stock). From what I've read, to get 35mm-like DOF you need to open up the f-stop all the way and pile on the ND filters to knock the light back down below washout. Or use a spinning ground glass disk 35mm adapter type of unit with it, and pile ON the lights.

The HXV200 is really a miracle product for those who know how to work it for all it's worth. I used to own a DVX100 and the CineGamma color was absolutely delicious. Things I shot on video looked like 16mm on a standard TV. And the audio was kick @ss. The HVX200 does all of that @ 1080p/24fps HD. Cool.

 

[faustfire]

HDV is a great compromise--for some things. Easy to edit, dirt-cheap media, nice picture quality (as long as it's locked down).

For indie filmmaking, though, I would think it would suck big-time. Barely any color space for tweaking in post, and, as you said, "artifact city" when the screen is busy with action.

The only compromise that one makes with the Panasonic HVX200 (as opposed to big $ pro units) is that the imager is 1/3", which is pretty small, making depth of field a lot harder to get (about the same as 8mm film stock). From what I've read, to get 35mm-like DOF you need to open up the f-stop all the way and pile on the ND filters to knock the light back down below washout. Or use a spinning ground glass disk 35mm adapter type of unit with it, and pile ON the lights.

The HXV200 is really a miracle product for those who know how to work it for all it's worth. I used to own a DVX100 and the CineGamma color was absolutely delicious. Things I shot on video looked like 16mm on a standard TV. And the audio was kick @ss. The HVX200 does all of that @ 1080p/24fps HD. Cool.

Yea, I'm really hoping that panasonic releases an HVX successor with a 1/2 ccd as the EX1 has. I also wish they would allow the HVX to record 1080/60p as it is physically capable since it records everything at 1080/60p and then downconverts inside the camera. According to the Panny sales reps, the only reason it hasnt been able to do so is because there is no DVCpro HD 1080/60p codec, which hasnt been created because no one broadcasts in 1080/60p. I guess slomo hasnt crossed their minds.

 

[fluidedge]

For indie filmmaking, though, I would think it would suck big-time. Barely any color space for tweaking in post, and, as you said, "artifact city" when the screen is busy with action.

I think HDV was designed with indie makers in mind, wasn't it? It's a great quality and cheap. As for color, i agree you won't get the same depth as with a camera costing double or three times the price, but if indie's get their sets properly lit and keep as much control as they can on the envirnoment they shoot in, there shouldn't be much tweeking needed.

As for quality, did you guys know that JJ Abrams shot some of Cloverfield in HDV - granted they will have done some serious post on the footage, but it just goes to show what HDV is being used for....

 

[LethalWolfe]

The problem with the EX1 is the CMOS rolling shutter, which makes it almost unusable for any event type photography, anything with flashing lights or really fast motion.

FUD.

As for HDV, the compression is horrible for any type of fast motion shooting. If you leave the camera sitting on on a tripod, shooting a landscape, you will get awesome images, shoot a bunch of kids running around at a birthday party and its artifact city.

FUD.

The only compromise that one makes with the Panasonic HVX200 (as opposed to big $ pro units) is that the imager is 1/3", which is pretty small, making depth of field a lot harder to get (about the same as 8mm film stock).

The not-much-larger than SD CCDs the HVX uses certainly qualifies as a compromise.

$20 says no one here can watch a TV show or movie and know what camera was used when so all the FUD people like to thrown around to defend their camera of choice is ultimately meaningless. The HVX has been used in feature films and for TV. The Z1U has been used in feature films and on TV. The Red camera (which has a rolling shutter) is being used on feature films. MiniDV cameras have been used in feature films and on TV....


Lethal

 

[fluidedge]

$20 says no one here can watch a TV show or movie and know what camera was used when so all the FUD people like to thrown around to defend their camera of choice is ultimately meaningless. The HVX has been used in feature films and for TV. The Z1U has been used in feature films and on TV. The Red camera (which has a rolling shutter) is being used on feature films. MiniDV cameras have been used in feature films and on TV....


Lethal

Thats the ultimate compliment to a DOP, that somthing looks so good as so that no one can tell whether something was shot on a camera costing £1000 or £100000

 

[faustfire]

FUD.


FUD.


Lethal

How does pointing out the problems with rolling shutters qualify as FUD. It is a fact, and is even causing problems for people shooting with the red camera.

And Cloverfield was shot with a Thompson Grass Valley Viper, Sony F23 and Panasonic HVX's. No HDV.

 

[LethalWolfe]

Thats the ultimate compliment to a DOP, that somthing looks so good as so that no one can tell whether something was shot on a camera costing £1000 or £100000

I always saw that as the ultimate paradox of the post/produciton side of the entertainment industry. We spend a ton of money of money on gear and a ton of time trying to get everything just right and it's pretty much all lost on the audience who are watching super compressed signals on $300 TVs w/completely f'ed up color settings.

How does pointing out the problems with rolling shutters qualify as FUD. It is a fact, and is even causing problems for people shooting with the red camera.

It's FUD when presented in such a way which makes the camera sound worse than it is. Under certain conditions the rolling shutter can be problematic, but obviously it's not a show stopped as more cameras are going CMOS including some of the hottest cameras like the HV20, EX1, and Red One. If you shoot extensively in the limited conditions that can give rolling shutters problems then don't get a camera that uses one (options are wonderful), but you don't to much shooting in those limited conditions than the EX1 is one hell of a bargain at $6.5k. Adjusting for the rolling shutter is no different than having to work around vertical smear and other image distortions inherent to using CCDs.

The "hdv falls apart during fast action" is pretty much an internet myth started by Panasonic and largely propagated by people that have zero/little real world shooting time on HDV cameras. Long GOP being prone to dropouts is another piece of popular FUD. I've literally dealt w/thousands of hours of HDV footage (some tapes shot in the Caribbean, put into zip-lock bags then FedExed back to LA) and I haven't seen the plague of dropouts people are afraid of.

Now for the funny part. W/all that being said, I'm not really a big fan of the HDV codec. It gives me problems in post that other codecs do not, and I'd love to move away from it, but there aren't any other options that fit our budget and workflow unfortunately.

And Cloverfield was shot with a Thompson Grass Valley Viper, Sony F23 and Panasonic HVX's. No HDV.

Yes, when they needed the handicam look they used the HVX200.

Z1U's were used in "Letters from Iwo Jima" so HDV compression obviously isn't insurmountable. Entire features are being shot w/the Red camera so obviously the rolling shutter isn't insurmountable. And the HVX was used in "Cloverfield" so obviously the low rez CCDs and relatively low rez codec aren't insurmountable.


Lethal

 

[faustfire]

It's FUD when presented in such a way which makes the camera sound worse than it is. Under certain conditions the rolling shutter can be problematic, but obviously it's not a show stopped as more cameras are going CMOS including some of the hottest cameras like the HV20, EX1, and Red One. If you shoot extensively in the limited conditions that can give rolling shutters problems then don't get a camera that uses one (options are wonderful), but you don't to much shooting in those limited conditions than the EX1 is one hell of a bargain at $6.5k. Adjusting for the rolling shutter is no different than having to work around vertical smear and other image distortions inherent to using CCDs.

The "hdv falls apart during fast action" is pretty much an internet myth started by Panasonic and largely propagated by people that have zero/little real world shooting time on HDV cameras. Long GOP being prone to dropouts is another piece of popular FUD.

Lethal

All I said was that the CMOS in the EX1 makes it almost unusable for event shooting, which it is. Anything with flashing lights will turn out worthless, and extra fast moving objects like cars will slant like they are going light speed. I have shot extensivly with HDV and a fair amount with the EX1, and HDV does fall apart in many high action conditions. (Try shooting extreme sports with it.) HDV is the main reason I decided to go with the HVX, sacrificing a little picture sharpness to work with a professional codec.

Though, I dont see why HDV would have more dropouts than any other mini DV format, but when you do have dropouts they do cause more problems than with an intraframe codec.

 

[LethalWolfe]

Though, I dont see why HDV would have more dropouts than any other mini DV format, but when you do have dropouts they do cause more problems than with an intraframe codec.

The theory as I've heard it is that it's harder for the error correction to "fix" an HD-sized LGOP problem than a DV-sized Intraframe problem so the likelihood of a dropout is higher, and, as you said, more damaging since you lose 1/2 a second instead of just a single frame.


Lethal

 

[Fallencircus]

From someone who has used the EX1 properly

Have any of you actually used the Sony XDCAM Ex1? You are all talking about it recording HDV, but I have never shot ANYTHING in HDV codec. I only use the XDCAM codec 35mbps VBR. I have shot documentaries, short films, commercials, and events with this and had no problems whatsoever. There have been car chases, lots of fast motion and quick pans in the short films and bright flashing lights and strobe lights in wedding videos I have done for friends. There has never been a single artifact on the screen in any of those situations. The HDV is there for people who want more record time on the SxS cards, just buy 5-6 of them with a macbook pro and you wont have the record time issues even in the more demanding situations. I also use to use the HVX200 until the EX1 came out and, while the Panasonic is a good camera I much prefer the EX1 because of the full hd and teh 35mbps codec.

 

[froogal88]

This makes no sense. If you deinterlace 50i, all you are getting is a lower quality 25p.

An easy misconception. While you won't be able to make it look like it was shot progressive, there is still twice as much data, resulting it a low-quality 50p, not a low-quality 25p. That is because the frame rate is for an entire frame, not just for a field (the odd or even lines of a frame when it is interlaced). That means that each field is just 1/100 of a second.