To High Def or not to High Def?
by carlsunder
on
Mar 11, 2006 at 5:28:00 am
Hi all -
We live in a very interesting time for videographers... Specifically, for a guy like me who's been in the market for a while and wants to start striking out on his own, beginning with weddings and events. It's an interesting time because there is a big question floating around... To High Def or not to High Def?
I'm sure some of you are saying "Silly man, why would you not go high def?" Well here's my quandary.
On the standard def side, there are a lot of options, but the one I'm most interested in is the JVC-GY5100. By the time I invest in the batteries, lens, tripod, etc, it's going to be an approximate $10,000 purchase. The positive is that it's a big camera with big CCDs. It has the manual control that I want, and simply acts like a camera should.
On the high def side, I've looked at many options, but have settled on either the Sony HDR-FX1 or HVRZ1U (probably...). They are affordable, and by the time it's all said and done, might end up being (slightly) cheaper than the standard def JVC. (at least the HDR anyway).
So the big problem that causes the quandary of what to get: I don't like the physical size of the little Sony HDV cams. I want a big camera to have on my shoulder. I want the weight there to steady my shots. And most importantly for me, I want to look like more than just "Cousin Bob" when I am at a wedding. There is a certain psychology with people in that you look more "professional" if you have the big camera vs. the same size camera any consumer may have (even if you and I know it's a high def cam, do Aunt Millie, it looks just like the one her son pulled out last Christmas...).
So the question is... What do I buy? (Keep in mind I'm only referring to the camera part here... I know there are other requirements for editing. But let's assume I would buy an FCP system either way)
Even if I would buy HD gear, what good does it do me? I shoot in HD, edit in HD, but then what? I still have to down-convert it to standard def for my end users anyway! And even if they do get this Blu-Ray/HD DVD format war figured out (I'm not holding my breath), it's going to take a while for something to saturate the market to where consumers know the difference.
Re: To High Def or not to High Def? by Thomas James on Mar 11, 2006 at 9:20:08 am
JVC makes a shoulder mounted HDV camera called the GY-HD100. Canon also makes a shoulder mounted HDV camera called the XL-H1. And both cameras look very professional. As far as market share goes standard definition televisions might seem to have the most market share acounting for 2 out of ever 3 televisions sold but in reality HDTV has the biggest marketshare because HDTV is a big ticket item that generates more profits even though more standard definition televisions sold.
As far as the distribution of high definition video most videographers don't deliver in high definition not so much because it is impossible but because they rather not bother. Once I shot a birthday party for my sister and I firewired the footage into her computer so she could watch it any time she wants to in high definition and all she did was complain that I took up her hard drive space. And what most people refuse to believe is that you don't need Blu-Ray to store high definition video but you can back up 8 gigabytes of high definition video files on a Data DVD and it works just fine.
Re: To High Def or not to High Def? by carlsunder on Mar 11, 2006 at 4:06:23 pm
I've shyed away from the JVC GY-HD100 because it only does 720p. If I'm going to make this big of an investment, it would be silly to only get something that does 720p instead of the full 1080i. I've looked at the new Canon XLH1, and it's a nice unit, but it's still a small camera.
From a pure looks standpoint, I disagree that these two camreas look "professional". I've shot with an XL2 before, and even though I've got the batteries, lights, and mic receivers hanging from it, I still feel out of place when I'm in a row of news guys.
And that's another thing that's annoying about these little cams. Even though the camera has shrunk, the accessories haven't. An anton bauer battery package is going to be nearly as big as the camera itself. Don't foget about the light on top of the camera... Those still have to be fairly big to get a wide throw. And of course the wireless mic receiver.
As far as your distribution point, if people aren't distributing in it, then why bother? Why not shoot on the camera I like right now (the JVC-GY5100), and once everyone has a player like a standard settop DVD player for HD video, then make the move?
Of course, then there's the question of the high end clients who are the early adopters. These are the people with huge TVs and expensive stereo systems. I want the video to look great on their sets, even if it isn't HD...
So I'm still not sure what to do.
(and on another note, I wonder how well Canon's XLH1 is selling, considering Sony's HDR-FX1 is half the price...)
Re: To High Def or not to High Def? by Tim Kolb on Mar 11, 2006 at 8:22:18 pm
I believe the H1 is being sold about as fast as it can be delivered. There are many users who want the high resoolution CCDs and the better lense than the Z1...I have a Z1 and I have no issues with it, it works fine, but I've test shot the H1 and if all issues are off the table but image quality, in my opinion, the H1 wins.
The JVC isn't a bad camera...I happen to remain concerned that the camera gets judged by what it can do with the stock lense...
Most technical comparisons indicate that the detail the human eye perceives is about equal between 720 progressive and 1080 interlace is about the same, with the principle difference being how motion is captured between the two methods.
My own opinion is that you might be able to get by with SD for a while yet, but it will get tougher to get paid a decent rate as time goes on as more and more of the industry is using HD. Keep in mind that all the footage you acquire during the time you are shooting SD won't be terribly useful once you move to HD, whereas you can shoot HD and deliver SD now and accumulate raw assets on HD for future use such as repeat business with clients, etc.
If you do decide to stay SD, I'd maybe look around for a gently used DSR- unit with 1/2" CCDs and try to keep your investment as low as possible because the time you'll have to earn that back will be somewhat limited in my opinon. The peripherals such as a good tripod, etc can be carried forward when you update cameras, etc.
These are my opinions, but I've got twenty years in the business now and I've spent more than half of that time trying to make low cost or obsolete equipment over-achieve...after a while it seems a bit futile.
Re: To High Def or not to High Def? by Borjis on Mar 12, 2006 at 6:40:13 am
[Tim Kolb]"Most technical comparisons indicate that the detail the human eye perceives is about equal between 720 progressive and 1080 interlace is about the same, with the principle difference being how motion is captured between the two methods."
When I watch 1080i or 720p footage it is difficult to tell one has more detail than the other.
especially with these cams. consider that all of them have subsampling and don't actually
capture a full image like the super high end ones do.
I have an HD100 and something I didn't know until after owning it is that it captures a full
1280x720 progressive image with no sub-sampling of any kind. thats incredible performance for a 5,000 price point. Though a better lense would sure be icing on the cake. :)
Re: To High Def or not to High Def? by Tim Kolb on Mar 12, 2006 at 6:24:51 pm
[Borjis]"
I have an HD100 and something I didn't know until after owning it is that it captures a full
1280x720 progressive image with no sub-sampling of any kind. thats incredible performance for a 5,000 price point."
Of course the question of whether a frame that is designed to be 1920x1080 subsampled at 1440x1080 is worse than a full frame of 1280x720 is one for debate...particularly considering that the data rate is also 20% less on the smaller frame HDV.
Also...HDcam and DVC ProHD both subsample...HDcam is recorded at 1440x1080, 3:1:1 and DVCProHD records 1280x720 at 960x720 4:2:2 and 1920x1080 at 1280x1080 (30fps) and 1440x1080 (25fps).
Re: To High Def or not to High Def? by Borjis on Mar 13, 2006 at 10:02:31 pm
Good Points Tim.
I know those other pro formats sub-sample, but not out the SDI tap (HDCAM/Varicam) Unless its HDCAM-SR that wasn't mentioned which you
probably already know is 1920x1080 4:4:4.
Thats why the JVC seems so incredible to do it at its low price point.
Re: To High Def or not to High Def? by Tim Kolb on Mar 14, 2006 at 5:30:22 am
[Borjis]"I know those other pro formats sub-sample, but not out the SDI tap (HDCAM/Varicam) Unless its HDCAM-SR that wasn't mentioned which you
probably already know is 1920x1080 4:4:4."
Yes, when using dual-link HDSDI (and a camera that will output it) at 880 Mbits/sec, it's 4:4:4...otherwise with a single HDSDI cable, it runs at an also impressive 440 Mbits/sec 4:2:2. Either way, it's pretty beautiful stuff.
I happen to think that D-5 HD is absolutely great at 235 Mbits/sec and I wish someone would make a camera that can shoot that...
Re: To High Def or not to High Def? by scott Hayes on Mar 14, 2006 at 7:31:49 pm
you can find some DSR300s on ebay for around 3-4K. i would go that route if I were you, wanting to
stay in SD. I had a big shoulder mounted camera, and I LOVED the image quality. the only reason I
sold it was because of the cost. I bought a Z1 to replace it, and saved a ton of money. I do miss
the shoulder mount. The little cams are hard to get used to using handheld. Seriously,
I would stay away from anything made by JVC. spend the money, get a Sony.
Re: To High Def or not to High Def? by Ron Shook on Mar 14, 2006 at 9:47:27 pm
Borjis,
[Borjis]"I used to stay away from JVC but this HD100U is just too good to pass up.
Full Native 720P imaging at 5k?!?! thats almost crazy.
I'm very pleased with the product as well as many others.
I would do it again without thinking twice."
After being fascinated in one way or the other with all of the under $10k HD cams and slowly discovering the compromises of all, I'm starting to come around to the opinion that the JVC, particularly at the Price, is the best compromise of the bunch.
Re: To High Def or not to High Def? by Tim Kolb on Mar 15, 2006 at 12:08:09 am
[Ron Shook]"
After being fascinated in one way or the other with all of the under $10k HD cams and slowly discovering the compromises of all, I'm starting to come around to the opinion that the JVC, particularly at the Price, is the best compromise of the bunch."
Durability will be the ultimate determining factor. JVC's cameras make beautiful pictures for the cost, I bought a DV500 without even test driving one back in 2000...but we've had issues and several tape transports in that camera.
I have another shooter 3 miles from me who bought one because mine made such great pictures and that camera has never worked properly since he got it and JVC didn't replace it, they just kept it in Chicago in service for about 6 months out of the first year he owned it...another colleague bought a DV700 (16:9) and now owns the FireStore unit designed for the camera after several thread malfunction losses of significant work because he simply can't trust the tape transport.
My JVC camera is the only one I have that DV Rack (or my PC for that matter) can't see on FireWire...My 600U VTR is sitting unused because I can't bring myself to send it in for yet MORE service as it has had three visits to Chicago for tape transport problems...one day I had it returned after they had it for three weeks and it ate the first tape we put in it and simply boxed it back up...and didn't have it for 2 more weeks.
I would stand by the quality of their SVHS stuff forever, I wish D9 and D9 HD would take off as I think those are really over-achiever formats, but I will be forever leary of a JVC product with a DV tape transport in it I think...
The HD100 looks great, probably even amazing with a decent lense...let's just hope JVC has made progress on the durability of these units as our 1700.00 TRV-900 plays anything anytime, never jams, never misthreads, any brand of tape, one and on and on...and my 3500.00 JVC Professional DV VTR won't eject a tape for the fourth time in 6 years...
It's a shame because when I bought that camcorder and deck, I was really an advocate for JVC...
Re: To High Def or not to High Def? by Harry Pallenberg on Mar 15, 2006 at 12:52:29 am
getting waaaay off topic... but you mentioned the TRV-900... one of the best comsumer cams ever IMHO.... i bought one of the 1st and it is still flawless...
Thanks,
Harry.
Forum Cowmunity Leader: OSX
Forum Cowmunity Leader: Indie & Doc
Re: To High Def or not to High Def? by Chris Young on Mar 15, 2006 at 4:17:16 pm
Ron ~
We have had discussions with a producer who has been commissioned to do eight HD programs in East Africa so we had a look at all the HD options to come up with the best solution in terms of a performance/cost ratio. As this series involves shooting a lot of wild life sequences it looks like the Varicam with its over/undercrank will be the chosen format even though
this is 720p and will be upconverted to 1080i. Discovery said that this was fine and that they were happy with the 1080i uprez from the Panasonic, they TX 'Discovery HD Theatre' in 1080i. Another 720p camera came up for discussion, the JVC 100. After looking into this a bit further I discovered that Discovery Channel has declined to accept any material that originated from the JVC HD 100 family. A bit info more can be found at:
Re: To High Def or not to High Def? by Borjis on Mar 15, 2006 at 5:57:17 pm
[Chris Young]"After looking into this a bit further I discovered that Discovery Channel has declined to accept any material that originated from the JVC HD 100 family."
actually its the JY-HD10U a completely different camera with almost no manual controls. The camera we are discussing is the GY-HD100U.
quote:
"One HD format that was unacceptable for HD production for Discovery was the new semi -- pro 19 Mbps system used by the JVC JY -- HD10U"
I sure hope JVC has come through on durability. Thanks for the heads up on that Tim. It seems ok so far though. several HD100 users have put many hours on their units without failure yet. I hope it stays that way. This is JVC's golden opportunity.
Re: To High Def or not to High Def? by Chris Young on Mar 15, 2006 at 6:38:46 pm
Borjis
Believe me it was quote "the 19 Mbps system used" which was their objection. It is the compression artefacts that are carried over to TX that causes the problem on any of the highly compressed MPEG formats that is the basis of Discovery's technical objection. They also told us that with special written dispensation they would allow up to 15% of 25Mbit HDV at 1080i (Sony, Canon) if the shooting circumstances called for it. The written document states that the production mandated formats are HDCam, HDCam SR and HD100 on Varicam. They are not very flexible when it comes to anything else. The HVX200 was also looked at for a second unit because of it's native HD100 codec on P2 but the logistics of storing an anticipated 100-120 hours of shooting on to the portable Panasonic P2 Stores in the field, each one can hold the contents of around seven 8GB P2 cards, each card being about 8 mins in HD100, was out of the question. The EE signal out of nearly all the small cameras meets the technical spec but it was only the HVX200 in the small cameras that met the minimum record spec, sadly.
Re: To High Def or not to High Def? by Ron Shook on Mar 15, 2006 at 8:25:11 pm
Chris,
[Chris Young]"Believe me it was quote "the 19 Mbps system used" which was their objection. It is the compression artefacts that are carried over to TX that causes the problem on any of the highly compressed MPEG formats that is the basis of Discovery's technical objection."
I'll bet it's more than the compression artifacts that cause the problem. 720p60 uprezes to 1080i quite well, but as Graeme, I believe, said and I've heard confirmation elsewhere, 720p30 doesn't uprez at all well to 1080i. 2 big strikes against the JVC100.
Re: To High Def or not to High Def? by Borjis on Mar 15, 2006 at 10:10:33 pm
well, the JVC uses a 6 frame GOP not 15 like the sony. That and the smaller amount of screen resolution to compress, makes for a much prettier and sharper image if you put it under a microscope. This has been proven in side by side tests with all the new mini-hd cams as well as CineAlta and Varicam.
It also captures from the imager a full 1280x720 with no subsampling
before HDV compression. no other sub 10k camera does that.
The HD100 doesn't have ANYWHERE NEAR the noise of an HD10, if it is setup
correctly.
I could almost promise, that a shoot done on a properly setup HD100, captured, up-scaled with GOOD equipment and mastered to HDCAM would not in any way be rejected. They would not be able to tell the difference if it had originated as 19mbps or 25.
Re: To High Def or not to High Def? by Tim Kolb on Mar 18, 2006 at 4:21:18 pm
[Borjis]"[Tim Kolb] "True...the Canon captures full 1440x1080."
what about the missing 480 horizontal lines? ;)"
You could ask the same question about HDcam...
In HDV...there aren't any more pixels. 1440 is the maximum you get. You were talking about the 1:1 relationship between image pixels and sensor cel sites so I just thought I'd point that out...
I don't know about the pricing, I saw some Canon ads in some trades this monthe where they're printing "$9,000.00" in big letters, though I don't know if that's a sale price or a no options (case, charger, battery etc.) price, or if they've lowered the price... They H1 I was traveling with on the Adobe tour was insured for $11K+ with a thermodyne case and accessories, but I had people telling me they had purchased that camera for less at B&H, so maybe Canon was sort of alluding to street pricing...I don't know.
With the JVC, I still maintain the best thing about the basic lense that I've seen thus far is that you can remove it...what bothers me is that I hear users saying "true 24p 1280x720 with a pro lense for $6K", but since the lense really should be replaced to maximize the camera's potential, the $12K replacement makes the whole works an $18K investment. I think I'd be looking at XDcam HD or Infinity if I had that sort of money to spend.
