I am certain the DP was instructed to NOT MOVE the camera and have no movement within the frame. You have to wonder how it makes no sense to have a motion picture camera that can't handle motion and why Sony rushed to maket with a mediocre camera. I had heard rumors about the motion artifacts that haunted that 60:1 compression method. But over at the Sony booth the world was still at peace: there was no motion and there were no artifacts until.... I found the server and hit the space bar right in the middle of a dissolve....
The compression is at it's weakest when a lot of information changes from one frame to the next -- the result was large digital "blocks" pixelating the entire screen. I went frame-by-frame to show that the ugly artifact was happening throughout the entire dissolve with blocks the size of a postage stamp.
Soon an angry Sony sales rep who felt he was caught with his pants down rushed over, pushing me away to hit the space bar and get the loop going again.
So here is my question -- I heard that the new Canon XH-H1 is using the improved HDV2 algorithm which has a dynamic compression allocation and supposedly handles motion considerably better.
Has anybody seen that being true and can confirm that Sony's FX1 is in fact only using the HDV1 method where as the Canon HD is using HDV2? Anybody done any comparative tests between those two cameras?
Edited by Daniel Andreas, 24 January 2006 - 12:05 AM.