Jump to content


Photo

Sony HVR-V1U 1080P true HD im buying it friday


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 alfredoparra

alfredoparra
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 177 posts
  • Producer

Posted 15 April 2007 - 01:26 PM

I was looking at the canon but you have to buy the 50I/60I upgrade and its a few bucks under the sony, the sony is 1080p and I see things moving that way so why not be ahead of the game! whats your advice cause to tell you the truth 1080p and 1080i look that same on 1080i tv but sony released the 1080P tv line and they got the cam to match it! sella pitch or what?? whats your opinon, im new to HD, im also looking to buy a micr35 or sppro DOF with rod set up not sure whice one to buy?? Thanks!
  • 0

#2 M Joel W

M Joel W
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 268 posts
  • Student

Posted 15 April 2007 - 02:09 PM

I was looking at the canon but you have to buy the 50I/60I upgrade and its a few bucks under the sony, the sony is 1080p and I see things moving that way so why not be ahead of the game! whats your advice cause to tell you the truth 1080p and 1080i look that same on 1080i tv but sony released the 1080P tv line and they got the cam to match it! sella pitch or what?? whats your opinon, im new to HD, im also looking to buy a micr35 or sppro DOF with rod set up not sure whice one to buy?? Thanks!


Definitely get the Canon. The Sony has a bug that makes progressive footage look awful and the Canon uses a superior codec that is much better for editing. Also, the Sony is much slower, so if you're using a lens adapter (maybe a bad idea; it will soften the footage a lot and eat up 2+ stops of light), you will not be able to get sufficient light for the Sony without breaking out the HMIs...
  • 0

#3 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19759 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 15 April 2007 - 02:14 PM

Definitely get the Canon. The Sony has a bug that makes progressive footage look awful and the Canon uses a superior codec that is much better for editing.


Are you thinking of the HVR-V1U, which does true 24P, or the 24F "CineFrame" option in the other Sony HDV camcorders? The HVR-V1U is so new, and the first Sony HDV camcorder to offer 24P, that perhaps the only problem is software support for the moment.

Maybe people are getting spoiled, but a $4000 camcorder that does 24P/1080 seems like a bargain.
  • 0

#4 alfredoparra

alfredoparra
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 177 posts
  • Producer

Posted 15 April 2007 - 02:51 PM

WOW! now im really lost with this! Can I edit 1080P on final cut express?
  • 0

#5 M Joel W

M Joel W
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 268 posts
  • Student

Posted 15 April 2007 - 05:13 PM

Are you thinking of the HVR-V1U, which does true 24P, or the 24F "CineFrame" option in the other Sony HDV camcorders? The HVR-V1U is so new, and the first Sony HDV camcorder to offer 24P, that perhaps the only problem is software support for the moment.

Maybe people are getting spoiled, but a $4000 camcorder that does 24P/1080 seems like a bargain.


Actually I am, although I should have been clearer in my response. There's a not-that-well documented but clearly extant "watercolor" effect with some progressive footage in 25p and less so in 24p that significantly degrades image quality in the new Sony. Also, the XHA1 records discreet frames, while the Sony buries them in 60i, which decreases quality (30fps at 25mbps<24fps at 25mbps) and makes post production a pain.

That said, seeing as the original poster is editing in Final Cut Express, the Sony may be the better option, since I don't think FCE supports Canon's proprietary (but nonetheless superior) 24fps HDV codec.

However, the Sony is somewhere around two stops slower than the Canon (although it produces cleaner footage, apparently) and three or four stops slower than a DVX. With an added 35mm adapter (and I've used plenty of these), you may be shooting five or six six stops slower than the DVX's roughly 500ISO. What would that be? Something like 16 or 32 ISO. And you can't really shoot at 32 ISO without serious lighting gear, which is far more expensive than either camera. Even with the fastest adapter and a bit of gain, your Sony will leave you shooting around 100ISO, which is prohibitive for large interiors. And you'd be limited to shooting wide open (unless you get even MORE light) and Nikkors are soft at f1.4 while Zeiss lenses are prohibitively expensive. And regardless, focus will be an issue.

I'd say go for the Canon and an upgrade to Final Cut Pro (the new version looks outstanding) and skip the low end lens adapter...for now. Or go with the Sony and stick with Final Cut Express. You can always add a lens adapter later, anyhow.

Edited by Matthew Wauhkonen, 15 April 2007 - 05:16 PM.

  • 0

#6 Mark Henderson

Mark Henderson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 62 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 16 April 2007 - 10:06 PM

Do you think those mini Pro 35mm adapters make that much difference? They are a lot of money. I believe somewhere between $15,000 and $20,000.00 new. That is a lot more than the cameras. I just bought the Sony HVR-Z1U and was wondering if it would work for that. I bought the Z1U camera vs. the P2 because for every job that a producer asked for the P2, I had 10 producers ask for the Z1U.

Edited by Mark Henderson, 16 April 2007 - 10:09 PM.

  • 0

#7 M Joel W

M Joel W
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 268 posts
  • Student

Posted 17 April 2007 - 12:19 PM

Do you think those mini Pro 35mm adapters make that much difference? They are a lot of money. I believe somewhere between $15,000 and $20,000.00 new. That is a lot more than the cameras. I just bought the Sony HVR-Z1U and was wondering if it would work for that. I bought the Z1U camera vs. the P2 because for every job that a producer asked for the P2, I had 10 producers ask for the Z1U.


What can I say? I don't really know; I'm just a broke student who researches cameras carefully, not a profesisonal being asked by producers to show up with a certain camera. From what I understand, the Z1U is last generation but it's excellent and does both NTSC and PAL. The HVX is better for narrative work (24fps, slow motion, etc.) in my mind, but it's probably considerably worse for ENG or videography. The Canon seems to be the happy medium. If you're shooting ENG, stick with the Sony I suppose.

The mini35 is actually only about $10,000 (plus lenses) but I'd only recommend it if you have a lot of light. HD cameras are so light hungry in the first place, I wouldn't really recommend it at all actually if you plan on doing a lot of interiors. If you're doing ENG the Sony is a great choice; if you are doing "filmmaking" on video, you may want to look into the HVX or Canon. Just my opinion.
  • 0


Ritter Battery

Rig Wheels Passport

Willys Widgets

Glidecam

Visual Products

Aerial Filmworks

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Abel Cine

CineTape

Paralinx LLC

Technodolly

Opal

CineLab

rebotnix Technologies

FJS International, LLC

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Wooden Camera

Metropolis Post

Tai Audio

The Slider

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Metropolis Post

CineLab

Rig Wheels Passport

Willys Widgets

FJS International, LLC

Abel Cine

Glidecam

Tai Audio

The Slider

Paralinx LLC

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Visual Products

rebotnix Technologies

Technodolly

CineTape

Aerial Filmworks

Wooden Camera

Ritter Battery

Opal