Originally Posted by Steve Cebu
The thing is Ken, I've seen videos produced by the XA10 online and they are nice but they are not RAW files and that matters. I know the Canon will take a hit in bright light compared to the TM900. The question is how much. Until I see more videos I won't be convinced that 60i will be superior to 60p. although certainly some 60i cameras could be better than some 60p cameras.
Hopefully it will all get sorted out but for me anyway the bitrate climbing to 40Mbps was an issue in 60p. I don't honestly think 60i will be better for motion shots than 60p.
I hope I am wrong tho.
Steve, I'm not saying motion will be better in 60i than 60p, but I am saying when displayed on an HDTV with a decent deinterlacer, it should not appear any worse. That's been my experience.
I too am expecting a hit in good light quality, but like you said, how much? If the XA10's good light video is such that when viewed by itself I don't say "Gee, that really doesn't look as good as the 900", then I think I'll be fine given the big improvement in low light. In other words if it takes careful A/Bs to see the difference between the good light video of the 900 & XA10, but in the end the 900 wins under those conditions
, then I'll be very happy with that aspect of the XA10's performance.
However, if I look at the XA10's daylight performance and keep lusting for the 900, then "Houston, we have a problem". I think you guys know by now I'm pretty objective about these things...I've never been good at kidding myself.
However, I am encouraged by owner's & tester's reports who have had other camcorders, including the 700. They all seem to think that there really is no hit to good light PQ. But I think it's 'healthy' to remain skeptical until I've got it in hand.