or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Other Areas of Interest › Camcorders › Sony NEX-VG10 OFFICIAL Camcorder Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sony NEX-VG10 OFFICIAL Camcorder Thread - Page 3

post #61 of 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by hpmoon View Post

Most importantly, almost 0% of 24p advocates ever get their footage printed onto 24p celluloid (which is the reference point for the 24p fetishism).

Yes sure. But celluloid is an indirect reference point for 24p fetishism. It prescribed the preferred progressive format for DVDs and Blu-ray that were not specified for putting home video, but commercial movies ... shot on celluloid and scanned to be put on DVD, so you can BUY them and give $$$ to the studios.

So yes 24p is the preferred progressive format for Blurays AND DVDs, because of the fetishism of the studios, if you want to call it this way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hpmoon View Post

In fact, their 24p footage gets converted "back" to 30p almost always, for either progressive DVD distribution or online streaming. And as you have noted, that kind of interpolation is a bad outcome.

Sorry, no. It is encoded natively in 24p. Blu-ray and DVD. Encoding 24p as interlaced 3:2 pulldown (which is how it can be encoded in "30p") is bad practice. The encoding is less efficient and chroma is degraded. This is done for particular purposes only. Broadcasted TV is a different story.
post #62 of 339
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris1444 View Post

Yes sure. But celluloid is an indirect reference point for 24p fetishism. It prescribed the preferred progressive format for DVDs and Blu-ray that were not specified for putting home video, but commercial movies ... shot on celluloid and scanned to be put on DVD, so you can BUY them and give $$$ to the studios.

So yes 24p is the preferred progressive format for Blurays AND DVDs, because of the fetishism of the studios, if you want to call it this way.

To put it much simpler, I am staring down the 24p video advocates and reminding them that they are not nearly at the level of celluloid distribution. In their whole lifetimes. So what remains, this "fetishism" I refer to, is the delusion that the inferior, "jerky" frame rate expediently evokes cinematic formalism. That's naive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris1444 View Post

Sorry, no. It is encoded natively in 24p. Blu-ray and DVD. Encoding 24p as interlaced 3:2 pulldown (which is how it can be encoded in "30p") is bad practice. The encoding is less efficient and chroma is degraded. This is done for particular purposes only. Broadcasted TV is a different story.

Again, I am reminding anyone who shoots in 24p that (a) anytime they post their footage to the Web (and even monetized Web distribution such as Jaman, Mubi, Netflix, etc.), they are degrading their content yet again by interpolating "back" up to 30p; and (b) even when the content stays at 24p via DVD and Blu-Ray, it's being converted back to a 30p display anyway. Almost 0% of LCD/plasma/projector displays can natively display 24p; they are only native 30p (i.e., 29.97 fps).
post #63 of 339
when you remove the lenses from the equation, the VG10 works out to be around $400 on top of the NEX-5. Those 18-200 lenses are not cheap throw-away lenses. Remember the NEX-5 only comes with either a 16mm or 18-55.
post #64 of 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by hpmoon View Post

To put it much simpler, I am staring down the 24p video advocates and reminding them that they are not nearly at the level of celluloid distribution. In their whole lifetimes. So what remains, this "fetishism" I refer to, is the delusion that the inferior, "jerky" frame rate expediently evokes cinematic formalism. That's naive.

Again, I am reminding anyone who shoots in 24p that (a) anytime they post their footage to the Web (and even monetized Web distribution such as Jaman, Mubi, Netflix, etc.), they are degrading their content yet again by interpolating "back" up to 30p; and (b) even when the content stays at 24p via DVD and Blu-Ray, it's being converted back to a 30p display anyway. Almost 0% of LCD/plasma/projector displays can natively display 24p; they are only native 30p (i.e., 29.97 fps).

Yes? Well I did not know that. The one I am using (JVC) has 24p, 50p and 60p. And computer monitors are 60p even in Europe. So 24p can be displayed with 3:2 pulldown (no interpolation, only frame repeats).

And indeed youtube seems to retime 24p contents to 30p by duplicating every 4th frame (no serious and potentially harmful interpolation though). This amounts to 2:2:2:4 pulldown on a 60Hz monitor, instead of 3:2 which would probably be better. Yikes.

So maybe Sony are ahead of their time and I am a dinosaur.
post #65 of 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chevypower View Post

when you remove the lenses from the equation, the VG10 works out to be around $400 on top of the NEX-5. Those 18-200 lenses are not cheap throw-away lenses. Remember the NEX-5 only comes with either a 16mm or 18-55.

I fully agree. It is terribly attractive. Leave me some time to swallow the 30p frame rate and I'll maybe get one.
post #66 of 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by hpmoon View Post

To put it much simpler, I am staring down the 24p video advocates and reminding them that they are not nearly at the level of celluloid distribution. In their whole lifetimes. So what remains, this "fetishism" I refer to, is the delusion that the inferior, "jerky" frame rate expediently evokes cinematic formalism. That's naive.

I do not feel entitled to comment on that. It is a matter of taste, probably influenced by decades of movie watching at 24p. You could say the same about shallow DOF. Is it technically better that only a thin portion of the scene is in focus? That's questionable too because you have less details in the background. Fact is, shallow DOF and 24p (and color and dynamic range) are part of what makes the difference between a movie and a newscast.

Also, 30p with the Sony is not *that* smoother than 24p. It is only 25% faster. If you do not want "inferior" "jerky" footage, grab a 60i or 60p camcorder such as the TM700.
post #67 of 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by hpmoon View Post

LCD/plasma/projector displays can natively display 24p; they are only native 30p (i.e., 29.97 fps).

I had not figured out that you were also talking about plasmas and LCDs for which what you say is definitely not true.

It was not even true at the time of good olde CRTs with interlaced 480i input. Their input was 480i__60__ so a temporal refresh of 60Hz. Now, all plasmas and LCDs are all 60Hz progressive displays, with now mostly 1080p60 input (not 1080i60). So they are 100% 60p. In such a case, 24p is displayed with 3:2 pulldown. The Europeans are probably happier with 25p being displayed as 2:2 pulldown at 50 fps which more even and less jerky.

The 120Hz TVs I know of are able to detect 3:2 pulldown and to display it as 5:5 pulldown at 120fps so the inherent jerkiness of the 3:2 pulldown is also gone, and you get the actual less disturbing jerkiness of a movie theater. They usually call it "theater mode". 120Hz TVs are now mainstream (unless you buy a cheapo noname on sale at your local pharmacy).

So I disagree with your statement. 24p is now easy to display. To me 30p was made popular by webcams, cameraphones and video capable point and shoots.

And in fact, youtube also supports 24p. See e.g. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66TuSJo4dZM which is encoded as 24p.

I think "30p" is very often used to denote interlaced 60i contents, because this is how the fields are packed together in software. They are grouped in pairs each pair constituting a single progressive frame, and you then get 30 of those frames per second. But these are not real progressive frames, because the even and odd lines are coming from different fields sampled at different times, and if you look at those "frames" you see fethering artifacts. The proper way to view this is to deinterlace to get 60p contents. Some SW deinterlacers drop every other output frame, so you get out of a 60i input a 30p deinterlaced output. Blame the deinterlacer.
post #68 of 339
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris1444 View Post

The 120Hz TVs I know of are able to detect 3:2 pulldown and to display it as 5:5 pulldown at 120fps so the inherent jerkiness of the 3:2 pulldown is also gone, and you get the actual less disturbing jerkiness of a movie theater. They usually call it "theater mode". 120Hz TVs are now mainstream (unless you buy a cheapo noname on sale at your local pharmacy).

So I disagree with your statement. 24p is now easy to display. To me 30p was made popular by webcams, cameraphones and video capable point and shoots.

I was surprised by these comments. I'm sure you know that the existence of a 120 Hz HDTV does not mean in any sense that it has a native 24p mode. There is just a handful of sets with this capability, with almost 0% market penetration. To assert otherwise is to say that sets advertising a native 24p mode are fraudulent.

Perhaps you are referring, though, to the fact that a 120 Hz set may perform better doing 3:2 pulldown than their ancestors. True. But it's still 3:2 pulldown, and it's still subject to jutter.

Lastly, 30p was not merely "made popular by webcams, cameraphones and video capable point and shoots." 30p is all progressive DVDs, all online HD content (no one debates that this is where we'll be consuming all content very soon), all 1080p panels, etc. etc. Everything else is the exception to that ubiquity.
post #69 of 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by hpmoon View Post

I was surprised by these comments. I'm sure you know that the existence of a 120 Hz HDTV does not mean in any sense that it has a native 24p mode. There is just a handful of sets with this capability, with almost 0% market penetration. To assert otherwise is to say that sets advertising a native 24p mode are fraudulent.

Not fraudulent. Just less capable than _some_ 120Hz TVs. 3:2 pulldown on a standard 60Hz TV is specially jerky because each 24p frame is not displayed the same amount of time: one frame lasts 3x 60Hz frames, and the next frame lasts 2x 60Hz frame (hence 3:2 pulldown). This is because 60 is not a multiple of 24. Once the display is 120Hz (you may know that 120 is a multiple of 24: 120 = 24x5), the display can repeat each input 24p frame 5 times, and provide a regular display where each frame is displayed the same amount of time. A 120Hz equipped TV can do this with 0$ 0c additional hardware. So they do it. How more native can this be? Do you want the screen to have a refresh rate of 24Hz? This would be extreme fetishism. Even a movie projector in a theater is flashing each image at least 3x, so it is a 72 Hz display doing 3:3 pulldown.

24p native is a wee bit better than 3:2 pulldown, but no revolution, and 120Hz panels can do this for free. No wonder it is not a headline feature any more. Note that this debate never occurred in Europe, where movies are displayed in 2:2 pulldown, so the frame rate is perfectly regular since the beginnings of TV there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hpmoon View Post

Perhaps you are referring, though, to the fact that a 120 Hz set may perform better doing 3:2 pulldown than their ancestors. True. But it's still 3:2 pulldown, and it's still subject to jutter.

They don't do 3:2 pulldown. They are 120Hz, not 60, so they do 5:5 pulldown (in some particular mode), which is different. 5:5 is (a little bit) better than 3:2 because 5=5 while 3≠2, see?

Quote:
Originally Posted by hpmoon View Post

Lastly, 30p was not merely "made popular by webcams, cameraphones and video capable point and shoots." 30p is all progressive DVDs,

Obviously you never watch movie DVDs but only DVDs you authored with your camera phone's video. Well authored movie DVDs are encoded natively in 24p, and the DVD player is in charge of doing the 3:2 pulldown on the fly, which is not a challenging task.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hpmoon View Post

all online HD content (no one debates that this is where we'll be consuming all content very soon),

Sorry no. And there is 0 technical reason that online broadcasting should impose a particular frame rate. Unlike TVs of 10-20 years and analog broadcasting networks, they are extremely flexible and can handle any format and any frame rate. This is just software.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hpmoon View Post

all 1080p panels,

Sorry. I think there has NEVER been a 1080p30 TV on the market (why would there? broadcast TV is 60 fields per second) so just go to any shop and check the specs before making such bold and erroneous claims. And you know, you will soon find it even difficult to buy a less than 120Hz TV. I am talking about real TVs, right? not handheld mini-displays or similar toys.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hpmoon View Post

etc. etc. Everything else is the exception to that ubiquity.

Sorry but I fear you really don't know what you are talking about. I don't understand why you are clinging so firmly to such misconceptions. Is it because you own a VG10? So what's the point? It does great films at 30p you can view with best quality on your 60Hz display if you are careful enough and I am sure it an enjoyable tool. So please do not let my comments harm your fun.

If you need to be cheered up, consider this:
- Charles Chaplin was shooting silent films in 16p
- Hitchcock was shooting sound film in 24p
- You are shooting in 30p. This is technological progress.

Cheers.
post #70 of 339
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris1444 View Post

If you need to be cheered up, consider this:
- Charles Chaplin was shooting silent films in 16p
- Hitchcock was shooting sound film in 24p
- You are shooting in 30p. This is technological progress.

Cheers.

Taking a very long step backward from these squabbles, there are two abiding realities: first, that no matter how you rationalize it and may advocate the relative mathematical elegance of pulldown techniques to make 24p compliant with the physical reality of how we watch content, it's preferable to convert 30p to existing display technologies than 24p. No argument there...and no argument that it's impossible to go from 24p to non-24p native displays. We all get it.

Secondly, your quote above is true (though probably tongue-in-cheek): it's only a matter of time before the archaic expedience of amateurs who think that 24fps evokes cinematic formalism will surely die to the eyes of forthcoming generations who simply do not have a natural preference for 24fps. They (me included) truly grew up with 30fps content, and that will be -- actually, it already is -- the artistic paradigm.
post #71 of 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris1444 View Post

And indeed youtube seems to retime 24p contents to 30p by duplicating every 4th frame (no serious and potentially harmful interpolation though). This amounts to 2:2:2:4 pulldown on a 60Hz monitor, instead of 3:2 which would probably be better. Yikes.

That's odd. Are you sure youtube does that for every user-video? Because I've watched plenty of user uploaded videos on youtube at frame-rates less than 30fps. Lots of (unauthorized) ripped primetime TV-shows are posted at 24fps. Since Adobe Flash 10.1, right-clicking on many youtube videos brings up a 'show video info' box, which lists realtime statistics. I've seen the rate fluctuate from 6fps to 24fps on some low bitrate videos -- the fact that they max out at 24fps suggest to me the source-video had a video-timebase of 24fps, and youtube kept the timebase.

And just about every movie trailer I've seen on youtube (that came from an partner member/site) has always been posted at the correct 24fps.
post #72 of 339
hi guys, do u know if the NEX-VG10 can mount CS mounting lenses ?

thank you
post #73 of 339
Preording this camera was the fastest I've ever spent $2000.

I said I would never buy a camcorder until they had interchangable lenses, a modestly sized sensor, and didn't cost $10K - and Sony built excactly that camcorder. The 60i issue is a very distant factor compared to a good lens and hefty sensor.

I'm coming from the world of high end photography though, not video recording, so that might explain my bias.
post #74 of 339
Here is an early review from another photographer: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/re...ers/vg10.shtml.

Michael's reviews are pretty good when it comes to usability of devices.
post #75 of 339
"Guess what broadcast channel supports naturally 30p? Youtube. So yes, this camera support ideal formats for youtube. This is not my primary use for a 2kUSD camera."

This thread is not about one poster's narrowlyd-defined needs, it is about the camera. And 30p in 60i means that one can make videos on bluray disks without transcoding that will play in any blu-ray player. So, you can distribute your videos in pristine quality to many folks. And, there will be no interlacing artifacts. It's great! So, YouTube and bluray native - this suits most users of video cameras, even those who are creative. Those with pretensions will miss 24p, and those who like to watch their videos but not share on standard media can choose the 108060p camera.

The biggest gripe for me is lack of manual control for audio - that is silly given the hype about audio quality. Anyone who knows and cares about audio would find autolevel control despicable. And you do not have to have pretensions of being a film director to want to avoid agc pumping in audio and flat dynamics. What's up with that? - available on all consumer high-end cams - JVC, Canon, Panasonic - except Sony. Marketing nonsense.
post #76 of 339
post #77 of 339
"30p in 60i relies on player's capability to detect and properly handle 2-2 pulldown. Not all hardware and software players can do that. Without it, you either lose half of the resolution, or, even worse, the player would apply some bogus deinterlacing, making it all worse."

You are just making this up - what commercial bluray player would have any trouble with this? And, all the top editors have no problem with it. So name something that people actually use, don't just talk about "possible."

"30p in 60p would be a better solution. 60p would be even better, and 30p can be easily derived from it by removing every other frame".

You just don't get it - 60p is not a bluray spec. You would have to convert the video to get it to play on a bluray. Now you do not have to do anything: The 60i with 30p right out of the camera plays perfectly on all commercial bluray players, and no interlacing artifacts. Convenient, follows a standard, avoids some important issues. A brilliant spec (if there has to be one - I am not arguing that one is better than choice)

What kind of video world do you live in?
post #78 of 339
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

"30p in 60i relies on player's capability to detect and properly handle 2-2 pulldown. Not all hardware and software players can do that. Without it, you either lose half of the resolution, or, even worse, the player would apply some bogus deinterlacing, making it all worse."

You are just making this up - what commercial bluray player would have any trouble with this? And, all the top editors have no problem with it. So name something that people actually use, don't just talk about "possible."

"30p in 60p would be a better solution. 60p would be even better, and 30p can be easily derived from it by removing every other frame".

You just don't get it - 60p is not a bluray spec. You would have to convert the video to get it to play on a bluray. Now you do not have to do anything: The 60i with 30p right out of the camera plays perfectly on all commercial bluray players, and no interlacing artifacts. Convenient, follows a standard, avoids some important issues. A brilliant spec (if there has to be one - I am not arguing that one is better than choice)

What kind of video world do you live in?

You're overreacting. It's a dead end from opposite ends - you're saying he can't prove that some players would fail at 2:2 pulldown, while he could say (along with any of us) that you can't prove that every player would succeed at 2:2 pulldown. Yet you're the one demanding that level of nitpicking. Thus you would have the biggest task of proving that every single player in the known universe can succeed at 2:2 pulldown. Good luck.

As for the point about 60p, you're still stuck on your "bare minimum," compromise argument. In reality, it would be better if this camcorder shot true 60p for the added versatility (just like higher resolution) of screwing around with frame rates in post, such as slow motion. And from 60p, a 30p or 60i stream is easily extracted without degradation.
post #79 of 339
You guys. It's not symmetric at all. One set of armchair photographers has no experience whatsoever playing 30p in 60i video files and has a preconceived bias against it. And I have experience with 30p in 60i. How?

I have a NEX 5. It has the same video spec as the VG-10. I have personally played video right out of the camera in Panasonic blu-ray players, Sony blu-ray players, an RCA portable Blu-ray player (!), and an LG HDTV with a slot with no problem whatsoever. I have used Pinnacle, Corel, Sony Vegas Pro, Nero 10, and they have no problem with the videos. I was as interested as you in whether this seemingly odd spec was a problem. unlike you theorists, I checked it out. Pass.

Any experience playing a 60p video on any commercial blu-ray player? The fact that theoretically it is easy to extract 30p from 60p is irrelevant - again, the question is: are any commercial bluray players able to do this? name one? Try it.

I am sorry, you are just making up a problem that some possible player may not be able to play these 30p in 60i files, and also that some player may be able to play 60p files. I cannot prove a negative of course - but all you have to do is come up with one commercial blu-ray player that has trouble with the 30p in 60i spec (and can play 60p!) and we might cut you some slack, but you cannot, can you? Maybe somewhere there is such a player that cannot do this, and maybe the sun won't rise tomorrow.

And of course having the option of 60p is great - I am with you. But you do not have to use debating tactics to tear down the spec that is offered to make the case to have more options. Unless, you have another agenda.
post #80 of 339
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

I cannot prove a negative of course - but all you have to do is come up with one commercial blu-ray player that has trouble with the 30p in 60i spec (and can play 60p!) and we might cut you some slack, but you cannot, can you?

Do you have any idea how schizophrenic that sounds? You can't have it both ways, and you're no guru anyway as an anonymous Internet pos(t)er. Just stop.
post #81 of 339
"Do you have any idea how schizophrenic that sounds? You can't have it both ways, and you're no guru anyway as an anonymous Internet pos(t)er. Just stop."

That's your answer, guru?

I present facts - what actually works with the videos that the camera under discussion makes. You present scares - what may not work. And when you are challenged, you start slinging psychological words you don't understand. Nice.

Still waiting for a real-world example of a blu-ray player that cannot play the Sony AVCHD videos, 30p in 60i.
post #82 of 339
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

"Do you have any idea how schizophrenic that sounds? You can't have it both ways, and you're no guru anyway as an anonymous Internet pos(t)er. Just stop."

That's your answer, guru?

I present facts - what actually works with the videos that the camera under discussion makes. You present scares - what may not work. And when you are challenged, you start slinging psychological words you don't understand. Nice.

Still waiting for a real-world example of a blu-ray player that cannot play the Sony AVCHD videos, 30p in 60i.

Do you hear the echo of your own voice?

It's funny to watch arrogant people freak out when they're wrong. Especially when it's on such a nerdy issue as this.

Google around about most all of the LG Blu-Ray players (e.g., BD360, BD550, etc.) and the way that they resolve 2:2 pulldown to half resolution or worse. If you can't find it in the minute or so it should take, please for the love of God don't have a temper tantrum about it here.
post #83 of 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

Still waiting for a real-world example of a blu-ray player that cannot play the Sony AVCHD videos, 30p in 60i.

Samsung BD-P3600
"The BD-P3600 failed our 2:2 cadence test for HD material. But this will only affect the playback of a few concert discs available on the market today, such as Nine Inch Nails' Beside You in Time Blu-ray Disc. This concert was shot in 1080p/30, but the Blu-ray is encoded as 1080i since Blu-ray doesn't support native 1080p/30 video." -- http://hometheatermag.com/discplayer...lu-ray_player/



Denon DVD-A1UDCI
"The asterisk is there to indicate that the Denon only passed our 2:2 HD test clip if the player's Progressive Mode setting was switched from Auto to Video 2 in the setup menu. This will only affect playback of a few concert videos and perhaps TV shows encoded at 1080i on BD. We feel that a player must pass our test suite in its Auto setting since the disc jackets don't provide the information users would need to engage a different deinterlacing mode on an as-needed basis." -- http://hometheatermag.com/discplayer...lu-ray_player/



Sony BDP-S5000ES
"With our standard 1080i HD deinterlacing tests, the BDP-S5000ES didn't pass our 3:2- or 2:2-based deinterlacing tests. This is surprising at this price point, since there are a number of lower-end players that have no problems with these tests at all. There are only a few 1080i-encoded Blu-ray Discs out there, but it's still important for a player to offer the right video processing to maximize video performance with all discs. Considering the fact that Sony Music releases the majority of 1080i content on the Blu-ray market, it's even more baffling that this player doesn't offer premium-quality video processing." -- http://hometheatermag.com/discplayer...lu-ray_player/

Samsung BD-P2500
"The HD decoder does have an issue with chroma upsampling with HD material mastered with a 2:2 cadence (not shown in our chart). This content represents a tiny segment of the market, but the player revealed obvious banding with our 2:2 Chroma Upsampling Error (CUE) test pattern. The player didn't show any signs of chroma error with DVD material or the more common 3:2 cadence with HD material." -- http://hometheatermag.com/discplayer...lu-ray_player/

Sony BDP-S350
"The BDP-S350 does not properly deinterlace 1080i material with a 2:2 cadence. This applies to concert media or anything sourced from a 30-fps camera. A few concert videos on the market today (including some by Sony BMG) employ a 2:2 cadence." -- http://hometheatermag.com/discplayer...lu-ray_player/

Is this enough?
post #84 of 339
"Google around about most all of the LG Blu-Ray players (e.g., BD360, BD550, etc.) and the way that they resolve 2:2 pulldown to half resolution or worse. If you can't find it in the minute or so it should take, please for the love of God don't have a temper tantrum about it here."

Thank you, an example at last; that is useful. Is this a problem only with LG bluray players? Why didn't you just indicate the players with the problem, when asked? Manipulator?

I am a bit confused hpmoon: I went to your Vimeo post

http://vimeo.com/13333374

and I agree 100% with everything you say about this camera: you defend the choice of 30p in 60i precisely because it conforms to the bluray standard, you pooh-pooh any adverse visual issues otherwise with it. So I don't get it.

Your web site is useful, some of your videos are very nice. I especially like the Curtis concert videos. I wonder if you could do better on the sound, though.

Anyway, aside from manners -calling people "arrogant" or their statements "schizophrenic" or talking about "temper tantrums" - you got a lot to offer. I notice you do the arrogant, nit-picking, name-calling dance with a lot of people on this site (LANC, if you know what I mean).

But I also recommend viewers here go that posting; it is very informative about the new camera. It will be even more useful when hpmoon actually gets to use one, and I look forward to the videos.
post #85 of 339
"Is this enough?"

Now we are getting somewhere. Great, very useful. Thanks.

On the players I used I did not see anything awry (and I have played videos from regular 3:2 camcorder files), but I could have missed it.

Is this "cadence" problem visible? What should we look for?
post #86 of 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

Is this "cadence" problem visible? What should we look for?

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/the-d...-scan-dvd.html
post #87 of 339
This entire argument is boring and ridiculous. It reminds me very much of a painting they found in some closet a few years back. They originally thought it was a Picasso and everybody thought it was "beautiful".... and the price shot up to a few million.

Then a few weeks later it was declared a non Picasso.... the price took a nose dive and the painting all of a sudden wasn't quite as beautiful anymore (figure that one out !?!?).

Then again... a few weeks later they declared themselves wrong and it was indeed a Picasso. Well.... yes of course... the price shot up and all of a sudden it was a beautiful painting again.

What a joke.

The proof is in the pudding. Take a look at the VG10 samples.... that's all you need. Pretty stunning stuff. And yes... I've seen it on Blu Ray too. Again... pretty stunning Now if you people want get tangled up in a bunch of absolutely useless talk about pull down and other such nonsense then knock yourself out because none of it changes the rather stunning images coming out of this cam.
post #88 of 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbarney View Post

Now if you people want get tangled up in a bunch of absolutely useless talk about pull down and other such nonsense then knock yourself out because none of it changes the rather stunning images coming out of this cam.

I am not sure the talk is useless. When lower end cameras have flexible frame rates, then a higher end camera looks bad when it doesn't. You expect more when you pay more rather than the other way around.

Anyway, there are other issues beyond frame rate mentioned by Michael's review that I post earlier:

"Weaknesses
While there is a great deal to appreciate about the VG10, and it fulfills its primary brief of shooting video with a large sensor and interchangeable lenses at an attractive price point, there is a lot about the VG10 to be critical of.

Unlike most camcorders there is no powered zoom provided, and none is possible. In exchange one has the advantage of interchangeable lenses, so I see no particular disadvantage since those interested in this model will likely have another camcorder as well for those times when powered zoom is required.

So – in no particular order, here are some of what I regard as the VG10's more serious deficits...

Sensor Dust. Just as with a DSLR the downside of a removable lens is the possibility of dust on the sensor. The camera has sensor shake dust removal technology, but this isn't always successful. I shot for most of a day with a dust bunny on the sensor and didn't notice it till I reviewed the day's footage that evening. Unlike when shooting stills, removing dust spots from video is not a simple matter of clicking once or twice with a magic wand.

Dust removal shake is actuated every time the camera is turned off, so I suggest that when changing lenses with the VG10 one get in the habit of cycling the power switch or activating sensor cleaning via the menus. My recommendation is that you also do what has always been done in the film industry between shots – check the gate, or in this case, check the sensor, visually.

No 24P. I discuss this in detail below, but I find the lack of 24P on a camera in this price range to be regrettable. Not everyone needs it, but at this stage in the game it doesn't cost extras to include and would be appreciated by exactly the type of buyer that the VG10 is designed to be attractive to, the indy film maker. Given that the Canon 5D MKII now has 24P, once Canon understood that this is what people want, and the Panasonic GH1 offers excellent 24P with the Tester 13 hack, it's more than a little surprising that Sony didn't include it.

No Focus or Exposure Support Indicators. The VG10 does not have any form of overexposure warning. No flashing highlights, or more appropriate for video, no Zebras. It also does not have any form of focus confirmation; no confirmation light; no Peaking. I frankly can't believe that a video camera priced at some $2,000 lacks these most basic shooting assists.

Even more curious is that the NEX5, which the VG10 is based on, has a very nice manual focus assist function that provides 7X and 14X views. This is fantastically useful for focusing A series and other wide aperture manual focus lenses, such as Leica M glass. Why it's missing from the VG10 borders on the imponderable.

Control Placement and User Interface. I'll be frank. The user interface on the VG10 is really not that good. It is based on that of the NEX5 which I roundly criticized when I reviewed that camera here recently. It improves on the NEX5 slightly by having a few additional buttons, but these are all covered by the LCD screen when it is closed.

If you shoot using the EVF then you'll likely have the screen closed, and this means that not a single control is available unless you open the screen cover, at which point the view through the EVF disappears, and reappears on the LCD. So to shoot while making any adjustment, even something as simple as exposure compensation, requires you to have the LCD screen open, even if you're not using it for viewing. Who on the Sony design team thought that this was a good idea?

No RAW in Still Mode. Once again, I have to ask – "why"? The NEX 5 has raw. The VG10 is aimed at a sophisticated user, likely one more so than an NEX5 owner, which is described by Sony as being aimed at the step-up-from-a-point-and-shoot customer. So, why omit raw on the VG10? It costs nothing because its already there. All cameras shoot raw, it's what the in-camera JPG is derived from. Why throw it away? I just don't get it. Market and product segmentation is all I can imagine is at work here. Look for step-up model that includes raw mode within a year or so, at a higher price, of course. Or maybe, if we get really lucky, a firmware upgrade.

No Front Release. There is only one shutter release at the rear of the camera. This is well placed for hand-held shooting but inconvenient for much tripod work. A front release would be highly appreciated, and is found on most higher end camcorders for this reason. Some even have three releases. The VG10 just one.

No Audio Level Controls. No Meters. No XLR. The built in mikes are fine for casual use, but anyone shooting narratives needs better audio than built-ins can provide. There is a mini-jack mike input on the VG10's top handle, and a cold shoe for mounting a shotgun mic, but the input has no levels meters or controls. There are obviously no XLRs, but size wasn't the reason because there are small cameras such as the JVC HM100 that manage to provide them.

The Histogram Fiasco. Just as with the NEX5 the VG10 has an available histogram. Thank goodness, because it's hard enough to judge exposure manually without Zebras. But, as was discussed in my NEX5 review, mysteriously the histogram disappears during exposure compensation adjustment – exactly the time that you want and need to see it.

Given that this is simply a firmware issue, and that every review of the NEX5 that I have seen has chastised Sony for this design flaw, you'd think that in the months since the NEX5 was released they would have corrected this in the VG10. Once again a very puzzling design error."
post #89 of 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post


Anyway, there are other issues beyond frame rate mentioned by Michael's review that I post earlier:

Yeah... and reviews are a dime a dozen. Here's one here:

http://www.videomaker.com/article/15150/

As for the one you list....
- Sensor dust is a problem with ALL removable lens cams
- 24p is for people who actually believe in that silliness.
- Other reviews state nothing wrong with the interface.... to each their own I guess.
- I can't remember the last time I shot RAW stills.... can you? (I even have a cam that CAN do RAW)
- A front release??? Come on... get serious. I suppose we should be pissed because the cam won't wash dishes.

So after discounting all of that junk... what do we have left to complain about...
post #90 of 339
[quote=bigbarney;19132700]Yeah... and reviews are a dime a dozen. Here's one here:

http://www.videomaker.com/article/15150/[/quite]
Yes indeed. And some are worth only a dime .

First, read it carefully and you see that he constantly apologizes for the camera by calling it a consumer gear, not prosumer:

"We think it is important, therefore, before moving on to the details, to point out that we believe this camera could quite easily be unfairly judged. The reason, simply stated, is that it is so close to being much more than what it actually is. The perspective we need to understand is, what the manufacturer, in this case Sony, intends it to be - which is a consumer level camcorder....

Remembering that this is a consumer class camcorder, the quality of audio produced with this microphone is very good. ....

You won't be plugging in your XLR mics without an adapter, or enjoying a bounty of buttons with this one, but remember, it is a consumer, not prosumer, camera....

It would be easy to deride the product by saying that it should have this or that feature. But in order to evaluate it fairly we must realize that it is not a prosumer or professional level piece of equipment that forgot to have certain features included, but rather a consumer level camcorder that has included some truly excellent features such as interchangeable lenses."


Excuse me but if I am paying $2,000 for a camera, it better have prosumer type features. Who pays so much and is not seriously into videomaking?

But let's stay with consumer classification. What excuse is there for not matching the features such as flexible frame rate selections in consumer gear? Or focusing aid? Or audio level control? These features all exist in consumer gear and the reviewer fails to mention them. Michael on the other hand, clearly talks about these things.

Quote:


As for the one you list....

The list is not mine but that of Luminous Landscape (Michael's site).

Quote:


- Sensor dust is a problem with ALL removable lens cams

That's true although Michael seem to have found it less effective and of course, none of the fixed lens camcorders have this problem as you state.

Quote:


- 24p is for people who actually believe in that silliness.

Not true for independent film makers who make a living that way. They need to replicate the look of film for good or bad. And unfortunately, rate conversion to 24p is very challenging so it is not a problem that is easily dealt with.

I fully agree that for people who want to shoot home videos, that is not a consideration at all. But rather, they may want more fluid motion for videos and such and that is where 1080p60 comes in. There is a reason broadcasters demanded and got 1080i60 for ATSC standard. They needed the higher frame rates than 30p even with the artifacts of interlaced video.

Quote:


- Other reviews state nothing wrong with the interface.... to each their own I guess.

I will go along with that with the mention that I have been following Michael's reviews for many years and they are dead on in finding usability issues.

Quote:


- I can't remember the last time I shot RAW stills.... can you? (I even have a cam that CAN do RAW)

Can I? Of course. I was shooting RAW today. I always shoot Raw. I have nearly 1 Tbyte worth of RAW images. I don't know of any serious photographers who don't shoot RAW.

Quote:


- A front release??? Come on... get serious. I suppose we should be pissed because the cam won't wash dishes.

Agreed.

Quote:


So after discounting all of that junk... what do we have left to complain about...

A lot . The problem with this camera is that it lacks focus in its design. It seems that the consumer group at Sony tried to do a prosumer camera. It should have been the other way around. Maybe they are trying to protect their higher end lines. But either way, they misses such simple things that don't cost a dime. If the encoder can do 30p, surely it can also do 24p. Histogram should always be on. Audio control? Surely Sony knows how to do audio control.

The camera is a diamond in the rough. It clearly has some innovative features. Question is whether a revision is coming alone to fix all of these problems in 9 months.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Camcorders
AVS › AVS Forum › Other Areas of Interest › Camcorders › Sony NEX-VG10 OFFICIAL Camcorder Thread