AVS › AVS Forum › Other Areas of Interest › Camcorders › Canon HF G10, XA10, XF100, XF105 Owners Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Canon HF G10, XA10, XF100, XF105 Owners Thread - Page 23

post #661 of 4132
4/8/11 at 11:24am
Quote:
Originally Posted by YLK View Post

While testing Canon please do not forget about the (in)famous blue dot...

this is a good point..
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #662 of 4132
4/8/11 at 11:24am
While testing Canon please do not forget about the (in)famous blue dot...
Reply
Reply
post #663 of 4132
4/8/11 at 11:29am
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilfurbal View Post

It sounds like you're talking about the wide angle lens, and Ken is talking about the wall charger for the batteries. Lol.

You're right... lol.
Reply
Reply
post #664 of 4132
4/8/11 at 12:34pm
The 'infamous blue dot' was a Sony issue as I recall. I've had 3 Canons and never saw that blue dot, but I did see it on the 560. My current XA10 has no blue dot.

I have seen some of the bigger Canons with CA lens issues, but fortunately I see no such issue with the XA10. It has a very nice lens.
Reply
Reply
post #665 of 4132
4/8/11 at 1:29pm
Yep. Blue dot is Sony.
Reply
Reply
post #666 of 4132
4/8/11 at 1:50pm
I think the blu dot reference was a joke
Reply
Reply
post #667 of 4132
4/8/11 at 2:24pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay968 View Post

I think that the bigger issue for me was that I was taking the card out of my friend's camera and placing it into the blu-ray player to view. Once I got my own camera and hooked it up directly to the TV things looked better.


Jay are you having a problem with the card playing raw files or could that just be your particular blu-ray player?
thanks
Reply
Reply
post #668 of 4132
4/8/11 at 2:28pm
Thread Starter 
Just wanted to post that B&H photo has the HF G10 in stock now.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...G10_Flash.html
Reply
Reply
post #669 of 4132
4/8/11 at 2:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ErLupo View Post

Canon HF-G10 in stock at BH Photovideo. Time to move!!!

Canon HF-G10

You guys are late!!!!
Reply
Reply
post #670 of 4132
4/8/11 at 2:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu View Post

Jay are you having a problem with the card playing raw files or could that just be your particular blu-ray player?
thanks

I don't think the card has any issues, at least none that I know of. I just see a slight difference in the look coming through the blu-ray player as opposed to directly out of the camcorder. It may be the blu-ray player's circutry, it may be the settings that I have on each input on the TV set, not sure. But there is a subtle difference and I do prefer the look directly out of the camcorder.

I can understand this. I have even seen slightly different results from the same blu-ray disk depending on which player it was being played on. The best way I can describe what I see is to say it is most apparent when shooting things with very hard edges, such as black text on a white piece of paper. There is a very slight ghosting to the text. It's still there directly out of the camcorder but hardly noticeable at all. Objects with hard edges such as a box edge against a contrasting background will show it as well. It's really not that big a deal but I do see it. When the sharpness on the camcorder is turned down, it helps. I have seen it from time to time with other camcorders, some to a greater extent, some to a lesser extent. When you turn up the sharpness on a TV set to the point where it is just set too high, you tend to see this.

And BTW, I have tried the same thing with the XA10 that I currently own. If I take the card out of the camcorder and play it through the blu-ray player the same thing happens. Not sure, but it IS possible that I am just very picky about what I am looking at. I do have a tendency to pick up on such things that no one else ever notices or cares about.
Reply
Reply
post #671 of 4132
4/8/11 at 3:04pm
Well I will post it for Prime time since it got lost on the LCD vs Plasma controversy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mistqFbofTg
Thanks,
Luidoly
Reply
Reply
post #672 of 4132
4/8/11 at 3:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay968 View Post

I don't think the card has any issues, at least none that I know of. I just see a slight difference in the look coming through the blu-ray player as opposed to directly out of the camcorder. It may be the blu-ray player's circutry, it may be the settings that I have on each input on the TV set, not sure. But there is a subtle difference and I do prefer the look directly out of the camcorder.

I can understand this. I have even seen slightly different results from the same blu-ray disk depending on which player it was being played on. The best way I can describe what I see is to say it is most apparent when shooting things with very hard edges, such as black text on a white piece of paper. There is a very slight ghosting to the text. It's still there directly out of the camcorder but hardly noticeable at all. Objects with hard edges such as a box edge against a contrasting background will show it as well. It's really not that big a deal but I do see it. When the sharpness on the camcorder is turned down, it helps. I have seen it from time to time with other camcorders, some to a greater extent, some to a lesser extent. When you turn up the sharpness on a TV set to the point where it is just set too high, you tend to see this.

And BTW, I have tried the same thing with the XA10 that I currently own. If I take the card out of the camcorder and play it through the blu-ray player the same thing happens. Not sure, but it IS possible that I am just very picky about what I am looking at. I do have a tendency to pick up on such things that no one else ever notices or cares about.

I have the same blu-ray player, and it does the same thing even though I am using the HF G10, your better off running it directly via the HDMI from the Camcorder to the TV, much better results that way. Also TV adjustments play a factor as well. Thats what makes comparisons on a computer/TV etc.. so flipping hard.
Reply
Reply
post #673 of 4132
4/8/11 at 3:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garman View Post

I have the same blu-ray player, and it does the same thing even though I am using the HF G10, your better off running it directly via the HDMI from the Camcorder to the TV, much better results that way. Also TV adjustments play a factor as well. Thats what makes comparisons on a computer/TV etc.. so flipping hard.

So you are seeing what I described when you play the files by placing the card into the blu-ray player? That's good to hear!
Reply
Reply
post #674 of 4132
4/8/11 at 4:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay968 View Post

So you are seeing what I described when you play the files by placing the card into the blu-ray player? That's good to hear!

Yes, and I have the Panasonic BD-30 connected via my TV, there are all sorts of things that can interfere with what type of picture your playing, thats why it is so hard to compare.

Examples: Running via your Card you have your video on through a Playstation3 or a Panasonic Blu-Ray player, or running HDMI switching through a receiver, they all vary to what types of video scalers they use. The best way I found to compare camcorders is through mini HDMI to HDMI on a good TV and then switch inputs. I have 2 inputs on my projector which is a SXRD VPL-VW85, and I can switch quickly and compare, bottom line the best way is to use the main device for playback you like and hook up directly, as software and other means of downloading and burning can create problems as can read back on different devices, computers still shots etc... etc...
Reply
Reply
post #675 of 4132
4/8/11 at 4:25pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay968 View Post

I don't think the card has any issues, at least none that I know of. I just see a slight difference in the look coming through the blu-ray player as opposed to directly out of the camcorder. It may be the blu-ray player's circutry, it may be the settings that I have on each input on the TV set, not sure. But there is a subtle difference and I do prefer the look directly out of the camcorder.

I can understand this. I have even seen slightly different results from the same blu-ray disk depending on which player it was being played on. The best way I can describe what I see is to say it is most apparent when shooting things with very hard edges, such as black text on a white piece of paper. There is a very slight ghosting to the text. It's still there directly out of the camcorder but hardly noticeable at all. Objects with hard edges such as a box edge against a contrasting background will show it as well. It's really not that big a deal but I do see it. When the sharpness on the camcorder is turned down, it helps. I have seen it from time to time with other camcorders, some to a greater extent, some to a lesser extent. When you turn up the sharpness on a TV set to the point where it is just set too high, you tend to see this.

And BTW, I have tried the same thing with the XA10 that I currently own. If I take the card out of the camcorder and play it through the blu-ray player the same thing happens. Not sure, but it IS possible that I am just very picky about what I am looking at. I do have a tendency to pick up on such things that no one else ever notices or cares about.


Thanks for clarifying that. I know what you mean about being picky and seeing things that others would overlook.
I've been generally happy with the PS3 playing back raw files.
I'm seriously interested in the Canon regardless of what Ken thinks. I just don't like to order something unless I'm fairly certain it will meet my needs. The fact that I can return it is good but i'd rather be very certain before i plunk down my hard earned.

It sounds like it's the blu-ray player if the camcorder can play it ok. The only thing is you can't store all your files on the camcorder. Also i wonder if teh camcorder is upscaling to 60p internally or something. I vaguely recall reading something about that but it might not have been Canon.
Reply
Reply
post #676 of 4132
4/8/11 at 4:39pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu View Post

Thanks for clarifying that. I know what you mean about being picky and seeing things that others would overlook.
I've been generally happy with the PS3 playing back raw files.
I'm seriously interested in the Canon regardless of what Ken thinks. I just don't like to order something unless I'm fairly certain it will meet my needs. The fact that I can return it is good but i'd rather be very certain before i plunk down my hard earned.

It sounds like it's the blu-ray player if the camcorder can play it ok. The only thing is you can't store all your files on the camcorder. Also i wonder if teh camcorder is upscaling to 60p internally or something. I vaguely recall reading something about that but it might not have been Canon.

I hear ya. My weakness is that I feel that the only way I am going to know for sure how good something is and how well it will work for me is if I own it or have access to it for at least a month. I know I have wasted a lot of money doing things this way but for me, it's the only way to know. While I like to hear other people's opinions of things and they do help, in the end it is my own personal opinion of a product that will dictate whether it's for me or not and I need to use it myself to find out.
Reply
Reply
post #677 of 4132
4/8/11 at 4:51pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay968 View Post

I hear ya. My weakness is that I feel that the only way I am going to know for sure how good something is and how well it will work for me is if I own it or have access to it for at least a month. I know I have wasted a lot of money doing things this way but for me, it's the only way to know. While I like to hear other people's opinions of things and they do help, in the end it is my own personal opinion of a product that will dictate whether it's for me or not and I need to use it myself to find out.


I can't disagree with you there. The thing is a $2k camcorder and from the videos I have seen and played raw files from the TM900 still looks better to me in bright light. But this is not a very vibrant time of year outside. I also noticed some strobing from some raw XA10 files.
I think if the TM900 didn't have all the high bitrate issues I would have kept it. It was super simple to use but lacked any real manual controls.
The Canon has a lot more manual control and I prefer that.

My wife is no help because she just says to buy the one I like. She did like the TM900. But the constant crashing was a chore.

The HF G10 looks pretty good overall, but I like a high wow factor in my video. That is something I haven't seen in the Canon raw files, yet.
But it's still very new so in a week or two it should be picking up and even in Japan things are getting slowly better.
I expect we will see more and more shipments as things crawl back to normal.
I was in the Philippines when the Tsunami hit Thailand and Indonesia, quite a few of my friends had friends who died in that disaster.

I think it will be getting better from what I'm reading in the news, it slowly is.
Reply
Reply
post #678 of 4132
4/8/11 at 5:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay968 View Post

I don't think the card has any issues, at least none that I know of. I just see a slight difference in the look coming through the blu-ray player as opposed to directly out of the camcorder. It may be the blu-ray player's circutry, it may be the settings that I have on each input on the TV set, not sure. But there is a subtle difference and I do prefer the look directly out of the camcorder.

Jay, as I've mentioned before, I have zero doubt that there is something different in your setups for these different sources (BD player & cam direct to display). If you're that fussy (as I am) you really need to trace down what that issue is and I'll tell you why.

If you begin to compensate at the camcorder level during acquisition for issues in your display setup (BD player or display), you will forever have your original footage compromised in a manner that was never necessary. By lowering the sharpness of the camcorder (and I'm really pretty sure the camera's default settings are correct, I see zero trace of edge enhancement or false contouring on a 60" ISF'd Pioneer Kuro), you will have lost a slight amount of detail forever. Yes, it may be slight, but again if you can see the little things as I can, it will be a needless compromise. The sheer fact that you have two different results, slight as they may be, proves beyond a shadow of a doubt there is something slightly different in the two setups (BD player and cam direct to display).

HDMI is simply a pure digital signal and it should look exactly the same whether the same source material is coming via the BD player to the display or the camera to the display. If your BD player is neutral and no enhancements or adjustments were made, then the culprit is probably the BD player input on your TV.
Reply
Reply
post #679 of 4132
4/8/11 at 5:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garman View Post

Yes, and I have the Panasonic BD-30 connected via my TV, there are all sorts of things that can interfere with what type of picture your playing, thats why it is so hard to compare.

Examples: Running via your Card you have your video on through a Playstation3 or a Panasonic Blu-Ray player, or running HDMI switching through a receiver, they all vary to what types of video scalers they use. The best way I found to compare camcorders is through mini HDMI to HDMI on a good TV and then switch inputs. I have 2 inputs on my projector which is a SXRD VPL-VW85, and I can switch quickly and compare, bottom line the best way is to use the main device for playback you like and hook up directly, as software and other means of downloading and burning can create problems as can read back on different devices, computers still shots etc... etc...

Just a note on this, anyone using scalers in this equation, you can throw all your comparisons out the window. Any HDMI signal should NOT be scaled and be allowed to 'pass through'. I've got a Denon receiver and it will not scale any HDMI signal passing through it. That's what you want.

If we inject the PS3 in to the equation, you can forget about that device with 1080p Panasonic files. They just don't play them properly...too much stutter. But yet they will play the lower bitrate Sony 1080p files with no problem. They also play the Canon files like butter, zero issues.
Reply
Reply
post #680 of 4132
4/8/11 at 5:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu View Post

The HF G10 looks pretty good overall, but I like a high wow factor in my video. That is something I haven't seen in the Canon raw files, yet.

It seems that most people that have viewed my raw A/B files disagree with you Steve, they think there is MORE of the 'wow factor' with the Canon footage than the Panasonic. Having done a ton of these A/Bs now, there is no question whatsoever that the Canon does indeed have more 'punch' and 'wow' than the Panasonic. The Canon has more contrast & color saturation and therefore by definition, more punch. My buddy who also does video professionally, came over and viewed the A/Bs (I did not tell him which was which) and he picked the Canon as better about 75% of the time in good light and 100% of the time in low light. He too felt the Canon had more of the wow factor. In fact the ONLY way to determine if the Canon or the Panasonic has more 'punch' is to do a side by side A/B of the same subject at the same time. Looking at footage that some guy shot with a Canon and then looking at footage that some other guy shot with a Panasonic, will never ever tell you how the two compare or their relative 'punch' when shooting the same subject under the same conditions. It's just impossible. You must view A/Bs.

One AVS member even commented on my A/Bs that the Panny looked almost drab by comparison and he commented he thought he'd never say that about the 900.
Reply
Reply
post #681 of 4132
4/8/11 at 5:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Jay, as I've mentioned before, I have zero doubt that there is something different in your setups for these different sources (BD player & cam direct to display). If you're that fussy (as I am) you really need to trace down what that issue is and I'll tell you why.

If you begin to compensate at the camcorder level during acquisition for issues in your display setup (BD player or display), you will forever have your original footage compromised in a manner that was never necessary. By lowering the sharpness of the camcorder (and I'm really pretty sure the camera's default settings are correct, I see zero trace of edge enhancement or false contouring on a 60" ISF'd Pioneer Kuro), you will have lost a slight amount of detail forever. Yes, it may be slight, but again if you can see the little things as I can, it will be a needless compromise. The sheer fact that you have two different results, slight as they may be, proves beyond a shadow of a doubt there is something slightly different in the two setups (BD player and cam direct to display).

HDMI is simply a pure digital signal and it should look exactly the same whether the same source material is coming via the BD player to the display or the camera to the display. If your BD player is neutral and no enhancements or adjustments were made, then the culprit is probably the BD player input on your TV.

Well actually what all this has done is force me to not look at the clips by putting the card into the blu-ray player anymore. I won't judge anything like that at this point.

I'm not sure why you say that an HDMI signal should look exactly the same regardless of the player vs the camera. In my experience, the same exact source material (a blu-ray disk for instance) can look very different when played back via one blu-ray player as opposed to another. Or for that matter, one device as opposed to another. I have 3 different blu-ray players in the house and have owned a few others along the way. No two looked exactly the same. What you say might be true if all the components being used had all the same circuits etc. but they don't. For that matter, it's the same when comparing TV sets. If we have a pure digital signal entering the house and arriving at the TV via an HDMI cable, but 2 different TV sets (even if each were LCD, LED or Plasma) the 2 can look vastly different in the end. So I don't see why a blu-ray player playing a file from an SD card should look exactly the same as a camcorder playing that same file from that same card. They are using very different circuits to achieve the end result. I would be very surprised if they did look the same.
Reply
Reply
post #682 of 4132
4/8/11 at 5:43pm
One more note Ken...I just read your last post where you mention scalers. Yes you see there is a difference here. What may very well be happening with my Panny blu-ray player is that it is probably taking 60i and converting it to 60p along the way. This make sense?

The XA10 does have an option that you can turn on which turns the HDMI output to 60p for viewing. I tried that at one time and turned it off because it too created that same look that I saw with the blu-ray player method.

Bingo!
Reply
Reply
post #683 of 4132
4/8/11 at 5:46pm
If you read the reviews on BD players, the pros will tell you that all these players produce the same picture. Now it IS possible that a given manufacturer is doing something to the signal to give a different look. But if that's the case, then they have probably taken the signal out of the digital domain and altered it in some D/A conversion. This is not what videophiles want to see. You want the signal direct from the disc with zero alterations. A good BD player should do just that. If I knew my BD player was altering the signal in a way that could not be corrected, it would go back to the store.

The display device is totally different because everything that you see does not occur in the digital domain. There are still many D/A, A/D conversions going on and it's not the intent of display manufacturer's to have every set look identical. Very often a given manufacturer has a given 'look' to their line of sets.

Sony has a look, Panasonic has a look, they all have a different 'look'. That's why anyone who is anal about this stuff should have their HDTV ISF'd by a good ISF tech.

If you haven't done that Jay, you really really should. If you appreciate subtleties, you'll surely appreciate an ISF adjustment.
Reply
Reply
post #684 of 4132
4/8/11 at 5:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay968 View Post

One more note Ken...I just read your last post where you mention scalers. Yes you see there is a difference here. What may very well be happening with my Panny blu-ray player is that it is probably taking 60i and converting it to 60p along the way. This make sense?

The XA10 does have an option that you can turn on which turns the HDMI output to 60p for viewing. I tried that at one time and turned it off because it too created that same look that I saw with the blu-ray player method.

Bingo!

Just curious, are you running out mini HDMI to HDMI to the back of your TV? I just hooked it up directly to my TV via HDMI and use same cables and just switch inputs.
Reply
Reply
post #685 of 4132
4/8/11 at 5:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay968 View Post

One more note Ken...I just read your last post where you mention scalers. Yes you see there is a difference here. What may very well be happening with my Panny blu-ray player is that it is probably taking 60i and converting it to 60p along the way. This make sense?

The XA10 does have an option that you can turn on which turns the HDMI output to 60p for viewing. I tried that at one time and turned it off because it too created that same look that I saw with the blu-ray player method.

Bingo!

Jay, what that is saying is that your TV has the best deinterlacer of the three. That's not surprising at all actually and yes, it does make sense.

P.S. Does your BD player have the ability to output a 1080i signal with NO conversion? If so, you should then get the identical picture if everything else is equal.
Reply
Reply
post #686 of 4132
4/8/11 at 5:51pm
Jay, someone else mentioned this, but are you running your BD player through a receiver? If so, is that HDMI input on the receiver set to 'pass through', meaning no alterations?
Reply
Reply
post #687 of 4132
4/8/11 at 6:02pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

It seems that most people that have viewed my raw A/B files disagree with you Steve, they think there is MORE of the 'wow factor' with the Canon footage than the Panasonic. Having done a ton of these A/Bs now, there is no question whatsoever that the Canon does indeed have more 'punch' and 'wow' than the Panasonic. The Canon has more contrast & color saturation and therefore by definition, more punch. My buddy who also does video professionally, came over and viewed the A/Bs (I did not tell him which was which) and he picked the Canon as better about 75% of the time in good light and 100% of the time in low light. He too felt the Canon had more of the wow factor. In fact the ONLY way to determine if the Canon or the Panasonic has more 'punch' is to do a side by side A/B of the same subject at the same time. Looking at footage that some guy shot with a Canon and then looking at footage that some other guy shot with a Panasonic, will never ever tell you how the two compare or their relative 'punch' when shooting the same subject under the same conditions. It's just impossible. You must view A/Bs.

One AVS member even commented on my A/Bs that the Panny looked almost drab by comparison and he commented he thought he'd never say that about the 900.


I can only go by the files I have seen. I've seen your files 19 sec long as well as files from others that are much longer. The Canon has a lot going for it. That said no one is posting action shots just static shots with some panning and zooming and some of those are helpful if it's like palm fronds which tend to blur if the camera isn't good at handling that sort of thing.

I'm glad you've found your ideal camera for now.

But I have to make a decision soon myself and based on the few clips I've seen with my own eyes. The Canon doesn't pop as well as the TM900. But that's only based on those clips.
I'm really in between at the moment. Indecision is a terrible thing.
Reply
Reply
post #688 of 4132
4/8/11 at 6:07pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Jay, someone else mentioned this, but are you running your BD player through a receiver? If so, is that HDMI input on the receiver set to 'pass through', meaning no alterations?

I mentioned it in a earlier post, when testing gear I just run direct to the TV as some receivers don't even have pass through, hence it can give you some pretty wacky stuff as most video boards in receivers are not created equal.
Reply
Reply
post #689 of 4132
4/8/11 at 6:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu View Post

I can only go by the files I have seen. I've seen your files 19 sec long as well as files from others that are much longer. The Canon has a lot going for it. That said no one is posting action shots just static shots with some panning and zooming and some of those are helpful if it's like palm fronds which tend to blur if the camera isn't good at handling that sort of thing.

I'm glad you've found your ideal camera for now.

But I have to make a decision soon myself and based on the few clips I've seen with my own eyes. The Canon doesn't pop as well as the TM900. But that's only based on those clips.
I'm really in between at the moment. Indecision is a terrible thing.

Get the Canon and compare them directly out of the HDMI inputs to a decent TV via HDMI and then be the judge. I have seen some great video footage with my 700, but the Canon seems to have me won over on lowlight and to my eye better than my 700 and of course much better than my Sony CX-150. I will know more tomorrow once I shoot this wedding if the HG 10 is a keeper, if not I will return it and play the waiting game.
Reply
Reply
post #690 of 4132
4/8/11 at 6:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu View Post

I can only go by the files I have seen. I've seen your files 19 sec long as well as files from others that are much longer.

Steve, I must be missing something. Even if my clips are '19 seconds long', they are still A/Bs with the 900 and thus more valuable in determining relative 'punch' than two clips from two different people using two different camcorders.

I'm doing A/Bs of the exact same subject at the exact same time. Where am I wrong here?

I don't have the ultra fast action you're looking for, but you can certainly judge relative pop, sharpness and color from my A/Bs. They were conducted in low light, good light, indoor and outdoor. :confused

I've got both cameras and there is simply no doubt that the Canon has more pop. Now some people may prefer the tamer look that comes from the Panasonic, but I don't see how one could look at the A/Bs I've done and come to the conclusion that the 900 has more pop, it simply doesn't.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Camcorders

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › Other Areas of Interest › Camcorders › Canon HF G10, XA10, XF100, XF105 Owners Thread