or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Other Areas of Interest › Camcorders › Offical Canon HF G10 Jello-Vision Problem Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Offical Canon HF G10 Jello-Vision Problem Thread

post #1 of 194
Thread Starter 
This is the place to post questions, comments, suggestions or problems regarding the problems that some people are having with their Canon HF G10 Camcorder models. This problem is defined as having a clear jello like effect usually on the upper right hand side of the picture. It's not limited to that but that is what is most prevelant. It will show up during slow pans or when slowly walking with the camcorder with the image stabilization on.
It typically does not show up when zooming and does not show up at all on a tripod.

You can also post links to video showing the problems you are having.
Here is a link to the one I have, You can download the raw file (for a week) or watch it on Vimeo. Try and watch it in 1080i as that is how I filmed it.

http://vimeo.com/22529938
post #2 of 194
Wow, this is pretty bad jello, especially considering that you shot in interlaced mode (the sensor readout is faster in interlaced mode).

Blackening of the corners is called vignetting and is expected with non-standard hood or WA adapter, but should not be noticeable with standard lens and hood.
post #3 of 194
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ungermann View Post
Wow, this is pretty bad jello, especially considering that you shot in interlaced mode (the sensor readout is faster in interlaced mode).

Blackening of the corners is called vignetting and is expected with non-standard hood or WA adapter, but should not be noticeable with standard lens and hood.

The thing is is it a defective batch of cameras or do they all do it?
I honestly have no idea. Quality control is so poor coming out of Japan lately and even before the tsunami.

At least you can see the jello and it's not on fast pans or unrealistic behavior that might screw up any camera.

I guess i'll try another one and see if that one is bad as well, if not then I'm golden.
post #4 of 194
The older Canon HF series also had the jello (HF10, etc.) - when doing walking or any sudden movement with the cam.

I'm don't think the newer Dynamic stabilization function tries to counteract jello - it seems that CMOS symptom is still beyond their control at this point.
post #5 of 194
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by xfws View Post
The older Canon HF series also had the jello (HF10, etc.) - when doing walking or any sudden movement with the cam.

I'm don't think the newer Dynamic stabilization function tries to counteract jello - it seems that CMOS symptom is still beyond their control at this point.

Well that kinda bites. I wonder why the XA10's don't have this problem?
Too bad Panasonic's have such poor low light performance. Their stabilization is great.
post #6 of 194
Thread Starter 
I found this in another forum, that I'm not a member of.
He makes some very valid points about stabilization. Now this could be what is happening to the HF G10.


"I'll tell you.. they did the same thing Sony did last year. The "hybrid" in hybrid stabilization is that it does both optical and digital. Now, I know what you're thinking, optical is great, digital sucks, so why bother? Well, that's not quite true. Optical stabilization works by shifting lens elements, digital works by essentially moving a window across a larger sensor area than you're using for video. Optical works better largely because it has substantially more range than any digital out there.

But actually, that's for X and Y axis displacement... but what about Z axis. That's the camera rolling either way around the axis of the lens itself... and there's nothing OIS can do about that. That's what these "hybrid" systems do, they use optical for X,Y stabilization and digital for Z. And of course, digital is ideally suited to do roll correction, because you don't need a huge number of extra pixels, it's just a rotation."
post #7 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu View Post

Well that kinda bites. I wonder why the XA10's don't have this problem?
Too bad Panasonic's have such poor low light performance. Their stabilization is great.

Bingo, and Sony's isn't too shabby either. Maybe we can put the accuracy of the Panny 900 and video stabilization in with the low light performance of Canon.

I am trying out the HF M41 not sure if this has it yet it looks to be good but the LCD screen looks washed out when viewing, but they did put some really cool features on this unit. You can watch both the view finder and LCD at the same time, and if you want to watch playback you can also just use the viewfinder. But back to the Jello issue, I had it and saw it before anyone posted about it, reminded me of on how NYPD Blue was filmed! LOL
post #8 of 194
Be aware...I am seeing the edge waviness in this video posted by Ken with his XA10. This is what happens to my HF G10...so maybe it's something to live with?

Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
Well it seems we have zero reports of jello with the XA.
False, Ken. Your own Video from Vimeo. 31 sec and later in the left side.Look at the trees!
http://www.vimeo.com/22080064

This camera has only 2 Mln. Pixels. The camera needs but for Dynamic and powered mode more pixels (pixel reserve a la Panasonic and Sony). Otherwise works switched digital image stabilizer is not effective. Standard mode uses only optical stabilization, so there does not this effect.
Last edited by takitano; Today at 02:20 AM..
post #9 of 194
Although I didn't go through them all but here are a few that I found. It was enough convince me it happens to many of the G10 cameras. I think its a great video camera especially if you put it on a tripod and need to shoot in low light. But that wobble is horrible and I don't see it on the 900 panny or the sony cx560/700. By the way.. I do see all of the wobbles I'm posting about on my 46" and 55" lcds also.


At CES :20
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kz45LoBz3k

You see at :48 as soon as he pans out
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsWNe_Ol_DQ

At 1:01
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqFGdLNlzP0


At the 1 second mark
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kah0CTO--8o

At :24
http://vimeo.com/21301495?ab
post #10 of 194
In relation to the issue I noticed that image stabilization in Vegas works great with images made with a CCD-based camera, but makes image even worse if it has been shot with a CMOS-based camera. Checking the "correct rolling shutter" flag does not really help.
post #11 of 194
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garman View Post

Bingo, and Sony's isn't too shabby either. Maybe we can put the accuracy of the Panny 900 and video stabilization in with the low light performance of Canon.

I am trying out the HF M41 not sure if this has it yet it looks to be good but the LCD screen looks washed out when viewing, but they did put some really cool features on this unit. You can watch both the view finder and LCD at the same time, and if you want to watch playback you can also just use the viewfinder. But back to the Jello issue, I had it and saw it before anyone posted about it, reminded me of on how NYPD Blue was filmed! LOL

The Panny excels at OIS and I'd agree that it's IS is on par with Canons low light performance. The HF G10 also allowed you to use the viewfinder and LCD but they should have make it so it clicked in as it is now if you press into it, it pushes in.


Quote:
Originally Posted by BigHAZE View Post

Be aware...I am seeing the edge waviness in this video posted by Ken with his XA10. This is what happens to my HF G10...so maybe it's something to live with?

Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
Well it seems we have zero reports of jello with the XA.
False, Ken. Your own Video from Vimeo. 31 sec and later in the left side.Look at the trees!
http://www.vimeo.com/22080064

This camera has only 2 Mln. Pixels. The camera needs but for Dynamic and powered mode more pixels (pixel reserve a la Panasonic and Sony). Otherwise works switched digital image stabilizer is not effective. Standard mode uses only optical stabilization, so there does not this effect.
Last edited by takitano; Today at 02:20 AM..


Ken likely doesn't notice or care about jello and in a short video you don't tend to see it and as he himself and others have pointed out, it doesn't bother everyone.

I will order one as soon as I can and will try out Standard IS, but I have a feeling the Canon will be a tripod only camera and for outdoor handheld shots the TM900 will be the GoTo camcorder. That way I spend a few hundred more than an XA10 but get awesome bright light performance and awesome lowlight performance but on a tripod. trpods are doable for most indoor shots. Too bad most museums don't allow them but a monopod might help there.
post #12 of 194
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by s-one View Post

Although I didn't go through them all but here are a few that I found. It was enough convince me it happens to many of the G10 cameras. I think its a great video camera especially if you put it on a tripod and need to shoot in low light. But that wobble is horrible and I don't see it on the 900 panny or the sony cx560/700. By the way.. I do see all of the wobbles I'm posting about on my 46" and 55" lcds also.


At CES :20
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kz45LoBz3k

You see at :48 as soon as he pans out
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsWNe_Ol_DQ

At 1:01
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqFGdLNlzP0


At the 1 second mark
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kah0CTO--8o

At :24
http://vimeo.com/21301495?ab


I see it from the getgo even on the first video. I guess if it doesn't bother you then it's probaly normal for this camcorder. Too many videos have it and if it's in videos taken at the CES then they all have it. Mine was just a lot worse than most, likely dropped in shipping by the baboons who work for UPS or something.

If anyone can try the same type of shots, walking and slow panning with Standard stabilization and see how much that reduces the problem that would be very telling. Also using Dynamic OIS and show the jello then mount it to a tripod and slow pan without shutting it off and see if it's still there. My guess is the tripod will eliminate the jello efffect.
So far not a single tripod shot has shown any jello at all, just handheld shots.
post #13 of 194
Can I ask how wide is the lens at it's widest? It seems VERY wide, almost reminiscent of a slight fisheye at some points.
post #14 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu View Post

The Panny excels at OIS and I'd agree that it's IS is on par with Canons low light performance. The HF G10 also allowed you to use the viewfinder and LCD but they should have make it so it clicked in as it is now if you press into it, it pushes in.





Ken likely doesn't notice or care about jello and in a short video you don't tend to see it and as he himself and others have pointed out, it doesn't bother everyone.

I will order one as soon as I can and will try out Standard IS, but I have a feeling the Canon will be a tripod only camera and for outdoor handheld shots the TM900 will be the GoTo camcorder. That way I spend a few hundred more than an XA10 but get awesome bright light performance and awesome lowlight performance but on a tripod. trpods are doable for most indoor shots. Too bad most museums don't allow them but a monopod might help there.


So are you going to get the 900? I would but my Son has been in a couple of plays and I would need a better low light camcorder for those shots. I might give Panasonic a shot, but I don't see the 900 in Best Buy or any other store around hear to try out. I will just shoot with my D7000 for now as it does pretty good (Depending on lens) in low light.

http://arcrental.wordpress.com/2010/...ideo-shootout/

The key here is to make sure you have your settings right in the camera. I hope regular camcorders get even better as HDSLRs are pushing the envelop as well.
post #15 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu View Post

The HF G10 also allowed you to use the viewfinder and LCD but they should have make it so it clicked in as it is now if you press into it, it pushes in.


That's interesting to note, the XA10's viewfinder does lock into place when you pull it out.
post #16 of 194
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garman View Post

So are you going to get the 900? I would but my Son has been in a couple of plays and I would need a better low light camcorder for those shots. I might give Panasonic a shot, but I don't see the 900 in Best Buy or any other store around hear to try out. I will just shoot with my D7000 for now as it does pretty good (Depending on lens) in low light.

http://arcrental.wordpress.com/2010/...ideo-shootout/

The key here is to make sure you have your settings right in the camera. I hope regular camcorders get even better as HDSLRs are pushing the envelop as well.


Iam actually going to buy the HF G10 when i can find it available for sale. I will try standard IS and see how that works as well as try out using a tripod and a monopod to see if that helps.

I will also likely buy a TM900 for outdoor action shots and anything that I cannot take with a tripod.

Jello might not bother some people or they might not see it but it does bother me and my wife doesn't like it either.

My guess is that next year Canon will have sorted out the problem. I don't see how they could be unaware unless they are in massive denial.
This is just an OIS problem so I think the mass hysteria comments that are being made are ridiculous.

Mass hysteria is not a bunch of people who don't liek an aspect of a product. It's people running headlong in panic because godzilla is right behind them or they are terrified of something like swine flu.

Those of us who see this problem are not cattle and mass hysteria implies that we are.
post #17 of 194
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilfurbal View Post

That's interesting to note, the XA10's viewfinder does lock into place when you pull it out.

It can't cost Canon that much to lock the viewfinder yet the HF G10 doesn't have it.
If i knew for 100% positive that the XA10 didn't have jello I would probably consider it as I love the low light capability of the new canons but I can't shoot all my videos on a tripod just to eliminate something that should not be there in the first place.
post #18 of 194
I shot a quick video in AUTO mode with POWERED I.S. (the other modes were worse). Do YOU see what I see? Is this acceptable wobble? I am hardly walking and it looks like the earth is shaking. I will admit that the camera performs BETTER in MANUAL mode...but in AUTO mode...would you put up with this shake?

Keep your eyes on the LEFT side of the video for the most noticeable effect.

I would ask Ken to put the XA10 in AUTO MODE with POWERED IS and take a quick walk like I did in this video. If his video does not show the amount of shake that I clearly see here..then I will bite the bullet and get the XA10. If his video looks similar, then I will get the TM900.

I am running out of days to return it, and I realize that Ken is in Italy. If anyone else has the XA10 and can make a quick video on AUTO MODE and post it, I would be very grateful.

If a FIRMWARE update can fix this problem and I get some sort of promise from Canon, then I will keep the HF G10.

Please have a look and post your thoughts.

post #19 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigHAZE
I shot a quick video in AUTO mode with POWERED I.S. (the other modes were worse). Do YOU see what I see? Is this acceptable wobble? I am hardly walking and it looks like the earth is shaking. I will admit that the camera performs BETTER in MANUAL mode...but in AUTO mode...would you put up with this shake?

Keep your eyes on the LEFT side of the video for the most noticeable effect.

I would ask Ken to put the XA10 in AUTO MODE with POWERED IS and take a quick walk like I did in this video. If his video does not show the amount of shake that I clearly see here..then I will bite the bullet and get the XA10. If his video looks similar, then I will get the TM900.

I am running out of days to return it, and I realize that Ken is in Italy. If anyone else has the XA10 and can make a quick video on AUTO MODE and post it, I would be very grateful.

If a FIRMWARE update can fix this problem and I get some sort of promise from Canon, then I will keep the HF G10.

Please have a look and post your thoughts.

You are not supposed to walk with the cam in powered IS mode. The manual clearly states that it is to be used for standing in one spot and using at high zoom magnifications.
post #20 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
You are not supposed to walk with the cam in powered IS mode. The manual clearly states that it is to be used for standing in one spot and using at high zoom magnifications.
OK..the other modes look WORSE than this...so I tried to use the best of the three. How do you put the camera in STANDARD I.S. in AUTO MODE?

*edit

I JUST went outside and shot walking with AUTO mode in both POWERED I.S. and DYNAMIC I.S. and they both were not good. I can't seem to find any way to put the camera in AUTO mode with STANDARD I.S.
post #21 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu

My guess is that next year Canon will have sorted out the problem. I don't see how they could be unaware unless they are in massive denial.
This is just an OIS problem so I think the mass hysteria comments that are being made are ridiculous.

Mass hysteria is not a bunch of people who don't liek an aspect of a product. It's people running headlong in panic because godzilla is right behind them or they are terrified of something like swine flu.

Those of us who see this problem are not cattle and mass hysteria implies that we are.
Steve, get a grip! I can't believe you took this comment so literally!! As I've told you before, the mass hysteria comment was put in quotes. People put things in quotes for a reason. I can't imagine anyone taking this so literally as you have above.

Since this issue is inherent in ALL CMOS-based cameras, DSLRs included, Canon and other manufacturers will not likely redesign their camcorders unless they go back to CCDs. This is not likely since CMOS sensors have some advantages over CCDs. Couple that with the fact that most people are not bothered by this issue (including apparently professional reviewers, who don't mention it) and you see there is no real incentive for the manufacturers.

This doesn't help people like yourself, whose shooting style accentuates this issue and who is apparently very sensitive to it. Since I don't do whip pans, running or walking videos (very rarely), it is not an issue for me and why I haven't seen it in any video I've shot.
post #22 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigHAZE

OK..the other modes look WORSE than this...so I tried to use the best of the three. How do you put the camera in STANDARD I.S. in AUTO MODE?
Certain modes are locked out in auto mode as is typical in all camcorders. Your best bet is to read the manual as there is a page that very clearly spells out what can and can't be adjusted in each mode. This is a very deep camera and without reading the manual, you'll never get the most out of it. If your objective is full Auto, the Canon may be too much camera for your needs. The Sony may be a better fit for you. Just ensure that you don't get the hideous color I did with both of my Sonys. QC is really bad these days.
post #23 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu
To be perfectly frank, the almost constant shaking in this video bothers me FAR more than the 'jello'. I simply could not watch such unsteady video. And yes, I do see the jello, but that's the least of the problems with a clip like that with such intense shaking. And I can now confirm beyond a shadow of a doubt after seeing that clip for the first time, that I do not have a single clip that looks anything remotely like that. This looks like a clip with no OIS engaged. I would have to work very hard to get that much shake with the cam's OIS engaged.

Forget the jello, if that's the kind of stability I got in my videos, the cam would be gone before the packing was removed.
post #24 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu
I found this in another forum, that I'm not a member of.
He makes some very valid points about stabilization. Now this could be what is happening to the HF G10.

"I'll tell you.. they did the same thing Sony did last year. The "hybrid" in hybrid stabilization is that it does both optical and digital. Now, I know what you're thinking, optical is great, digital sucks, so why bother? Well, that's not quite true. Optical stabilization works by shifting lens elements, digital works by essentially moving a window across a larger sensor area than you're using for video. Optical works better largely because it has substantially more range than any digital out there.

But actually, that's for X and Y axis displacement... but what about Z axis. That's the camera rolling either way around the axis of the lens itself... and there's nothing OIS can do about that. That's what these "hybrid" systems do, they use optical for X,Y stabilization and digital for Z. And of course, digital is ideally suited to do roll correction, because you don't need a huge number of extra pixels, it's just a rotation."
Thera nothing in that explanation that explains the phenomena of jello in all CMOS-based cameras, DSLRs included. In fact the guy is saying it's an advantage not a disadvantage to have a hybrid system.
post #25 of 194
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigHAZE View Post
I shot a quick video in AUTO mode with POWERED I.S. (the other modes were worse). Do YOU see what I see? Is this acceptable wobble? I am hardly walking and it looks like the earth is shaking. I will admit that the camera performs BETTER in MANUAL mode...but in AUTO mode...would you put up with this shake?

Keep your eyes on the LEFT side of the video for the most noticeable effect.

I would ask Ken to put the XA10 in AUTO MODE with POWERED IS and take a quick walk like I did in this video. If his video does not show the amount of shake that I clearly see here..then I will bite the bullet and get the XA10. If his video looks similar, then I will get the TM900.

I am running out of days to return it, and I realize that Ken is in Italy. If anyone else has the XA10 and can make a quick video on AUTO MODE and post it, I would be very grateful.

If a FIRMWARE update can fix this problem and I get some sort of promise from Canon, then I will keep the HF G10.

Please have a look and post your thoughts.

You really need to call Canon tech support they are open pretty late, you might be able to call them tonight.
Canon Customer Support Center
Phone: 1-800-652-2666
post #26 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
To be perfectly frank, the almost constant shaking in this video bothers me FAR more than the 'jello'. I simply could not watch such unsteady video. And yes, I do see the jello, but that's the least of the problems with a clip like that with such intense shaking. And I can now confirm beyond a shadow of a doubt after seeing that clip for the first time, that I do not have a single clip that looks anything remotely like that. This looks like a clip with no OIS engaged. I would have to work very hard to get that much shake with the cam's OIS engaged.

Forget the jello, if that's the kind of stability I got in my videos, the cam would be gone before the packing was removed.
I'd agree with this too. While I do see a weird jello like effect I also see what appears as a very shaky cam. Also combined with the stuttering framerate that vimeo applied to it, I didn't download the raw video.

With that said, on the XA10 I have recorded far more sloppy footage as I walked around carrying it by the handle fiddling around with mic settings and not even paying attention at all to what i was filming. and well, I didn't get any results remotely similar to that video. Nor did it look that unsteady.
post #27 of 194
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
Steve, get a grip! I can't believe you took this comment so literally!! As I've told you before, the mass hysteria comment was put in quotes. People put things in quotes for a reason. I can't imagine anyone taking this so literally as you have above.

Since this issue is inherent in ALL CMOS-based cameras, DSLRs included, Canon and other manufacturers will not likely redesign their camcorders unless they go back to CCDs. This is not likely since CMOS sensors have some advantages over CCDs. Couple that with the fact that most people are not bothered by this issue (including apparently professional reviewers, who don't mention it) and you see there is no real incentive for the manufacturers.

This doesn't help people like yourself, whose shooting style accentuates this issue and who is apparently very sensitive to it. Since I don't do whip pans, running or walking videos (very rarely), it is not an issue for me and why I haven't seen it in any video I've shot.

Ken I think using the term mass hysteria is disingenuous and detracts from the real issue.
Also not all CMOS cameras are doing this. The TM700/900's aren't Sony isn't just the Canon's so no it's not normal. Your camera, might not have it, you might not see it and far be it from me to say that your camera has a problem. But that doesn't mean there isn't a problem and the proof has been posted online for all to see.
No one is doing whip pans, god only knows what someone whould see doing a whip pan except a blur.

The fact that you don't film anything walking doesn't mean you arethe only person who shoots staic style shots. Most of us move around while filming depening on what it is and jellovision while walking is ridiculous and unacceptable for most of us.

You don't have a problem and that's good, but a lot of us have had the problem and want it fixed or to not be happening and there is no way you can say it's normal, it's not.
post #28 of 194
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
To be perfectly frank, the almost constant shaking in this video bothers me FAR more than the 'jello'. I simply could not watch such unsteady video. And yes, I do see the jello, but that's the least of the problems with a clip like that with such intense shaking. And I can now confirm beyond a shadow of a doubt after seeing that clip for the first time, that I do not have a single clip that looks anything remotely like that. This looks like a clip with no OIS engaged. I would have to work very hard to get that much shake with the cam's OIS engaged.

Forget the jello, if that's the kind of stability I got in my videos, the cam would be gone before the packing was removed.

The only way to hold the cam more steady Ken would be to lock it down on a tripod! That was a very steady hold on my part, I made sure I got as little movement as possible. That intense shaking is caused by the camcorder.
The jello is likely caused by the IS which quite honestly is shite.
All you'd have to do to get that amount of shake with mine is hold it in your hand and press record.
post #29 of 194
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
Thera nothing in that explanation that explains the phenomena of jello in all CMOS-based cameras, DSLRs included. In fact the guy is saying it's an advantage not a disadvantage to have a hybrid system.

Yes but if something isn't working right it could easily explain why there is a problem.
post #30 of 194
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilfurbal View Post
I'd agree with this too. While I do see a weird jello like effect I also see what appears as a very shaky cam. Also combined with the stuttering framerate that vimeo applied to it, I didn't download the raw video.

With that said, on the XA10 I have recorded far more sloppy footage as I walked around carrying it by the handle fiddling around with mic settings and not even paying attention at all to what i was filming. and well, I didn't get any results remotely similar to that video. Nor did it look that unsteady.

Yeah there was some slop when I adjusted the mic settings to less than jet engine levels due to the wind. But the shaking is a problem and that cam had a problem. It also had jello. I knew I was going to post the video, did you think I could shake like an epileptic having a seizure on command?

The real point here is that neither you or Ken believe this is a problem or that it even exists. Others have offered up suggestions as to what the problem might be, how to fix it or whatever. If you want to just keep on saying it's operator error or that it's in our imagination then you aren't helping.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Camcorders
AVS › AVS Forum › Other Areas of Interest › Camcorders › Offical Canon HF G10 Jello-Vision Problem Thread