|
|
Posted by Smarty on 11/02/07 02:51
Paul,
I have not seen the problem you describe, but it may be the fact that I
virtually never view the camera through its' HDMI port. I normally capture
the Firewire data / .m2t, edit and author an HD DVD, and watch the resulting
(non-transcoded) output. When I have made direct comparisons from tape
output from the camera's HDMI port versus playback of the HD DVD via HDMI,
both had none of the "shimmer" you describe at the post on the DVI forum you
linked to.
I think the distinction you make regarding dramatic differences in HDMI
versus component is very telling, however. Both should contain high
frequency components up to about the same cut-off frequency / half-power
point. Each delivers essentially the same bandwidth and resolution. And on
the 2 HDTV monitors I have here (both of which are 1080p) as well as the
computers / monitors I have for editing, the progressive display shows no
such effects. Perhaps the camera's 1080 interlaced signal is managed
differently on your monitor when seen through the HDMI port versus the
component input? I personally doubt the default setting of the camera's
sharpening would (if the camera is working properly) create this effect,
although reducing the high frequency energy with lower sharpening may
"solve" the problem at the expense of the camera's excellent resolution. If
it were me, I would want to see another HDTV / monitor with HDMI to judge
how much of this, if any, is truly a camera issue. If it persisted in the
second monitor, I would get a replacement camera.
The mpeg encoder is imperfect, and motion does stress the encoder so as to
make fast pans take on a more under-sampled and degraded appearance, but
very very seldom have I seen any real macroblock effects or other
artifacting. My movies of Niagara Falls, with lots of vertical water motion,
horizontal panning, and very agitated and tiny water details is about the
most stressing case I have tried, and even then the HV-20 was a vast
improvement over the older FX-1 as well as the recent Sony HC-3 my son was
using.
Although I am by no means an advocate of high priced cables, I might also
take a look at the HDMI cable being used between the HV-20 and the HDTV. The
cables I use here are very inexpensive, work very well, and introduce no
particular problems, but it is remotely possible that high frequency ringing
or other transient / overshoot problems could make the HDMI port look bad.
This is a bit far fetched but worth a quick substitution if you have another
HDMI cable to substitute.
Please continue to update as I really would hope this problem is not a
deal-breaker.
Smarty
"PTravel" <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote in message
news:5oue5kFoaqqtU1@mid.individual.net...
>
> "Smarty" <nobody@nobody.com> wrote in message
> news:J9aWi.29875$eD3.26430@trnddc03...
>
>> Looks like nappy is beginning to get tempted...... I am anxious to see
>> how you and the other true professionals here find this camera, since I
>> judge image quality and other related performance mostly as a
>> non-professional user.
>
> As everyone here knows, I am far from a professional, either in skill,
> experience or knowledge. However, I've hit a significant problem with the
> HV20 that may result in my returning it.
>
> Short version: there are significant motion artifacts in high-frequency
> detail, not unlike what you see with a Bayer-filtered single-CCD SD
> camcorder. The problem is dramatic on the camera's HDMI output, far less
> visible on component out. I'm still trying to figure out whether it's
> caused by over-sharpening in the camera, lousy HDMI circuitry, or
> something odd with my television.
>
> I've discussed it at length here:
>
> http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?p=768436
>
> Since these videos are for my own personal use only, I may keep the camera
> as long as it looks good on the component output. However, I'm going to
> do so more tests this weekend. If the output continues to display these
> signficant high-frequency motion artifacts, I'm returning it and waiting
> until next year to buy either an AH1 or FX7.
>
> I'm really disappointed -- I had high hopes for this machine.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|