Posted by Spex on 08/14/07 09:34

Mark & Mary Ann Weiss wrote:
>> The US model also suffers progressive scan image problems although the
>> over-sharpening artefacts are much reduced from the V1E model. Just
>> compare a locked off 60i image to either 24P or 30p and make sure you
>> look at the dark areas of the image and areas of similar colour will be
>> lacking detail and macroblocked compared with 60i. You will also see
>> much more mosquito noise round contrasty fine detail in progressive mode
>> compared to interlace.
>
> This is interesting. I already found out that the 60i mode has less noise
> for a given gain up setting. Now your additional information will be
> material that I will try experimenting with, to see how much difference. The
> noise difference is about 3dB.
>
Yep, that tallies with what I found too. As you apply gain to the V1
this seems to set of the noise reduction circuit that robs even more
fine detail from the image. I shot a locked off shot with lots of fine
detail at different gain settings and found the higher the gain the more
detail that was literally washed away. The V1 is so insensitive one
finds quite quickly that in reasonable light levels that one has to
resort to winding some gain on. There is no way of turning of the noise
suppression circuit to my knowledge.

>
>> Some time later I purchased the Canon XH-A1 and I am delighted with the
>> way its encoder handles motion in both 25F and 50i. Resolution tests
>> might put the V1e 50 lines more res vertically but as soon as the image
>> moves the Canon image hold up to some very close scrutiny where the Sony
>> fails immediately.
>
> I recently bought a Canon HV20, and I am embarassed to say that both the
> picture AND sound are VASTLY superior to the V1U. The CODEC seems to be MUCH
> less plagued with artifacts. In fact, some stills I pulled from my HV20, run
> through PhotoShop with levels set to exaggerate the macroblocks on a blue
> sky scene showed much smaller and less obvious types of macroblock
> artifacts. The V1U footage has such extreme macroblock artifacts that I am
> noticing them on blue sky footage and on flat, still water in a shot looking
> down on a river's edge where the water is stagnent. Flat green color, but
> pronounced rectangular stepping of colors there.
> Some footage of people's faces looks like a Solarizing filter was applied.
> It's awful.

Any area of similar colour and any dark area you will find macroblocking
on V1 footage. Not only that these blocks leap around the image to and
are completely obvious. It's completely disastrous.

Sony's poor progressive HDV implementation looks like the encoder is
starved of bandwidth. It has even more artefacts than the Z1 encoder an
that didn't exactly excel at its job.

>
> I shot some footage with my HV20, which I purchased as a B roll camera for
> the 2 V1Us, and the only real deficiency with it is that the picture has too
> much contrast. Cinema mode helps, but applies a blurring effect to the whole
> picture, making it look slightly soft. Normal mode has crisp, sharp edges,
> hardly any chromatic aberration, and amazingly good color fidelity for a
> one-chipper.
>
> I recorded a wedding last month, using the HV20 for the altar mic feed. I
> also fed the V1U as a backup. When I listened to those two versions, and
> also my Zoom H4 version, which was recording the choir/organ performance, I
> was stunned at just how bad the V1U audio was, and how good the HV20 audio
> was. This is all upside-down! More expensive should not mean worse sound &
> picture!
>
>
>> The HVR-V1 has received glowing reviews but this is a reflection of the
>> competence of the person reviewing the camera rather than the camera
>> itself. There seems to be a cadre of pseudo intellectuals making
>> pronouncements about a subject they demonstrably know very little about.
>> I know people who have been banned from web fora for voicing those
>> opinions.
>
> ========================================================================
> The problem here can be traced to one individual. He is a Sundance media
> fellow and part of VASST. One should trace the money/funding. I think that
> explains that gentleman's blind eye and deaf ear to the bad sound and
> picture on the V1U. This gentleman has implied on public forums that I am a
> quack and have an agenda to harm Sony. He is doing a grave disservice to the
> video community by suppressing my views and using his clout and reputation
> to discredit my scientific tests of camera audio. My testing and making
> public of this problem should be welcomed, as it opens the door to a
> possible Sony recall and we all benefit. Wouldn't everyone who owns a V1U
> rather have the full audio frequency response, rather than what it is now?
> DSE seems to think otherwise.
> ========================================================================
>
> In all fairness, I think what Sony accomplished with 1/4" chips is nothing
> short of amazing, however, it should be a CONSUMER camera, not an ENG
> camera. HD needs 6X the chip surface area as SD to obtain the same light
> sensitivity. Going down in chip size just aggravates the CODEC. And Sony's
> CODEC is clearly inferior to Canon's. I would have bought the XL-H1, except
> that all the footage I found shot with that camera suffers the worst
> chromatic aberration I've ever seen in a semi-pro camera. The HV20 is
> actually better than both the XL-H1 and the V1U. Amazing little camera.
>

Funny you should say that as the dealer I purchased the V1E from no
longer sells the V1 as a progressive HDV camera and warns those that are
interested in purchasing it. He was very grateful for all the footage I
supplied him to show the faults of the V1 and he found Sony's lack of
transparency over the issue quite worrying. Most people buying the
camera from him are buying it for DVCAM shooting and couldn't care less
about HDV. It is becoming the vogue to use compact camera for news
gathering as the quality is comparable to DSR570s and they are much
lighter and the batteries last longer which is ideal if you are waiting
all day for something to happen. So most professional owners of this
camera don't know of or care about the HDV capability of the V1 on this
side of the pond.

The XH-A1/G1 suffers far less chromatic aberration than the XL-H1
standard lens. I briefly owned an XL-H1 and returned it because of the
CA which was far too obvious to be usable. The XH-A1 produces a
beautiful filmic image that is head and shoulders above any of the other
compact HD cameras IMO. I have heard the HV20 produces a wonderful
image too although I have never seen any footage myself.

Good luck with bashing on the Sony door...

[Back to original message]