Canon HF S10/S100

[nobbystylus]

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=177&modelid=17993

so with a sensor like that i'm wondering what we can expect from (wait for it) its 'shallowness' of depth of field?

or is that just for stills?

[spideralex90]

That's the real sensor. You'll still have to zoom in for shallow depth of feild, but not as much as an hv30 or anything. So far this cam looks awesome, although it seems to lack any sort of manual focus.

[um3k]

The video will be 3264x1840 scaled down to 1920x1080.

The HV40 has the upper hand as far as having a native 24p mode.

[nobbystylus]

The video will be 3264x1840 scaled down to 1920x1080.

The HV40 has the upper hand as far as having a native 24p mode.

But that probably won't mean shallower depth of field i don't think. The actual sensor size is only .1 difference to a HV20 (1/2.6" HFS10 - 1/2.7" HV40), and i think its the sensor size which means most to depth of field.

Please correct me if i'm wrong.

[um3k]

You are correct, the difference in DOF will be negligible.

EDIT: Though if you are bored and not very good at math, you could say the difference is 10 inches (1/0.1). :P

[Ian-T]

Actually...10 inches is very helpful...

And I'm still talking about DOF here...:hv20-smilie01:

[dcloud]

hv40 only offers 2 new stuff. custom button and native 24p. its still the old digic II sensor.

looks like hfs10 would be the hv20 killer.

better lowlight?
- 1/2.6 digic III sensor (like 5d mk II except smaller.)
- it's lens is 58mm diamater!

based on infos on the site, hfs10 offers so much more than hv40. It's great.
edit:
HOLYCRAP!
# Enhanced zebra pattern (70%, 100%) indicates blown out or high brightness areas to help you set the proper exposure.
# Color peaking displays the edges of your subject in color (red, blue, yellow) - to aid in manual focusing.
# Color bars with Test Tone.
# Gain control function is selectable from 0, 6, 12, and 18 dB and Auto. Lowering the dB value can ensure that dark scenes can be shot with the correct level of darkness. A higher gain setting can provide extra brightness for dark scenes.
#100% area display gives you a complete view in the LCD of the scene being shot. No need to worry that areas in the margins are being left out.

[nobbystylus]

- 1/2.6 digic III sensor (like 5d mk II except smaller.)
- it's lens is 58mm diamater!

of course you still cant control the gain. bastards.

- a MUCH smaller sensor than the 5d mk II (and only a tiny bit bigger than the HV20/30/40)

- i thought it did have manual gain adjustment?

[dcloud]

yeah edited my post...

yes MUCH smaller but its a better sensor. with better sensor you can achieve more.

is that a manual focus dial on the lower corner of the lens?

wow this cam is looking mighty good :)

[koolpenguin89]

Like i posted in the other thread, that many pixels on a sensor that small is going to result in terrible low light performance. Other than that, this cam looks mighty nice.

Dylan

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

Yes, the S10/S100 have new software features compared to the previous AVCHD Canon cameras:
1. Manual gain control.
2. Zebra support.
3. Some color calibration stuff for third party accessories.

Also, as stated above, the quality you will get out of them is significantly better than ANY consumer camcorder today (and even compared to some prosumer ones), because of the new sensor and lens. In fact, Canon themselves advertise the fact that these cameras has a much better dynamic range than their previous ones. So yes, the new DigicDV III-based cameras will blow away the HV series in terms of quality. The faster sensor will also help the h.264 encoder to cram more quality at 24mbps than the current Canon 24mbps AVCHD cameras can. So you don't only win in terms of lens and sensor regarding quality, but also in terms of encoding process. However, we will have to wait and see how it will perform in low light conditions.

Unfortunately, Canon did not include true native 24p support in the S10/S100, and not only that, but they REMOVED Cinemode (which is still needed - no matter what some will say in this forum - because its gamma curve helps with color grading). I am personally very unhappy that Canon chose to give true 24p to an inferior camera like the HV40 now is, and not to the much better camera of the S10/S100. It's like Canon is playing with us.

Other problems is the mini advanced shoe included, instead of a full advanced show that all the HV series have, still not a full focus ring (although the new focus wheel seems to be an improvement over the HV series'), and you can only output video out of the A/V port now, you can't also input video there as you could with the HV series (e.g. to transfer to digital old formats from old cameras).

Overall, the S10/S100 are the best consumer cameras in the market today, and I have this FEELING, that when in August Canon refreshes their consumer camcorders (they usually introduce 2-3 updated models every August), they will update the S10/S100 to have true 24p support and maybe Cinemode. So I can't decide currently: do I just buy the S100 now, or wait for August to see if they add true 24p support by then? It's a question that doesn't have an easy answer.

[dcloud]

by "achieve more" i mean, face detection, all the features that hv or hf didnt have.

Low light would be its greatest test. if it beats hv20 there, its a must have.

im a bit optimistic on its lowlight though. it cant be worst than the hv20...

[Ian-T]

...
im a bit optimistic on its lowlight though. it cant be worst than the hv20...Exactly. Even if its a slight improvement this cam is so worth it.

[dcloud]

taken from the 24p cinema mode section of the site:
"you can use the VIXIA HF S10's CINEMA setting, which changes the color and tonal characteristics, evoking the look and feel of a movie shown in a theater. For added flexibility, these settings can be used together or independently."
I'm sure cinemode wouldnt be discarded.

maybe the new sensor has a better noise reduction with gain.

hopefully msrp sub 1500

although im still holding out for lumix G though.

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

The specs do NOT mention Cinemode
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=177&modelid=17993#ModelTechSpecsAct
While they DO mention it in all the older AVCHD and HV spec pages. So I am not convinced that Cinemode is actually there.

[Ian-T]

I can't imagine this not having something similar to cinemode. maybe it's not an actual preset called cinemode but some something that functions similar.

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

BTW, there is the possibility that Cinemode is NOT part of the Program mode anymore, but part of the COLOR settings! In fact, that would be a more correct thing to do, as I prefer to think cinemode as a gamma/color setting rather than getting in my way when i also want to use Shutter or Aperture mode. Having read their 24p section on the S100 page, it seems that indeed Canon moved cinemode to the Color settings. That's a good thing.

[dcloud]

heres some more interesting bit
you no longer need to switch mode in still and photo ... the cam has a histogram function.
this would be pretty helpful in video since you dont have to switch mode to check the histogram from your stills.

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

According to Canon, the HF-S series require a minimum of 3 LUX in their low light ability, while the HV series can manage with 2 LUX. This indeed means that the HF-S series are a bit worse than the HV seies in low light support. But their better visual quality overall will probably make up for that problem. Personally, I am either shooting outdoors in sunlight, or I use my continuous lights, so I will not be seeing that problem much.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

....
Unfortunately, Canon did not include true native 24p support in the S10/S100, and not only that, but they REMOVED Cinemode....

.... I have this FEELING, that when in August Canon refreshes their consumer camcorders (they usually introduce 2-3 updated models every August), they will update the S10/S100 to have true 24p support and maybe Cinemode. ...


taken from the 24p cinema mode section of the site:
"you can use the VIXIA HF S10's CINEMA setting, which changes the color and tonal characteristics, evoking the look and feel of a movie shown in a theater. For added flexibility, these settings can be used together or independently."
I'm sure cinemode wouldnt be discarded.
...


The specs do NOT mention Cinemode
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=177&modelid=17993#ModelTechSpecsAct
While they DO mention it in all the older AVCHD and HV spec pages. So I am not convinced that Cinemode is actually there.


BTW, there is the possibility that Cinemode is NOT part of the Program mode anymore, but part of the COLOR settings! In fact, that would be a more correct thing to do, as I prefer to think cinemode as a gamma/color setting rather than getting in my way when i also want to use Shutter or Aperture mode. Having read their 24p section on the S100 page, it seems that indeed Canon moved cinemode to the Color settings. That's a good thing.

I don't understand.

This says plane as day that both the HF S10 and HF S100 have 24p/Cinemode:
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ProductCatIndexAct&fcategoryid=173
Just click on either cam.

So doesn't seem ambiguous or vague at all. They even use the same graphic and text as always.

Unless the Canon page is just flat out wrong due to being so new with some copy incorrectly cut and pasted in.

EDIT: 24p and Cinemode are mentioned under the FEATURES tab for the HF S10 and HF S100 at the link above ... But are you talking about the fact that the HV40 says 24p recorded at 24p and HF S10 says 24p recorded at 60i? Doesn't this just mean there's reverse pulldown to be applied just like with the HF11? Other than taking a bit more storage space - what's the big deal? AVCHD is so efficient you probably won't notice, and if you are converting to pro res, those frames will be dropped on import - right? I mean this is the way the DVX $3000 captures 24p (over 60) and the way the HVX ($5500) does it in 1080 too.

[cspak71]

I don't understand.

This says plane as day that both the HF S10 and HF S100 have 24p/Cinemode:
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ProductCatIndexAct&fcategoryid=173
Just click on either cam.

So doesn't seem ambiguous or vague at all. They even use the same graphic and text as always.

Unless the Canon page is just flat out wrong due to being so new with some copy incorrectly cut and pasted in.

EDIT: 24p and Cinemode are mentioned under the FEATURES tab for the HF S10 and HF S100 at the link above ... But are you talking about the fact that the HV40 says 24p recorded at 24p and HF S10 says 24p recorded at 60i? Doesn't this just mean there's reverse pulldown to be applied just like with the HF11? Other than taking a bit more storage space - what's the big deal? AVCHD is so efficient you probably won't notice, and if you are converting to pro res, those frames will be dropped on import - right? I mean this is the way the DVX $3000 captures 24p (over 60) and the way the HVX ($5500) does it in 1080 too.

pound for pound, I think people here do agree that the HFS10 seems like the bigger leap in tech. I think most people's biggest gripe is that Canon didn't include the native 24p on what would have been the more logical choice (HFS10)... but I think that's just to keep the HV40 alive and milk that for all it's worth.

Some have said that native 24p will come to the HF series in a refresh most likely after the product launch.

[Ian-T]

Some have said that native 24p will come to the HF series in a refresh most likely after the product launch.
...or a worthwhile hack...whichever comes first.:hv20-smilie77:

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

pound for pound, I think people here do agree that the HFS10 seems like the bigger leap in tech. I think most people's biggest gripe is that Canon didn't include the native 24p on what would have been the more logical choice (HFS10)... but I think that's just to keep the HV40 alive and milk that for all it's worth...

I guess so. But it's only the difference in checking the "remove pulldown" box. You wind up with true 24p to edit on a 23.98 just the same way that cameras which cost 3 to 6 times as much do it.

I really don't care if I have to check "remove pulldown" when I bring it in, the same way you have to on the HPX 500 ... wait make that cameras costing 10 X's as much.

If you wound up with 24 frames over a 29.97 timeline then I would care, vs 23.98 over a 23.98. Seems like a non issue if your mouse works and you have opposable thumbs / all of your finers :)

[hepabst]

Will a Letus Mini work on these cams with a step down ring?

[Ian-T]

I'm thinking you would get some vignetting (possible). Thread size might be 58mm but the glass might be a little smaller than that size. So...it's kind of hard to tell.

[cspak71]

...or a worthwhile hack...whichever comes first.:hv20-smilie77:

I would love to see a good hack on the HF series for native 24p.

[cspak71]

I guess so. But it's only the difference in checking the "remove pulldown" box. You wind up with true 24p to edit on a 23.98 just the same way that cameras which cost 3 to 6 times as much do it.

I really don't care if I have to check "remove pulldown" when I bring it in, the same way you have to on the HPX 500 ... wait make that cameras costing 10 X's as much.

If you wound up with 24 frames over a 29.97 timeline then I would care, vs 23.98 over a 23.98. Seems like a non issue if your mouse works and you have opposable thumbs / all of your finers :)

Out of curiousity, when you mention "remove pulldown" box... are you talking about an editing program such as premiere? But I think you're right, native 24p, and current 24p seems to be a marginal difference.

[Erik Bien]

Thread size might be 58mm but the glass might be a little smaller than that size.

Since the lens specs are more similar than different (6.1-61mm actual/43.6-436mm 35mm equivalent for the HVx0 vs. 6.4-64mm actual/43.5-435mm 35mm equivalent for the HF S10) I'm guessing the larger filter thread has more to do with the relocated IAF sensor than a whole new lens.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Out of curiousity, when you mention "remove pulldown" box... are you talking about an editing program such as premiere? But I think you're right, native 24p, and current 24p seems to be a marginal difference.
Yeah. Talking about FCP. Advanced pulldown is not a big hurdle. Been around since the DVX. In cam's like the HPX500 and HVX200 which shoot DVCpro HD shooting with pulldown is a waste of storage, but that's the only way those cams shoot 1080. In 720 they can shoot just 24p without the extra frames. and the storage savings of 720 24pn (native, i.e. no extra frames) and 720 24p (24p over 60i) is pretty great. But with AVCHD I can't imagine the storage size would be much different.

This is one reason it may have been more of a priority to implement the native 24p on the camera with the less efficient codec which shoots to tape - the HV40 - you might get a significant increase in recording time by going native because you aren't recording frames you don't need.

In fact, maybe there's a good reason to not go native with the flash cameras. 24p over 60 is slightly more versitile. That footage could be more easily edited into a 60i time line for example if you had to mix footage. So since the storage difference is probably minimal with AVCHD why not have the extra option in post? Sure it's probably rare that you need it, but it's there.

I was just P2 tech for a feature shot on the HPX500. And the workflow was the same at least in the broad strokes. You take the 1080 24p over 60 cards, and bring them into FCP applying advanced pulldown.

[dcloud]

According to Canon, the HF-S series require a minimum of 3 LUX in their low light ability, while the HV series can manage with 2 LUX. This indeed means that the HF-S series are a bit worse than the HV seies in low light support. But their better visual quality overall will probably make up for that problem. Personally, I am either shooting outdoors in sunlight, or I use my continuous lights, so I will not be seeing that problem much.

I know read somewhere that those specs on lux that are put out arent really the best measurement for sensitivity. I just checked xha1 specs and it has 0.3 lux too and its waay far better in low light than hv20

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

>I really don't care if I have to check "remove pulldown" when I bring it in

Sorry, but this is not possible for all editors. On my editor, Sony Vegas, I would have to bring it in via cineform NeoHD instead of using it directly in the timeline after importing. That's a major annoyance for me. And let's don't forget that people don't have $500 to buy NeoHD, plus a $15 license from CoreAVC to remove pulldown from AVCHD footage. The freeware method that I have on my blog for AVCHD pulldown removal is not fool proof, it creates A/V sync issues overtime.

So yes, not having native 24p it's a major deal and blow to many of us. Pretty much, the only people who have it well is After Effects and maybe Premiere users, as these are the only NLEs that can remove pulldown in the timeline, without additional steps. Even on FCP you need to get the run-around on one of their external utils to remove pulldown for AVCHD/HDV and then import it to FCP in the timeline. That's too much work IMO.

[cspak71]

>I really don't care if I have to check "remove pulldown" when I bring it in

Sorry, but this is not possible for all editors. On my editor, Sony Vegas, I would have to bring it in via cineform NeoHD instead of using it directly in the timeline after importing. That's a major annoyance for me. And let's don't forget that people don't have $500 to buy NeoHD, plus a $15 license from CoreAVC to remove pulldown from AVCHD footage. The freeware method that I have on my blog for AVCHD pulldown removal is not fool proof, it creates A/V sync issues overtime.

So yes, not having native 24p it's a major deal and blow to many of us. Pretty much, the only people who have it well is After Effects and maybe Premiere users, as these are the only NLEs that can remove pulldown in the timeline, without additional steps. Even on FCP you need to get the run-around on one of their external utils to remove pulldown for AVCHD/HDV and then import it to FCP in the timeline. That's too much work IMO.

Hmm... interesting, but from reading your previous posts regarding the HFS10 and the HV40, I take it that you'd still take the HFS10 over the HV40? Even without the native 24p?

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

Yes, that's correct. Although, I might wait for August to see what "refresh" Canon will do to the HF-S series. I might be lucky and get 24p native support in the refreshed model.

[DrDave]

This looks like a great CAM. We will have to see about the lowlight capabilities, since that is dependent on on various factors. I can't see a sensor that size having worse LL capabilities, given Canon's record so far. I find the face tracking intriguing, if I read this right it would follow a person in focus. Hope they keep the spotlight mode. Hope the price is right!

[Emanuel]

The worst lowlight performance vs. HV40 comes from the pixel density side.

[Emanuel]

Why not the HF S100 instead? It should be circa $200 cheaper.

[xtazysv]

Hey all. I've just noticed the next line from Canon's cameras for 2009.

VIXIA HF S10 for example is the top of the line and I think it will top the HV's.

*1/2.6-inch CMOS at Approx. 8.59 Megapixels
*DIGIC DV III Image Processor
*zebra pattern , test tones & GAIN CONTROL FROM MENU (0,6,12,18db)
*3 sec pre-record feature

I think we will finaly have something that will end Canon HV20/30's supremacy. Check the cameras out on Canon's websited.

On a notice: I'm actualy sad because I was really happy with my HG20.

I'd like to hear your thoughts about the new cam series. :hv20-smilie03:

Cheers,
Tudor M

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

I'd like to hear your thoughts about the new cam series.

I blogged about the new HF-S series compared to the HV series here:
http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2009/01/06/regarding-the-new-canon-cameras/

[net]

Is the HF S10 going to require higher pc and/or pc video card requirements, (even if unofficially)?

[dcloud]

Hey all. I've just noticed....

i thin that was discussed before :P

[1]

i thin that was discussed before :P

It was merged from a different thread.

[dcloud]

oh. my bad. :)

[bluesgeek]

How would we know it's merged?

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

>I really don't care if I have to check "remove pulldown" when I bring it in

Sorry, but this is not possible for all editors. On my editor, Sony Vegas, I would have to bring it in via cineform NeoHD instead of using it directly in the timeline after importing. That's a major annoyance for me. And let's don't forget that people don't have $500 to buy NeoHD, plus a $15 license from CoreAVC to remove pulldown from AVCHD footage. The freeware method that I have on my blog for AVCHD pulldown removal is not fool proof, it creates A/V sync issues overtime.

So yes, not having native 24p it's a major deal and blow to many of us. Pretty much, the only people who have it well is After Effects and maybe Premiere users, as these are the only NLEs that can remove pulldown in the timeline, without additional steps. Even on FCP you need to get the run-around on one of their external utils to remove pulldown for AVCHD/HDV and then import it to FCP in the timeline. That's too much work IMO.

Well this is a bad assumption on my part. I never dreamed that Canon would not have tagged the unneeded frames for easy removal on capture or import.

Still if you can ultimately get 24p out of it ... also if you can set up what ever process to remove the pulldown without baby sitting it and that is quicker than real time capture of tape ... then I'd say we're back to a wash again.

[1]

... then I'd say we're back to a wash again.

Yeah, I sort of agree.

Regarding the HV40 and its native 24p:
For anyone that DOESN'T have a HV20 or HV30 it's GREAT cam.
And simple &easy acquisition of TRUE 24p is a bonus.
It would be dubious to SELL an existing HV20 or HV30 to get a HV40 IMHO though.

BTW,
are you the JDS that shot some BTS stuff at a HVX-instruction meeting in NYC a couple o' years ago?

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Haha, yes but now I'm a Mod at DVXuser and teach the HVX Training Bootcamps with Barry Green and David Jimerson, most recently also at Abel Cinetech in NY last March.

The three of us also have three short films at festivals this year:
http://frenchquarterfeatures.com/french__quarter_features_in_exile.html
with David and Barry producing and me directing.

Hm ... #1 ... traveling mal ... hmm ... wondering who you really are now ... and how you would remember me from such marginal participation on my part in the Bootcamp at that point ... hmmm ... I also thought you started this place, but your post count only says 34 ... hmm ...

I think I mentioned earlier that I just sold my HVX and Letus extreme and several other things in order to simplify / downgrade to something smaller and simpler. I don't really shoot my ownstuff anymore / needed the money for a cross country move. So was basically looking for a "freedom rig" meaning if suddenly no DP's will work with me or I want to shoot a mumble core opus on my own every Saturday over the course of the year I could go right ahead and do that.

I bought an HF11 and Letus mini and was really dissapointed with the low light performance, i.e., ghosting/trailing. With the announcements of Scarlet's all in price (though I am sure it will be a bit more) and these new Canon cam's it's not time to rush into anything, so returning the hf11/letus mini to B&H. Won't buy anything until I have to for some project, or until a lot more is known about these cams.

[1]

Oh, very cool!
I have to check out some of the shorts when I get a minute!

Cams: yeah, I sold my HVX too recently, and now have a 5D Mark II (although that was bought mainly as a 300D replacement, not really for video; certainly not for video only). Wouldn't mind a small "holiday cam" and the new Canons do look sweet.
Maybe a HF S10, but it's a little pricey for what I'd use it for.

[Tomtebo]

I think this cam is very neat! Put the pulldown problem, is that just for NTSC or even we in europe? I mean, this is not tape so im comfused :)

[spideralex90]

I think this cam is very neat! Put the pulldown problem, is that just for NTSC or even we in europe? I mean, this is not tape so im comfused :)

Pulldown is solely a NTSC problem.

[Emanuel]

And let's don't forget that people don't have $500 to buy NeoHD, plus a $15 license from CoreAVC to remove pulldown from AVCHD footage.Not necessarily. You have this for a few bucks:

http://www.cineform.com/products/NeoScene.htm

EDIT -- What am I saying? You posted @ your own blog too:

«Update: Cineform now sells a new product, called NeoSCENE, that removes pulldown of HDV and AVCHD. Costs just $129.»

BTW, I've checked you give the fair value to Cinemode now. Weren't you skeptic about it before?

[1]

Pulldown is solely a NTSC problem.

No it isn't.

NTSC is a SD format and has nothing to do with 24p.

[Tomtebo]

okey, so that means the pulldown issue wille be a problem with everybody on this earth?

[1]

okey, so that means the pulldown issue wille be a problem with everybody on this earth?


Except for Papua New Ginuea, yes!

No, of course not. Pulldown is an issue with cams sold as NTSC versions (meaning they also shoot NTSC). For cams sold as PAL versions (meaning they also shoot PAL) pulldown isn't an issue.

I was more concerned about mixing terminology.

[Tomtebo]

haha! Okey thanks. Its jsut so comfusing sometimes when everybody talking about that issue and we in PAL countrys dont have to wory about it. Then i see only posstivte thing from this camera.

[xtazysv]

I'd like to hear your thoughts about the new cam series.

I blogged about the new HF-S series compared to the HV series here:
http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2009/01/06/regarding-the-new-canon-cameras/

Well to be sincere, these cams seem to me as a big leap in consumer HD video. Leaving aside the overseen sensor density over size matter, this is not the only method to measure low light quality. Electronically speaking things evolve, so the new chip can handle better , probably, the data trough it than the one on , lets say , HV20. Therefore, quality should be better. That is a must. I am truly disappointed by the fact that I got recently my new cam, the HG20 , and it will automatically turn into refurbished material, because from the HV20 i think THIS is the next step, not HV30 nor HF11(which was a leap for AVCHD but quality came close to HV20/30).

By far I can say that this will be one of the best cameras available nowadays, and I would be very happy if I would somehow get one of these, because it will clearly be mind blowing equipment in terms of quality.

On a more realistic side, making a good movie/internet clip is more than just quality. So everyone should reflect upon the situation, but if you have a HV20 from the beginning this is the time to upgrade, if you are like me.. you have second thoughts. :hv20-smilie51:

Tudor M

[net]

Is the HF S10 going to require higher pc and/or pc video card requirements, (even if unofficially)?

Anyone?

Do "more lines" = more data = faster cpu/bigger video card needed than what's presently required for the HF11?

[Emanuel]

2 observations to make:


1st)

See this [ LINK (http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-HG10-Camcorder-Review-33146/Performance.htm#) ]:

«Cine Mode
Cine mode is a gamma setting that affects color behavior in the Canon HG10. It can be used in 60i or 24P. The HG10 groups the Cine mode with the AE mode settings, which unfortunately prevents it from being used at the same time as Aperture or Shutter Priority mode.»

Eugenia has posted this [ LINK (http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2009/01/06/regarding-the-new-canon-cameras/) ]:

«- CineMode has *most probably* moved to the Colors Settings, rather than the ‘Programmed AE’ menu found in the HV series. If this is indeed true, it is a very good thing, as it will allow you to use a cinema gamma/look, while you can use your camera in Tv or Av mode at the same time, to properly control it.»


BTW, there is the possibility that Cinemode is NOT part of the Program mode anymore, but part of the COLOR settings! In fact, that would be a more correct thing to do, as I prefer to think cinemode as a gamma/color setting rather than getting in my way when i also want to use Shutter or Aperture mode. Having read their 24p section on the S100 page, it seems that indeed Canon moved cinemode to the Color settings. That's a good thing.

I don't have the camera (HG10) but...

Now compare what's written in both webpages @ Canon site [ HG10 LINK (http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=177&modelid=15617#ModelTechSpecsAct[/url) ] [ HF S100 LINK (http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=177&modelid=17992#ModelTechSpecsAct) ] as you already know:

«AUTO, P, Av, Tv, Portrait, Sports, Night, Snow, Beach,Sunset, Spotlight, Fireworks»

In conclusion, if all these sources are correct, we should review the Eugenia's presumption. Nevertheless, why doesn't Canon mention the Cine mode as one of the Programmed AE modes as it happens with others such as HV30/40 as for instance?

Can anyone know and answer it?


2nd)

See this [ LINK (http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-HG10-Camcorder-Review-33146/Performance.htm#) ]:

«1080/24P
Switching to 24P in bright light, the color performance and apparent resolution are more or less identical to the 1080/60i. Obviously, Canon is going to tout any consumer camcorder with true 24P. In the case of the HV20, they were absolutely right to do so – the video looked beautiful and managed to side-step the staccato look of older camcorders with a “24P-like effect.”

Not so with the HG10. For whatever reason (and we have our theories), the 24P video on the HG10 looks terrible. Both panning and tilting create a very choppy movement, even when moving slowly. This is not the motion blur you might get when shooting at a slow shutter speed in 60i. It’s a stuttering, chug-chug-chug effect that absolutely kills the shot. Our best guess is that the progressive scan and output is in conflict with the AVCHD compression, which is extremely taxing on the processor. HDV is less processor-intensive, which may be why it looked so much better on the HV20. Regardless of the reason, we don’t recommend shooting in 24P unless you’re going for a special effect.»

Why? Higher AVCHD compression from low (15Mbps, I think) recording mode? Not @ 24Mbps? Or just the AVCHD codec vs. a «less processor-intensive» HDV as the article's author is wondering. Is there any HG20 shooter out there who may testify it?

[Ian-T]

2
Why? Higher AVCHD compression from low (15Mbps, I think) recording mode? Not @ 24Mbps? Or just the AVCHD codec vs. a «less processor-intensive» HDV as the article's author is wondering. Is there any HG20 shooter out there who may testify it?This is just a wild guess here..... but maybe the processor in that early AVCHD cam was the same or identical to what was being used in the HV20/30. It couldn't handle the very new AVCHD codec. Canon finally got it right in their following cams and it has not been a problem since. Matter of fact...seeing how the newest cams have even more pixels and are at the highest data rate with AVCHD tells me Canon's processing power in these brand new chips are getting more and more powerful. Just a guess though...

[Ian-T]

I bought an HF11 and Letus mini and was really dissapointed with the low light performance, i.e., ghosting/trailing. With the announcements of Scarlet's all in price (though I am sure it will be a bit more) and these new Canon cam's it's not time to rush into anything, so returning the hf11/letus mini to B&H. Won't buy anything until I have to for some project, or until a lot more is known about these cams.Hey..you were in the short flick "18 Seconds?" If so...I saw that a couple of years ago...."Tragically Brilliant."

[spideralex90]

[quote=1;169007]No it isn't.

nevermind.

[Emanuel]

2 observations to make:


1st)

See this [ LINK (http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-HG10-Camcorder-Review-33146/Performance.htm#) ]:

«Cine Mode
Cine mode is a gamma setting that affects color behavior in the Canon HG10. It can be used in 60i or 24P. The HG10 groups the Cine mode with the AE mode settings, which unfortunately prevents it from being used at the same time as Aperture or Shutter Priority mode.»

Eugenia has posted this [ LINK (http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2009/01/06/regarding-the-new-canon-cameras/) ]:

«- CineMode has *most probably* moved to the Colors Settings, rather than the ‘Programmed AE’ menu found in the HV series. If this is indeed true, it is a very good thing, as it will allow you to use a cinema gamma/look, while you can use your camera in Tv or Av mode at the same time, to properly control it.»


BTW, there is the possibility that Cinemode is NOT part of the Program mode anymore, but part of the COLOR settings! In fact, that would be a more correct thing to do, as I prefer to think cinemode as a gamma/color setting rather than getting in my way when i also want to use Shutter or Aperture mode. Having read their 24p section on the S100 page, it seems that indeed Canon moved cinemode to the Color settings. That's a good thing.

I don't have the camera (HG10) but...

Now compare what's written in both webpages @ Canon site [ HG10 LINK (http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=177&modelid=15617#ModelTechSpecsAct[/url) ] [ HF S100 LINK (http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=177&modelid=17992#ModelTechSpecsAct) ] as you already know:

«AUTO, P, Av, Tv, Portrait, Sports, Night, Snow, Beach,Sunset, Spotlight, Fireworks»

In conclusion, if all these sources are correct, we should review the Eugenia's presumption. Nevertheless, why doesn't Canon mention the Cine mode as one of the Programmed AE modes as it happens with others such as HV30/40 as for instance?

Can anyone know and answer it?


2nd)

See this [ LINK (http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-HG10-Camcorder-Review-33146/Performance.htm#) ]:

«1080/24P
Switching to 24P in bright light, the color performance and apparent resolution are more or less identical to the 1080/60i. Obviously, Canon is going to tout any consumer camcorder with true 24P. In the case of the HV20, they were absolutely right to do so – the video looked beautiful and managed to side-step the staccato look of older camcorders with a “24P-like effect.”

Not so with the HG10. For whatever reason (and we have our theories), the 24P video on the HG10 looks terrible. Both panning and tilting create a very choppy movement, even when moving slowly. This is not the motion blur you might get when shooting at a slow shutter speed in 60i. It’s a stuttering, chug-chug-chug effect that absolutely kills the shot. Our best guess is that the progressive scan and output is in conflict with the AVCHD compression, which is extremely taxing on the processor. HDV is less processor-intensive, which may be why it looked so much better on the HV20. Regardless of the reason, we don’t recommend shooting in 24P unless you’re going for a special effect.»

Why? Higher AVCHD compression from low (15Mbps, I think) recording mode? Not @ 24Mbps? Or just the AVCHD codec vs. a «less processor-intensive» HDV as the article's author is wondering. Is there any HG20 shooter out there who may testify it?On the 2nd one, it can also be any HG21 or HF11 user, well, any with AVCHD 24Mbps hands-on experience. Thanks.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Anyone?

Do "more lines" = more data = faster cpu/bigger video card needed than what's presently required for the HF11?
it all gets downsampled to 1920X1080 24mbps by the time it gets to your computer, so sensor size should't matter on the post end.

[cspak71]

I'm not sure how many others here will be attending CES, but I'll be there. I'll make it a point to stop by the Canon booth and see if they have any of these cams to try.

Hopefully they'll let me sneak in a SD card and try to get some HD footage.

[dcloud]

try a comparison on hf20 vs hfs10...
shoot both in 24p, 1/48, fully wide open, 0 gain.
we'll see who is brighter :)

then shoot hfs10 with increasing gains... lets see the noise on the gain.

[Tomtebo]

Yeah :) im dying for some test of this cam!

[Piewee]

I'm not sure how many others here will be attending CES, but I'll be there. I'll make it a point to stop by the Canon booth and see if they have any of these cams to try.

Hopefully they'll let me sneak in a SD card and try to get some HD footage.

haha...That would be awesome! I guess that would make you the coolest guy on this Forum.:hv20-smilie110:

Anyway, I read the whole thread here, but here are some thoughts.


Would this cam be ideal for a DIY 35mm DOF adapter?

First:

Since I read that it has a 58mm threadsize. This would mean we would be able to fit the popular 58mm Opteka right on the lens, so no more step up ring, that would mean less vignetting, since it's as close to the lens as possible.

Second:

Also since the lens is bigger, it might me better in low light.

Third:

It has no viewfinder, but since most DoF adapter users use a separate monitor, they won't really need it.

Fourth:

I looks like it has a big manual focus scroll wheel beside the lens, wich should make it easy to attach a bigger focus wheel system on it and attach it to your rigg.

Fifth:

Do the extra megapixels add anything to the image quality?

Six:

For as far as I can read it does have Cinemode.

Did I leave anything out?

[Adriano Apefos]

when will canon give us a flip function to make easy the use of 35mm adapter?

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

I have some cool news:

www.CamcorderInfo.com will be publishing their HF-S series review very soon, in just few weeks from now. They were very kind to let us poll the HV20 crowd about what they would like to see mentioned in the review. So, fire away, after you visit their site, see how they conduct their reviews, and request additions based on things you haven't seen on their existing reviews. E.g. a low light test will be part of the review, so there's no reason to ask for it.

Also, they wrote me: "...look for a First Impressions review later today. It will be
short, but should answer some basic questions."

[net]

The newer camcorders at Canon are now saying "Available in February 2009".

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=177&modelid=17992


This makes it even more tempting to wait it out. I'm guessing the HF S100 could be $800+ by May, being the the HF11 was released for the same price in September and is now in that range.

[Rumpelgeist]

Did you mean CCInfo had some cool news, Eugenia? Where are you suggesting to fire away, here on on CCInfo site? They banned me and I have no intention of registering again. So:

* List all focus assist modes. Are all of them available while shooting? Can all/some of them be combined? Check, how focus assist works in different conditions: low/high contrast, glare.
* How smooth focus wheel is. Is it speed-sensitive?
* Does iAF sensor work with attachments on? Do all/most attachments work or one has to buy special attachments designed for the cam?
* What threads are made of, plastic or metal?
* Does the cam forgets some/all settings when turned off? Which ones?
* Does it display recording parameters (frame rate/shutter/aperture/gain/ND) while recording, without resorting to the photo button?
* If prior is not true, does the photo button still work?
* Is it possible to control ND filters manually?
* Can the LCD display the frame with no underscan?
* What is the maximum video file size? Does the cam continue recording next file after it finishes with prior one?

I'll think of something else later.

[Piewee]

I have some cool news:

www.CamcorderInfo.com will be publishing their HF-S series review very soon, in just few weeks from now. They were very kind to let us poll the HV20 crowd about what they would like to see mentioned in the review. So, fire away, after you visit their site, see how they conduct their reviews, and request additions based on things you haven't seen on their existing reviews. E.g. a low light test will be part of the review, so there's no reason to ask for it.

Also, they wrote me: "...look for a First Impressions review later today. It will be
short, but should answer some basic questions."

Well 2 things are important for me:

1) The focuswheel, is it better then (better handle) the one on HV20 and HV30?

2) Does the 58mm lens thread look strong enough to mount a dof adapter on it

[net]

They were very kind to let us poll the HV20 crowd about what they would like to see mentioned in the review. So, fire away...

I would like to see a comparison of the HF S10 to the HF11, detailing the differences of their final output. (Video only.) A feature comparison isn't necessary as this is already available.

[Shadow_7]

I would like to see a comparison of the HF S10 to the HF11, detailing the differences of their final output. (Video only.) A feature comparison isn't necessary as this is already available.

Ditto. With the relocated IAF and larger thread, the HF S10/100 might be a cam I could live with. Although my HG20 footage was easier to get usable results from than any HF11 footage I've come across. Which might just be a 60i versus 24pf issue. Don't really know, all I know is that only one method (the most undesirable) was able to handle the HF footage decently in linux.

[Piewee]

Hi Guys,

by looking at the pictures it will get a different name in europe, so not Vixia, but Legria?:hv20-smilie51:

Anyway, look at the pics. By the way, they also show the top of the cam. Looks neat!

http://www.letsgodigital.org/images/artikelen/6/canon-legria-hf-s10.jpg

http://www.letsgodigital.org/images/artikelen/6/canon-legria-s10.jpg

http://www.letsgodigital.org/images/artikelen/6/canon-hf-s10.jpg


And here are some of the NTSC version, made at the CES 2009:

http://www.infosyncworld.net/resources/products/canon/canon_vixia_hf_s10_i00.jpg

http://www.infosyncworld.net/resources/products/canon/canon_vixia_hf_s10_i01.jpg

http://www.infosyncworld.net/resources/products/canon/canon_vixia_hf_s10_i02.jpg

http://www.infosyncworld.net/resources/products/canon/canon_vixia_hf_s10_i03.jpg


How happy I am about this upcoming cam to try out, is not up for debate, but.....It troubles me to see the canon HD Lens beïng so far inside the camera. Since as a DoF Adapter fan, I would like to be able to place my Achromatic lens as close to the camera lens a possible. For as far as I can see, it will probably have a distance of 1 cm open space between it. This will probably create a lot of vignetting in the final image. Or am I wrong guys?

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

The Infosyncworld article http://www.infosyncworld.com/news/n/10026.html has JPG grabs from the HF-S and there's a lot of noise in these pictures. The bottom corners are not too sharp either. No, the JPG file format the author chose instead of PNG is not to be blamed for these two problems noticed. The JPG format added some artifacts, but the noise is all HF-S's. The kind of footage I see in these pictures is impossible to color grade properly btw. Hopefully by selecting cinemode and neutral coloring before you shoot might help out the situation...

[net]

The Infosyncworld article http://www.infosyncworld.com/news/n/10026.html has JPG grabs from the HF-S and there's a lot of noise in these pictures. The bottom corners are not too sharp either. No, the JPG file format the author chose instead of PNG is not to be blamed for these two problems noticed. The JPG format added some artifacts, but the noise is all HF-S's. The kind of footage I see in these pictures is impossible to color grade properly btw. Hopefully by selecting cinemode and neutral coloring before you should might help out the situation...

They look like they were shot in TV mode.

The framegrabs with leaves involved are noticeably better than the HF11 framegrabs with leave shots which have a distinct characteristic.

Still need to see video to judge.
Camcorderinfo has a YouTube channel. Since YouTube has HD now, I hope they post comparison video of the HF S10 to the HF11.
i know it's not a perfect representation; but it would be something to at least to see the differences on YouTube HD.

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

Camcorderinfo's preview is up: http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-Vixia-HF-S10-First-Impressions-Review-36042.htm

[net]

Camcorderinfo's preview is up: http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-Vixia-HF-S10-First-Impressions-Review-36042.htm



camcorderinfo: You can then import the series of clips onto your computer and throw on one of ten included soundtracks. Or, if you don't trust your camcorder's taste in music, you can drop in a .WAV file.

That's different.



camcorderinfo: Color Bars and
Test Tone The camcorder can output SPMTE color bars, with the additional option of outputting a 1kHz audio reference tone.

niiiice.

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

Special thanks to Mike Perlman at InfosyncWorld who re-de-interlaced within FCE and re-saved the images in PNG to replace the previous JPG images.
http://www.infosyncworld.com/news/n/10026.html

However, please note that because the images were grabbed from FCE, there's a chance that FCE imported the footage using AIC instead of ProRES (FCE doesn't edit AVCHD natively), and AIC is really lossy, and therefore not a good evaluation of the quality of the camera. We'll see, as I might have a chance to view the actual .m2ts file itself. Will keep you updated.

[Rumpelgeist]

"Right off the bat, you have a 1/8-inch (mini) microphone jack located on the right side. A jack on the rear doubles as AV-output and a headphone-out." -- Did they mean that the rear jack CAN also be used for a second external mic?

They did not mention whether left and right channel can be controlled separately. Is it possible to use BOTH the built-in and external mic and to control sound levels on both mics separately? Same, if two external mics can be used.

"Note that the 24P recording on this camcorder is not an emulation of 24P, and not the new native 24P mode on the Canon HV40 (Specs, Recent News, $0.00) HDV camcorder." -- What emulation they are talking about? Cineframe was Sony's lame approach to progressive, never Canon's.

"The actual zoom toggle is located on top of the body. It's not an outstanding control; it feels cheap and drags across the plastic below it when you toggle back and forth." -- I don't know why Canon switched to zoom slider. Even the cheap zoom lever on the HV is better. Canon should have put a real rocker instead. The HG10 was manufactured and outfitted almost to Sony standards, but apparently was too expensive to build, now Canon is cutting costs again. Meh. "Canon's camcorder bodies have never felt particularly hearty, and the HF S10 is no different. It's a cheap, plastic exterior, and all the good stuff is inside." -- Hear, hear.

"In addition to the standard, joystick-operated focus in the Function menu, you can use the dial located on the lens barrel." -- This is good. If I am not mistaken, the HV allows focusing only with the focus button and roller, not with a joystick, which always seemed strange to me.

"To make the feature even better, Canon has added a one-touch option for shifting the entire picture into black & white, then adding the colored peaking fuzz on top to accentuate the effect." -- This is exactly how JVC focus assist works, nothing new here.

"The manual exposure can be controlled in via the joystick in the Function menu, or with the dial and Custom button on the lens barrel. The range is the same as on previous models: 11 steps up and 11 steps down." -- No real aperture/shutter values? Lame.

Overall, a pretty useless review, devoid of any real content. I could write one myself simply by looking at the pictures and by reading the specs. Yawn. Maybe their hands-on review will be better, but I doubt.

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

>Overall, a pretty useless review

Aramis, please stop being so aggressive. This is called a "First Impressions" article, and it's a PREVIEW. It is NOT the review. The real review will come in 2-3 weeks. I explained that yesterday.

[Rumpelgeist]

>Overall, a pretty useless review

Aramis, please stop being so aggressive. This is called a "First Impressions" article, and it's a PREVIEW. It is NOT the review. The real review will come in 2-3 weeks. I explained that yesterday.

Aramis can read: "Canon Vixia HF S10 First Impressions Camcorder Review by David Kender. Published on Jan 9, 2009 11:00 AM"
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-Vixia-HF-S10-First-Impressions-Review-36042.htm

As I already said, I could write the same "first impressions" based solely on Canon PR pics and tech specs. Gee, I actually could write a better one. I could mention, how moving iAF sensor inside the threads should help with autofocuing with attachments on. I could mention that an LCD-based joystick on a viewfinder-less camcorder is an idiotic idea. I could make fun of Canon stealing ideas from Sony, like the sliding cover for the accessory shoe or a cam-control roller or a pop-up flash. All this based solely on pics and cold numbers. I did not because I did not feel the need to chew on what everyone can see with their own eyes.

These guys apparently held the camera in their hands. Well yeah, they did not shoot formal tests, but at least they should have been able to tell me something new, something that I could not get from the pics. They barely did (so the sliding zoom controller feels more rough than tilting or rocking, this is some freaking news). Their news blurb contained more meat than this, um, preview.

I am not a big fan of DVinfo, but they are dissing CCIinfo for a reason. CCInfo insults its audience's intelligence by explaining, millimeter by millimeter, every button and cover on each of the sides of the camera. I stopped reading CCInfo reviews because they contain very little useful info and are extremely boring. Reading FX1000 review from B&H or Z5 review from urbanfox was like a gulp of fresh air. I prefer Adam Wilt or Steve Mullen to David Kender any day.

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

CCinfo editor provided some info as to where Cinemode is for example, info that is not readily available elsewhere. I think you should just be more patient. More web sites will offer more in-depth reviews soon too.

[DrDave]

CCInfo is very useful. The Canon looks great, we have to wait for some real world info now. I'm also curious to see if Sony's new wiring system will provide some real competition.

[bluesgeek]

How happy I am about this upcoming cam to try out, is not up for debate, but.....It troubles me to see the canon HD Lens beïng so far inside the camera. Since as a DoF Adapter fan, I would like to be able to place my Achromatic lens as close to the camera lens a possible. For as far as I can see, it will probably have a distance of 1 cm open space between it. This will probably create a lot of vignetting in the final image. Or am I wrong guys?

This question, alone, is worth the price of admission.

[Emanuel]

The Infosyncworld article http://www.infosyncworld.com/news/n/10026.html has JPG grabs from the HF-S and there's a lot of noise in these pictures. The bottom corners are not too sharp either. No, the JPG file format the author chose instead of PNG is not to be blamed for these two problems noticed. The JPG format added some artifacts, but the noise is all HF-S's. The kind of footage I see in these pictures is impossible to color grade properly btw. Hopefully by selecting cinemode and neutral coloring before you shoot might help out the situation...
Special thanks to Mike Perlman at InfosyncWorld who re-de-interlaced within FCE and re-saved the images in PNG to replace the previous JPG images.
http://www.infosyncworld.com/news/n/10026.html

However, please note that because the images were grabbed from FCE, there's a chance that FCE imported the footage using AIC instead of ProRES (FCE doesn't edit AVCHD natively), and AIC is really lossy, and therefore not a good evaluation of the quality of the camera. We'll see, as I might have a chance to view the actual .m2ts file itself. Will keep you updated.Which one is accurate?

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

What do you mean? The PNG files are new, after I asked the author to replace the JPEG ones. So obviously, the newest comment and the PNGs are the most accurate as they are the newest. But as I also said, there's a chance that even the PNGs don't show the full quality because AIC might have been used.

[Emanuel]

So perhaps it is a little bit early for any conclusion on noisy outcome from there, I think. Do you agree? :-)

[dcloud]

maybe the gain was on..

[kaidomac]

Well Eugenia has convinced me, bye bye HV30, helllooooooo HF-S100! :D

Can't wait to see some sample footage from this beast!

[1]

BTW, about the 58mm lens diameter I keep reading about:
isn't that just the front thread size. To me it looks like the actual lens is a whole lot smaller. Small lens, but slap enough big plastic around it and give it a big diameter filter thread, and it will appear that the lens is big?

[koolpenguin89]

I was thinking the exact same thing Mal. Then again, squared off lenses always look smaller to me.

Dylan

[Rumpelgeist]

Look at the HDR-HC1:

http://img.engadget.com/common/images/1016803924624335.JPG?0.42293986367256176

Thread diameter: 37mm
Outer barrel diameter: ~59mm

So the HC1 could easily have 58mm threads. In fact, I just bought a 52mm WA adapter and it looks just a tad small slimmer than the camera barrel :)

Compare with the S10/100:

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/upload/Image/Canon/Canon_HFS10/FI/Canon_HFS10_Front.jpg

I think, the technical reason for large thread was putting the iAF sensor inside the thread.

[dcloud]

BTW, about the 58mm lens diameter I keep reading about:
isn't that just the front thread size. To me it looks like the actual lens is a whole lot smaller. Small lens, but slap enough big plastic around it and give it a big diameter filter thread, and it will appear that the lens is big?

makes sense. perhaps similar to old hv30 lens but different sensor.

[Halsu]

Special thanks to Mike Perlman at InfosyncWorld who re-de-interlaced within FCE and re-saved the images in PNG to replace the previous JPG images.
http://www.infosyncworld.com/news/n/10026.html

Wow, those look pretty bad. Of course, camera settings, de-interlacing and recompression might have a lot to do with that... but still, i like my HV20 results much better.

[Ian-T]

BTW, about the 58mm lens diameter I keep reading about:
isn't that just the front thread size. To me it looks like the actual lens is a whole lot smaller. Small lens, but slap enough big plastic around it and give it a big diameter filter thread, and it will appear that the lens is big?I thought the same thing....

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

>Wow, those look pretty bad.

Indeed they do. However, I am 99% certain that the reason they look bad it's because of the AIC codec. These shots -- in my opinion-- are not straight out of the M2TS stream, but after FCE converted them to AIC. And AIC sucks big time -- which is why Apple dropped it for ProRES.

Mike, who took the screenshots, only has access to FCE on his Mac I think. He said he will send me the .m2ts files via snail mail, he tried to upload them but his connection kept dropping.

[net]

Here's a short video of CNET @ CES with first impressions of the HF S10.

http://ces.cnet.com/1801-19505-50004948.html?tag=contentBody;digiPhoto

[dfwblah]

Here's a short video of CNET @ CES with first impressions of the HF S10.

http://ces.cnet.com/1801-19505-50004948.html?tag=contentBody;digiPhoto

I was surprised to hear her say it will go for $1,400 twice in the video. Thought that hadn't been released yet.

[kaidomac]

>Wow, those look pretty bad.

Indeed they do. However, I am 99% certain that the reason they look bad it's because of the AIC codec. These shots -- in my opinion-- are not straight out of the M2TS stream, but after FCE converted them to AIC. And AIC sucks big time -- which is why Apple dropped it for ProRES.

Mike, who took the screenshots, only has access to FCE on his Mac I think. He said he will send me the .m2ts files via snail mail, he tried to upload them but his connection kept dropping.

Anxious to see those. I have an FTP server if you need a storage place :)

[kaidomac]

I was surprised to hear her say it will go for $1,400 twice in the video. Thought that hadn't been released yet.

I'm going to slap some Scarlet wanna-be stickers on my HF-S100. Meet the Crimson :hv20-smilie84:

[zcream]

The HFS crams 2.9 times as many pixels (3M vs 8.6M) into nearly the same sensor that the HV20/30 has.
Methinks that lowlight will end up being a lot worse than we imagine.
But even at that price i.e. 1400USD vs 2700USD for the 5D Mark II, the 5D looks a lot better.
Thhe 5D "sees" like an owl, has removable lenses, and some posters on dvinfo have had success in using twixtor to convert to 24P. Problem is that the shutter can change sometime, but realistically, unless you shoot a fast moving object it will not be an issue. I mean, how much can something move indoors between 1/40 or 1/50th of a second.
Or perhaps, the 5D for indoors shooting and the HFS for outdoors ? That would be best if someone has the budget.
Still think that 1K or less is a better entry point for the HFS.
On another note, has anyone ever tried to adapt these gyro stabilizers http://www.gyroscope.com/d.asp?product=SUPER2 for the HV20s or HFs.
Should be interesting at the price they are offered.

[Paulo Teixeira]

The HFS crams 2.9 times as many pixels (3M vs 8.6M) into nearly the same sensor that the HV20/30 has.
Methinks that lowlight will end up being a lot worse than we imagine.

Both the CMOS chip and the lens are bigger so I don’t see it being that much of a problem.

[zcream]

The CMOS is about the same 1/2.6 instead of 1/2.7
The outer lens diameter is bigger, but that does not mean anything.

Both the CMOS chip and the lens are bigger so I don’t see it being that much of a problem.

[mt. siskiyou]

The CMOS is about the same 1/2.6 instead of 1/2.7
The outer lens diameter is bigger, but that does not mean anything.

exactly.

[Paulo Teixeira]

Canon still made the lens differently for a reason and there’s also the new DIGIC DV III Image Processor that should help. I’m one of those people that can’t stand companies putting a lot of pixels on a chip if a lot of it wont be used for video but I don’t think Canon is that stupid to cram lots of pixels knowing that it’s going to be terrible in low light situations.

[zcream]

Well. Processing cannot really add any low-light. But we are all speculating. Can't wit for actual reviews.
A bit disappointed that Canon tried to cram in so many megapixels though..
The CAnon Powershot lines have about the same pixel density and their lowlight at 1/50th shutter is nothing to shout about..

[koolpenguin89]

I don’t think Canon is that stupid to cram lots of pixels knowing that it’s going to be terrible in low light situations.

Of course they knew, and they aren't stupid. But they aren't advertising it as "The worlds worst camcorder for low light" are they? No. I would suspect something along the lines of "The worlds first HD camcorder that can take 8.5 Megapixel stills while recording 1920x1080 HD video to a 32gb internal flash memory"....or something like that. Im no advertising agent. I don't see how a better processor could possibly compensate for the amount of light loss expected (by me) from the pixel increase.

Dylan

[mt. siskiyou]

Of course they knew, and they aren't stupid. But they aren't advertising it as "The worlds worst camcorder for low light" are they? No. I would suspect something along the lines of "The worlds first HD camcorder that can take 8.5 Megapixel stills while recording 1920x1080 HD video to a 32gb internal flash memory"....or something like that. Im no advertising agent. I don't see how a better processor could possibly compensate for the amount of light loss expected (by me) from the pixel increase.

Dylan

possibly they are using some form of sorcery. or maybe it is a selling point since many consumers think more noise means better audio quality. bwahaha.

[Halsu]

I don't see how a better processor could possibly compensate for the amount of light loss expected (by me) from the pixel increase.

Oversampling is generally a good thing, dudes. When the big image from the sensor is scaled down to HD, the noise of multiple individual sensor pixels will be averaged when constructing the final output pixel.

Or in other words, cramming more pixels to the sensor shouldn't make the image any more noisy as long as the resulting image is properly scaled down to the same size.

[zcream]

Halsu, that is true to a certain extent. However, any pixel ultimately converts incident photons to flowing electrons. Light to electrical energy. The "strength" of the flowing current is proportional to the area of the incidence i.e. the individual pixel area. There will be clearly a lower limit, when there is no flow due to the intensity of photons dropping below a threshold value.
This is the lowest "low light" that the camera can "see"
Clearly, a pixel size much larger will have a higher threshold. This relates to the min. lux rating.
Now, noise does not have a linear relationship either, so it is not true that scaling makes the noise equal.
This may happen until a lower limit, perhaps a magnitude or two higher than the min. lux rating. However, at low light scenarios the noise will be too much

Anyway, I can't wait for the camcorderinfo review - though we have to treat reviews with a pinch of salt until the camcorder is out in the open..

[dcloud]

take this into consideration,
the 5d vs 5d mkII
both same sized sensor.
both similar low light capabilities.

however,
mk II has a 21.1 megapixel sensor with better noise performance on higher ISO.

hfs100 will most likely perform slightly better in low light but not worst than hv40. Why would it be the flagship camcorder if its worst than the hv40? the gain perhaps will have less noise on smaller db

overall, we have to wait for more reviews to be released. its pointless to speculate.

[net]

Halsu, that is true to a certain extent. However, any pixel ultimately converts incident photons to flowing electrons. Light to electrical energy. The "strength" of the flowing current is proportional to the area of the incidence i.e. the individual pixel area...

I know it's just speculation until reviews/video footage...

I'd still be interested to know, while we're waiting, what you think the differences might or can be between the images produced by the HF11 and HF S10?

HF11
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&tabact=ModelTechSpecsTabAct&fcategoryid=177&modelid=17384

HF S10
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=177&modelid=17993#ModelTechSpecsAct

I see that the HF S10 has a lot more features like zebra stripes, gain control that potentially can produce better information.
As far as the pixels, both camcorders produce a final output of 1920 x 1080. Is the HF11 "missing" something in that final output compared to the HF S10?

The HF S10 is squashing it down, but there can't be "more" since it's the same amount of pixels...right?

[Piewee]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piewee View Post
How happy I am about this upcoming cam to try out, is not up for debate, but.....It troubles me to see the canon HD Lens beïng so far inside the camera. Since as a DoF Adapter fan, I would like to be able to place my Achromatic lens as close to the camera lens a possible. For as far as I can see, it will probably have a distance of 1 cm open space between it. This will probably create a lot of vignetting in the final image. Or am I wrong guys?


This question, alone, is worth the price of admission.

haha...Thanks bluesgeek, so I asume you also think we're in trouble?:hv20-smilie122:

[Ian-T]

The HF S10 is squashing it down, but there can't be "more" since it's the same amount of pixels...right?But that's just it....it's not the same amount of pixels. The HF S10 has (I believe) almost 3 times as much effective pixels as the HF11. I think maybe you wanted to say "since it's the same size image in the end?"....maybe..

Think of it this way...if both the HF11 and the HF S10's images were untouched (without compressing them to AVCHD)...then obviously the HF S10's image would look much more detailed and better overall. So down sampling both to a common size wouldn't change anything...and in this case...that's exactly what's happening.

[bluesgeek]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piewee View Post
How happy I am about this upcoming cam to try out, is not up for debate, but.....It troubles me to see the canon HD Lens beïng so far inside the camera. Since as a DoF Adapter fan, I would like to be able to place my Achromatic lens as close to the camera lens a possible. For as far as I can see, it will probably have a distance of 1 cm open space between it. This will probably create a lot of vignetting in the final image. Or am I wrong guys?



haha...Thanks bluesgeek, so I asume you also think we're in trouble?:hv20-smilie122:

We don't know. I'm saying that with the prevalence of DOF adapter use, every reviewer should test one. I will hope by chance to see a number of adapters tested by the time we see several reviews.

I'm glad you gave me an opportunity to expand on this because I think it's critical.

:hv20-smilie81: No serious review should be without a DOF adapter test!

[net]

But that's just it....it's not the same amount of pixels. The HF S10 has (I believe) almost 3 times as much effective pixels as the HF11. I think maybe you wanted to say "since it's the same size image in the end?"

Yeh, that's what i mean; the final output - because that's how it will be viewed.

At this point, I understand the advantages of the prosumer features of the HF S10 that will give more control of the information. I just am not grasping the concept of the final output pixels of the two...

In my mind, conceptually, I am trying to imagine what the differences are/what is potentially lacking...

http://i40.tinypic.com/2cggaki.jpg

So, for conceptual purposes only/not an actual representation of pixels...
1 HF S10 as "maximum" in this concept.
2 HF11 is faded, as if it is not as "strong" as 1.
3 HF11 has information missing in the edges.
4 If HF11 information were distributed in a speckled manner

Which would be the closest conceptual comparison of the images, or would it actually be something different?

/just for discussion and help

[HDME]

I'm thinking you would get some vignetting (possible). Thread size might be 58mm but the glass might be a little smaller than that size. So...it's kind of hard to tell.

I've been reading this thread with some interest because I'm very intrigued
by the HF S100. The first thing that I noticed when I saw a pic of it was
what a big lens it had but having thought about what you said, I carried some
very unscientific research based on it having a filter ring of 58mm.
I placed a ruler up to the screen (told you it was unscientific!) and tried to work out how
many milimetres the widest point of the lens was in relation to the filter ring. I wouldn't mind betting
that the HF S100 lens is roughly 3cm at its widest point.
This would only make it around 6mm wider than the HF 100 which I have. In fact where the lens is
wider on the HF S100, the HF 100 lens would be just as wide in mm if
the very small bracket shaped areas were removed from it.

In other words, I would venture to say the lens (purely from a visible surface size) is almost the same.

Hope I explained it well enough.
And it is dreadfully unscientific!

[Ian-T]

Which would be the closest conceptual comparison of the images, or would it actually be something different?

/just for discussion and helpI like this example. If I would have to guess..I think #1 and #4 represents it best (though in a very extreme way...but like you said...just for conceptual purposes).

Even though the rectangles are the same size, example #1...detail is greatest. It creates what I call a more dense image where as #4 detail would be less. At least that is how I look at it.



In other words, I would venture to say the lens (purely from a visible surface size) is almost the same.

Hope I explained it well enough.
And it is dreadfully unscientific!LOl...I understood perfectly what you are saying. I think you have a point (which some others here have mentioned also). Just looking at the pictures it looks like there is just more plastic around the lens then any of their other cams...which could mean then lens are the same size as...and HF11 or HV20 etc.. But...we are all just best guessing here. We will find out soon enough.


Oh..and welcome to the site.

[koolpenguin89]

Net, i think you are confusing pixels with resolution.

Dylan

[Noel]

I really don't know anything. But it seems like there's a big gap between this camcorder HF S100 and the next semipro camcorder XHA1. I have a feeling something can come out. Like the GL4 HD, or something from Sony. Do you think they're holding on to something until people get tired of their 5DII SLR? And this new HF S100?

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

>But it seems like there's a big gap between this camcorder HF S100 and the next semipro camcorder XHA1

Exactly my point for the past 1.5 years. The HV20 *CREATED* this new artistic videography market, that it's ideal camera sits at around $2000 and it's something between a very low-end prosumer or high-end consumer (depends how you see it).

I expected Canon to take up on this on their January announcements, but it seems that we will have to wait even more to see a manufacturer that has the intelligence to cater to this new market segment.

[Noel]

I wish they can come out with the GL4 HD just before the RedScarlet comes out. Pricing around $2,000+... May be they're testing with the HF S100 if a bigger lens and sensor would have a good effect on AVCHD. Can't wait to see the review.

[David Zeno]

Hi everyone,

I'm an HV20 owner, and also am really impressed with the HF S10, but I got to wondering this....

Has everyone forgotten about the AVCHD issues with **editing*** video ?

I read through this whole thread, and it seems nobody has remembered that AVCHD is a bear to deal with, and many editors still do not even support it.

Before the HF S10 was announced, there was a lot of AVCHD bashing on many boards, but this seems to have totally disappeared in light of the new Canon HF S10 being announced.

I am just wondering what has changed to make everyone so eager to get their hands on the new HF S10 ?

I'd love to hear some comments, input etc on this. I am still very happy with my HV20, but truth be known, I do love the idea of never having to touch a tape again,, however, editing problems will still be a major problem for anyone owning a Windows based computer. I know somebody who has an iMac desktop, and who has an AVCHD Canon camera, and the iMac eats this footage up for breakfast. It's kidsplay for his computer, but it will hardly run on my very fast quad core Windows computer. Editing is very difficult.

With that said, I would love an HF S10, but the price tag of $1,500 takes this camera out of my budget, so I'll be happy with my HV20 for a few more years it seems.

I'd love to hear though, how you feel about the AVCHD issue. OH and why is Canon touting the new HF S10 as "FULL HD " is it really 1080p vs the Canon HV20's resolution of 1080i ( not true HD ) ?

Dave.

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

>Has everyone forgotten about the AVCHD issues with **editing*** video ?

You are overreacting about this. Full HD 1080/60i AVCHD is up to 6 times slower to edit than HDV, that's true. However, on a Quad Core 2.4 Ghz, you can get 100% preview speed when editing (Sony Vegas). So yes, it does require a modern, fast PC. But it's not unusable. And if you are using Apple's editors, it's not slower at all, as Apple re-encodes during importing. But that's how technology progresses. When DV AVI came out, everyone was bitching about the exact same thing! It needed a 400 Mhz PC to edit fast, and people at the time had 200 or 300 Mhz. But these days, DV AVI is a snap to edit. This will happen to AVCHD too.

So if your PC is not fast, stay with HDV, or use proxy files. If it is fast, there's no reason why not to jump on the HF-S series. Most editors do support AVCHD now btw.

>OH and why is Canon touting the new HF S10 as "FULL HD " is it really 1080p vs the Canon HV20's resolution of 1080i ( not true HD ) ?

Yes, it's full 1080p at 30 fps. It's also 1080i at full HD resolution. At some point, they might add true 24p too. The HV series record to tape 1440x1080 instead of 1920x1080.

[Ian-T]

Actually the HV20 is true HD. And they used the same term for the HV20…”Full HD”….because it is. It’s all just a marketing term to sell more camcorders.

In regards to AVCHD…I don’t remember the last time I used M2T files from the HV20. I only use intermediate codecs anyways. If I had an AVCHD cam I would basically do the same. Once you remove pulldown from the HV20 you are headed in that direction anyways.

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

>Actually the HV20 is true HD.

The sensor is, and when you record via HDMI too. But for 99.9% of the users out there, who just use tape, practically-speaking, is not full HD.

[David Zeno]

Hi Eugenia

thanks for putting my fears away. I am very glad you explained how the iMac works. I did not understand how how the iMac could play the raw AVCHD footage like it was a 320x200 size movie. 2 full hours of this footage played effortlessly, and very smooth, anywhere you jumped to in the timeline. So ! this is how it does this, it encodes it upon import... this is very interesting indeed. Thank you for explaining this.

I still am not clear on the HD thing. Is the HF S10 a higher resolution than our HV20s ? ( I didn't really understand what you mean, I am sorry about that )

thank you again Eugenia

Dave.




>Has everyone forgotten about the AVCHD issues with **editing*** video ?

You are overreacting about this. Full HD 1080/60i AVCHD is up to 6 times slower to edit than HDV, that's true. However, on a Quad Core 2.4 Ghz, you can get 100% preview speed when editing (Sony Vegas). So yes, it does require a modern, fast PC. But it's not unusable. And if you are using Apple's editors, it's not slower at all, as Apple re-encodes during importing. But that's how technology progresses. When DV AVI came out, everyone was bitching about the exact same thing! It needed a 400 Mhz PC to edit fast, and people at the time had 200 or 300 Mhz. But these days, DV AVI is a snap to edit. This will happen to AVCHD too.

So if your PC is not fast, stay with HDV, or use proxy files. If it is fast, there's no reason why not to jump on the HF-S series. Most editors do support AVCHD now btw.

>OH and why is Canon touting the new HF S10 as "FULL HD " is it really 1080p vs the Canon HV20's resolution of 1080i ( not true HD ) ?

Yes, it's full 1080p at 30 fps. It's also 1080i at full HD resolution. At some point, they might add true 24p too. The HV series record to tape 1440x1080 instead of 1920x1080.

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

>Is the HF S10 a higher resolution than our HV20s

Yes, both the sensor has more pixels when you count them raw, and the actual recorded resolution. The HV series is equal to the HF-S series in recorded resolution only when you capture via HDMI, using a special PCI card that costs $250+. Even then, its quality is not expected to be better than the HF-S series.

[David Zeno]

Hi Ian

I still don't even know what a pull-down is, and i know I shouldn't be a member of this forum if I don't so telling you this, I know I will get into trouble.

I bought the HV20, because it did HD. I have never used the 24p mode. If I understand correctly, 24p mode ( cinema mode ) makes the film a bit more blurred, kind of "soft" so it is more like a movie you see at the cinema. However, on one of the threads here, I remember a senior member saying he filmed a lot of bands, and always filmed in 24p mode, and was not happy thinking back, as now the film he shot was not as sharp as it could have been.

I know there are a lot of movie makers here, but I'm a simple guy, I shoot video, add simple transitions, and just admire the amazing quality on my TV that the HV20 gives me. I've never shot in manual mode, too scared I guess.

I wish I knew more about the HV20, wish I could take more advantage of all the nice stuff on it.

Hmm, so it now seems that because I only use the HV20 with tapes, I'm NOT getting full HD ( 1920 ) out of it, and my max resolution is 1440... this is indeed intersting.

So my friend show shoots with his HF10 shoots at even higher quality than I can with my HV20. Boo hoo :hv20-smilie51:

I never shoot directly to the computer via HDMI cable.. this is impossible to do, if you are not near a computer, so if you are out visiting family, or shooting in your front yard, or backyard, etc, capturing via HDMI directly to your hard drive is impossible.

Dave.

Actually the HV20 is true HD. And they used the same term for the HV20…”Full HD”….because it is. It’s all just a marketing term to sell more camcorders.

In regards to AVCHD…I don’t remember the last time I used M2T files from the HV20. I only use intermediate codecs anyways. If I had an AVCHD cam I would basically do the same. Once you remove pulldown from the HV20 you are headed in that direction anyways.

[Rumpelgeist]

> I still don't even know what a pull-down is

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecine

[David Zeno]

Ok so here is a dumb question.

The new HF S10 sports the same hotshoe as the HF10... it's a mini-hotshoe, it will NOT support anything that fits onto a regular sized hotshoe, so what does one do ? do you buy an adapter ( similar to a step up or down ring ) but this would step up sizes of the mini-hotshoe to a normal industry standard hotshoe ( ? )

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

>So my friend show shoots with his HF10 shoots at even higher quality than I can with my HV20. Boo hoo

The HV series have some of the best quality in the consumer camera space, so you should not be unhappy about it. EVEN if they record in 1440x1080 instead of 1920, they are still *probably* the best -- by a hair -- to the HF series. But the new HF-S series are indeed better than anything on that market -- according to their specs.

>do you buy an adapter

There is no such adapter. Read here: http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2009/01/06/regarding-the-new-canon-cameras/
If you have such hardware already, they will be useless with the HF-S series.

> I still don't even know what a pull-down is

If you don't record in the PF24 mode (default is 60i), then you don't need to know.

>If I understand correctly, 24p mode ( cinema mode ) makes the film a bit more blurred, kind of "soft" so it is more like a movie you see at the cinema.

24p and Cinemode are two different things. What you are referring to is CineMode, which is a visual "look" (aka a gamma curve). 24p is about frame rate, not about gamma curves.

[Ian-T]

...what Eugenia said. I just want to add that you might be confusing CineMode (which is what Eugenia briefly explained above) and Cinema mode (which is basically 24p mode).

...yeah I know.....confusing :)

Edit: Which I see Eugenia already explained...my bad.

[bluesgeek]

And if you are using Apple's editors, it's not slower at all, as Apple re-encodes during importing.

On my 2-year-old MacBook (2.16 Core 2 Duo) that can scheduling import sessions for when I'm sleeping or out on errands. But then you don't have tape capture time, so I guess it works out.

[cspak71]

Hello all...

Back from CES. I was able to get my hands on some one on one time with both the canon HFS100 and the Pansaonic HDC-TM300. I was able to get some short footage but since I'm a noob to AVCHD I have no clue what I'm looking at. I haven't even really successfully downloaded the footage yet!

I may have inadvertently corrupted the footage by using the same card on 2 diferent brand cameras?? Is that possible?

I haven't done any serious testing, nor did I do any low-light, or anything like that... and the footage may be all but unusable, but if there is a slight chance that someone here could take a look at the footage and see if they can get a better grasp of what we're seeing.. I'm willing to send them a copy of the data on the SD card.

Please let me know if you'd like to get a copy... (I'd rather only do it for a few people if possible). PM me.

I do ask that if you request the footage, that you are able to compare and objectively compare it to the HV-series, and the pre-existing HF series (basically be somewhat knowledgable about what you're looking at).... since I'm sure alot of people have that as their forefront of their thoughts. Obviously posting a review of some sort on this site.

OR!

You have access to a website where you can store and share the footage for everyone to mess around with.

Does the HFS series live up to the hype? Or does HDV still have some life left.

btw.. I asked the rep at the booth retail price... if I recall correctly:

Canon HFS10- $1499
Canon HFS100- $1299

Give or take a hundred (my memory is crappy).

I'm not sure if anyone else has offered this... so I apologize if I'm being redundant.

**Moderator** Please let me know if this offer is against any policy of this site.

[Soultrape]

I'll take the HFS100 for $800. k10x...

[dcloud]

eugenia:
heres some suggestion for camcorderinfo: a shoot out on all cams.

canon hfs100, sony HDR-XR500, panny HDC-HS300, hv40, etc

low light test, high speed test, codec test , rolling shutter test, color, gain, etc.

[DrDave]

From Electronista
The new models are due in late March to early April. The HF S10 will retail for $1,400, the HF S100 for $1200, the HF 20 will be $1,000 and the HF200 bows at $850. The HV40 has not been priced yet; the HG20 is $900, while the HG21 is $1,300.

[net]

From Electronista
The new models are due in late March to early April. The HF S10 will retail for $1,400, the HF S100 for $1200, the HF 20 will be $1,000 and the HF200 bows at $850. The HV40 has not been priced yet; the HG20 is $900, while the HG21 is $1,300.


If you click on any of the new camcorders @ Canon USA, it states "Available in February 2009", like the HF S10:

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=177&modelid=17993


The only one released in March will be the HV40.

[cspak71]

Hey guys... I got a couple of responses, and then realized that I have a .mac account where I can make the files public.


So far I have one .mts file from the HFS100 uploaded, and am currently uploading the larger second file as we speak
(although I've been having uploading issues, so it may take a bit.. keep checking.)

01.mts, and 02.mts are the Canon HFS100 files... later there will be a 00.mts file that is from the Panasonic TM300

The files are located at:

http://public.me.com/cspak71

I'll keep it up there for a while but get it earlier than later.

Please let me know what you guys think! I'm interested in knowing if 24mbps AVCHD is really as good as we're hoping it'll be.

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

Thanks, I downloaded the 0001.mts, will have a look tomorrow morning my time (too late atm here).

[LoganT]

Thanks. That looks insanely good, detail is amazing.

[Tomtebo]

how do you download it? i don't have either mac or someting like that. could somebody download it and put it up on a free/download site?

[Paulo Teixeira]

Just hit the arrow facing downward. It’s on the right side of (159 MB)

[dcloud]

do you know the settings when you shot it? would be helpful if you do.

edit:
based on the footage... im guessing its wide open (good DOF)? no gain? (default should be 0 unless in auto mode?)

[mt. siskiyou]

Thank you for putting this up!
The colors are good. I see some grain though. It's hard to judge based on that model set with fake plastic trees (haha) and shower tile buildings, someone had fun building this. It would be more accurate to gauge in daylight with actual objects, obviously. The playback was very choppy on my setup. Perhaps someone can upload this to vimeo. I would, yet cannot get an editing program to recognize the file unless its from a camera., I think the HV series can hold up closely to this. I could be wrong, though.

[Tomtebo]

still think that i need a apple or someting, or mebership....

[Ian-T]

Now that's a very detailed picture. It looked like 60i to me. It plays very choppy (like 1 or 2 fps) on my workstation that I used AutoCad on (I used VLC Player).

I'm trying to find where the noise is because it looks very clean to me.

[mt. siskiyou]

i noticed noise in areas of shadow.

[EssentialParadox]

Why is Eugenia Loli-Queru such a HF fangirl?

Even in the HV40 topic she's just going on and on about how the S100 "blows away the HV series", as if she's unsure about her purchase and needs to justify it constantly.

Eugenia, if you like your camera then good for you… but it would be appreciated if you try to keep the HF10/100 discussion in here please.

[EssentialParadox]

As for the new HF cams, I wouldn't exactly say they have "a much better visual quality" than the other Canon camcorders.

A bigger lens is nice, and the 0.1 of a fraction bigger image sensor is nice also, but that megapixel count at almost 9MP is actually a serious negative on the low light performance.

I'm not buying further camcorders. DSLR's w/ video have already leapfrogged the image quality of most video cameras, and a couple of years and they'll include professional functionality along with a price tag of around $500 dollars.

[FrenkAE]

Ok so here is a dumb question.

The new HF S10 sports the same hotshoe as the HF10... it's a mini-hotshoe, it will NOT support anything that fits onto a regular sized hotshoe, so what does one do ? do you buy an adapter ( similar to a step up or down ring ) but this would step up sizes of the mini-hotshoe to a normal industry standard hotshoe ( ? )
There is, however, an adapter to convert to a universal cold shoe:
http://shop.dm-accessories.com/products/cms-flat

This will generally allow you to use accessories that come with their own power source.

[net]

Now that's a very detailed picture. It looked like 60i to me.....

Vegas says it's 60i.

cspak's sample looks very clear. I do see the motion blurring that the other HF's have during pan. This doesn't personally bother me; I like the HF's. I'm just saying that, just from this, it still doesn't seem to match the smoother panning on the HV's.

From this sample, I can't see a major difference from that to the HF11.

[Halsu]

that megapixel count at almost 9MP is actually a serious negative on the low light performance.

Possibly, but not necessarily so. First of all, downsizing 9MP to 1.9MP will average pixels out, averaging noise at the same go. Second, the sensor may be otherwise of better quality.

We'll need to wait for test footage to be able to judge anything for real.

[mt. siskiyou]

As for the new HF cams, I wouldn't exactly say they have "a much better visual quality" than the other Canon camcorders.

A bigger lens is nice, and the 0.1 of a fraction bigger image sensor is nice also, but that megapixel count at almost 9MP is actually a serious negative on the low light performance.

I'm not buying further camcorders. DSLR's w/ video have already leapfrogged the image quality of most video cameras, and a couple of years and they'll include professional functionality along with a price tag of around $500 dollars.

I could not agree more. Can't relate to all the HF praise. Maybe will pick up AVCHD in a year or two when it is worth it's weight as a DSLR option. Don't mind flash memory as a quicktime native file without trouble, as JVC has demonstrated in near models. AVCHD is B.S. !!!

[SenorKaffee]

I could not agree more. Can't relate to all the HF praise. Maybe will pick up AVCHD in a year or two when it is worth it's weight as a DSLR option. Don't mind flash memory as a quicktime native file without trouble, as JVC has demonstrated in near models. AVCHD is B.S. !!!

If I had to buy a (secondary) camera now, I'd buy the HF-S. I like the flash memory concept and it has Zebra, which the HF11 lacks, and has about the same quality as the HV-models.

Quicktime has its own problems (gamma shift), so I'm not sure what to make of that design choice.

I'm not sure what you mean with DSLR option - AVCHD as a recording format for movie-DSLRs?

AVCHD isn't really more "BS" than HDV or MPEG4-AVC in a Quicktime container. The only alternative with less "BS" is moving to intraframe or (nearly) lossless compression. But that's not going to happen in the <1.000$ segment.

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

>Why is Eugenia Loli-Queru such a HF fangirl? Even in the HV40 topic she's just going on and on about how the S100 "blows away the HV series"

The "Why" is explained in the HV40 thread. Read my last reply there. Besides, I WAS NOT the only one comparing the HV40 with the HF-S series in that thread, in fact, I came to that thread much later. But you had to single me out, did you?

The reality of the thing is, the HV series are as good as dead in the amateur but serious videography market -- the market of most of us here, that is -- if you don't want to see the truth and you leave your emotion blur your objectivity, it's your problem, not mine.

[Rumpelgeist]

Why is Eugenia Loli-Queru such a HF fangirl?

Even in the HV40 topic she's just going on and on about how the S100 "blows away the HV series", as if she's unsure about her purchase and needs to justify it constantly.
She has the HV20. It was a nice cam for 2007. It was on par or worse in image quality with the 17Mbit/s 2008 HF series, but had better manual controls. Now in 2009 the only benefit of the HV40 over the S is native 24P mode. It is still a good camcorder, but not the best anymore, with workflow from stone ages.


AVCHD is B.S. !!!
AVCHD is Blu-Ray. Well, one might say that Blu-ray is B.S. too.

It is entertaining to watch how amateurs defend tape-based workflow "because pros use tapes". Now when pros are switching to P2, SxS and even SDHC and offload their A1s and V1Us on eBay, the tune has changed from "tape rules, tapeless sucks" to "MPEG-2 rules, AVCHD sucks". Funny.

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

Aramis, exactly. AVCHD is just another format. Not inferior to HDV in any way. Sure it's slower, because it's more complex as it can cram more quality at the same bitrate (when a good encoder is used). But then again, when DV came out, it was slow too and people were bitching about it too. It's funny how some people here are so one-dimensional with little understanding of history.

And pros don't all use tapes anymore. All the *new* camera models use flash storage now, e.g. the EX1. The new Canon prosumer cameras to be released in April will be predominantly flash too. Tape-based models will be fewer, and only still there just because there are some bozo prosumers who also claim that "tapes are better". Right.

[Ian-T]

I'm not sure if being an amteur has anything to do with it. I'm sure there are pros who would like to store their HD on tapes still. if the manufacturers gave us an option (tape and card) on one machine...then that would be a lot of folks choice...at least IMO.

I was an IT guy some years back...and tapes to me (used as backup) are the wiser choice.

[Rumpelgeist]

The new Canon prosumer cameras to be released in April will be predominantly flash too.
This was so subtle. I am all ears now. What do you know? will we ever see an AVCHD version of the GL-2 for $2K? Don't be a tease.


I'm not sure if being an amteur has anything to do with it. I'm sure there are pros who would like to store their HD on tapes still. if the manufacturers gave us an option (tape and card) on one machine...then that would be a lot of folks choice...at least IMO.

I was an IT guy some years back...and tapes to me (used as backup) are the wiser choice.
Pros shoot video for a living, the faster the workflow the better. With a file-based workflow you don't need to capture in runtime, but you need to carry a laptop with you if you use expensive P2 or even SxS cards, unless you are really rich. Also, it seems that high-bitrate formats take almost as much time to transfer as realtime capture from an HDV camcorder (how long does it take to copy RED files?) Therefore, reasonably slow (say, up to 50Mbit/s) yet reasonably high-quality formats recorded onto cheap media (read: SDHC) are the sweet spot in terms of cost and fast workflow. Compared to MPEG-2, AVC provides just that: better quality with the same bitrate.

The only benefit of tapes is instant archiving, but with 8GB cards being sold for less than $20 some videographers already have started archiving the cards. Price difference between cards and tapes is not so huge now.

[Goose]

I for one like my cheap tapes for archival

[Rumpelgeist]

I for one like my cheap tapes for archival
Good for you. Do you also prefer LPs and tapes to MP3s?

[Ian-T]

Good for you. Do you also prefer LPs and tapes to MP3s?..Well...honestly...the quality is much better.:hv20-smilie84:

[threadhanger]

There's nothing wrong with minidv tapes. They are inexpensive and great for archiving, as said. The firewire cord could of been a little better designed, however.

A lot of retro technology still holds up quite a bit and is coming back.

3-D is being pushed by movie studios and is the next big thing in video game technology.

Vinyl records still have a big fan base for audio purists.

Home projectors are nice if you can afford them. Remember when people would shoot 35mm slides??

Those are all things that have been around for decades. Flash drives are basically about convenience. Not quality of final product.

<stepping off my soapbox>

[cspak71]

do you know the settings when you shot it? would be helpful if you do.

edit:
based on the footage... im guessing its wide open (good DOF)? no gain? (default should be 0 unless in auto mode?)

Sadly I didn't have time to examine all the settings, and figured the most important would have been the 42mbps setting, and the 24p.

I think everything else was pretty auto...

[cspak71]

Hey all,

I tried several times to upload the second HFS100 clip (587mb) but it somehow doesn't close the deal. It'll upload all the way and just hang there...

At this point, I'll try again.. but don't hold your breath.

I'll try to upload the Panasonic TM300 clip later too.. but that seems to have the same problem.

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

Ok guys, the moment of truth! Mike Perlman of InfosyncWorld was very kind to send me his .mts files that he shot with the HF-S10 at the CES. He made sure that he recorded in 24 mbps. The camera was in Tv mode. 1-2 of the following shots are from the user "cspak71" who uploaded another .mts yesterday.

I used Vegas to grab the images in Best/Full quality, with the "blend fields" algorithm used as a de-interlacer (interpolation had lower quality when zoomed in). All videos were handheld, but I tried to take shots from the most static parts of the clips.

http://hv20.info/yopu/hf-s10-1.png
http://hv20.info/yopu/hf-s10-2.png
http://hv20.info/yopu/hf-s10-3.png
http://hv20.info/yopu/hf-s10-4.png
http://hv20.info/yopu/hf-s10-5.png
http://hv20.info/yopu/hf-s10-6.png
http://hv20.info/yopu/hf-s10-7.png
http://hv20.info/yopu/hf-s10-8.png
http://hv20.info/yopu/hf-s10-9.png
http://hv20.info/yopu/hf-s10-10.png

And a low-light picture from the HV20 for comparison reasons:
http://hv20.info/yopu/hv20-lowlight.png

Viewing these pictures, to me it looks like the HF-S series have a real problem with low light, you can see the red/brown artifacts and smear-like noisy look in some surfaces, when zoomed in to the screenshots. It seems that the added "dynamic range" that Canon advertises is polluted with easy to see, and hard to color grade, noise. Of course, the HV series and any camcorder have such problems, but I think they are more pronounced in the HF-S series. I checked some of my older HV20 footage and I found it more pleasing to the eye. The HV20 also seems to color-grade better. The HF-S lens doesn't seem to be sharper than the HV's either.

If this is indeed how the HF-S series can record, I think I might just go for the HV40 to replace my HV20. I don't know yet... There are some points that I like in the HF-S series (e.g. gain support, flash storage, Cinemode in the Colors menu), but if it doesn't translate to real world cleaner footage, I am not sure it's worth the extra cash.

UPDATE: I might have been overreacted here. The grabs aren't really that bad. :)

[cspak71]

Why is Eugenia Loli-Queru such a HF fangirl?

Even in the HV40 topic she's just going on and on about how the S100 "blows away the HV series", as if she's unsure about her purchase and needs to justify it constantly.

Eugenia, if you like your camera then good for you… but it would be appreciated if you try to keep the HF10/100 discussion in here please.

I think because there really wasn't anything more to say about the HV40. Outside of the native 24p, and the custom button... there isn't anything new for anyone to talk about... seems like everything's already been addressed on the 20/30 threads.

[cspak71]

Ok guys, the moment of truth! Mike Perlman of InfosyncWorld was very kind to send me his .mts files that he shot with the HF-S10 at the CES. He made sure that he recorded in 24 mbps. The camera was in Tv mode. 1-2 of the following shots are from the user "cspak71" who uploaded another .mts yesterday.



Hmm... my bad if I didn't have it set to 24mbps... could have sworn I made sure I changed that.

As for your findings Eugenia.... if that's the case, then I'm personally a fan of image quality over tech, so I may end up picking myself a HV30 or 40 if that's the case.

Save me some cash... thanks! :hv20-smilie03:

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

cspak71, your video seems to be 24 mbps, but it seems to be PF24, not 60i. :)

[Ian-T]

The grabs aren't really that bad. :)I agree. I think we all might be expecting a little too much out of this cam. The added features on this camera could just end up making the image marginally better than the HV20 or much better...but that's yet to be seen. From what I'm seeing so far though the image does look...more detailed.

[kaidomac]

I agree. I think we all might be expecting a little too much out of this cam. The added features on this camera could just end up making the image marginally better than the HV20 or much better...but that's yet to be seen. From what I'm seeing so far though the image does look...more detailed.

As long as the HF-S100's image is as good as the HV20's and not worse in any way, I'll switch. My next purchase was going to be a QuickstreamHDV to make importing less of a hassle (I mostly just use my camera for fun, and importing via Firewire from tape 1:1 is NOT FUN!), but since it starts at $799 and goes upwards of $2300, it makes more sense to buy a digital camcorder instead. Very anxious to see some real reviews!

[kaidomac]

Now that's a very detailed picture. It looked like 60i to me. It plays very choppy (like 1 or 2 fps) on my workstation that I used AutoCad on (I used VLC Player).

I'm trying to find where the noise is because it looks very clean to me.

Yeah it was very choppy on my Quad Mac w/ 8gb RAM & 3870 video card. Converting to ProRes...

[Rumpelgeist]

since it starts at $799 and goes upwards of $2300, it makes more sense to buy a digital camcorder instead.
Instead of what? HDV is digital. DV is digital. Digital8 is, um, digital.

[Rumpelgeist]

Ew. Diagonals are stair-stepped, image is terribly soft, yet the aliasing is obvious, for example on image #2. Judging by #5, latitude seems to be ok. Color coding in #7 is awful.

I disagree with "blend" deinterlacing, it softens the image. Please post a single field instead.

I don't know who in their right mind shoots handheld video in interlaced mode to check b/w and color resolution, considering that the camcorder is capable of progressive. This had to be shot with 30p. Interlaced would work too if the camcorder was placed on a desk instead of shooting handheld.

Oh well, we will know more details from CCInfo and the likes in a week or two.

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

The sample that cspak71 uploaded does not have noise because there was a lot of light in that place in the Canon booth. Most of the mts samples I got from Mike though have lots of noise.

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

>I disagree with "blend" deinterlacing, it softens the image.
>Please post a single field instead.

I always use interpolation myself. But it looked even worse. There were jpeg-like artifacts in addition to the ones you already saw. And the default on Vegas is blend fields anyway so most people are going to use it as such no matter if you and me are going to use interpolation.

[mt. siskiyou]

Good for you. Do you also prefer LPs and tapes to MP3s?

Now, now. No need to mock someone who does not agree with you. And I much prefer LP for sound quality compared to an mp3. Do you really think an mp3 sounds better than an LP?

[mt. siskiyou]

I'm not sure if being an amteur has anything to do with it. I'm sure there are pros who would like to store their HD on tapes still. if the manufacturers gave us an option (tape and card) on one machine...then that would be a lot of folks choice...at least IMO.

I was an IT guy some years back...and tapes to me (used as backup) are the wiser choice.

You make logical points. I agree.
I don't think every amateur bases their decisions on what system professionals use either! lol, please.

[Emanuel]

I'm trying to find where the noise is because it looks very clean to me.Yes, apart the Eugenia's sharpness issue notice, I don't see any inferior outcome from a very basic set of samples, considering the initial expectations.

HV20/30 owners whining for the bucks on relatively recent purchases? :hv20-smilie50:

[Rumpelgeist]

Now, now. No need to mock someone who does not agree with you.
This was a question.

And I much prefer LP for sound quality compared to an mp3. Do you really think an mp3 sounds better than an LP?
Depends on bitrate, sampling frequency and other factors. In any case, I don't have tapes. It is either CDs or MP3s.

[kaidomac]

Instead of what? HDV is digital. DV is digital. Digital8 is, um, digital.

In this context, I am referring to digital as hard drive or memory card-based recording systems. Sorry for the confusion. The QuickstreamHDV records to a hard drive or a solid-state drive:

http://www.mcetech.com/quickstreamdv-hdv/index.html

But for the price of one of those, I might as well get a new camera that records to SDHC if the image quality is at least as good as the HV20. The concept I'm going after is 'easier transfer to my computer', which a digital system (i.e. HDD/SSD/Memory Card) would give me over a tape-based system (HDV/DV/etc.).

[Shadow_7]

Do we know for sure if the HF S-10 is resampling 8MP to 2+MP? And not just grabbing every 4th or 8th pixel? One make sense for quality, the other for battery life and processor demands.

Of course I'm only interested at this point because the IAF was moved. And it's the first consumer 24Mbps AVCHD cam by canon to offer zebra. But in all honesty I'm a little more interested in the next generation Samsungs. Aside from the higher MP stills, technically either the new HF S's or HV40 are the hardware equivalent of a service pack. Although I may end up with an HV40 if these solid state cams are known to shutoff at temps > 100F. Since that accounts for 30% of the year in these parts.

[Rumpelgeist]

The concept I'm going after is 'easier transfer to my computer', which a digital system (i.e. HDD/SSD/Memory Card) would give me over a tape-based system (HDV/DV/etc.).
HDV and DV are digital. The concept you are going for is a file-based random-access system. Tape is a linear-access system.

With reasonably small bitrates this can even be faster than realtime. On my machine it takes roughly 1 minute to transfer 1GB from an SDHD card. This means, it takes about 8 minutes to transfer one hour of video shot at 17 Mbps.

[Piewee]

Hi guys,

I looked at the pics that Eugenia placed on here. Some say it has trouble with low light, and the lens isn't more sharp then the hv20, some are even saying they think they will go for the hv40!

But....don;t we forget that these pictures are taken at the CES?! There is so much false light overthere, I can imagine it almost impossible to get a picture that really shows what's it's up to.

Let's look at the first picture and split it in 2, horizontal. The top part is light blue, with lots of lighting on it. The bottom part has darker colors, this means that the camcorder has to choose, or find a way in the middel to get the best possible picture and colors/whitebalance.

Think of it as when you take a picture of a big church. You want to have the building and the tower as well in your frame. That also means that half of the picture most likely will be blue sky. That asks for adjustments! if you don't asjust that yourself, you'll end up getting the bottom to be darker then it really has to be.
I think the same think happened with a lot of the shots taken at the CES. So I'd say, please wait for the reviews. Give this guy a chance.

Ofcourse you have a point when you say that the camcorder should be able to give a reasonable picture without any adjusted settings. If that's the case, I think it did a good, not perfect job. But then again, I don't think people that want a point and shoot camcorder will go for this one.

[kaidomac]

HDV and DV are digital. The concept you are going for is a file-based random-access system. Tape is a linear-access system.

With reasonably small bitrates this can even be faster than realtime. On my machine it takes roughly 1 minute to transfer 1GB from an SDHD card. This means, it takes about 8 minutes to transfer one hour of video shot at 17 Mbps.

Yeah...my first project was my sister-in-laws wedding. I ended up with 8 hours of footage. Boy was that fun to import :hv20-smilie102:

[Rumpelgeist]

Yeah...my first project was my sister-in-laws wedding. I ended up with 8 hours of footage. Boy was that fun to import :hv20-smilie102:
The worst thing is that you have to change cassette every hour. Cannot leave it and go to sleep.

[DrDave]

My Good LPs sound better than CDs; my DVD audio disks sound better than anything, and even though I make my living in audio, I would not bet money that I could hear the difference between good, high bit MP3s and the source material in a truly blind test. The difference would certainly be less than the differences in the quality of the listening gear or the op amps in the analog stage. If you have computer speakers, as many do, or listen through a 25 cent line/hp jack on a laptop, MP3s are fine.
And Eugenia Rocks!

[kaidomac]

The worst thing is that you have to change cassette every hour. Cannot leave it and go to sleep.

Yeah and I also can't use my computer for anything else while importing, so it's kind of a pain. I'd love to just pop in an SD card and copy over the files for conversion. But only if the HF-S100 is at least as good as the HV20, otherwise it's pointless. That, and it will be nice to get rid of tape noise!

[Halsu]

Do we know for sure if the HF S-10 is resampling 8MP to 2+MP? And not just grabbing every 4th or 8th pixel? One make sense for quality, the other for battery life and processor demands.

The examples seen so far certainly don't look like what a downsized 8MP image *should* look like.

So, seems like there's something fishy going on there.

[bluesgeek]

...it will be nice to get rid of tape noise!

Please explain. Thanks.

[Shadow_7]

Please explain. Thanks.

Moving parts == noise / vibrations. With performance impacts on audio quality, and image stabilization. Not to mention greater power demands to physically move things. Even if your device is fortunate enough to not suffer noticeably to this now. With enough use and/or time it will eventually suffer. Assuming that it doesn't stop working first.

[Paulo Teixeira]

Do we know for sure if the HF S-10 is resampling 8MP to 2+MP? And not just grabbing every 4th or 8th pixel? One make sense for quality, the other for battery life and processor demands.


It’s approximately 6.01 MP for the videos.
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=177&modelid=17993#ModelTechSpecsAct
I hope that's the information your looking for.

[Shadow_7]

It’s approximately 6.01 MP for the videos.
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=177&modelid=17993#ModelTechSpecsAct
I hope that's the information your looking for.

Actually it is. Sort of.

Video Recording system
MPEG4-AVC / H.264

Is this the same as the samsungs .MP4 files? And not the .MTS / .M2TS files?

Frame Rate
60i, 24p Progressive (records at 60i), 30p Progressive (records at 60i)

I guess NOT. Strange that it's not using AVCHD as a selling point anymore. Not plastered all over the camcorder, or mentioned on the specifications, features, or other pages. Although briefly mentioned on overview.

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

>Is this the same as the samsungs .MP4 files?

Of course not. It's AVCHD, thank God. Canon follows standards, unlike Samsung, Sanyo, and Aiptek. These digirecorder's MP4 files are about 4 times slower than AVCHD to edit. No matter how much people like to knock AVCHD, it does have some container attributes that help video editors, unlike straight MP4.

[EssentialParadox]

The "Why" is explained in the HV40 thread. Read my last reply there.
– "Yeah, but the HV series sold amazingly well, so it wasn't a problem of oversupply of parts."

Hmm… very insightful.


Besides, I WAS NOT the only one comparing the HV40 with the HF-S series in that thread, in fact, I came to that thread much later. But you had to single me out, did you?
You were the only one coming into that thread saying the HV40 is inferior and your S100 is superior. You just tend to come off as really arrogant.


The reality of the thing is, the HV series are as good as dead in the amateur but serious videography market -- the market of most of us here, that is -- if you don't want to see the truth and you leave your emotion blur your objectivity, it's your problem, not mine.
See what I mean?

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

I already had a bloody bar (=online) fight last night. I will pass on this one.

[Rumpelgeist]

I already had a bloody bar (=online) fight last night. I will pass on this one.
Chicken! :)

Yesterday I disturbed a laid back talk in a Sony coffee house (=online) in an effort to find out about new Sony products and its current position on consumer tapeless recording. They told me nothing. The only thing they kept stressing out is that AVCHD takes up to 8 times more processing power than MPEG-2, thus they consider MPEG-2 a better option for tapeless recording for now. They also kept saying that AVCHD is great for consumer market, and that different companies take different strategies. This, and considering that Sony licensed their XDCAM EX wrapper to JVC, one might suspect that Sony wants to promote its XDCAM EX and maybe SxS down the line to prosumer tapeless market. I would not be surprised if Sony announced a model similar to JVC HM100 at NAB. Will it use Memory Stick or SxS instead of JVC?

Now, what do you know about upcoming Canon's cameras? Come on, you mentioned them yourself. Tell us.

[Rumpelgeist]

If the "S" will record 25p/30p with interlaced chroma, I will pass. http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/awilt/story/review_canon_vixia_hf11_avchd_camcorder/P1/ Notice, that Adam Wilt says that in native interlaced mode AVCHD indeed holds to its promise: same quality at half of MPEG-2 bitrate.

I wonder does HV40 record 24p with progressive chroma? Gee, next year Canon will release the HV50 that will record 30p as native progressive. All this crap is just a firmware update for the HV20.

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

Actually, it requires more RAM to do progressive. Even "just" 24p requires more RAM in the camera than 60i. So in some cases, it's more than just software.

[rob]

Too bad the HFS10 doesn't have a viewfinder. Saves batterytime (HV20) when recording on the move.. also helps on sunny days...

Using Avid Media Composer and have not yet found a smooth workflow with AVCHD..

[ircswh]

I absolutely LOVE my HF10. And HFS10 is verrry tempting but I think Im going to get the 5D Mark II and and stick with my HF10 as a back B-roll. Ive already founds ways to match the two.

I want the HF10/100 but $1400 is a bit much right now for something with an adapter. I'll wait and see what happens in august or next year. Don't get me wrong though I believe Thats a very fair price for this camera, but I'm going to wait for the prices to go down.

As far as low light issues with the cam. The HV20 and the HF10 BOTH suffer big time and a few improvements on either aren't going to help that if they no going to make the sensor bigger . My suggestions is LEARN HOW TO LIGHT. <-Then it wont matter what camera you use:)

[JCM_GDL]

One thing anybody has mention is, as I read in some forums, the fact that the HF SXX series has a 1.7X digital teleconverter, as the SX1 still camera for video (2.0X in that case), without loss of detail or definition in the image, using a 1920 X 1080 central area of the sensor. That means a more powerful 17X telephoto with the highest resolution, as an advantage of having a 8MP sensor. This is a feature that, once confirmed, may drive me to this camera.

[Emanuel]

If the "S" will record 25p/30p with interlaced chroma, I will pass. http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/awilt/story/review_canon_vixia_hf11_avchd_camcorder/P1/ Notice, that Adam Wilt says that in native interlaced mode AVCHD indeed holds to its promise: same quality at half of MPEG-2 bitrate.

I wonder does HV40 record 24p with progressive chroma? Gee, next year Canon will release the HV50 that will record 30p as native progressive. All this crap is just a firmware update for the HV20.Nice tip. However, why are you mentioning the 30p mode and not only the 25p mode? 30p recording is 2:2 (24p 3:2) but using interlaced anyway. 25p, yes. It should be free of interlaced encoding. That said, if so, a PAL countries version should be more useable than the model for sale into NTSC land.

[Emanuel]

Nice tip. However, why are you mentioning the 30p mode and not only the 25p mode? 30p recording is 2:2 (24p 3:2) but using interlaced anyway. 25p, yes. It should be free of interlaced encoding. That said, if so, a PAL countries version should be more useable than the model for sale into NTSC land.It could be free of interlaced encoding. And then, a PAL countries' version should be more useable than the model for sale into NTSC land. Is that actually so?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecine

The actual 25p encoding @ HV 20/30 should answer it.

[Isaac Brody]

Just looking at the uploaded MTS it looks pretty good considering it was shot on auto, and I have no idea what gain setting was at work. I can't judge too strongly on what I've seen, since using a blend mode deinterlacer will reduce the sharpness of the footage. This definitely looks cleaner than HF10 footage I've shot so I'm probably going to upgrade. Wish I could get my hand on this and shoot a lit scene, I have a feeling this camera is going to give the more expensive AVC/HDV cams a run for its money.

Does anyone have access to footage shot at highest bitrate, 24P, and no gain?

Biggest advantage of this camera is gain control, no more HV20 gain hacks. The fact that you can control gain on your image can actually free this camera up for some professional uses. I'll be happy to no longer white balance to my blackberry to trick the gain into going off. :)

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

>Does anyone have access to footage shot at highest bitrate, 24P, and no gain?

The MTS you downloaded was highest bitrate and 24p.

[Rumpelgeist]

http://www.simplydv.co.uk/reviews/camcorders/canon/avchd/canon-legria-hf-s10-review.html

If someone just wants to read a review, any review, here you are.

P.S. So, either zebra or peaking, eh?

[Isaac Brody]

>Does anyone have access to footage shot at highest bitrate, 24P, and no gain?

The MTS you downloaded was highest bitrate and 24p.

Odd, I had trouble removing the pulldown. Will try again. My usually method of removing HF10 pulldown choked on this file.

[Ian-T]

P.S. So, either zebra or peaking, eh?I hear you on that. But I think, if the wheel is able to be programmed, you should be able to jog between the two functions (zebra and peaking) when trying to obtain that perfect shot. I really hope so.... You would just set your exposure first....then get your focus afterward.

At least this is what I'm thinking....

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

Whoever searches, finds! I found the following by searching on japanese sites that I can't read a thing! :D

The first hands-on review of the HF-S10:
http://trendy.nikkeibp.co.jp/article/pickup/20090113/1022724/?P=1
Translation: http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Ftrendy.nikkeibp.co.jp%2Farticle%2Fp ickup%2F20090113%2F1022724%2F%3FP%3D1&sl=ja&tl=en&history_state0=

I am not overly enthusiastic, I must say, over these grabs and still pictures.

[kaidomac]

Whoever searches, finds! I found the following by searching on japanese sites that I can't read a thing! :D

The first hands-on review of the HF-S10:
http://trendy.nikkeibp.co.jp/article/pickup/20090113/1022724/?P=1
Translation: http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Ftrendy.nikkeibp.co.jp%2Farticle%2Fp ickup%2F20090113%2F1022724%2F%3FP%3D1&sl=ja&tl=en&history_state0=

I am not overly enthusiastic, I must say, over these grabs and still pictures.

Hrm. Well, guess I keep on saving up for a Scarlet :hv20-smilie159:

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

A few more links. The japanese HF-S10 pages have more info than the US ones:
http://74.125.19.101/translate_c?hl=en&sl=ja&tl=en&u=http://cweb.canon.jp/ivis/lineup/hivision/hfs10/spec.html&prev=_t&usg=ALkJrhgXd7taLuCCuHA0rumSW54-Ivlkfg
http://74.125.19.101/translate_c?hl=en&sl=ja&tl=en&u=http://cweb.canon.jp/ivis/lineup/hivision/hfs10/features.html&prev=_t&usg=ALkJrhgQ2oLK5l0wtllBjdIAhpf1dROx_g

Also, HF-S10's manual is out, but only in the japenese language: http://cweb.canon.jp/manual/dvcamera/pdf/hfs10-nim2-ja.pdf

[MistahTibbs]

Translations of text of the Japanese super fun excellent!

heh.

MT

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

Two more pictures, shot in still pic mode from the HF-S10:
http://cweb.canon.jp/ivis/hfs10-sp/jpg/sample01.jpg
http://cweb.canon.jp/ivis/hfs10-sp/jpg/sample02.jpg

[LoganT]

http://trendy.nikkeibp.co.jp/article/pickup/20090113/1022724/05_px250.jpg

Is that a video light or just a flash for still photos?

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

Both. There are two lights there.

[LoganT]

Both. There are two lights there.

Ahh, I see. Wonder how good that light is, would be nice if I didn't have to buy an external one.

[jmorton]

If I were going to buy a new Canon HD camcorder I'd get one of these:

http://www.enduserblog.com/2009/01/ces-2009-canon.html

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=177&modelid=17993

For what you get it's really great pricing IMHO.

JM

[jabloomf1230]

$1,100 US is a much lower retail price, than what was originally rumored for HF S10, which was ~$1,500 US. That must be the Canon "economic downturn" discount. I wouldn't be surprised to see the HF S10 down in the $800-900 range by summer. The demand for consumer electronics is very weak.

[Ian-T]

Outstanding. I'll wait for the summer drop myself.

[net]

If these prices are correct, that would mean the HF S100, the card-only version, could be near $700 by June.

The follow-up to the HF11, the HF20, would probably be priced even lower.

[jmorton]

Canon never did update the firmware of the HV20 as far as I know.

It has been suggested that after the launch of the HF S series it is hoped that they will come out with a revised camera a few months later with native 24p for example.

If this also suggests there will be a firmware upgrade for previously released and sold HF S series camcorders so they too will have native 24p then this could be our door to a firmware hack of the HF S series camcorders. Wouldn't that be something.

But I am doubtful such a firmware upgrade will happen because the HV20 firmware update never materialized perhaps because Canon feared that just such a hack might be feasible and it would have killed the HV30 and HV40.

So they may never provide a firmware update for the originally released and sold HF S series camcorders even if they upgrade the model a few months after their release.

I'm not counting on a firmware update after the original release of the HF S series cameras because too much will be at stake. This is even more reason not to buy until after the HF S series has been upgraded. So we're talking perhaps near the 3rd quarter of '09.

I hope I am wrong.

JM

[MistahTibbs]

While these cams are small they certainly appear capable of being suitable replacements for my DVX100b cams...if I pimp them up a bit with a lens hood and other mods to make them....beefier and more "pro" to the average bystander.

It's an inexpensive way (if enduser is correct) to get HD for my recitals, plays and similar events and I can shoot shorts too. :hv20-smilie77:

24p would be very nice but not necessary for event work but short subjects could use the "film look" so here's hoping for a firmware upgrade shortly after their release. Surely it's not THAT difficult to implement for a flash-based cam.

Looking forward to pricing...or not :hv20-smilie36:here in the GWN.

Now I just need to go the modification threads and see how I can make these cams more remote control friendly.

MT

[jmorton]

Has everyone seen these? (actually I guess there are just 4 images)

http://www.infosyncworld.com/reviews/camcorders/canon-vixia-hf-s10/?n=0

Or these cheesey frame-grabs. Frame-grab #6 is the best of the lot and that ain't saying much.

http://www.infosyncworld.com/news/n/10026.html

(Sorry if this has already been posted. #1: feel free to delete this post if it is redundant.)

JM

[MistahTibbs]

I suppose it all depends on the price point between internal flash and no internal flash but why would you buy the HFS10?

Here in the GWN newegg has PNY? & Kingston (Class 4) 32 GB for $140 CDN, HP for $116 CDN, and Patriot???? for $90 CDN.

Can't speak to the quality of PNY or Patriot memory but them's good prices and they're only going to go down.

Class 4 should be sufficient for even 24Mbps AVCHD, correct?

Assuming the above is correct then with the HFS10 $200 USD more than the HSF100 it appears one could handily bypass the internal memory version and put less money into equivalent sized memory cards and have cash left over to buy additional cards or, maybe, put it towards a Merlin™.

Mmmmm. Merlin™. I love you and your smooth, floaty goodness

MT

[Dr. Benway]

Yay tapeless! Try taking 50 MiniDV tapes in your carry-on luggage!

[MistahTibbs]

Yay tapeless! Try taking 50 MiniDV tapes in your carry-on luggage!

hehe.

Not only is the media coming down but as blank blu-ray media drops in price there's your long-term storage issue solved without resorting to hard-drives.

A touch labour-intensive, yes, but taken care of I imagine blu-ray media, like its DVD predecessor should last a very long time.

MT

[MistahTibbs]

Hmmm.

Just had another thought.

Here's hoping that time lapse, included or through firmware upgrade, will be available.

Nothing mentioned on the website unfortunately. Apparently the new Panasonic cams offer a time-lapse option in their top-of-the-line consumer models at 1,10,30,60 & 120 second intervals. Nice.

Maybe we'll see this in the HF S10/100. One can hope.

MT

[net]

I suppose it all depends on the price point between internal flash and no internal flash but why would you buy the HFS10?

Here in the GWN newegg has PNY? & Kingston (Class 4) 32 GB for $140 CDN, HP for $116 CDN, and Patriot???? for $90 CDN.

Can't speak to the quality of PNY or Patriot memory but them's good prices and they're only going to go down.

Class 4 should be sufficient for even 24Mbps AVCHD, correct?

Class 4 or higher is recommended for the HF11.

As far as getting the HF S100 to save money; it would be a waste to get a 32gb @ $100++ when 16 gb class 6 cards are now going for $30. Just swap them out.

I'm not saying it would be bd to get the 32gb card - but if the aim is to save money, why not a few 16's instead.

As far as the reason someone would be interested in the HF S10 with the internal memory; you can dump the contents of a card onto the internal storage (or vice versa).

[MistahTibbs]

As far as getting the HF S100 to save money; it would be a waste to get a 32gb @ $100++ when 16 gb class 6 cards are now going for $30. Just swap them out.

I'm not saying it would be bd to get the 32gb card - but if the aim is to save money, why not a few 16's instead.

As far as the reason someone would be interested in the HF S10 with the internal memory; you can dump the contents of a card onto the internal storage (or vice versa).

Excellent points, net.

I was only looking at the 32 GB cards for not swapping but considering a 16GB card holds over 1 hour and 20 minutes of footage and is far cheaper per Gig than the 32GB. 80 minutes is more than enough storage space to record everything in a recital prior to intermission..

As for the internal memory vis-a-vis "dumping" form card to cam. Yeah. Hadn't considered that.

What I'd love to see is a small device (like an older iPod) with about 100GB of storage and an SDHC slot you could plug the card into and dump footage to.

Kinda like what already comes with a cam whose name eludes me at the moment.

MT

[DrDave]

Excellent points, net.


As for the internal memory vis-a-vis "dumping" form card to cam. Yeah. Hadn't considered that.

What I'd love to see is a small device (like an older iPod) with about 100GB of storage and an SDHC slot you could plug the card into and dump footage to.



MT
Well, a Dell X1 with an SSD drive makes a nice little accessory.

[JCM_GDL]

Canon releases prices for the new camcorders:

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-Announces-Prices-For-Its-2009-Camcorder-Lineup-36173.htm

HF S10 : $1.300
HF S100 : $1.100

[jabloomf1230]

The Japanese translation seems to indicate that the digital zoom does take advantage of the larger sensor. Unless I've got it mixed up, it says you can go an additional 1.7x beyond the optical zoom limit and still have an HD quality image. We have always speculated that this was true for the HV20 & HV30, but on a smaller scale, since the CMOS sensors in the HVs have less resolution than those used in the HF S10.

Also, a translated review. (http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&langpair=ja%7Cen&u=http://av.watch.impress.co.jp/docs//20090204/zooma397.htm&prev=/language_tools)

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

Looking at some of these grabs on that new review, the HF-S10 has much better quality than that new Sony camcorder they are comparing it to. There is more detail on the Canon frames.

[net]

The Japanese translation seems to indicate that the digital zoom does take advantage of the larger sensor. Unless I've got it mixed up, it says you can go an additional 1.7x beyond the optical zoom limit and still have an HD quality image. We have always speculated that this was true for the HV20 & HV30, but on a smaller scale, since the CMOS sensors in the HVs have less resolution than those used in the HF S10.

Also, a translated review. (http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&langpair=ja%7Cen&u=http://av.watch.impress.co.jp/docs//20090204/zooma397.htm&prev=/language_tools)

Yikes, there's really bad interlacing on that HF S10 mpg movie with the girl walking ("ezst_ca.mpg (71.5MB)").


I saw a review on that site of the Panasonic HDC-SD 100 and they filmed all the footage on a dark, dreary day...lol. I guess they didn't get enough scratch from Panasonic.

Thanks for posting that - still waiting on the camcorderinfo review...

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

I downloaded four mpeg files from that review, comparing the new Sony and the HF-S10 camera, and the Canon image stabilization sucks compared to Sony's. The image has this double-image look that I also get on the HV20 when I pan (not a de-interlacing issue, mind you).

There are quite some gain artifacts in the Canon mpeg file of the night footage, much more than Sony's. Then again, the HF-S had better dynamic range, so the artifacts might be because of that.

Overall, the Sony seems to perform better as a "consumer camera", but the Canon one has more manual controls and image quality (on a static image). So I am not happy with either one.

[kaidomac]

The Japanese translation seems to indicate that the digital zoom does take advantage of the larger sensor. Unless I've got it mixed up, it says you can go an additional 1.7x beyond the optical zoom limit and still have an HD quality image. We have always speculated that this was true for the HV20 & HV30, but on a smaller scale, since the CMOS sensors in the HVs have less resolution than those used in the HF S10.

Also, a translated review. (http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&langpair=ja%7Cen&u=http://av.watch.impress.co.jp/docs//20090204/zooma397.htm&prev=/language_tools)

Be sure to select a De-interlacing option with VLC when you play this stuff to make it look good!

I'm impressed. It looks good! :hv20-smilie03:

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

Are we looking at the same footage? It looks incredibly crappy. The first comparative footage (the one with the girl walking) is extremely shaky with double-imaging compared to Sony's (and when using interpolation to get rid of the ghosting the visual details are vanishing), and in the second one (shot during the night), the ~5% of added dynamic range (compared to Sony's footage) doesn't make up for the 50% of more luma artifacts.

From where I am sitting, this footage sucks hard. Forget my usual nagging of "where's my native 24p support". This camera has more problems in its basic functionality. I just lost all my respect for it. This camera ONLY EXCELS in well-lit, near-static, scenes. And I am not talking about general stabilization here, these ghostly images will be visible even when you carefully pan with a good tripod. It's how these Canon cameras work (the HV series have the same problem btw). In the ideal conditions of near-static/light, the HF-S can not be surpassed in the consumer space. But video-making is much more than that.

I just hope the new Canon prosumer cameras coming in April won't be as crappy in these respects and use the exact same technologies that create these particular problems.

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

And don't let me start with the microphone. The Canon waveform is full of wind artifacts, while the Sony one is much more muted and natural (obviously their mic has more protection).

[MistahTibbs]

Is the bokeh on the screen grabs with shallow depth really that...geometric... on the Canon?

That looks so odd and distracting.

Seriously.

That can't be what it looks like.

Not that a consumer cam will be used a lot for shots like that.

MT

[Rumpelgeist]

The image has this double-image look that I also get on the HV20 when I pan (not a de-interlacing issue, mind you).
Please, explain.

I see no point evaluating anything but raw M2TS files.

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

The HV series have a somewhat ghosty imaging when the image is not completely stationary. With blend fields or interpolation doesn't fix the problem. Other cameras produce a more clean look somehow.

And it doesn't matter about not being m2ts. The terrible image stabilization is visible there no matter what format you use.

>Is the bokeh on the screen grabs with shallow depth really that...geometric... on the Canon?

Yes, all the Canon consumer cameras use a diamond shape aperture, hence that terrible looking background blur.

[Rumpelgeist]

The HV series have a somewhat ghosty imaging when the image is not completely stationary. With blend fields or interpolation doesn't fix the problem. Other cameras produce a more clean look somehow.
I never noticed that. Granted, I owned the HV30 for just a week, and the HF100 for just a month, but not in one video I had the ghosting aside of normal motion blur. Ghosting that I noticed always was caused by improper deinterlacing. And I am a person who is really bitchy about ghosting ;-)

EDIT: Right now I am having ghosting problems with Vegas. I use deinterlacing plugin by Mike Crash, and sometimes it works and sometimes does not. I don't know is it Vegas's problem or in the plugin. It worked perfectly, then after I saved and reopened my project, my video is ghostly. I put the same even on the timeline to double check, it looks fine. Seems that saving a project somehow screws deinterlacing. I know you are a Vegas user, so the problem may be in the Vegas.

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

I never use third party deinterlacing. Only interpolation, as provided by Vegas. I have also tried various algorithms from Avisynth (e.g. bob, bob+weave) on VirtualDub, but with the same results.

[Luxaltor]

Right now its looking like I'll be getting the HV40. Still waiting for the Camcorderinfo review though, but that review was not very hopeful.

[dcloud]

i dont see what eugenia is seeing...
however i can conclude from the video its badly shot with bad compression. its also 60i. I'd really want a review that breaks down all the features.

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

>i dont see what eugenia is seeing...

Did you download BOTH videos Canon and Sony, and watch them both? They were both recorded at the same time (on a tripod that holds both camcorders), and they were processed the same way. So the fact that it's 60i and mpg2 or anything else, is the same for both cameras. The conditions are the SAME for both cameras! So you just need to compare the two camcorders to see how terrible the mic and image stabilization is on the Canon side.