Tony Yates

While shooting on my HDW 790P I watched some footage played back through the B&W eyepiece HDVF-20A (I dont like playing back off camera and if I do I would usually watch on a monitor - but there was a crowd around it !). I noticed that the viewfinder picture was completely lacking contrast and sharpness compared to the same image through the viewfinder when I was recording. Checked the next few takes to make sure and compared them to the monitor playback and it was the same - very low contrast and soft in the eyepiece on playback but fine while recording and fine on the monitor when played back.

Eyepiece setup is zebras off, peaking on minimum, VF detail set to maximum, brightness and contrast set by SMPTE bars.

I concluded there was a problem and sent the camera back to be checked over.

Lo and behold I am told by the engineers that this is not unusual and that the PLAYBACK signal to the viewfinder is of inferior quality to the recording signal and to all other playback outputs. It can be made slightly better by turning the peaking up to full but its still not good.

Have not had a chance to check this on a colour eyepiece but would assume it is the same.

So dont make any judgments on viewfinder playback (my poor focus puller thought he was having a really bad day when I kept saying " No that one was soft too !") always use a good quality HDSDI monitor to check stuff if playing back off camera.

Sounds like a cave diving documentary is safest for the camera !!........ although that might be a bit dangerous for me !

tony

Does stuff like high intensity radar and x-rays also effect the camera block or is it just gamma rays ?

Thanks Mitch -

Your posts have been really useful for me. I have just bought an HD camera here in the UK and am filming in Italy next month. There is a van going to the location with some gear and wardrobe but I was going to take my camera with me on my flight as handbaggage - I think I might just put it on that van now !!

cheers

tony

Thanks Mitch - its always worrying to see a line like "theres nothing that can be done about it" !

Is this something that builds up through regular flights or can it effect the camera block on just one flight ? Is it more severe in the hold than in the cabin ? Am I being paranoid to consider road transport over air to minimize the possible damage to my camera ?

Tony

Over the last year or so I have noticed a lot of problems with missing pixels on the HDCam cameras I have been using. Are they more prone to this problem ?

Someone told me that they can loose a lot of pixels if they are involved in airline transport because of the high altitude. Is this just a myth or is it true and if so is there a way of protecting the block when flying a lot ?

Tony

I have been asked if I can shoot some pick-ups for a low budjet feature on which the original footage was recorded HDSR onto an SRW-1 deck (14 bits 4:4:4).

The production company want to shoot the pick-ups with a F900R recording HDCAM on-board for money reasons.

I have shot on both these formats and am well aware of the reduction from 14 to 10 bits and the reduction in color space too but I have no experience in wether this reduction will be massively noticable on screen when the two are intercut.

Has anyone seen this done ?

What was it about the Phantom you didn't like (just curious)?

 

Both the director and on line editor and myself thought the pictures lacked "bite" with a slightly soft feel.

That gets a little out of my experience, so I'll tell you what I can and pass the buck to someone else...

 

From what I understand, HDCAM SR only supports 4:2:2 when it's 60P.

 

I think you might want to take a look at the Phantom: http://www.photonicsonline.com/content/pro...p;VNETCOOKIE=NO

 

There was some discussion on CML 2K-444 about using the Viper to create 120fps:

http://ls.cinematography.net/read/messages?id=124528

Thanks for that. I've used the phantom but didnt like the results. To be honest I'm leaning more and more towards trying to get them to shoot on film

Unless there's some very recent development I'm unaware of (which is possible), I don't believe you can do any kind of speed ramping in-camera with the F-900. It records 24P, 25P, 30P, 50i and 60i only, and you can't change frame rates while recording. You would have to pick one speed for the shot you want to ramp, and decide how you want to affect the speed change in post. At 60i you're obviously losing some resolution if you're trying to create 60fps out of it, but it has been done with pretty good-looking results. I'm not sure exactly what it entails in post, though.

 

The SRW-1 HDCAM-SR deck will record a 1080/60P signal at 4:2:2, but I'm not sure if you can shoot this speed with the 900 or if you need the 950 model. Never done that before. In any case, that still only gives you the option to shoot the desired scene at 60P, then you'd still have to create the ramp in post.

 

With the Panasonic Varicam you can change the frame rate while recording, but not a smooth ramp (again, unless there's a newer development I'm unaware of). And in any case, that still doesn't allow you control over the exposure change.

hi Michael

on a similar question to this thread I need to shoot slow motion (not ramped) on green screen (about the equivalent of 100fps has been requested) and am using the SRW-1 HDCam SR deck to record onto. Any advice on choice of capture camera bearing in mind I want to get as much color information and record 6op and push the slo mo in post ?

Hi,

 

1440 x 1080 3:1:1 then compressed thats HDCAM.

 

Currently on a 10 day Viper to HDcam SR shoot. 2 BNC's needed for 4:4:4. Works like a dream!

 

Stephen

Yeh - I've just come off a shoot using two HD SDI feeds from a sony 1500 camera fed to a HD Cam SR deck recording 4:4:4 14bits and it worked fine but BNC connector plugs are still a pretty unsubstantial method of feeding all that information down a cable.

The whole reason I started this thread is that I was due to do some pick-ups for that shoot but on a 900 camera in camcorder mode foolishly thinking I would be recording 4:4:2 in 12 bits. Luckily I am now aware that it would be 3:1:1 in 8bits and will push for the SR deck again.

Many thanks

Tony.

One difference is that the HDW 750 has 10 bit A/D conversion against 12 bit A/D conversion on the F900R. Which I suspect is the difference being pointed out, since the HD SDI is 10bit. This will give slightly smoother looking colours on the F900.

 

There are also a range of set up curves available for the F900, which you can't use on the HDW 750. Together with a larger selection of formats available with the F900, including 23.98p/24p.

 

I expect the deciding factor is the market that you're aiming to use the camera in. If possible look at test pictures from theses cameras side by side and see if any differences are of consequence on the productions you plan to shoot. Although it has been pointed out that these cameras don't give their best pictures straight out of the box.

 

CML has recently shot some tests with these cameras and they should be up on that site in the near future.

Thanks Brian

I look forward to seeing the tests but from what I understand if you are using the 750 or 900 as camcorders and disregard any output available to external decks you are recording 8bit on both.

Hi,

 

Unless you record to Hard Drive or HDCamSR I think you will be stuck with 8 bit.

 

Stephen

Thanks Stephen

Arent Sony giving a slightly wrong impression then by marketing those two cameras as 10 bit and 12 bit. I kind of chanced upon this information - its not widely advertised.

If you were going to record to hard drive or an HDCam SR deck you would be better off with a system camera like the 1500 or 1550 which supports 14bit 4:4:4 - although all that information going through a BNC plug slightly worries me !

However this must mean that the diffenrence between a 750 or 900 recording on-board in 8bits and a 1500 recording to a deck in 14 bits must be quite noticable ?

Tony.

I read recently in a forum that the Sony 750 and 900 cameras actually record to their onboard recorders in 8 bit and that they only output 10 or 12 bit to HD SDI. This was not elaborated on or questioned but I find it actually very important when it comes to camera choice. Is the way these cameras are marketed as 10 bit / 12 bit just part of the sales pitch - as we are likely to choose the 750 or 900 because they have the convenience of the onboard recorder and they both actually record in 8bit there isnt a lot of difference between them.

Has anybody had any experience of the diference between the (older) canon HJ 9x5.5 KLL and the new HJ 11x4.7 KLL and the HJ 8x5.5 KLL.

I already own a Canon HJ21 and want to buy a general workhorse wide angle cine style HD zoom for TV drama. The newer 4.7 wide angle seems a bit too wide for me (yet another matte box to buy). The HJ9 seems to give me an adequate focal length range and my matte box will cover the wide end but being an older model I am unsure if it has any of the pitfalls of the earliest HD lenses. I am particularly interested in large lens focus rotation and minimal breathing.

Any useful comments appreciated.