Padre,
I agree. I meant it was obvious that a post was censored because the truth might hurt certain people who might have a personal agenda for benefit. My post was not about "obvious", but to let people know what might have really happened at the shootout and whether it was fair or not. My subject above says,,, fair?

Is Shannon telling the truth? Probably. Who could make all of that up. Is the test fair? Porbably sometimes, but sounds like it may have been manipulated in areas. Panny is getting complaints from owners of noisy video and they still want their chip's native resolution kept a secret (probably the smallest chips).

I read through some of it but my lord did it take the man forever to get to the test results. Now, I am sure there are two sides to every story but I dont find it too hard to believe some of what was written. Nothing personal towards Barry, but he does seem to trumpet Panasonic's horn at every turn that one would perceive a certain pair lips stuck on a certain company's buttocks.

More importantly, it would be nice to know what the agenda is. Either someone owns some stock or something because it does seem everytime someone discusses a camera over a Pany, he appears to debunk just why the Pany is so much better. I think I remember a thread here of why the DVX100a was so much better than the Sony HDV cams. I just shake my head and stay out of it. Some people will never change their mind or opinion.

Barry seems like a decent guy as long as you arent discussing why you feel a camera is better than some Pany cam. But if I had more free time in my life, i might follow the drama to follow that post but I just dont have time.

As long as I get my Z1/FX1, I could care less what else is out there.

Well this isn't the first time someone has noted the rather obvious bias of said party. I seem to recall a rather protracted discussion on this very forum that ended with the whistle blower becoming personna non gratis.
I'll allow anyone the right to their own bias but when they're sprouting obvious bunk and there's a risk that gullible parties might swallow it that's when I start loosing my tolerance.
I think the latest clanger goes along the lines of 'just think of video noise as film grain' and something about how one cameras noise is more film like!
Now I'm no expert on film emulsions but I do read of DOPs preferences for certain film stocks because of its grain structure but there is no way anyone who has ever worked with or even watched film could equate film grain to video noise. Just for anyone who doesn't get it, film 'grain' isn't random pixels of random color, its where the halide crystals are large enough to be visible, shoot grainy film of a color strip and you don't find blue bits of grain in the red swatch.
To suggest that there's any correlation between film grain and video noise is just simply misleading, if the statement was made by someone who knew no better it's excusable but here it's being made by a man whose credentials clearly indicate he does know better, much better. Why that spin was put on the noise issue is indeed an interesting question.
Bob.

The funniest thing I read was when someone made an 'award' for;

Most film-like recording times: HVX200!

Anyhow, I've got too much editing to do. Must...stay....away....from....forums.....

For those Z1/FX1/A1/C1 owners who'd like a more 'filmic' experience I'm thinking of offering 11 minute MiniDV tapes. They'll come in a nice looking round metal can that you can only open in total darkness otherwise you'll erase the tape. In keeping with the 'filmic' experience they'll cost $400 each and have to be sent away for decoding before you can view the footage. 'Work prints' (i.e. dubs) will be available for a nominal charge.
Bob.

Priceless!

:O)

After discussing this idea with Kodak they suggested several enhancements:

1) Use of a new tape formulation that prevents accidental overwriting of images. Accidently rewinding the tape and recording over it will result in a unique effect, 'Double Exposure'. Try doing that with a P2 card.

2) We're adding a small cog amd plastic flap device that makes a very loud 'tick, tick' sound as the tape turns. This will ensure you'll always know the tape is rolling, at the price we're charging for this stuff that's a good idea don't you think. This sound will certainly get into your audio so we'll also be offering 'blimps' for the range of Sony and Canon cameras.

Bob.

Too rambling to be of any real use. There may be good stuff in there some place, but I couldn't get through it.

I'm with Barry on this one, since I'm a DVX100A user myself! :)

This camera is great in the right hands and it does what it is advertized to do. I can't say enough about the quality and performance of this camera.

Are you talking about the DVX100 or the HVX200?

Didnt he sit here last year and say that the DVX100a was better than the Z1? I looked for the thread but nothing turned up but I swear I remember that.

"Didnt he sit here last year and say that the DVX100a was better than the Z1? I looked for the thread but nothing turned up but I swear I remember that. "

And in some ways it is...In other ways the Z1 outperforms the DVX...

ive got both units here and i can tell u off the bat that the DVX (for MY <keyword> line of event work, definately outperforms the Z1, but lets not bring that argument here.
The only benefit i see with the Z1 is the HD resolutions, Native 16:9 and and Zoom range. but apart from the FORMAT differences, there are plenty more things the DVX can do that the Z1 definately cannot... AND vice versa

Each camera has its use, and thats all there is to it.
Theres no such thing as "better" only DIFFERENT.
Each one will take u to where u want to go, which road u take is up to u

Padre,
well said!
At the end of the day all HDV cameras are very serious compromises. Trying to extract a decent SD image out of 1/3" CCDs is hard enough, trying to do it in HD is a huge stretch and it would seem trying to do it with a progressive scan CCD is even more of a problem. Trying to record that image at a prosummer price point is just as difficult.
What really puts me off the HVX200 is the level of hype, it's probably a half decent effort if left to stand on its merits but so far all I'm feeling is it's a bit like one of those Hollywood blockbusters, the greater the hype the more you wonder what's really wrong with the thing.
I can understand folks getting passionate about things that matter like the war in Iraq, saving whales or global warming but good grief we're talking about a bunch of (relatively speaking) el cheapo cameras.
Bob.

Totally agree with u there Bob.. Its a shame that the hype behind the Cam itself has bludgened the impact the camera COULD have had on release... Where REAL performance was looked upon as a performance issue and not an assumption based on technical spec...

Personally, i cant fault the way the DVX100 performs, and the onset of the HVX being its big brother, PROMISED (based on teh DVX Build) to be something special..
NOW the issue here is that we as "consumers" havent been given the option to make our own minds yet.. .
Everythign has ben tainted and for what purpose??

I sure as hell am not going to let one or 2 peoples opinions dictate waht I THINK of A PRODUCT... If it works for me.. good.. if it doesnt, i sell it off..

But this issue has gone across somethign liek 4 other forums... and its bringin gthe realisation that WE ARE HUMAN and PEOPLE ARE BIASED. We are biased towards our cars, the food we eat, the drinks we dirkn, the NLEs we use, teh cameras we use, the tape stock in our cameras etc etc..
Its human nature...
Loyalty may be seen as Bias, either way, hype means nothng.. in fact Hype makes it harder for people to establish truth.. also hype encourages TOUGHER scrutiny... Which isnt such a bad thing..

Once the unit (and every other unit) establishes itself, THEN will we be able to make an INFORMED decision as to which tool WORKS FOR US.. Is it cost, is it performance, is it media, is it workflow, is it the cost of extras and accessories, etc etc..

People dont realsie this, becuase its natural, but all these factors WILL play a part in the decision making.. NOT ONE PERSONS OPINION.
If someone lets one personss opinion dictate what u do, then your a weak idiot who shouldnt be in the position of making this kind of business decision.

For me, there are many things i like about the HVX< but there are also MANY MORE things which i dont like about it (mainly sue to recording foramts and price here in Aus)... But until i get my hands on one.. i wont trully know..
The point though is that the DVX had set a precedent for me, with regard to tweakability, quality(build, image and audio0 and performance...
And when i got my dirty mits on my Z1s i COULDNT HELP but compare the 2.. .
Then i thought.. why??
Its natural... its natural to do this.. its also natural to be biased twards a product.. i still FEEL that the DVX performs better in many ways (hang on let me finish...lol) , BUT when i lay the 2 down side by side, and try to work out WHY i FEEL why one works better than the other, there really is no difference. Sure thre are the OBVIOUS details here and there.. but the only REAL difference being is that ive had a longer relationship with the Pana unit.

In the end, im still the one left holding the camera.. and that choice of camera was obviously made with alot of thought before hand...

as u mentioned these are relatively cheap cameras.. but i wont be surprised when they come down to SD cam prices.. it WILL happen, but it seems these manufacturers are cashing in on the buzz for as long as they can...

Trying to extract a decent SD image out of 1/3" CCDs is hard enough, trying to do it in HD is a huge stretch and it would seem trying to do it with a progressive scan CCD is even more of a problem.

Pardon my ignorance, but why would it be more difficult with a progressive CCD? They have less light sensitivity than interlaced CCDs, but what other difficulties are there?

I'm also put off by the hype for the HVX200, I'm inclined to believe Panny partnered with Apple because they shared a taste for KoolAid. Maybe Panny should just buy Apple and call it PanApple?

I can see why many see this as a closer issue than the Iraq civil war though, not to mention global warming.

(I saw a wonderful cartoon that depicted the "Statue of Liberty torch sticking out of the beach sand" scene from "Planet of the Apes," except instead of the torch there was a pointed finger sticking up, belonging to a certain leader of the free world saying from beneath the sand "there is no such thing as global warming, it hasn't been proven yet.")

I'm not 100% certain as to why it's so much harder to build a "p" CCD block. I think the issue comes down to having to read twice the amount of data in the same amount of time. There's some very good info at http://www.ccd.com/ccdu.html but that's about the CCDs used in still cameras although one can get a fair amount of background into the issues and what's going to happen with smaller CCDs as they are clocked harder. The thing I learned there that quite astounded me is the small number of electrons involved, I'm so used to not thinking about numbers of electrons, in most electronics it's such a huge number as to be meaningless.

Getting back to the 4 camera shootout, if there's one good thing to come out of it, it's a post over at DVInfo by Walter Graff, I think this link will get you roughly there:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=58170

Man does what he has to say ring loud and true in my ears. Only two days ago kind of by accident I was watching something shot by a pair of newbies on a HDV camera, it wouldn't have mattered what they'd shot it on, it was just wrong, the shot just screamed wrong. It should have been a great shot, the talent sure had 'talent' , the idea behind the shot was perfect, they just didn't get the basics, I mean they really didn't 'get it'.

Bob.

having to read twice the amount of data in the same amount of time.

A progressive CCD reads the whole frame in 1/30 sec. in these parts.
An interlaced CCD reads the whole frame in 1/30 sec. in these parts.

The difference is that the interlaced CCD reads half the picture (odd scanlines) in 1/60 sec. and then reads the other half in 1/60 sec. 1/60+1/60=1/30 sec.

QED.

Thanks for the Walter Graff post, that was nice.

The worst misuse of technology I can recall was at a DV Film Festival a year ago.

The scene was a dialog between two people sitting on a park bench. The "DP" (Depraved Punk?) was so excited by his new dolly track that he kept the camera on a 2-shot while sliding the camera sideways 5-6 feet, back and forth, back and forth, back and forth on the dolly track. No storytelling reason, just an asinine distraction.

Ah, well. I guess the sun will rise again tomorrow anyway.

(Even if we won't be able to see in tin L.A.) :O)

Guess I am late on this bandwagon.

File Transfer: Unavailable

But how and where was this censored? here or another forum?