Sony's new HVR-V1U HDV cam does 24p

Pro video types without the budget for a high-end HD setup have a new friend in Sony's HVR-V1U cam: the HDV camcorder is the first in its class to shoot 1080p video at 24fps, the holy grail of indie DV cinematography. Sony's V1U is the followup to their Z1U, and is the pro companion to that FX7 prosumer cam we saw the other week. Along with the 24p action, the cam can shoot full-res 30p and 60p flicks, along with with slow-mo vids at up to 240 fields per second. In another boon to pros, the camcorder can record to HDV tapes while simultaneously pushing video to the new HVR-DR60 hard-disk recording unit which offers 60GB of space for up to 4.5 hours of recording in either HDV or DVCAM/DV mode. Other highlights include dual XLR inputs, a 20x optical zoom lens and a 3.5-inch LCD. Of course, this stuff isn't exactly "cheap" in most literal senses of the word: the camera and HDD recording unit are dropping in December for $4,800 and $1,800, respectively. Still, plenty of good things going on here, and if you don't have need for Canon's interchangeable lens capabilities, you'll save a whole lot of cash in comparison to the XL H1, and get some 24p action to boot.

[skljdfngvwker @ Sep 19th 2006 3:41PM]

o_O now, is that a nice gadget or what?

i'm sure there are better cams out there but if i ever get into shooting videos, one of these won't blow my pocket...

[boe @ Sep 19th 2006 3:48PM]

Ahhh - video technology is progressing far too slowly. This should be 60fps to meet the new HD environment.

[Franssu @ Sep 19th 2006 4:02PM]

...and you would edit those 1080p/60 videos with... ?

1080p/60 is absolutely NOT an ATSC standard. 720p/60 is. The 1080/60p transmission of 1080/24p material between players and displays is a total waste of bandwidth for pure marketing reasons (oh, cool, each pixel is transmitted 2.5 times, I guess now I can see them better).

Sure being able to shoot my holidays or my shorts in 1080p showscan would be nice... Hell why bother with HD, I'd better shoot it in IMAX, this should appear in home theaters in two years time :D

The only interest of 1080p/60 would be for FPS games. 1080p/24 or 30 is quite enough for movies, thank you very much.

[Jason @ Sep 19th 2006 3:56PM]

HD is a nice accomplishment, but why was 24p so hard to achieve in the first place? I'll never understand that. NTSC and 1080i alternate fields at 60fps (interlaced) which is actually *more* data than 24p, right?

[Franssu @ Sep 19th 2006 4:09PM]

You're right, 1080i/60 needs more bandwidth than 1080p/24. But because the two fields in interlaced video are taken at different moments in time, you can make decent-looking 1080i video with a 540 lines sensor. Try to make a real 1080p image with this kind of sensor, and it will look like crap. Good sensors are expensive, that's why real progressive camcorders are expensive.

[Joe V @ Sep 19th 2006 3:57PM]

Boe,
There isn't an HD workflow currently in existence that needs 1080p at 60fps. HOWEVER, if you need the extra frames for slow-mo effects at a (kinda) budget price, the Panasonic HVX with P2 recording has been out for a while.

[Jim F @ Sep 19th 2006 4:05PM]

24p is an aesthetic desire. It may be "inferior" to 60 fps from a technical standpoint, but (when used with the correct shutter speed setting on your camera!) 24p can do a damn fine job of mimicking the film-like look of the 35mm cinematography that everyone from John Ford to Francois Truffaut to Michael Bay have used to entertain audiences over the decades.

[Jason @ Sep 19th 2006 5:20PM]

Ahhh, that makes sense. Thanks!

[Jake @ Sep 19th 2006 4:12PM]

I'm confused. The press release says it does do 60p.

If it does do 60p, doesn't that mean that every single frame should make a crystal clear still "photo" if used as a frame grab?

[Paul @ Sep 19th 2006 4:56PM]

Having 60p is a boon to editing in case you want to slow something down.

[Andrew Augustine @ Sep 19th 2006 5:16PM]

The Sony HVR-V1U HDV Camcorder is compact and shoots at 1080p delivering Full High Def at 60p (i.e. 60 frames per second) plus it has 3 CMOS Sensors to capture deep brilliant colors.

This is the perfect match for Sony's 70 inch 1920x1080 3 Chip SXRD TV (fall 2006) or their just released 50 inch SXRD TV which comes with a Display Response Time of 2.5 ms. True, the current TV shows are not being broadcast at 60p; but this unit should perform fully on current 1080p TVs now hitting stores, like the two discribed above!

See details: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1080p

[Jacob Kennedy @ Sep 19th 2006 5:29PM]

How many fps do you need for sports recording? I was taking some short videos with my Sony DSC H1, which is supposed to be 30 fps at 640x480 but it was pretty jumpy. 24 fps seems quite slow...

[Paul J. @ Sep 19th 2006 5:32PM]

Looks like a great product, always loved Sony's HDV cameras.

[CharlieX @ Sep 19th 2006 5:32PM]

1080p@60fps? I don't think HDMI or component HD supports that... does it? It's not an ATSC recognized standard... so how does it display on the Sony TV at that frame rate?

[CharlieX @ Sep 19th 2006 5:50PM]

I take it back. HDMI does support 60fps. Guess that makes sense since it's basically DVI as far as video goes.

[Michael @ Sep 19th 2006 5:38PM]

It should be noted that Canon is offering the XH A1 for $4000. it also features a 20X zoom, 24fps and dual XLR jacks. So this sony isn't eh first in it's price range and certainly not the cheapest.
But I have to admit Sony they did good with this one, at least from the way it looks afar.

[indie @ Jun 19th 2007 6:58PM]

Actually, Canon does not do 24p, it does 24f. The use of 24p is either to go back to film, or at least to look like it was shot on film. 24f does not do that and is not a standard that a lot of NLE understand, I'm not sure if your TV would understand either. I haven't seen a TV by Canon yet.

[Michael @ Jun 19th 2007 7:21PM]

Where did I say 24p in my above comment? I said 24fps.

But for your information
24f is virtually indistinguishable from 24p. And several editing suites will work with it. And yes the purpose is to make it move like film.
There are several methods for getting that footage out and onto any TV. Just like stuff shot on celluloid at 24fps can appear on your TV with the magic of conversion.

Canons HDV implementation is considered the best on the market at the moment.

[Nick Gold @ Sep 19th 2006 6:27PM]

So... Will these work with Sony's two current HDV decks, w/ 24p material?

[Henry @ Sep 19th 2006 6:46PM]

Finally, Sony gets the picture. 24p is what it's all about! Although 240 fields is just too flickery, you'd be better off sticking with 120i.

[Mike McLin @ Sep 19th 2006 7:22PM]

The Panasonic HVX-200 was released at then end of last year. It sells for roughly $5500 and does 1080/24p and 1080/30p. It also does 720/60p. So, obvious this Sony isn't the first camera in it's class to do 1080/24p. It might be the first HDV camera to do it, but I'm not sure. To answer some of the questions earlier...

HDMI is capable of 1080/60p.
The benefit of 24p, is it is the standard by which major motion pictures are shot. It gives you the "film-look", that digital filmmakers are looking for.
The benefit of 60p is that it is the best format for high-speed sports (note: ESPN is broadcasted in 720/60p).
If motion of the video is really fast, you need a faster framerate to show the video smoothly, otherwise it will look stuttery.

[Mike @ Oct 16th 2006 2:46AM]

The HVX shoots at an upsampled 1080p. It's native resolution is 1280x720...

[Daniel Hollister @ Sep 19th 2006 7:53PM]

Is this true 24p? I just wonder becuase of 1) the price point, and 2) their cameras thus far have had that shitty cineframe mode...

[Daniel Hollister @ Sep 19th 2006 7:57PM]

Oh, and how 'bout some cine-like gamma? Anything of that nature?

[Kemikal Burn @ Sep 19th 2006 8:27PM]

This is very cool. I would totally get this if one of my kidneys happened to be made of platinum.

[Kevin Mogee @ Sep 19th 2006 8:34PM]

That is one sweet looking cam. I can't wait to get mine. I just hope is gives me that cinema quality for my kids' soccer games.

[Mike @ Oct 16th 2006 3:39AM]

Kevin,

Cinema quality has little to do w/ the camera. This camera will provide the kinetic feel of a film camera. But that's where the similarities end... If you want a real 'film look', focus on your choice of lens selection and lighting, to start. Since this camera has a zoom lens, you've got the entire lens selection gamut covered. You can go wide to cover the entire action. Then you can go long, to get the closeups/reactions and emotions on the kids faces. If you had two of these cameras, you'd be in hog's heaven. You could cover both the wide shots and long shots, in one pass. Then you could cut them together seamlessly. THAT would be quite impactful. For the lighting, it's strange. When we light a movie set -I work as an assistant cameraman-, we light the scene in a way that appears unnatural to the eye. However, when it's capture on film or digital, it appears life-like and almost 3D. We try to avoid flat lighting and instead backlight our subjects, to make them stand out from the background. Typical home movies aren't shot like this. They're shot in available light only -light from the ceiling fan, etc. So they lack that 'cimena quality' that you were talking about. There are some great books out there that cover 3 point lighting techniques. It's a great place to get started.

Hope this helps...

-M

PS. One way to make your videos not look so 'video' is to try to shoot on a long lens w/ the iris wide open. The Sony has 2 neutral density filters built-in, to compensate for the increased light. Shooting like this will allow the camera, or you, to focus the lens only on your subject, while the rest of the image goes into soft focus. This directs your audiences attention to what you want. The soft background will make your subject stand out and help to achieve that 3D look that I was talking about.

[Dude @ Sep 20th 2006 1:38AM]

Man, there is NO technical reason why 24p can't be supported in their "low end" HDV cams. Dealing with interlaced video blows, even if you're just a nerd who shoots holiday outings in HD.

[Mike @ Oct 16th 2006 3:15AM]

There was once a guy that shot a movie in 65/70mm IMAX at 60fps. He intended for it to be this kind of 'ultimate format' experience. In short, everyone that viewed it said that it looked too much like reality. This was long before reality tv. But maybe it sparked a thought in one of those viewers:) 60 fips is good for slo-mo, provided that it's played back at 24 or 30...

To my knowledge, there is no format that PLAYS BACK at 60 frames per second...

I think that, unfortunately, a lot of companies are twisting the 'fps' acronym in the consumer and even prosumer market. I've seen some marketing that is very misleading, in this regard. Clearly, they want you to believe that you're getting 'frames per second', while the hardware is only capable of providing 60 fields per second. The HVX, Varicam, D20, etc. are the exceptions -w/ the first one only really affordable for most of us. They will record a true 60, progressive frames every second. Sony's lit states that this model shoots at 60i, not progressive. And to those who not in the know, there is a difference.

Anyway, all of this is tech garble. And are we doomed to become 'pixel fairies'? Getting over the hurdles, one can know that this model will shoot at 24 and 30 progressive frames per second at 1920x1080 resolution. It will shoot 60 1920x540 resolution interlaced fields per second. It's got a terrific lens. If it has the same build quality as my old PD-150, you can bounce it off a wall. And IT'S A SONY. I wonder if they still put those stickers on their products! December may be time for a nice, new tax write off:)

Cheers...

[Erik Petroni @ Dec 19th 2006 1:29AM]

Hi Mike, I really enjoy your letters.
My sister (a professional surfer)and I are off on a world wide shoot (www.karinapetroni.com) and we are going to buy two of the Sony V1U's.
I would love to take some classes on shooting HD Video. I am a still photographer and shot the majority of what you will find on her web site but when i read your letters, i feel like such a novice in how to pull off the HD side of things.

I would love to capture that film like feel, and you really focus on lighting.

Are you a 2nd A.D. in Calif by chance? I live in Florida but am in Calif (Santa Monica) every month to see my girlfriend.

Any advice on HD Video and HD Video lighting classes would be great. Or perhaps you could be hired for some.

Thank you.
Erik Petroni. [e-mail]

[xkx @ Oct 20th 2006 12:29AM]

Does the HVR-V1u Have Manual White Balance? I feel that that is something important. I keep reading about Auto White balance.

[Mike @ Nov 2nd 2006 11:45PM]

X,

Most every prosumer video camera will have manual white balance. To call a camera 'prosumer' and not have this feature would be a sin:) If you point your browser to filmtools.com, you'll find a nice kit that I use on every HD job. It provides laminated cards that have white on one side of every card and a variety of shades of blue on the others. I can't tell you how much this has come in handy. Just about every DP that I work with loves the blue cards -when you white balance to them, it gives the image a nice, warm look. They go nuts for these.

Best...

[gary @ Oct 30th 2006 5:43PM]

I was just getting ready to purchase the Z1U. What do I do now? Is this V1u going to give me a better picture/results??? Do I buy the A1U or the Z1u??? I do wedding videos and other event type.

[Mike @ Nov 2nd 2006 11:32PM]

Gary,

It depends on the looks that you're going for. To be able to shoot at true 24fps -the Z model does a gimmicky version that is not true- gives you the kinetic look of a film camera. But your results will depend on a variety of conditions. For the wedding videos, you'll most likely be shooting in available light only. This means that you won't be able to purposefully light the alter, bride and groom, and etc. Most churches do provide for very flat light though. And depending on the deal that you strike up, you may be able to work a couple of 650 watt lights that are placed behind and to the sides of the couple. Mind you that they should be far out of the way, so as not to distract anyone. With nice, flat lighting and a decent backlight, your clients should be very happy w/ the look you've achieved. However, it should be stressed that 24fps will not make your project look like it was shot cinematically. Case in point, take an 35mm movie camera and stick it in your living room on Christmas day to shoot the kids and it won't look much better than Hi8. It'll have 4000 lines of resolution. And it will have all of the abilities and characteristics of film. But the picture won't jump. And in the end, you'll be scratching your head and wondering why you spent $2000 to rent the body, lenses, etc for one day, $1000 per 11 minutes of footage, and all the costs associated w/ processing, transfer, DI, and a laser print out:) So lighting, not the camera, is what should be stressed.

Either camera would probably do fine. I would go w/ this model, over the Z. Low light situations will be a factor for you. So take that into consideration. But video tends to do pretty well in low light. So I wouldn't fret too much over it. If you plan on shooting some shorts or commercials, later on, I would highly recommend this one.

Cheers!

[indie @ Jun 19th 2007 6:58PM]

Just don't go with A1U. If you do my wedding, let say, and you come with a small camera, look like something I can pick up at BestBuy, I would demand my $1000 or $2000 or whatever you charged for the wedding. Not everybody understand that A1U can do HDV.

[Mark Krenzien @ Dec 22nd 2006 6:24PM]

As an Imax film producer who longs to someday both film and project at higher rates than 24fps, I feel that vidiographers infatuation with 24p for a "film " look is a transitional phase until digitial projection will make filming and exhibition at higher frame rates much more desireable. 24 fps was arbitrarliy choosen for film cameras as sound came in and film had to move faster than the previous 18fps just to produce good audio. Sony's HVR- V1U looks like a nice step forward for economic field production and behind-the-scenes shooting, but there is nothing magical about 24p other than it has helped mask some of videos early inherent flaws. Even Imax films will look better when shot and projected at higher rates.

[Larry Burns @ Dec 31st 2006 5:49PM]

Am I correct that if recording in DV-Cam mode the tapes can be played back on other Sony equipment such as DSR-1600/1800 decks in 4/3 format. We are looking at this as a bridge as we move to HD

[Erich @ Jan 5th 2007 3:25PM]

I'm confused as to why Sony's own website is calling this camera a 1080i, not 1080p.

[Rob @ Jan 5th 2007 9:23PM]

Well as for the Panasonic HVX-200. Super camera for its original time of release, actualy it would have been the best camera ever for its class.
But this new Sony camera with its 1080 60 p will be blowing all the others out of the water.
Unfortunatly the Panasonic has one problem, solid state memory, P2 Cards. They are way to expensive to purchase, and they are a real pain in the ass to back up with. With out the cards you cant even use the interpolometer feture on the Panasonic.

Now Im wondering if this new Sony has a built in interpolometer for shooting timelapes?
One thing that also makes me question, the size of there Cmos chips, why did they make them smaller? Sony's Cmos chips are horible in higher and lower lighing levels. The images are almost unusable for most pro productions. High levels, you must use gradiant filters etc!
Befor I get to excited about this cheepy cam, Ill have to test drive it in both high and low lighting samples in a studio.

However the Canon A1 probably will do much better in all lighting conditions.
Make sure you try them out first before purchasing one over the other.

[Jon @ Jan 6th 2007 1:39AM]

The biggest advancement this camera is offering over the competition is the cmos technology over ccd. A higher latitude and less noise in low light situation compared to 1/3 ccd is what is really turning me on to this camera. When sony starts making 2/3" 3 cmos HD cameras is when I'm really going to get excited!

[John R Bosco Jr @ Jan 19th 2007 7:00PM]

This Camera won't do 1080 60P nor will the most expensive HD camera. The Camera scans at 1080 60P then is processed to 1080 60I. Remember that U.S. systems cannot handle the 1080 60P Bandwidth. If it could, there wouldn't be two standards - 1080 60I and 720 30P. New cameras have recently been able to record 720 60P for a clearer picture. Most prefer the higher resolution of 1080 60I; however, most sports orientated networks prefer 720 30P because progressive is more pleasing to fast motion. Please don't get all wrapped up with marketing strategies. A camcorder that scans in 1080 60P is not necessary one that produces that picture in the final output. Regarding the HVR V1, you can get a 1080 60I with a more desirable 4:2:2 color space by direct output from the component or HDMI conectors, but once it goes to tape or it's hard drive, it gets the HDV compression, which is 25 MPEG Long GOP at 4:2:0 color space. Considering True HD is better than 135, the signal is quite compressed. The HVX 200 is not a HDV camcorder; it is a true HD with DVCPROHD compression at 100. It records both formats: 1080 60I and 720 60P all in 4:2:2 color space. The drawback is because it records on 1/3rd inch chips, Panasonic had to scale back the pixels of the chip and use pixel shift to attain HD resolution. Considering my top three under 6K, Panasonic HVX 200, Sony HVR V1U, and Canon XH A1, side by side, it would be difficult to see which camera has the better picture; it's all subjective. Being the more expensive camera, the HVX has a few more professional features.

I hope this cleared up some misconceptions.

John

[John R Bosco Jr @ Jan 20th 2007 10:32AM]

Sorry, some of what I wrote in my above comments have errors in them as I was quite tired when I wrote this. I meant to say that this camera won't record 1080 60p nor will many of the most expensive cameras. The Camera scans at 1080 60P then is processed to 1080 60I. Remember that U.S. systems cannot handle the 1080 60P Bandwidth. If it could, there wouldn't be two standards - 1080 60I and 720 30P. New cameras have recently been able to record 720 60P for a clearer picture. Most prefer the higher resolution of 1080 60I; however, most sports orientated networks prefer 720 30P because progressive is more pleasing to fast motion. Please don't get all wrapped up with marketing strategies of vendors. A camcorder that scans in 1080 60P is not necessary one that produces that picture in the final output. Regarding the HVR V1, you can get a 1080 60I with a more desirable 4:2:2 color space by direct output from the component or HDMI conectors, but once it goes to tape or it's hard drive, it gets the HDV compression, which is 25mbs MPEG Long GOP at 4:2:0 color space. It also compresses the audio using MPEG 1 384K. Considering True HD is better than 135mbs, the signal is quite compressed. The HVX 200 is not a HDV camcorder; it would be the closest to true HD with DVCPROHD compression at 100mbs and uncompressed audio. It records both formats: 1080 60I and 720 60P all in 4:2:2 color space. The drawbacks are that its P2 cards really expensive and currently only hold 8 minutes of HD. Also, because the unit captures images on 1/3rd inch chips, Panasonic had to scale back the pixels of the chip (For better and competitive low light capabilities) and use pixel shift to attain HD resolution. The end result is a softer picture and still retaining the less desirable characteristics of the 1/3rd inch chip, like less latitude. However, you have to consider the low price. In my opinion the top three under $6K, Panasonic HVX 200, Sony HVR V1U, and Canon XH A1, side by side, it is difficult to see which camera has the better picture; it's all subjective. Being the more expensive camera, the HVX has a few more professional features.

I hope this cleared up some misconceptions.

John

[David Bond @ Jan 26th 2007 9:17AM]

Has anyone got a price curve for 1080p dropping below £1K? My estimate is 2008, Quarter 1.

Thanks! David

[Kauzmic @ Mar 24th 2007 1:39AM]

Does anyone know if this camera has a continuously variable zoom lens? Or is it more like a PD-150?
Thanks -

[Simon @ May 13th 2008 3:16AM]

My HVR V1U is experienceing a problem playing back my footage on the LCD. It wont show anything on the LCD when i press play, but when i fastforward, rewind or play in slow motion the footage DOES appear on the LCD. Wierd...i dont know what to do.

[Chinch @ Aug 4th 2008 11:52AM]

Hello all, great discussion.

I just moved into a new job as a documentary producer/camera operator. We are using 2 HVR-V1U's. I have never used this camera before but am interested in the 24P mode and am wondering if anyone else has shot in 24P in a documentary setting?

Kind of a stupid question, but I'm just trying to get some info from experienced users.

Thanks in advance
Chinch

[Kfanya @ Sep 30th 2008 12:09PM]

Does any one highly recommend this camera. I am new to this and trying to find a cam for corporate In-House use....Ex technique demonstrations of surgical instrumentations, surgeries, company overview, and other training.

I have also looked at Canon XH A1 and Sony HVR-A1U HDV Camcorder.

I have to stay at this price range.

I welcome all the suggestions.

THanks

[Brian @ Oct 10th 2008 7:42PM]

The glass- Carl Zeiss 20X ----------------- the close-ups are so great, sometimes I just zoom in on ants or leaves.
the processing ----------- 1920 x 1080 60p - this is cmos progressive sensor
output-------------------------HDV tape-FireWire(laptop or compact flash drive)-HDMI

For what you are doing, this camera is so wicked,
more than that, it's actually fun to use
it's got more than you'll need,
unless you get into editing and start
doing commercials, documentaries, etc
Then you find out about HDMI capture
and with this camera - your ready! Kinda future-proof if-you-will.
I'm thinking about getting another HVR-V1u for a 2 camera set-up!

Break a leg - sorry hospital humor!