Digital 8 or Pure DV

[Grigory]

Jerry,

I can agree that long-term stability of tape is an issue for any new generation of recording devices.

However, it is always fun to see how Americans are looking only inside their own standards.
For NTSC, the tape speed of D8 is doubled in comparison with video8. This makes some observers to say that "the tapes were not designed..." The first such thought was published on Internet almost a year ago. And it is correct expectation in any event when somebody tries to move something at doubled speed

If you look at another side of ocean, you will find that PAL always used 1.5 of NTSC speed for video8 recording.
For PAL, the tape speed is increased by factor of only 1.5. So, the expectations of tape failure decrease greatly. Looking at my tapes, I don't see deformations of any kind.

Optics.
Think about this: is it reasonable to make optics for better than 400 lines of resolution for Hi8? No.
Is it reasonable to make optics of >400 lines of resolution for D8? Yes.
What is the resolution of D8? I got 420 lines in PAL.
Inexpensive Hi8 camcorders have ~350 lines, you can check this.

Now, look at the CCD specifications for mini-DV and D8 1 CCD camcorders. Is there any difference?

So, the resolution of D8 is the same as for NEW 1 CCD mini-DV camcorders, and better than for Hi-8 models.

Now about lenses. Actually, any lens MUST provide 500 lines of resolution.
The lens quality is not only its resolution, but the level of geometric and chroma distortions (aberrations), the quality of AR coating. The cost of professional quality lens is very high and comparable to the camcorder price.
For equal price, mini-DV and D8 units the lenses quality must be similar.

Resolution itself is a measure of ability. The quality is not only in resolution. Signal to noise ratio, sync stability, chroma resolution and S/N ratio are very important. So, any DV device has much better image quality in comparison with Hi8.


Again, I tell about 1 CCD devices in ~1000 $ price range.

Remember - I drive Daewoo, but not Mercedes600 SEL, unfortunately . However, I can use it in any weather any time and park under the window of my apartment, instead of garage with complicated security system. It also takes x4 less money for fuel.

Grigory

[VIKINGMAN]

Well two things:

No 1: I agree with This_Idiot regarding the lifespan of D8. It is a "phenomenon" like Beta where in the old days, the CD-I has been recently. Sony is the only maker of Digital8 cams. I know, I know, other brands has them too, but they're still ALL manufactured by Sony! DV is here to stay, also because TV-stations all over Europe are starting to use them for smaller asignments (can be operated easily by a single person.

No 2: If someone would buy a Digital8 cam - speaking of lens-quality - I'd for sure go for a Canon over a Sony any day. All the Canon cams are, as mentioned, manufactured by Sony, but they're equiped with Canon's own lenses, which are of much better quality than Sony's lenses! Take a look at Pro studio-cams, they're often made by Sony, but 95% of the time, they're fitted with a Canon lens.

OH! And I'd anyday buy a Pana DV-cam over a Sony Digital-cam - this from years of personal experiences of their drivequality and durabilty!

------------------
ASUS P2B-S, PII-350 (o/c to 412MHz), 128MB RAM, Cheetah 9.1 GB, Matrox Mill. G200SG, SB 64AWE, Plextor 32x CD-Rom, Sony CDU-924S CD-R, Canon BJC-7000 InkJet and Canon CanoScan 300 Scanner.

[This_Idiot]

Wow, another forum script revision. Wonder what it will do.....

Anyhow, nice to see another intense discussion, I kind of knew it would get like this.

My original point was "strokes for folks". You can, if you wish, replace this with "bang for buck" or mebbe "my budget constraints.."

D8 certainly seems to be a good interim format for those that want to move from analogue to digital on a budget (and don't we all have those). A good marketing move by Sony, and no doubt they are happy with it. If we all had nlimited budget then we'd probably be going for XL1 and Digisuite (or something in a similar vein).

But the truth is that we don't. So what is important here is settling on a personal budget, and then trying to make the best match with available gear. That involves talking to other people that have come to similar decisions and to find out whether they think they made a mistake.

It's worth remembering that buying nearly anything today on a tight budget will result in an early upgrade (thus costing more in the long run). That's not a reason to invalidate an early purchase, but should be taken into account.

Keep chatting amongst yourselves folks, this is interesting.

[A_BIT]

As you all know, I'm no DV expert. As an amateur I am very satisfied with My D8 TRV103. Something that has not been mentioned yet is lens/filter diameter.

I have a large collection of 52mm filters for my Nikon lenses. When I wanted to get a polarizer for my D8 (everyone MUST have one), it was turning out to be a bit of a headache to find. I decided to puy a step up ring which cost me about $3.00. Now I can use the entire collection of filters & hoods, etc. that I have. I'm not sure if the Mini DV units have a filter diameter close enough to 52mm to get a step up ring.

Besides that I have to say the controls are well laid out and the camera has worked flawlessly for me.

Grigory, have you experimented with modifying the aperture under Program AE mode on your D8?

-Anthony

[Patrick]

I'm always amazed at the half-truths and the absolute bullsh*t that comes out in discussions such as this. I don't have the passion or the patience (or admittedly sometimes the knowledge) to cover every questionable statement. Therefore, I'll limit myself to two things.

1) Jerry, you can interpret the Doc's statement concerning D8 "quality" any which way makes you feel the most comfortable. It seems pretty clear to me (and others) what he meant.

2) Brian, you have come out with the most ludicrous statement I've ever read at this forum:

"... there is no raison d'etre for Sony to have introduced a new format when there is a perfectly adequate one already available..."

I find it difficult to believe that someone as seemingly educated as you would state something so ridiculous. Are you suggesting that there be no competition between the manufacturers? Should we all simply be satisfied with an "adequate" existing format? Maybe we should all still be shooting and editing with VHS?. It was "adequate". Maybe we should all still be driving Model T Fords. They were "adequate". Hell, horses were "adequate".

All of us who have an interest in shooting video should be thankful that Sony came out with Digital8. Yes, all of us, even those of you who think that MiniDV is "adequate". It's this competition in the marketplace that has increased the features and brought down the prices of all the digital camcorder formats. Everyone of us comes out ahead, whether we shoot with Digital8 or MiniDV.

**************

Since this is Thanksgiving Day in Canada, I'd just like to express my thanks to Chris and Ant for being responsible for this site. It's great that we have a forum such as this to express ourselves in an open and frank manner. Chris, I hope that you are soon able to get your (un)employment situation under control. It has been loosely discussed here before, but if it gets to the point where a few dollars from the "regulars" would help keep things going, just let us know.

[This_Idiot]

Hi Patrick,

It might be a good idea to seperate technical "excellence" from a marketing strategy. Sure, I agree that D8 will have a depressing effect on the lower end DV cams, and that's something that we can all be grateful for. But do you think that is what Sony had in mind ? Nope, they were trying to grab the lucrative bottom end.

Now that DOESN'T mean that D8 is a substandard product, and from Grigories post (I knew that he would have good post to make on this), it is certainly a good quality solution pro-tem.

Anyhow, I've not managed to get to the bottom of the Canadian Thanksgiving celebration yet. I know that the Americans celebrate the arrival of the Pilgrim Fathers by cooking up those native Turkeys with Cranberries (yummee) and pumpkin pie (never thought that sounded very nice myself). What kind of ritual does the Canadian equivalent go through ?

Thanks for the applause, should I mention that it is the major intention of Ant and myself to be irresponsible and not responsible ? That is, to promote (and provoke) the total arena of useability of Matrox products.

And in another month or so I shall be asking for phone-voucher contributions so that I can keep on making posts like this one

[Patrick]

Hi Chris, I'll refrain from saying anything more about D8/DV until the others have had a chance to take a swing at me.

Thanksgiving Day in Canada is much the same as it is in the States. There's more to it than this, but it's basically a celebration of the harvest at the end of the growing season. With Canada being a little further north than the States, our growing season ends sooner, therefore we have our celebration a month earlier. It's a great "New World" tradition.

Pumpkin pie is probably my favourite pie. Hot from the oven with ice cream on it, mmmmm....... The Doc might even agree with me on this one.

[Brian Ellis]

Grigory

If you cannot see the difference between a 3-CCD and a 1-CCD camera, then you need a new TV set.

I repeat, the ONLY advantage of D-8 is the ability to play Hi-8 tapes, as a compromise.

As for tapes, Hi-8 ones are designed with a high-coercivity coating which will record levels over an approx. 60 dB range. Pure digital tapes have an even higher coercivity coating (similar to floppies) that are designed as all or nothing types, enabling a much higher data density.

There is another disadvantage of D-8: you are limited to one make of camera (and I hope it will stay that way). As you yourself say, feature for feature, there is no difference in the signal quality, therefore there is no raison d'etre for Sony to have introduced a new format when there is a perfectly adequate one already available, if not for pure marketeering. Sony must realise this, because they have attacked only the low end of the market, keeping DV for their better cameras.

Tape cost is a red herring. If you use it professionally or semi-pro, the time taken to shoot 60 min of tape costs MANY times more in just your salary than the difference between a Hi-8 and a DV tape. If you are an amateur, you will presumably re-record onto VHS after NLE and you can reuse your DV tape many times. To use your camera as a VCR will cost you much more in mechanical wear (whether it be D-8 or DV) than the cost of tapes. This is another reason why a dual purpose compromise so that you can play back your old tapes is a false economy: you wear out the expensive digital camera mechanics unnecessarily.


------------------
Brian (the terrible)



[This message has been edited by Brian Ellis (edited 10-11-1999).]

[Keith Wiebe]

I got my Sony TR7000 for $665 (I did see it advertised for $601 but doubt one could buy it for that). I sold my Canon ES3000 for $300 with a couple of batteries so my outlay was $365. For that money I got a much cleaner camcorder with nightshot and fancy ditital effects and a tremendously better archive vcr deck! If I went the DV tape way I would have had to keep my Canon and it would have cost me considerably more! I saved enough to perhpas buy a Canopus Raptor fire wire card and qualtiy will be that much better.

[Jerry Jones]

Patrick gazed into the stars and exclaimed
with awe and wonder:

>I'm always amazed at the half truths
>and the absolute bullsh*t that comes
>out in discussion such as this...

And you--presumably--know what
constitutes "bullsh*t" and "half truths"
everytime? Oh wise one... please share
your boundless wisdom with the rest of
us poor, miserable wretches. How dare
we even venture to soil your presence in this humble discussion forum?

Hey--Pat--It's robust discussion that makes this forum a worthwhile endeavor.

Hellooooo. Is anybody (are you) home?

Everybody is free to believe what he or
she wishes and, hopefully, learn in the
process. Your use of the word "bullsh*t"
is really something that strikes me as
both unnecessary and... frankly... I could do without it.

And... allow me to thank you... for giving
me the "permission" to interpret Doc's
statement "any way I wish." That's really
charitable of you to give me that privilege.

Why... how do the rest of us even survive without your "all knowing" and "all seeing" omnipotence?

[Jerry Jones]

http://www.adamwilt.com/dv.html

Grigory?

Question:
I read the text by Adam Wilt concerning
Digital8 at the link location above.

In his description of Digital8... Wilt
says something about timecode not being
transmitted over 1394 where Digital8 is
concerned... casting--in his opinion--doubt
on whether batch capturing was possible.

This isn't true is it? I thought batch
capture was possible with Digital8.

[Patrick]

Hey, this is fun Jerry (or is it Jerrold today?)

[Jerry Jones]

Actually, thanks to this discussion,
I'm giving serious thought to buying
a low end Digital 8 camcorder such as
the DCR-TR7000 to:

a) supplement my DV camcorder when a
two-camcorder shoot is warranted

and...

b) use as an inexpensive digital deck

http://www.sel.sony.com/SEL/consumer...00_specs.shtml

My JVC MiniDV has an annoying auto shutoff
feature that can't be disengaged unless
the camcorder is recording. So I'm
thinking a D-8 camcorder might fit the
bill... and give me that extra camcorder
that's occasionally needed.

[This message has been edited by Jerrold Jones (edited 13 October 1999).]

[Patrick]

Jerry, if I may be so bold, I can answer your question addressed to Grigory. I want to help you reap the full benefit of your upcoming D8 purchase.

Batch capture from a D8 camcorder is no problem if you are playing back digitally recorded tapes. It's only a problem if you use the D8 camcorder to play back analog recorded Hi8 or 8mm tapes. That's because timecode from analog recordings is not transmitted through the i.LINK connector.

I hope you're satisfied that you've messed up our nice little thread with that mega-long URL in your last post.

(Maybe Ant or Chris can fix it.)

[DrMordrid]

If you think you'll get rid of the 5 min. shutoff by buying a Sony cam, think again. Every Sony consumer grade cam I've had has that annoying "feature". So do many other cams. I agree: it's a royal PIA.

Other thoughts;

Let's not forget the real reason for D8's existance: keeping the Sony 8mm division in business a while longer while at the same time carving a niche market for Sony to have to itself.

D8 issues:

First let me say that I am not saying there is a digital quality difference between D8 and miniDV. There are issues of mechanical quality and reliability that can be as important as image quality, or even more so.

1. Tape and head life are problematic. Since D8 transports 8mm/Hi8 tapes at more than twice their design speed (8mm/Hi8: 14mm/sec, miniDV: 18mm/sec, D8: 29mm/sec) you run into durability issues for both the tapes and the heads. Note that D8 transports ~64% faster than miniDV as well.

PAL may transport at 1.5x NTSC (21mm/sec?) but where is the cutoff where 8mm tapes can't handle more speed? At SOME point these tapes will not take the stresses over time. I wouldn't want to be the customer who finds it.

A parallel issue: 8mm tapes of either variety do not have as robust an anti-friction layer nor as strong a substrate as tapes for the DV formats.

2. Hi8 tapes in particular have been susceptable to dropouts because of problems with the formulation of their coatings. This sometimes results in the subsequent flaking off of the coatings from the substrate.

In a Hi8 cam this means maybe a horizontal streak in some frames. In DV this could cause the codec to fall over the digital cliff and into a stream of DCT errors. At double the transport speed this is even more likely than on a Hi8 cam.

This has been getting better as time goes on but you still have to watch our for it particularly with certain major brands.

3. Because of #1 and #2 I sure as h**l wouldn't use a D8 as a DV deck. The wear and tear would likely mess up the tapes in short order, not to mention the heads if the coatings flake off. See #2 again.

4. Optics are another issue. Sony is making the D8 cams to a price and this is one area you can save a buck.

A friend of mine, who is also a photographer, recently purchased a Sony TRV310. On a whim we decided to run the U.S. Air Force Optical Resolving Power Test on our cams (mine: a Panasonic PV910) using the still capture modes.

Since D8's and DV capture at 720x480 any resolution problems should be the responsibility of the lens and the CCD.

GOTO RESUME unless you want to know the gory details:

In the Air Force test you place 5 USAF test charts on a wall with the spacing and distance to the cams focal plane determined by the lenses focal length. Since these lenses were both < 135mm the distance was set to 55 times the focal length of each lens at the zoom setting used for shooting. We used the minimum zoom setting for each cam.

One card is placed in the center of the visual field. The corner cards are placed with their centers 22" (56cm) above and below and 32" (81cm) left and right of the center charts midpoint. The corner charts are mounted with their bottoms facing the center chart and angled so their vertical centerlines intersect at its center.

To test you shoot a frame, magnify the image and look for the smallest line pairs that can be seen as separate lines on each chart. Then you score each chart individually using the line group and line pair numbers on an x-y chart.

RESUME

The Sony lost. It had visibly less resolving power and showed signs of spherical abberation at the corners of the image field. The Panasonic showed no visible spherical abberations. Lenses are at least 50% of any photographic system so....

My friend took back the Sony and bought a Canon Vistura for $770 and change. No lens problems there and it shoots gorgeous video.

5. Consumer miniDV cams are now available in the same price range as D8 in many discount stores (at least in the US) so why? Example: the previously mentioned Canon Vistura.

6. Being a propriatary format support is a big issue. Remember Sony's last excursion into a proprietary consumer video format?

Dr. Mordrid



[This message has been edited by DrMordrid (edited 10-12-1999).]