We posted previously on Showreel Magazine’s ongoing article series covering so-called “small camera” tests on the set of Fox’s hit drama “24″. In Part 1 of the 3-part series, directors of photography Rodney Charters and Taylor Wigton tested the Sony HVR-Z1U and JVC HD100U cameras on set. In the current article, Part 2, they bring the Canon XL-H1 and Panasonic AG-HVX200 cameras into the mix.

One very interesting comment from Rodney, on talent in front of the lens:

“…I told Keifer we were testing more small cameras for drama use and he said again that he doesn’t feel he can perform as intensely in front of a small camera as when he faces a large Panaflex. So I’ll start by reiterating a point I made last time: it’s a good idea to use large matte boxes if you intend to use HDV for drama, so that the actors feel there is something of substance there they can address obviously not for taking an eyeline down the lens, but at least to act as an audience…”

That’s a very important point…what good are cost and workflow savings in the camera when the performance suffers? Before you assume Sutherland is just being snooty and resistant to change, consider that he himself shoots with the Z1 for personal work. This is mentioned later in the article…

Rodney again, on 24p for drama:

“To get 24p out of the Sony you need to do a little bit of fiddling. Use the 50i (25fps), then extract the additional frame in either a software engine or on HDCAM by playing at a variable speed to get it back to 23.98fps. Or use the new up- and down-rez box from Sony. These are fiddly things, to do, so obviously it is somewhat easier to shoot with a camera that does 24p natively.

Ultimately, you do need 24p, and it might be easier to get there on another camera system. Sony is about to launch the 1/2in chip XDCAM HD for around $20,000, and that will represent something to be reckoned with and at price point for people who want to get into HD at a more professional level.”

More people talking about the XDCAM HD, it really seems to be stirring up the industry…

“Each manufacturer has taken a different approach, and the results are all extraordinary; some of them are better than others and some aspects of some of the cameras are also better than others. Some of the limitations differ in importance depending on whether you are shooting documentary, drama or commercials.”

These two DP’s really seem to be impressed by the capabilities of the current crop of “small” 1/3″ chip cameras. But they mention again the over-arching issue of overly-wide depth of field, something that they address with cine-lens adapters. There is also mention made of the concern of sub-standard optics and the issue of the fixed lenses “breathing.” They mention the lens breathing issue affecting the Z1, and the stock lens (interchangeable, remember?) that ships with the HD100 “breathes like crazy.” The XL H1? “The lens is very sharp, but useless for drama because of the degree of breathing.”

Again, there is no magic bullet folks. Camera decisions must meet budget, shooting, and workflow requirements. What works for you might not work for me…but the good news is there are plenty of options on the market at this time. God Bless America. Err, maybe that should be God Bless Japan…but I digress.

Camera Summary (I’m chopping up comments here, quoting what catches my eye):
Sony Z1U- “A great introduction to the HD world, with its negatives being a fixed lens and a lack of proper focus controls. Great for docos, but it’s probably not your first choice if you want to shoot drama with an HDV camera. The camera is also truly menacing for stock footage. The underscan and ultra-bright LCD screen should be copied and implemented on every other camera. With its ability to shoot both PAL and NTSC 1080 50/60i, this is a sweet little unit overall.”

JVC HD100U- “It is designed very well for hand-holding and has a proper broadcast quality viewfinder. However, if you wanted to hide as a documentary maker, it’s the camera that looks the most professional…But again you’re restricted to 1280×720 and that’s barely enough resolution in this age. When you see it up against the Canon XL H1, the Canon has better picture sharpness but does so at the expense 24P…It is the one to watch.”

Canon XL H1- “The Canon camera was somewhat of a surprise: it came in at $10K, but in a way I think it’s probably worth it. First off, you can take an HD-SDI signal out…hopefully someone’s going to come out with a lens that will allow you to shoot relatively breathe-less so you can rack focus dependably back and forward. It could also use a decent focus control with it and matte box…the viewfinder is pretty much useless and, as it doesn’t have a flipout…the lens is a 20:1 zoom, which is an amazing range. But I would love it if they sold the camera body only, which they may do eventually.”

Panasonic HVX200- “…P2 cards is a completely different way of working. Filmwise, it’s fine for us; we have always changed magazines after 4 or 6 minutes in the 400ft loads and 10 and 16 minutes in the 3-perf version in 1000ft loads, so we’re used to that, so the idea of having three flashcards and exchanging them one in the camera, one being downloaded and one on standby is totally acceptable. We have enough people to do that…However, not being able to use tape made Sparkhill reconsider their purchase. Mass storage in the aftermath of that is coming online fast. We did find the HVX200 the noisiest of the cameras…But it does give variable frame rate, and I think the resolution decrease is worth it in this case.” (a reference to the slightly-lower-res, biaxial-pixel-shifted CCDs)

The concensus here is that the faux progressive modes of the Sony and Canon are decent, but don’t equal the look and feel of true progressive. They used Magic Bullet to convert 60i to 24p, and while they agree it’s good, it didn’t quite match the filmic look of true progressive. I wonder how Nattress filters would compare? Has anyone seen a head to head shootout (convert-out?) between Nattress and Magic Bullet 24p filters?

Taylor Wigton on optics:

“Regardless of how great the off-the-chip quality of these cameras is, until the problem of poor optical performance is resolved, and as long as the physical limitations of a tiny chip equate to near infinite depth of field, a lot of pros, particularly those working in drama, are going to steer clear of them.”

Hence, the cine-adapter tests that ensued. They tested the Movietube, Cinemek G35, P+S Technik Mini35 and the Red Rock Micro M2.

My quick and dirty synopsis of, umm, their synopsis:
Movietube-
*upright image (no post-flip required)
*impressive construction (hey, mfr’d by Germans, would you expect less?)
*patented static film screen rather than ground glass
*can only be used with fixed lens cameras at this point (Panny and Sony only)
*upper iris range is limited by visibility of the screen

Mini35-
*upright image
*loses quite a bit of light
*oscillating ground glass swirling visible in HDV

Cinemek/G35-
“unit we had proved to be unusable for HD/HDV shooting. Although we didn’t see the hair and dust on the G35 static ground glass straight away, it was there when we looked at footage on a 17in HD monitor. However, we had an early (probably preproduction) model, and the company is now completely redesigning the adaptor, and in the absence of it providing technical specs, photos or uncompressed frame grabs from its new design, we have to rule it out for the time being.”

M2-
*Lowest priced solution
*nearly lossless resolution/no image degradation
*no visible grains/no artifacting/no soft edges.
*wide iris range with no visual loss of resolution.

Conclusion on the cameras:
“Of course, there are differences between the three HDV offerings, but each of the three MPEG2 compressed HD cameras are crystal clear. From our limited tests so far, the Panasonic HVX200 is the noisiest camera of the four, but it has other saving graces.”

But when it came down to it, they both selected the JVC as top choice for narrative work:
“…the JVC HD100 (in large part because of its true progressive mode) combined with a Redrock M2 and a nice new set of 35mm Nikon SLR primes.”

But the kicker of this whole article are the footnotes concerning film vs video dynamic range:
“Of the 30 to 40 (one hour drama) pilots being prepped for shooting at this moment, and of those considered by the networks to have the most potential, all are being shot on film…in an uncontrolled world I think at the moment that film still gives me an advantage when shooting 24.”

I wonder what advances in dynamic range we can expect from the RED camera? NAB should prove to be an excited show to attend this year. Anyway, a great great article, take the time to read it thoroughly, I’m sure you’ll pick up insights thatI’ve missed. Thanks Taylor and Rodney for sharing all this information.