HV20 vs DVX

[Shane Jackson]

Ok so I sold my DVX and was looking for something smaller but with very good picture quality. How does the HV20 compair to the DVX???

[Huy Vu]

Wasn't there a thread with this identical title and content sometime ago?

[vsansal]

The video quality of HV20 is better than DVX since it records HD but the low light capabilities and manual controls of HV20 is nothing close to DVX.

[Jack_Felis]

With my experiences at school, the HV20, combined with a Beachtek XLR adapter, blows the DVX out of the water. If it matters to you, you won't get control over specific image elements such as coring, detail level, ect. but, in my personal experience, I never really needed to alter those options on the DVX anyway. Still, I know people like to tweak and mess with the image in camera and it really shows but I've always been fine with the default settings most of the time so the HV20 really works in my case.

[Artscroll]

I agree with Jack for the most part. I sold my DVX and bought an HV20. I've had it for about 5 months now. However, as much as I love the "near 1080p", 24fps that it puts out, I really miss the pro features of the DVX. Of course, I knew I was getting a consumer cam with the HV20 ahead of time but I was too "awed" and "ooed" at HD for the price!

When conditions are right, the HV20 is a very pleasing image ( I love static shots and slow tripod pans, not a big fan of the hand held look with the HV20). I do miss so many things of the DVX though, the zoom ring, the gamma curves, the focus ring, and last but not least, the true 24p. Like it or not, the rolling shutter artifacts are apparent and you have to shoot around those limitations. My opinion is that if you can't afford a pro 24p HD cam, and absolutely have to have HD, then the HV20 is for you! I just wish my finances would have allowed for me to keep both! The softer DVX image is also nice and film-like if you prefer a softer, not-so-detailed look. The DVX always reminded me of the "telecined film look". In post, I've tried to emulate a DVX look by gamma adjustments and dumbing down the image but it is not the same. Oh and yes, the above post about the DVX being better in low light is certainly true. I once shot snowfall at night time with the DVX-100B (just with natural household porch lighting) and the image was superb. Can't do that with the HV20 uless you use slower shutter speeds, gain/and or add lighting. I guess I have to work a lot harder to obtain an image that satisfies me with the HV20 whereas the DVX was so good for run and gun shooting. Daydreaming aside, to view the absolutely gorgeous small ants crawling on colorful flowers that I shot the first week I had my HV20, I WAS SOLD!

[Huy Vu]

However, as much as I love the "near 1080p", 24fps that it puts out, I really miss the pro features of the DVX.

I do miss so many things of the DVX though, the zoom ring, the gamma curves, the focus ring, and last but not least, the true 24p.


Just to clarify here, the HV20 does not use 24F mode like the A1. Its CMOS chip is natively progressive and thus delivers "true" 24p.

[Ian-T]

Just to clarify here, the HV20 does not use 24F mode like the A1. Its CMOS chip is natively progressive and thus delivers "true" 24p.Thanks for clarifying that. It might have been all well intended on the former posters part but it just bothers me sometimes when people innacuratley refers to or implies that the HV20's 24p is not real. I suppose if Canon had included flags in its footage then we would'nt even be having this discussion.:thumbsup:

[D_Odell]

But pay some extra and with your DVX = Andromeda. And the HV20 is out of the league.

DVX is old, yes, but what HV20 only has or more of is resolution. Other than that nothing else. Pricier cams also bring better colours. You can never get DVX colour from a HV20. But you can get good resolution.

[William_Robinette]

If you every want to migrate to a more professional camera, the DVX will give you a much better idea of how they all work. The only thing that the HV20 has on the DVX is resolution.

You guys can count pixels, I'll take manual control and mojo any day.

[D_Odell]

That's exactly my point if I was unclear...

Regards,
David

[wilsonedits]

come on people these threads comparing these cameras are about as bad the ones about " can I really get a dvx for 750 bucks from this online store".... :lol

hv20 is a 900 dollar camera with a CMOS sensor.. doesn't even come close to the dvx...you get what you pay for and thats a 900 dollar camera

and for anyone that has used a CMOS sensor camera ,if your dealing with lights or alot of movement your going to not be pleased with the hv20 and check your hd resolution on the camera its not real HD ... besides your recording HD to a tape which comes with all kinds of issues

[smpproductions]

I like the HV20 pretty well, but I would never replace my DVX with it. It's not a professional camera, resolution doesn't justify that. Sure, the HV20 is a sweet camera.....but no true manual control makes it difficult to use in the professional world.

[Cheesesailor77]

does the HV20 have manual aperature control?

[vsansal]

does the HV20 have manual aperture control?

Yes, it does.

[William_Robinette]

wilsonedits, while CMOS does have a rolling shutter problem, I think you need to check your facts. How is it not real HD? And how is dealing with lights an issue?

[Artscroll]

I believe we have seen from vertical resolution tests done in the past that the HV20 falls short of true 1080 lines. It is closer to the HD 720p standard. This is a drawback of HDV. I don't believe HDV has ever attained a good 1080 lines of quality. Looks more like 720 blown up to 1080. Yes, there are 1080 lines there, just not a true 1080 if you catch my drift. To clarify my earlier post, 24p on the DVX looked better than 24p on the Canon in regards to geometry and the rolling shutter problem. My opinion having owned both cams.

[Ian-T]

come on people these threads comparing these cameras are about as bad the ones about " can I really get a dvx for 750 bucks from this online store".... :lol

hv20 is a 900 dollar camera with a CMOS sensor.. doesn't even come close to the dvx...you get what you pay for and thats a 900 dollar camera

and for anyone that has used a CMOS sensor camera ,if your dealing with lights or alot of movement your going to not be pleased with the hv20 and check your hd resolution on the camera its not real HD ... besides your recording HD to a tape which comes with all kinds of issuesWith all due respect his is an ignorant statement. This is very much "real" HD. As a moderator at another site said...if you are looking at the 1440x1080...then you would have to discount the best of the best HDCAM which also shoots video at that resolution. Rwally...the only thing the HV20 does not come close to in regards to the DVX is the manual controls...but if you shoot primarily with DOF adapters......then either cams just becomes camera heads. The DVX is nice...but don't just discount the HV20...rolling shuter and all. What do you mean if you are dealing with lights and lots of movement. I have been dealig with this cam since April...no issues here. Just don't take it on helicopter rides...but contrary to what some might same...I mount mine in truck and get beautiful video every time. The DVX is what it is...a beautiful cam...so is the HV20. I understand you might have an investment to protect...but misinformation is never a good thing.

[Ian-T]

I believe we have seen from vertical resolution tests done in the past that the HV20 falls short of true 1080 lines. It is closer to the HD 720p standard. This is a drawback of HDV. I don't believe HDV has ever attained a good 1080 lines of quality. Looks more like 720 blown up to 1080. Yes, there are 1080 lines there, just not a true 1080 if you catch my drift. To clarify my earlier post, 24p on the DVX looked better than 24p on the Canon in regards to geometry and the rolling shutter problem. My opinion having owned both cams.I've heard this before. Is that true for all HDV cams? Is that an HDV thing or is it partivualr to a camera? Just asking.

[Artscroll]

I don't believe it is a documented fact Ian but it is something I have observed with HDV cams and others have. HDV is really quite amazing for what it packs all in on that little MiniDV tape and 720p quality is HD. I believe 720p was what HDV was originally shooting for and designed for.

[Ian-T]

..... HDV is really quite amazing for what it packs all in on that little MiniDV tape and 720p quality is HD. I believe 720p was what HDV was originally shooting for and designed for.Yes you are right. I be;ieve there are a few standards of HD and it does start with 720p. In the end however its the final picture that sells me. The DVX with the Andromeda (sp) hookup to me is the ultimate "prosumer" cam or maybe even an HVX with the HYDRA. But for what this little cam can do..I think its great. It's only going to get better in regards to future cams...Canon really pushed the envelope with this one. I really did not mean to come off hard on the last poster..just wanted to make it clear that the statement about HDV "in general" not being "real" HD was false.

from what I understand...when HDV first came out (JVC) it was only at 19 mbps. So I can imagine trying to fit all this information at that lower rate caused all kids of issues...even more than what some see today. So HDV got a bad rap when it first came out. It seems the technology has gotten much better today with different implementationss of HDV...@ 25mbps. Less artifacting (not saying there is none...but less than before).

[Huy Vu]

I believe we have seen from vertical resolution tests done in the past that the HV20 falls short of true 1080 lines. It is closer to the HD 720p standard. This is a drawback of HDV. I don't believe HDV has ever attained a good 1080 lines of quality. Looks more like 720 blown up to 1080. Yes, there are 1080 lines there, just not a true 1080 if you catch my drift. To clarify my earlier post, 24p on the DVX looked better than 24p on the Canon in regards to geometry and the rolling shutter problem. My opinion having owned both cams.

The HV20 indeeds fall short of 1080 lines. So does the HVX, the A1 or the HPX500. "True" 1080p is a tricky word. Technically you can't have full 1080 resolution unless you have enough pixels on your chip, but none of these camera have it. Their chip size is a compromised between performance quality and cost. In a real situation you're never going to be able to get the full number of resolution lines because there's so many other factors involved. Saying something isn't "true" HD because it falls short of 1080 lines is just wrong because this disqualifies nearly every HD camera in existence.

This is like when people debate that 1080 24F isn't "true" 1080p because it's lower resolution. Look at some 1080 footage from the A1 versus a comparable camera with "true" 24p and tell me whether you can see a difference. The proof is in the image so people need to stop nitpicking.

[seunosewa]

The real question is whether the HVX has a higher resolution than the HV20.

[PappasArts]

Well since I have owned both. Not close. The HV20 screams more rez than the HVX200. Strictly talking res only. The HVX is a full fledge small form professional camera, the HV20 is not! However core image, I wish my HVX200 had delivered the same image quality as the HV20. If you record HDMI out, OMG god the HV20 delivers a pristine image even more. However, it's controls suck, suck suck. There are work arounds though.


The real question is whether the HVX has a higher resolution than the HV20.

[maarek]

The real question is whether the HVX has a higher resolution than the HV20.

I'd have to say, no it doesn't. I've seen a lot of hvx200 footage and it's good looking material but hv20 does have better resolution.