Fall - HPX + Letus Ultimate Test Footage

[Kholi]

http://www.vimeo.com/2075303

Might be my last... but, now it's a huge might because I've found some decent settings in CineD, for one, and I've had a bit more personal time with the camera's functions. Namely my new favorite... 1/4 ND Filter!

This is a REALLY freakin' great camera for 35mm Adapter users. All of the subtle additions can't be denied:

1/4 ND Filter -- Gives you the chance to slow the camera's Iris down to a sharper point. One example would be: 1/16 ND and F2.8 on Camera. Now it's more like 1/4 ND and F5.6 on Camera. Eckin' out every lil' bit of sharpness is great for 35mm Adapters and I prefer to start at the camera end, at least when using glass that's already sharp from the get-go

IRIS Switch -- No more bumping the Focus Setting! Admittedly, you could still knock the auto focus button but it's least likely to happen. Walkin' around all day with the cam on a Monopod I didn't bump the focus once. The IRIS Switch is yum.


Cleaner Gain -- You definitely shouldn't be afraid of using 3dB or 6dB. 9dB, err, nah. But that just means a faster core system all around.

SD Downconvert -- This should have been on the original 200, can't fathom WHY it wasn't but okay.. moving on. It'll come in handy, truly when you jump into using a small SD monitor for framing or cobble together a "viewfinder" to use while feeding SDI or Component. You could have done it before, the stretch made framing weird.

There are some other odds and ends, of course the LCD flip function, etc, but that's what I can think of now.

Just wish they would have matched the 200A's image to an exact. =T

[gmoe]

Aahh.. I miss L.A. Nice and warm..

Kholi that footage looks quite nice to me even from vimeo. Don't be Krazy Kholi keep your camera.

By the way was your camera at 5.6? How about the Zeiss what f/stop? And Ultimate spinning at 99?

When I come out to L.A. in Nov. I got to do a proper test comparion with HMC150 and Ultimate and your rig? If you do keep the HPX that is..

-G

[Barry_Green]

Just wish they would have matched the 200A's image to an exact. =T
Are you certain about that though? I posted that low-light noise comparison and to my eye they do look exact. I'm wondering what you're seeing that's different?

[Kholi]

I'm very very certain at this point. I'm bettin' that if you grab a 200A and 170, throw them up on a screen or better yet an NLE you'll see it right off. I saw it the second I turned the camera on in the LCD.

If I can grab a 200A and prove it I will, maybe Panasonic will do something about that too. :D

[Barry_Green]

But the LCD is different between a 200A and a 170. The 170's LCD is way sharper than the 200A's is. Are you sure you're not just seeing the EVF DTL difference between the 170 and the 200A?

[Kholi]

Ultra positive. Just grab some footage from both and head to the nle. I would love to be wrong on this one but I'm pretty sure.

[Joseph Stunzi]

Can you guys make sure you post settings as well so we can compare the two cameras more accurately. Whoever grabs some side-by-side footage and what not.

[Barry_Green]

Just grab some footage from both and head to the nle.
+12dB comparison clip coming up in a few minutes after it uploads. Looks about the same to me. Link will be posted in the "midtone noise" thread.

I don't get it. I'm just not seeing the difference. In fact, I'd say that either of these look awfully good considering it's +12dB.

[Kholi]

Are they both from production model cameras? I'm gonna try to go to EVS this to put the production models side by side, no gain, just the same image and I'll record the footages.

[PaPa]

with this additional clean gain, i wonder what it will mean for adapter users and light.

[Kholi]

On the 200A I was pretty okay with 9dB. 170? No. Either way havnig 3 and 6 at your disposal means great things.

[Barry_Green]

Are they both from production model cameras?
Unfortunately no, the 200A was but the 170 I'm showing here was the pre-pro. I now have a production 170, but don't have a 200A to compare it against. I would, however, be rather shocked if the production version turned out to have a noisier image than the preproduction unit.

[Kholi]

If that's the case, will you help us get the clean image from the 200A back into the 170? LOL

Barry for President?

[Barry_Green]

But that's what I'm saying... as far as I know, there isn't any difference. I'm scratching my head over your posts to the point where I'm getting a bald spot... (okay, at least that's what I'm BLAMING my bald spot on...) :)

I'll try to recreate my 200A vs. 200 noise comparison on the grayscale chart with my production 170, hopefully that'll get us closer to an answer.

[Kholi]

You know me... I'm off kilter. But, I'm pretty sure on this one. If I could only find a 200A to do a direct comparison. EVS (I think) said I could come by and grab some footage but I don't have time at the moment.

Oh, by the way, I tried HD-SDI out 720 ProRes HQ 422... I spy resolution.

[PaPa]

ya, what's up with that? I checked out your stills kholi and the HD SDI out is SOOO much sharper. What gives? How does one record like this? I guess it's not on P2?

[Kholi]

ya, what's up with that? I checked out your stills kholi and the HD SDI out is SOOO much sharper. What gives? How does one record like this? I guess it's not on P2?

Definitely not to P2, sadly. I recorded that straight into a system with HD-SDI in capabilities, an AJA Card. That allows you to feed signals from different sources into your NLE (Final Cut Pro) for digitizing or capturing.

The system itself or the disks in the Mac Pro here aren't fast enough to capture more than three seconds of 8-Bit uncompressed 720 or 1080, either that or I don't have the proper settings. The cool thing is that ProRes looks extremely comparable to Uncompressed and the file size isn't that much larger than DVCproHD.

The DVCproHD file was 25mb
The ProRes HQ file was 85mb

There's also a unit called the XDR by Convergent Designs and, soon, the nanoFlash from the same Company. These two devices allow you to record straight out through your HD-SDI port to High Speed CF Cards to a Sony Codec that's supposed to be Full Raster MPEG4 4:2:2. Now that I've found the bit of resolution in 720 (testing 1080 today) I plan on trying out an XDR in the field to see if it's worth the extra resolution. I'm thinking it will be, especially when dealing with 35mm Adapters and the HPX170.

[Barry_Green]

that's supposed to be Full Raster MPEG4 4:2:2It's not MPEG-4, unfortunately, it's MPEG-2. Even so, at 100mbps MPEG-2 should look really good.

[Kholi]

Thanks for correctin' me (as usual). LoL. I couldn't remember if it was 4 or 2. Do you remember what the 160mbps was about? I thought that was the highest you could go? iFrame 160mbps or something-or-another 100mbps.

Either way, it'll be interesting to see.

[Barry_Green]

It was i-frame-only 160mbps 4:2:2 MPEG-2.

[Kholi]

Oh! That's right. i-Frame 160mbps and Long-Gop 100

[Chenopup]

.

Either way, it'll be interesting to see.

Will be interesting to see especially considering some and their hatred of the FS-100 - Aside from transcoding though, which Cineform does really well, I don't see any drawbacks to this unless there's a lack of metadata in the conversion. Would be nice to see Cineform step up and support DVCProHD a bit more but hey - if it will take HD-SDI, it's worth a shot -

see, Kholi - ANOTHER benny to the 170 ;)

[Kholi]

Yes, I'm finding that, despite the noise thing (yet to be proven/unconfirmed) there are still way too many things I like about the camera. =T Such a pinch.

[PaPa]

kholi, when you have that setup running, be sure to update us!

[Kholi]

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=151548 - More here, PaPa

[USLatin]

hey Kholi, the Vimeo it needs a password

thanks for the work!

[hvx200shooter]

sell your 170 man get the 200a back! thats what im doing..i miss it
What is it that you guys don't like about the 170? I've been reading about it and was really jealous of the on board spectroscopes and better LCD, what's missing that would make you want a 200 back?

[Barry_Green]

170 is better in nearly every way than the 200A. 200A still has the tape drive for standard-def recording, other than that the 170 is better.