From HVX200 to the EX1? [Archive] - DVXuser.com -- The online community for filmmaking

David_Tanner

02-02-2009, 07:15 AM

Hello, I realise the HVX vs EX is a popular topic but Id like to get a little more specific.
Me and a friend have been using a HVX200 for a while now and the more we continue to use it and the more HVX footage we view the more one thing haunts us. The noise levels.
Now I realise all camera's display a certain amount of grain or noise in their image but HVX's dances about in such prominent way that I find it highly unlikely that even the most 'techincal - side' ignorant auidence will be oblivious to it.

Now Ive been told the noise is less obvious when the blacks are pressed, crushed in post etc and for the most part this is true...in the blacks. Problem is noise is still all over the midtones.
With that I am also told that the HVX produces less noise when the subject is well lit. Which again is true, however what about the parts of the image that you want to be slightly darker to create contrast?
Do I have to evenly light my subjects and create a flat, boring image in order for it to be useable.

From what I have seen the EX1 not only peforms better in low light, in make less noise in low light. Hell it makes less noise in good light.
Even if it was total crap in low light and could barley see a thing it would still make less noise.
So Im looking into 'upgrading' to an EX1

Some of the cons mentioned when looking at the Ex1 are things such as the image looking more Video-ish and the rolling shutter artifacts being a problem.

Now, the image looking more like Video-ish; what are your thoughts on this?
From what I have seen the image the EX1 produces is less colorfull however this seems okay to me as the HVX seems somewhat too colorfull and I find the skintones always need desaturating a bit to make them more realistic.

It also looks a little too sharp to be film, I agree - surley this could be improved upon by turning down the softness or by using a soft lens filter?

See, I think when people say this they mean the camera, set to its default's, creates a less filimic looking image than the HVX but I see certain fine tuning of settings and post color correction only bringing it up on par with the HVX. Even the RED ONE camera's creators admit their cameras create an image that is made to be color corrected.

The Rolling shutter artifacts however are really bullying me into not buying this camera.

I need serious help here folks x

PerroneFord

02-02-2009, 07:37 AM

David,

This has been discussed to death.

ALL cams are noisy in poor light, even 35mm. Light your blacks at a level that eliminates noise, and light everything else accordingly.

Yes the EX1 is sharper. Yes the 1/2" sensors are better in low light. Yes, the stock settings make the video look "videoish". Yes, the EX1 has ranges of settings the HVX can't get near. Yes, you can set the softness to give you the blurrier look if you prefer. I rather do that in post, but that's me.

Yes, the rolling shutter effects are real, just like they are on the RED. Work inside the paramters and it's not an issue.

As for the "colorful" comment, that's just bunk. Either camera can put you well off scopes on every axis. The difference is that the EX1, will actually let you correct each axis in the menu and not just saturation.

Rent an EX1 or borrow one. There are tons uot there now. Shoot it side by side with the HVX and see what you get. I've done it, and I know what I saw.

ChristianScott

02-02-2009, 08:10 AM

And what did you end up settling with ?

David_Tanner

02-02-2009, 08:36 AM

Thanks for your comments PerroneFord; even if they did come across slightly obnoxious, they are needless to say, helpfull.

ALL cams are noisy in poor light, even 35mm. Light your blacks at a level that eliminates noise, and light everything else accordingly.

This may seem seem like an obvious approach that we may have overlooked but it is something that we always try to do. The HVX is so noisey that, in practice it means setting exposure for the midtones, rather than the highlights.
It means lighting our shadowish/darker areas and perhaps even midtones on the skin up by about 60% which doesn't really leave us much room for nice highlights and thus- creating a moody, contrasting image.

Yes renting a EX1 would be perfect, however we live in a location of the UK where I would have considerably higher chance of renting john lennon's oven mitts.

ChristianScott

02-02-2009, 08:39 AM

Talking about john lennons oven mits, that guy phoned me back and said theres more chance of us renting a Ex1 so i dunno dude.

Lighting blacks to eliminate noise just simply is not the most ideal method. Has anyone got any footage that looks more like film(as opposed to video) than the Hvx200, i have yet to see such footage. Iv seen great looking footage sharp looking stuff but nothing as close to film as the hvx,

David_Tanner

02-02-2009, 08:56 AM

I don't know what HVX footage you have seen Christian, but the Kerberos trailer -

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=sBoBUVbB5ic

..puts it on the same level as the HVX in my eyes.
As I said earlier, give or take some softening/diffusion filtering and color correction and in conjunction with a 35mm lens this would look just as 'filmic' as the HVX. The reality is, neither look like film.

My main concern was this http://dvxuser.com/jason/CMOS-CCD/

PerroneFord

02-02-2009, 09:07 AM

And what did you end up settling with ?

EX1, and I'd buy another tomorrow if I had the money.

ChristianScott

02-02-2009, 09:09 AM

Say for instance, that film the ghost hour or w/e that looked as close to film as you could get with any cam in this price range, if the noise was not as extreme as it was it would of been great looking footage,

as for that trailer, it looks better on youtube as apposed to there hi res version they have on there website, must be the compression. i havent really seen any rolling shutter issues with the ex1, can you post a link with the problem.

PerroneFord

02-02-2009, 09:13 AM

Apologies. It's just that I've seen this conversation devolve into nasty politics and closed threads so many times, I'm always wary when it comes up again.

The original HVX is very noisy, there's no two ways about it. The update is quite a bit better from what I've seen.

Unfortunately, no one is going to be able to tell you if the rolling shutter is going to be problematic in your shooting. You really do have to try it out and see. And I'm sorry if they seem to be rare in your area. There's just no way over the internet to tell you how it will work for you.

Most of my shots tend to be on the tripod, and occasionally on my FigRig, but I've not had rolling shutter issues. Other people have returned their cameras because it just wasn't feasible for them. Still others have had issues breaking the codec and have gone to off-board recording with a better codec.

I wish I could be of more help, and maybe there is someone in your area with an EX1 who could loan you one for a day.

-P

Thanks for your comments PerroneFord; even if they did come across slightly obnoxious, they are needless to say, helpfull.

This may seem seem like an obvious approach that we may have overlooked but it is something that we always try to do. The HVX is so noisey that, in practice it means setting exposure for the midtones, rather than the highlights.
It means lighting our shadowish/darker areas and perhaps even midtones on the skin up by about 60% which doesn't really leave us much room for nice highlights and thus- creating a moody, contrasting image.

Yes renting a EX1 would be perfect, however we live in a location of the UK where I would have considerably higher chance of renting john lennon's oven mitts.

Bokes

02-02-2009, 09:50 AM

quick two cents - sell the HVX and buy the EX1.
you can tweak it in post to look just like the HVX- only better.

David_Tanner

02-02-2009, 09:53 AM

Apologies. It's just that I've seen this conversation devolve into nasty politics and closed threads so many times, I'm always wary when it comes up again.

I understand, I dont expect any video camera it to look 'filmic' out of the box and was looking into specific pros and cons. Which is why I thought I deserved my own thread. Aside from the fact Im a straight up attention whore. :beer:

Others have had issues breaking the codec and have gone to off-board recording with a better codec.
This is really interesting, will have to look into it.

quick two cents - sell the HVX and buy the EX1.
you can tweak it in post to look just like the HVX- only better.

Okay, see that is kinda my logic at the moment - 'I can make it look like 'CINE -D' in post with a slight alteration to the color curves, easily. What I cant change is the amount of dancing noise!'

:dankk2: for the debate yall'

David_Tanner

02-02-2009, 10:14 AM

that trailer, it looks better on youtube as apposed to there hi res version they have on there website, must be the compression.

Thats why I said earlier, give or take some softening or diffusion. I think Sony set the default detail level too high on their camera's to please the HD punters. It looks just as the HVX would set to +7 detail level. Detail level usually means the level of artifical image enchancement and looks ugly. You can turn it down or use one of these http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ssx40e6Jrts

can you post a link with the problem.

I did earlier buddy. There is a video of its effects with flickering light if you look to the bottom of the page.

http://dvxuser.com/jason/CMOS-CCD/

ChristianScott

02-02-2009, 10:18 AM

I did read that shutter thing, but i have yet to read other users round here complaining about it, and on video hosting sites for that to be an issue to me.

I think maybe a little bit more research is nessersary however i think one thing is certain, we do need to sell the HVX.

Pascal Payant

02-02-2009, 11:20 AM

i rent the ex1 for my short film. i really liked it. i was wondering if i was going with panasonic or sony. i had the dvx100 and it'S a delight. i know sony was doing the same thing. low light , better resolution. more time on the card. my only problem that i found was it's freaking heavy with a letus35fe. the way the camera hold itself it's pure crap . after a while you find a touch to grab it in a confy way. that was my only problem. now i can make full blue ray DVD . the quality is very good. of course you have to light your shot to create a film look. i didn't see any different between both 24p. i like the sony. it's cheap to rent. here's some grab of my new short called Kalore.

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=160730

it was with the letus except the ballroom scene.

Bertholt4

02-02-2009, 12:04 PM

Don`t know, but in my eyes the Youtube-Kerberos trailer does in some shots look to me videoish! Something in the movements and especially the colors - I think there is better EX1 footage out there to show how filmic the EX1 can be. Maybe it`s the compression?

I would not step up from HVX to EX - not in 2009, because there are cameras hitting the market, which are a muh bigger step up. Just my 2Cents.

ChipG

02-02-2009, 01:09 PM

I'd wait until NAB before I buy anything.

Any rumors of a EX-1a coming out? An improved version.

PerroneFord

02-02-2009, 01:44 PM

I'd wait until NAB before I buy anything.

Any rumors of a EX-1a coming out? An improved version.

What would they improve? Codec isn't changing, glass isn't changing. I'm sure they are not redesigning the body. Can't think of anything else to change at the price point.

ChristianScott

02-02-2009, 02:39 PM

Don`t know, but in my eyes the Youtube-Kerberos trailer does in some shots look to me videoish! Something in the movements and especially the colors - I think there is better EX1 footage out there to show how filmic the EX1 can be. Maybe it`s the compression?

Which ex1 footage did you consider to be more filmic ?

anyway this is all kinda moot as it depends whos hands these cameras are in. you can always add noise to ex1 footage but you cant remove it =[

ChipG

02-02-2009, 02:49 PM

What would they improve? Codec isn't changing, glass isn't changing. I'm sure they are not redesigning the body. Can't think of anything else to change at the price point.

I heard something about a sensor upgrade that has less of a rolling shutter effect. Just rumors, will wait and see.

Sumfun

02-02-2009, 03:32 PM

I heard something about a sensor upgrade that has less of a rolling shutter effect. Just rumors, will wait and see.

That would be nice. Would be nice to get better IR rejection, too. Let's hope.

DCSensui

02-02-2009, 04:10 PM

Looks like video? Here are a bunch of "photos" which are actually frame grabs from EX1 footage. Some of you saw these before:

http://hawaiigoesfishing.com/images/festival_display/index.html

MitchLewis

02-02-2009, 05:45 PM

If you want the film look, why aren't you talking about buying a 35mm adaptor to go with it?

David_Tanner

02-03-2009, 02:25 AM

Thats the thing Mitch, we are - and so we wanna make sure we are happy with the camera first because its only gonna cause a loss in light. This will ultimately cause an already over noisey HVX image to contain yet even more noise.
The levels are so substancial already in good lighting conditions that spending our hard earned cash on an adapter just yet, is out of the question.

As for those saying wait?:huh:

Are you serious?

If I wait another few months there will be a better camera out there? maybe. So why dont I wait another year and there will be something even better than that?

Learning how to manipulate the camera you own will usually get you better results than just buying the next one. Obviously, Im contradicting myself here slightly but theres no real way of manipulating the noise level.

DCSensui, those frame grabs look alot like video actually lol. Didn't really sell it to me there im afraid.

Bertholt4, you can't make a statement like that and not back it up with a link or two :eek:

ChristianScott

02-03-2009, 03:06 AM

haha. I clicked the link and I went back to here to check I clicked the right thing they did indeed look just like video.

And yeah I asked for a link to back up his comment.

MitchLewis

02-03-2009, 12:01 PM

The only reason I would wait, is if you wanted to gamble that Canon (or another manufacture) releases a camera with a built-in 35mm adaptor. I predict there's a good chance of that happening. But when? Who knows. :)

Benjus

02-03-2009, 04:57 PM

quick two cents - sell the HVX and buy the EX1.
you can tweak it in post to look just like the HVX- only better.

Somebody knows some setting or picture profile to have the EX1 look in the hvx, or some link where someone speak about the topic.
Greetings

Stevet

02-03-2009, 05:15 PM

Somebody knows some setting or picture profile to have the EX1 look in the hvx, or some link where someone speak about the topic.
Greetings

That's simple,
Just crank the contrast and sharpening, and add noise. lol ;)

Bertholt4

02-03-2009, 05:25 PM

Sometimes ago I saw some gothic-festival-footage from the blank EX1 which looked very filmlike in my eyes. But can`t remember where...
The Colors in the Youtoubevid linked above looked too flat to me, maybe some simple cc would help.

DCSensui

02-03-2009, 05:29 PM

DCSensui, those frame grabs look alot like video actually lol. Didn't really sell it to me there im afraid.

Looks like video?

Then rent a RED for a test drive. DOF control and raw data that can be massaged in a myriad of ways. Might be a bit too crisp and detailed for your tastes, but it can always be softened up either in-camera or in post.

No light loss since there's no need for an adapter. You can use 35mm SLR lenses. And an amazingly efficient codec, recording more minutes per gigabyte than the P2 system. It also uses Compact Flash cards that cost a lot less than P2 or SxS cards.

It might be counterproductive to waste time and money trying to hack a system that wasn't intended for a particular purpose. The EX1 and EX3 are basically ENG gear.

I have my cameras set with the sharpening circuit turned off. The posted images are slightly sharpened by the web design software so if that's what's providing the impression of "video" then you should see the original footage.... not practical via the web.

Also, they're set up with the Cine 4 profile. Take note of the detail in highlights and shadows -- they're all there except for the brightest speculars. The HVX doesn't get that kind of dynamic range. I used that camera for more than a year and noticed the difference immediately.

While it's possible to experiment with a variety of rigs and tweaks with an ENG camera, and attempt to emulate the larger focal plane and tonal response of film, it might be more productive to start off with something of a known performance level and go onward from there. The RED system is designed for cinematography which is where you want to be.

Brentmeister

02-05-2009, 12:30 PM

hey...
i own 2 ex1s and 2 hvx200a camera. first and foremost...youre vision and composition will always be more important than the camera you choose... if you dont believe that, ask ed burns or robert rodriguez... so dont get too hung up on so much of this.
As one of the posters above says... as long as your realistic about your cams limitations and live within its parameters, you'll be happy with each of these cams.
Neither cam is perfect...but both are great.
The EX1 is a cam that we use on sveral shows where the cam is on stix and the set is well lit...it looks absolutely beautiful. When we take this cam into an area where it is physically moving and capturing moving objects, it definitely gets a little less beautiful... a little murky/muddy in the image detail. Also...i dont think this ex1 handles outdoor shooting very well... seems to blow out the highlights without any forgiveness. Also...handHolding the EX1 for any period of time is a brutal exercise... plan on getting a red rock shoulder mount or something similar if you plan on hand holding this rig. Cam has beautiful viewfinder.
The HVX200a... eats so much light its unreal. But if youre in a controlled environment, the cam can be lit to be gorgeous. I also think the native 24P recording of the HVX200a looks cleaner/sharper than the EX1s 24p settings. The HVX200 also has a horrible viewfinder. The ergonimics of the hvx200 are better. Easier to handhold if need be... also the hvx can more easily be interchanged into other shooting schemes... ie multicam shoot where other cams are DVX100s etc. The HVX can rock HD and SD, whiuch crazily enough...is still a huge asset for professional dps and crews.

so...theres my feeling in a nutshell. each cam has shortcomings, but each one will allow you to put your visions on screen in a way that will make you happy. the most important tool is free...your brain. use it properly and both these cams are amazing cash value. good luck...have fun.

go gunners!!!!
The

booth

02-05-2009, 02:09 PM

I can't say I agree with the majority of Brentmeisters findings about the EX1. I find the EX1 great under natural exterior light. I can't see how the HVX200a is cleaner or sharper than the EX1. I also find the EX1 fine for using off-sticks.

I actually purchased an EX1 whilst still owning a HVX200. So I had a period of time with which to evaluate the two side by side (I could have kept the HVX200 if I'd wished). Within about two weeks I realized I had no need for the HVX. With a lens adapter using ND's and shooting fully wide open. The HVX was sold as soon as possible.

I still maintain that those who can't create a decent filmic look using the EX1 + lens adapter aren't using them to the best of their ability. Just open the lenses up wide to soften the image. Instead of stopping down use ND's.

On a good display, well shot (which means well lit) HVX footage alongside well shot EX1 footage there's just no comparison. The EX1 just looks great. That said this is with lens adapters in mind. Though for landscapes and timelapse, I love the EX1 stock lens. I have some footage shot at 1fps of the sun setting and it looks fantastic in full HD. In comparison, if I shot a timelapse of the sun setting with my HVX (which I attempted once) it just looked muddy and unusable.

What I do agree with is that the LCD on the EX1 is simply amazing. I can nail focus in seconds when with the HVX even during takes I'd be more than a little worried if it was coming out okay.

The HVX is a good camera but just not as good as the EX1 in my opinion. That's also why it's a lot more expensive.

PerroneFord

02-05-2009, 02:19 PM

The HVX is a good camera but just not as good as the EX1 in my opinion. That's also why it's a lot more expensive.

It's only a lot more expensive if you already own p2 cards. Once you have to buy an hour's worth of media, the HVX and the EX1 are a wash. If you need 2 continuous hours, the HVX costs well more than the EX1.

ChristianScott

02-05-2009, 03:09 PM

PerroneFord

02-05-2009, 03:25 PM

I dont even know why people say that p2 is more expensive than sxs as it costs £540 for 16gb p2 card and 16gb sxs card £769.

how is it cheaper ? or do you mean in terms of how much time you get in comparrison ?

Notice I said to shoot an hour. Or two.

On the EX1 a 16GB card is an hour of 1080p. On the P2 it's 16 minutes. You need 4 to get an hour. And yes, I KNOW you get more space if you shoot 720p. They are both 1080p cameras and I want to shoot at the best resolution my camera can give. Heck I could shoot in SQ mode and save space on the EX1.

So lets do the B&H math.

HVX200A = $5195
4 16GB P2 cards = 4 * $789 = $3156
Grand total to shoot an hour $8351

Sony EX1 = $6099 (includes one 8GB card)
1 8GB card = $429
Grand total to shoot 1 hour = $6528

For good measure, let's say we add another 16GB card to the Sony.

That's $899. Grand total to shoot 90 minutes $7427.

This is with Sony media. If we do the SDHC cards it gets silly as the price per hour (including the adapter and card) is about $70.

So the gap if we include the extra 16GB card is $924. Nearly enough to go buy a 35mm adapter. Or enough to buy a couple spare batteries, a bag, and a filter or two.

That is why I say it's cheaper.

Oh by the way, I believe your quote for SxS is for the 32GB card, not the 16GB.

ChristianScott

02-05-2009, 03:41 PM

PerroneFord

02-05-2009, 04:26 PM

No my quote was from bentonvillemall.co.uk , i recently brought a 16gb p2 from there. decent price's.

But you can get an hour on the 8gb ?

Also what do you mean SDHC card ? can you use these with the ex1 ?

No we get an hour on a 16GB. But the camera holds two cards. So one 8GB comes free with the camera, so you just need another to get an hour's worth.

And yes we use SDHC cards in the EX series cams and have since nearly last summer. You must have been under a rock. It's all over every board that EX1/EX3 users frequent.

That place you got the SxS quote is charging INSANE prices for the cards. B&H is about the most expensive around in the states and it's $899 there. I've seen the 16GB card for $749. I barely pay attention now because I just load up on SDHC cards. I can shoot 8 hours for $350.

reem12

02-05-2009, 05:14 PM

Brentmeiseter, that was a perfect description of both cams. the ex1 seems to blow out the highlights in a way that is very unpleasant to the eye, but the 200a does eat its fair share of light.

DCSensui

02-06-2009, 03:48 AM

The EX1, as with any other camera, will blow highlights in an unpleasant way. So don't blow the highlights.

If you pay close attention to exposure -- as you should -- the highlights will hold AND you'll retain shadow detail as well.

That's the point I try to drive home when directing people to check out the frame grabs. I've been in situations where the subject is back lit, with sun glinting off the water behind them and I can still pull faces out of the shadows.

With a more than a quarter century shooting everything including 4x5 film, I find that capability impressive.

As for shooting in HD, my own personal opinion is that if you decide to shoot in HD, then go full HD. 1080 p 30. You're taking the time and effort to shoot a scene. Why shortchange yourself and go halfway?

ChipG

02-06-2009, 11:56 AM

Perrone,

The hvx comes with a 16 gig card, you'd need to purchase 3 not 4. If your savvy you can pick them up on eBay for $500 each.

ChipG

02-06-2009, 12:06 PM

ChipG

02-06-2009, 12:17 PM

Brentmeiseter, that was a perfect description of both cams. the ex1 seems to blow out the highlights in a way that is very unpleasant to the eye, but the 200a does eat its fair share of light.

I have both and tend to agree with Brentmeiseter. I've hardly used my ex-1 but enough to confirm what Brentmeiseter said. I bought it to lease to a friend who owns a production co. so after 12 months I'll own it for $600. I do shoot a lot of FAST action adventure reality stuff including tornado / storm chasing and the image isn't there if it's not locked down, we use very fast camera movements. Love the look of it on sticks or even slow pan's, it rocks! P2 sucks for what I do btw, it is a workflow nightmare but the payoff's are better for me and my situation.

PerroneFord

02-06-2009, 12:30 PM

Perrone,

The hvx comes with a 16 gig card, you'd need to purchase 3 not 4. If your savvy you can pick them up on eBay for $500 each.

The B&H link I referenced yesterday did NOT show an included card. This one does:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/558723-REG/Panasonic_AGHVX200A_AG_HVX200A_P2HD_Camcorder.html #includes

I am not talking about buying USED gear off Ebay. I am talking about buying factory hardware new.

ChipG

02-06-2009, 12:35 PM

It might not have showed it but they come with one. They have for a year and a half now.

I understand you are not talking about buying used gear off eBay which is why I made a point to use your math for aa new card and not the $500 for a used 16 gig card.

PerroneFord

02-06-2009, 12:39 PM

Using Perrone's math you could buy the hvx (that comes with 1 16 gig p2 card) add another 16 gig card for a total recording time of 34 minutes for $5984 which will allow you to shoot forever if you have a laptop to download. 16 gig card takes 8 min to download, shoot with one while downloading the other. It's not an ideal situation for everyone but it works if you can swing it.

... if you have a laptop to download.

By the same token, the EX1 which comes with a 8GB card (30 minutes) could be augmented with another HOUR of SDHC for another $70. And as long as you have a laptop and time, sure you could download it.

But why are we off on this tangent. The scenario I listed is about what ANY new shooter would expect with a hi-8, DV, HDV, or any other consumer or prosumer camera. A new camera, with NEW media, able to shoot at least an hour. DV tape was an hour, HDV is an hour, hi-8 was an hour, VHS was an hour (or 2). Where is this 30 minutes stuff coming in?

The fact is, the EX1 is cheaper to shoot *per hour* than the HVX. It's cheaper in the field, and it's cheaper at the NLE (no Raylight, no conversion software costs). It's even cheaper to archive the native files because it doen't require as much storage space per minute.

But whatever. I am sure someone can come with a few Ebay/"I only shoot 10 minutes" scenarios to show how shooting the HVX is cheaper.

ChipG

02-06-2009, 12:55 PM

34 minutes came in because that is the time for 2 16 gig cards, as I said, it is all you need to record forever IF you have a laptop to off load to and can swing it.

DCSensui

02-06-2009, 01:37 PM

At 1080p30, the DVCPro HD format is one minute per gigabyte.

At 1080p30, the XDCam EX format is three minutes per gigabyte.

In both situations the cards can be reused. So the long-term cost is archival storage for the original camera files. And in that case the HVX's P2 format costs three times more than the EX1's SxS format.

booth

02-06-2009, 06:35 PM

Brentmeiseter, that was a perfect description of both cams. the ex1 seems to blow out the highlights in a way that is very unpleasant to the eye, but the 200a does eat its fair share of light.

This isn't my experience of the HVX and EX1. The EX1 is more forgiving of blown out highlights. But as suggested, best not to blow highlights out at all if you can avoid it.

I suppose it depends where you look. You can find lots of bad footage out there of each camera. If you choose to look at the bad footage from the EX and the good from the HVX, the HVX will look a lot better.

David_Tanner

02-08-2009, 05:44 PM

Thanks for the comments everyone.

We decided to sell the HVX and its gone!
I think the most important thing is how it looks once you slap it into your editor. Everything else you just adjust to.
After minor adjustments you can get almost all these camera's looking the same, even Red. I find. Thats all thats important to me, not so much how it got there.

I will say though, the HVX has a serious noise issue. There is no way around it. I can see when its HVX footage a mile off because Im so used to its behavior. Its really bad, even in well lit peices. Unless the whole thing is evenly lit and bland.

:kali: The HVX is not all bad, but it is painfully overated. Its the Halo 3 of HD cameras.

PerroneFord

02-08-2009, 07:03 PM

At 1080p30, the DVCPro HD format is one minute per gigabyte.

At 1080p30, the XDCam EX format is three minutes per gigabyte.

If this were true then a 16GB card would only hold 48 minutes. My card says 58 minutes, so it's 3.6 minutes per gig. Maybe picky, but that extra 10 minutes could be important to some shooters.

lambchops99

02-10-2009, 04:58 AM

I've used the HVX and EX1 alot in alot of different situations....EX1 kills the HVX.

I would shoot 720p on the HVX because shooting 1080 wasn't worth twice the data rate...and even 720p was very very noisey.

The EX1 is extremely clean and sharp, is much more user friendly (high res LCD, peaking etc.) and I love using it with my brevis35 kit. Trying to pull 35mm d.o.f on the HVX lcd was ridiculous. On the EX1 with peaking it's 10x easier.

The EX1's footage can be pushed and pulled and zoomed in post and it won't get too noisey, on the HVX if you tried to pull anything out of the shadows it would look like noisey poo! Same with the highlights; on the HVX cine gammas highlights would go like sludgey white where as on the EX1 they roll off much nicer into pure white.

EX1 is the best under $10000 camera out there IMO.

DustBowl

02-10-2009, 09:41 AM

I have both and tend to agree with Brentmeiseter. I've hardly used my ex-1 but enough to confirm what Brentmeiseter said. I bought it to lease to a friend who owns a production co. so after 12 months I'll own it for $600. I do shoot a lot of FAST action adventure reality stuff including tornado / storm chasing and the image isn't there if it's not locked down, we use very fast camera movements. Love the look of it on sticks or even slow pan's, it rocks! P2 sucks for what I do btw, it is a workflow nightmare but the payoff's are better for me and my situation.

Why are there so few comments like this? I am having a hard time right now between the EX1 and HPX170. I own an HVX200 and am not happy with the noise, low light ability and lousy LCD. These are all issues that the HPX170 addresses (I know the 170 LCD is improved but not as good as the EX1). The only thing scaring me away from the EX1 is the dip in resolution when shooting motion. I shoot mostly docs but do have my fair share of movement in both subject and camera while gathering B-roll for the interviews. Sometimes the B-roll is slow, sometimes it is quick, depends on the content of the story.

One thing the HVX200 and 170 have is a solid image frame to frame. I can't imagine a shooter accepting images that dip in resolution in the middle of a shot. Everything I have read and looked at concerning the EX1 I love, other than the most important issue - long GOP. I know there are options like the Nanoflash but that is another $3500 + media. I would buy an EX1 today if I could use one and see for myself what the images look like under motion but live far away from rental houses and know of no one in my immediate area that owns one. I have to depend on web videos and forums for info.

I have also seen some footage from the 170 that looks really clean and nice. I guess what I am asking here is, are the dips in resolution worth the great image the EX1 puts out? How often do you see dips in res, all the time and you just live with it? Are the 170/200a a good enough improvement that it makes choosing them over an EX1 a closer race?

I can deal with sharpness, color, ergonomics, storage capacity, etc. A solid image is what is important.

PerroneFord

02-10-2009, 10:09 AM

I would buy an EX1 today if I could use one and see for myself what the images look like under motion but live far away from rental houses and know of no one in my immediate area that owns one. I have to depend on web videos and forums for info.

I need to shoot some tests with the EX1 in the next 2 weeks. What do you want? I can put some raw footage on my FTP server and let you download it.

I have also seen some footage from the 170 that looks really clean and nice. I guess what I am asking here is, are the dips in resolution worth the great image the EX1 puts out? How often do you see dips in res, all the time and you just live with it? Are the 170/200a a good enough improvement that it makes choosing them over an EX1 a closer race?

Yes, the HPX170 can certainly look great. HMC150 also. There are lots of solutions out there. Honestly, the EX1 with a Nanoflash comes out cheaper for me than the HPX170 with P2 cards since I would need at least 4 hours worth at 1080. It's all about needs and workflow. I'm not sure what you mean by "resolution dipping". The camera still records the same resolution.

The HPX170 and EX1 bring different things to the table, and frankly will likely suit different shooters. The EX1 is ALWAYS going to have CMOS issues, and the HPX is ALWAYS going to have less than full-res sensors.. That's just how it is. The SDI port allows both to walk around codec issues so the long GOP and the 1280x1080 just go away.

I can deal with sharpness, color, ergonomics, storage capacity, etc. A solid image is what is important.

Then buy a RED. Or a Viper, or SI2K, or an Arri 435. Because honestly, at this price point there is ALWAYS going to be compromises versus 35mm sensors. There are lens problems, codec compromises, ergonomic issues, latitude compromises, etc. If image is truly king, then move up to where you can get the image, and charge your cients accordingly.

My clients were very pleased with what I was giving them with the DVX and an on-camera shotgun mic. Now they have 1080p HD and 24bit audio. To them, I am "The Discovery Channel" downstairs. To someone trying to put together a feature, I'm the guy with a handycam. Both are very fair assessments.

Sumfun

02-10-2009, 10:46 AM

Honestly, the EX1 with a Nanoflash comes out cheaper for me than the HPX170 with P2 cards since I would need at least 4 hours worth at 1080.

HPX170 with Firestore is cheaper.

ChipG

02-10-2009, 11:01 AM

Why are there so few comments like this? I am having a hard time right now between the EX1 and HPX170. I own an HVX200 and am not happy with the noise, low light ability and lousy LCD. These are all issues that the HPX170 addresses (I know the 170 LCD is improved but not as good as the EX1). The only thing scaring me away from the EX1 is the dip in resolution when shooting motion. I shoot mostly docs but do have my fair share of movement in both subject and camera while gathering B-roll for the interviews. Sometimes the B-roll is slow, sometimes it is quick, depends on the content of the story.

One thing the HVX200 and 170 have is a solid image frame to frame. I can't imagine a shooter accepting images that dip in resolution in the middle of a shot. Everything I have read and looked at concerning the EX1 I love, other than the most important issue - long GOP. I know there are options like the Nanoflash but that is another $3500 + media. I would buy an EX1 today if I could use one and see for myself what the images look like under motion but live far away from rental houses and know of no one in my immediate area that owns one. I have to depend on web videos and forums for info.

I have also seen some footage from the 170 that looks really clean and nice. I guess what I am asking here is, are the dips in resolution worth the great image the EX1 puts out? How often do you see dips in res, all the time and you just live with it? Are the 170/200a a good enough improvement that it makes choosing them over an EX1 a closer race?

I can deal with sharpness, color, ergonomics, storage capacity, etc. A solid image is what is important.

Thanks DustBowl,

I'm for the most part netural now on both camera's one will always be better than the other for certain content / situations. Because I shoot 95% of my stuff outside where light is not an issue it's not worth it for me to upgrade to the 200a or 170, not much of an image difference when well lit outside and used hvx's can be bought now for $2,500 or less (no p2 card) the lcd does suck and autofocus performance isnt't very good. If I shot indoor under studio lights or low light I'd upgrade to the 200a or 170. Again, It's just my situation. BTW I use B. Press and not cine gamma.

What kind of docs will you be shooting?

DustBowl

02-10-2009, 11:15 AM

I need to shoot some tests with the EX1 in the next 2 weeks. What do you want? I can put some raw footage on my FTP server and let you download it.

Sounds great. You may already have some footage as well. I'd like to see anything that could be a challenge to the compression. Fast moving cars, aircraft, whip pans/tilts of the camera, leaves on trees blowing in high wind, etc. PM me a link to your server.

Yes, the HPX170 can certainly look great. HMC150 also. There are lots of solutions out there. Honestly, the EX1 with a Nanoflash comes out cheaper for me than the HPX170 with P2 cards since I would need at least 4 hours worth at 1080.

I would never need that kind of capacity all at once. Two 16GB P2 cards and an external harddrive have been all I ever need. Anything special I would just rent P2s.

I'm not sure what you mean by "resolution dipping". The camera still records the same resolution.

What I mean by dipping is when the codec can't handle high motion and the image shows softness, blockiness, etc.

Then buy a RED. Or a Viper, or SI2K, or an Arri 435.

Way too much horsepower for my needs.

My clients were very pleased with what I was giving them with the DVX and an on-camera shotgun mic. Now they have 1080p HD and 24bit audio. To them, I am "The Discovery Channel" downstairs. To someone trying to put together a feature, I'm the guy with a handycam. Both are very fair assessments.

Agreed. I made a lot of money with my DVX100a. In fact, most of my clients only need SD at this point.