FX1 HDV Converted to SD beats XL2's Image Quality

[Guest]

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=1e624276f78850aec9ffe255c30d267f& threadid=35482

I don't know if anyone remembers Robin Davies-Rollinson. He was one of the first people to test XL2 . He did it for some British publication. He was very impressed. Now he's buying FX1, which is better than XL2 even for SD work, not to mention the superb HD quality.

The only thing he did not like is FX1's low light performance, but this guy is a pro, so he must be comparing it to 2/3" cameras. From what I read, the FX1 low light performance is better than that of XL2.


This is what Robin says: I shot some footage at the same location with both cameras, and I had to admit to myself that the FX1 HDV material downconverted in camera to DV (Firewire into a Canon) looked better that the straight Canon DV. Note that I was shooting in 16:9, since that is the only format I really need since I work in the broadcast sector.

[Shaw]

Yeah but no progressive ::)

And I'm not a fan of the chroma sampling either.... Too many problems for me.

[ckarcher]

I too have done extensive testing against other DV cameras and fullsize camera rigs. My FX1 is closer to downconverted footage from a Varicam. (albeit, not 24P) but the images are stunning!

here's a few D/C samples from a recent shoot.

http://www.sonyhdvinfo.com/showthread.php?p=3777#post3777

[Shaw]

I don't know man. You may be right, it's hard to tell from grabs. I don't think those looked better than the XL2 though... I was just looking at some grabs from the XL2 right before opening those.

[hvpz]

ckarcher,

Thanks for sharing your experiences but...
I don't want to play the "rabat joie" or the devil's lawyer, but I looked at your images and I'm not convinced that they are superior to a dvx or a xl2.

Of course, there is just few grabs and I never seen the result of downconverted footage from varicam.
May be, it could be interested that you post a small clip.

Thanks in advance.

[ckarcher]

I realized that FCP was not saving highres stills. I've posted some additional still grabs from (uncorrected) still frames at the original link listed above.

[BLUESPIDER]

They looked a little soft. It couldn't be from the down convert. It should look cleaner. But the girl was cute! ;)

[Hayden_Rivers]

I expect to see something quite amazing coming out of the HDV format, but there are a lot of kinks to workout in the cameras and editing systems. If I had a film right now that I was working on and it was going to be transferred to film or even down-sampled to fit onto a DVD, I'd be giving serious consideration to the FX1 at this point.

Still, I look forward to Panasonic, Canon, and JVC's HDV offering or competing products in the future.

[TigerScent]

...yes, I agree Hayden, the FX! does seem to be the best overall solution at the moment for low-budget pro film work, however...it would be prudent to wait a bit, to see what the others will come up with, however, one can only wait so long, while maintaining an acceptable and 'expected' standard...