DVX200 versus SDX900

[DAVO KORNFLAKE]

HI, This is my first post. Hope this is not is stupid question.

Today I was offered the option of a sdx900. I had planned to wait for the dvx200 to shoot my first feature. Hopeful of film out/HD .

Noah ( I know you have used the sdx900 so that;s why I mention you) - anyone.. If you had the choice based on presumed dvx200 quality vs sdx900 which way would you go.

Factors I can think of:
1. SD vs HD;
2. ease of post- FCPro
3. type of camera ( physical profiles are quite different)
4. colour space same;
5. chips size probably different.

Thoughts anyone.

Thanks for your time.

[Jack_Felis]

What are you shooting?

[NoahK]

The only area where the HVX200 really beats the SDX is in shooting to HD resolution. And that's with 1/3" chips and fixed lens. I firmly believe the SDX uprezzed would give an HVX in native HD a serious run for its money.

Factor in the greater range of photographic creativity you can achieve with interchangeable lenses and it's an even tighter race. If you must deliver HD and can't afford VariCam the HVX is likely the simpler way to go. If you are in SD for now and want best image quality- rent the SDX.

I will personally own an HVX and use it for my personal projects. However when I get ready to do another feature it will be very hard for me to resist the SDX as it did me so right on Formosa.

Noah

[Mediacre]

I have to second Noah on that. The HVX will be an great camera for the money. but don't forget, it's still is a prosumer camera. Yeah, some are saying profesional, but 1/3" with a fixed lens is really on prosumer level. And please don't give me the "if you can make money ith it, it's professional" usual deal. You know what I mean. It's more of a high end prosumer.
As Noah says, resolution is the biggest advantage of the HVX. Besides resolution, I think the SDX900 wins hands down in everything else. I also heard it converts really nice to HD. When are you shooting your feature? The best thing would be to do a test, shooting in similar situations as you will for the film and have it trasnferred to film, HD or whatever is your end format. But I can almost see the SDX already winning. Bigger chips, better lens, better latitude, more dof control, better electronics, signal processing and dsp, better low light performance. Basically better everything. Only the resolution. But chances are in the end of the day, the other advantages would make up for it after upconverted.

If you would shoot now, but is considering delaying it to wait for the HVX, because you are not sure about the SDX, besides looking a the facts, just think, Panasonic will not shoot themselves in the foot. They won't make a 6k camera to outperform their 25k one.

[DAVO KORNFLAKE]

What are you shooting?

I am shooting a feature. I was waitinf for the HVx but yesterday a potential DOP suggested the sdx900. The more I looked at it the better it looked.

[DAVO KORNFLAKE]

Thanks for the help.

I have researched the hvx through to post for a feature but not the sdx900. If anything I would presume the sdx900 will be cheaper. Is that about right?

Is the old sdx900 forum still kicking Noah?

If I want more info on the sdx900 where do you suggest I go? All of a sudden I have a stack of questions to ask not relevant to the hvx200.

Like:

What additional lenses would people recommend?
It really looks more like a 'set up' kind of camera compared to the hvx200 turn it on and get on with it. Some of this feature will be road movie. For a 2nd camera could I consider the hvx?

thanks again

[Mr. Blonde]

I have researched the hvx through to post for a feature but not the sdx900. If anything I would presume the sdx900 will be cheaper. Is that about right?



The sdx is definitely not cheaper..retails for about $25,000 vs the HDX at $5995, don't forget, the HVX will have a bigger brother coming out soon, the HDX400 which will have the 2/3 inch ccd set n all.

[DAVO KORNFLAKE]

The sdx is definitely not cheaper..retails for about $25,000 vs the HDX at $5995, don't forget, the HVX will have a bigger brother coming out soon, the HDX400 which will have the 2/3 inch ccd set n all.

Sorry I was not clear enough. On a question of purchase HDX is defintely cheaper. The potential DOP for our feature would provide a SDX . So I was trying to do a comparison in Post costs of the 2 cameras and also just a usage in the field comparison. Before this DOP came on board I was gonna buy the HDX and shoot myself. So now I am trying to analyse the merits of the 2 cameras from shoot through to film out.

[Jan_Crittenden]

Davo,

Go over to www.cinematography.com, and under the Video Forums you will find an SDX900 home. There are a couple of owner operators over there.

And frankly the HVX will be a good second camera to the SDX. It will not be as good, on a comparison basis using DVCPRO50 to DVCPRO50. A 1/3" camera is not a 2/3" camera.

Best,

Jan

[Bokes]

The sdx is definitely not cheaper..retails for about $25,000 vs the HDX at $5995, don't forget, the HVX will have a bigger brother coming out soon, the HDX400 which will have the 2/3 inch ccd set n all.


We haven't even seen footage from the 200 and a now there's news of a 400 coming out soon?

Is this true?

[Mediacre]

The sdx is definitely not cheaper..retails for about $25,000 vs the HDX at $5995, don't forget, the HVX will have a bigger brother coming out soon, the HDX400 which will have the 2/3 inch ccd set n all.


Coming soon? The HVX itself is about 6 months away. That's already not soon. If they bring a 2/3" Version, I doubt they would announce it before NAB2006 and probably ship it fall 2006. That's the soonest I an see it comeing, maybe even later.
That's not soon for somebody who already has a project. Besides I wouldn't wait for a Vaporgear camera.

The HVX would sure be a good second camera for the SDX900. But if you waiting for the HVX anyways, I would just make a test and be sure. But as I said before, I think the SDX will kick the HVX's butt, whatever the HVX is in DVCPRO50 or DVCPRO-HD mode.

[David Jimerson]

Coming soon? The HVX itself is about 6 months away. That's already not soon. If they bring a 2/3" Version, I doubt they would announce it before NAB2006 and probably ship it fall 2006. That's the soonest I an see it comeing, maybe even later.
That's not soon for somebody who already has a project. Besides I wouldn't wait for a Vaporgear camera.


http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ModelDetail?displayTab=O&storeId=11201&catalogId=13051&itemId=87887&catGroupId=14616&modelNo=AJ-HDX400&surfModel=AJ-HDX400

However, to call it the HVX's "bigger brother" is misleading.

[Mediacre]

That's ann 1080i camera. It has nothing to do with the cine cameras family. It's also 42k, I might as well get a varicam. I thought he meant the camera eceryone is talking about which would close the gap between the varicam and HVX, which would need to be another cine style HD cam.

[Zig_Zigman]

I'll bet that SDX still puts out a more pleasing picture than the hvx. 2/3 chips are a world's diference from 1/3.

But if you can afford the $650 day rate on an SDX, I'd shoot super16mm.

[NoahK]

I differ on that. Shooting 16mm you're then looking at a very long and expensive route to finishing your project. With the SDX it's load footage and edit, done and image quality IMHO blows 16mm away.

[Mediacre]

What he said. :thumbup:

[Bokes]

o.k. I'm a bit late to the game- but how would you "uprez" SD footage to HD?
Is it similar to a 16mm film blow-up to 35?
and how is it done- on Avid or FCP?

[Wiyum]

I have to respectfully disagree with Mr. Kadner about 2/3" video vs Super16 (standard 16 maybe), especially when going to 35. 480 lines is your limit with SD, and I think that's the crucial difference. But neither is here nor there, really, because both will get you a perfectly acceptable image.

I'll be bold and say that you need to look at what options you can swing, post-production wise, and let your cinematographer pick. The camera is his tool, after all, and you'll get the most out of him when he's comfortable and happy. Sure, a good DP can use any camera effectively, but what's he most used to? Will using a small camcorder like the HVX lull him into complacency? I know I feel like that sometimes with the DVX, based on form factor alone. It isn't something to be proud of, but the tools can make a difference in how you think and work, and I know that, all things being equal, I'd rather shoot with an Aaton XTRprod than a DVX.

[Ralph Oshiro]

Today I was offered the option of a SDX900. I had planned to wait for the dvx200 to shoot my first feature. Hopeful of film out/HD.
That's an EXCELLENT question!

If I had the choice, I would PROBABLY shoot with the SDX900 at 1/48th shutter @ 24p in its native 480p SD resolution over the HVX200. The primary benefit is the 2/3" CCDs, plus the shallower depth-of-field you'll obtain with the larger CCDs. I asked an engineer friend at NAB essentially the same exact question--he recommended shooting 480p (e.g., an SDX900) over HDV, hands-down. But when compared with the forthcoming 100-mbit HVX200 signal, I'm not so sure the SDX would be the automatic winner (although it seems like it would be). A critical deciding factor may be that the SDX900 will prove to have significantly superior dynamic range over the HVX200. Also, the SDX900's chroma SNR (signal-to-noise ratio) and sensitivity may prove to be significantly better than with the HVX. Just as in digital still cameras, in addition to mere pixel counts, there are a lot of other factors which can affect overall picture quality and suitability-to-task for the application. It will be interesting to A/B the images from a standard-definition 2/3" SDX900 with a high-definition 1/3" 100-mbit HVX200 when the product actually launches. I'll be shooting my first SDX900-acquired short "film" soon, and I'm really excited to get the opportunity to put this much-talked-about camera through my own series of real world tests. (I'm probably going to buy an HVX200 later this year anyway, even though I have access to an SDX900).

[Mediacre]

In a perfect world, and perfectly controlled situation, I can see the HVX200 looking as good as the SDX. But filmmaking is never a perfect situation, specially "low budget", and neither is the world perfect. :grin:

[Party_Pooper]

why not the spx800 over the sdx900? it's the same camera minus the tape transport, no? plus about 7K cheaper, and you dont have to worry about the deck because of the p2 cards.

I was just thinking if you can get a good deal on an spx800 (say just over 20K) it might be worth it over the hdx200.

[Mediacre]

why not the spx800 over the sdx900? it's the same camera minus the tape transport, no? plus about 7K cheaper, and you dont have to worry about the deck because of the p2 cards.

I was just thinking if you can get a good deal on an spx800 (say just over 20K) it might be worth it over the hdx200.
Well, not really. The HVX is 6k. A SPX800 has a price list of around 19k, without a lens. That's over the double of a HVX and without a lens.

[DAVO KORNFLAKE]

If it comes to buying a camera then it will be a HVX. A lot of this is for cost but also they are different beasts. I have researched more since my first post and it really does look like the sdx900 will give the kind of vision I'd hope for. Still wondering if there are any hidden surprises in post vs the 2 cameras. Noah I saw yuo had a 20 day shoot. Did you split off your sound to DAT or did you use the camera?

[Party_Pooper]

Well, not really. The HVX is 6k. A SPX800 has a price list of around 19k, without a lens. That's over the double of a HVX and without a lens.

Thats true, I'm not saying they are in the same price range, I'm saying that instead of 26K you can get the spx800 at 19K, making the price difference much closer. additionally, you need not worry about the rental or buying of a 4K deck.

Instead buying an hvx200 and renting the sdx900 on occasion, why not just buy the spx800? a 20 day shoot at $600 a day runs 12K

[ddh]

Personally, I'm thinking of an HDX200, an andromeda reel-stream modification on the cam, a guerilla35 and a good set of lenses = about $15,000.

[Knock Out Films]

So is the consensus that the 900 would easily look as good as the 200, even with the possibility of film out?
Okay, to streach it further, The new JVC HDV vs the Pany 900. No contest?

As I mentioned in other posts, we have a film ready to go end of summer. The 200 will not be available. I don't want to hold off production. Considering the Varicam, which would be rock solid, but as I understand it has a huge learning curve. Lots of Varicam shoots I read about have both DOP and Tecchnician.

We have done some shooting with the Pany 900 with success. Again, what about film out from an 480p? Is this just about budget vs acceptability or do I dig in my heels for the Varicam. The 900 does look beautiful on NTSC.

Cheers,
Chris

[Rosestar]

If you are considering the Varicam and can afford it, that would be the way to go. Yes, it has a serious learning curve, but should not something a competent DP shouldn't be able to master. However, your question about having a DP and a technician concerns me. If you can only afford a one man camera crew I would not consider the Varicam. It is larger and set-up should be done by a ful-sized crew, i.e., DP/Operator (I assume), 1st AC and 2nd AC. There are additional expenses, more expensive tape, HD monitor rental, care and feeding, more expensive deck for digitizing, ect.

The 900 is a hella of a camera. Check out the articles on this site, has a good article about that.

If you have a good script, cast and tell a compelling story. The difference between the 900 and the HVX/ Varicam will not make or break it.

good luck

[caseyhayward]

I just shot a doc on the 900. It is a beautiful camera. I think that you should be content with it, especially if your DP is. I have also shot on the varicam. In my mind the varicam is not that much more difficult to pick up than the 900 but again it all depends on your DP and budget. If you save a little money using the 900 instead of the varicam you can then put that extra cash into lights or actors or some other area that will help your overall production value. My 2 cents.

[NoahK]

We used a DAT to record double-system. You could easily record into the camera but we wanted more flexibility because there was a lot of hand-held shots.

Noah

[DAVO KORNFLAKE]

Thanks for that Noah. I'm hoping to go for a single system. I read quite a bit on your workflow from your website and the old sdx900 forum. Arethere any other places I should be checking out on the sdx900. Obviously it is a bit"old" school at the moment with all the excitement around the hvx200 / 400...

Dave

[Zig_Zigman]

2/3 chips will beat the hell out of 1/3 chips everytime.

But if can rent an sdx900, you could probably rent super16mm and REALLY look good.

I'm not sure I'd use the sdx for any exterior wide-angles. Interior and close ups it does look very close to super16mm.

[Knock Out Films]

We will have mostly a full crew with tonnes of shooting and set-up experience, just not with the Varicam. Physically I don't see the Varicam as being much bigger than the 900. We always shoot with full gear - sticks, monitor, dollys & jibs, with DV or the 900. Again it's not so much the bodies as it is paying a high-end DOP and Tech that has experience with the Varicim.

I understand you get what you pay for, but the group I work with is an extremly talented and confident bunch. Having said that I hear a lot of concern about the various set-up options on the Varicam. I would probably rent from SIM in T.O. so maybe they can help me out for a day or so on instruction. Or maybe they know someone that can give us a primer. It will be a 3 to 4 week shoot so the difference between the Vari and the 900 starts to even out a little. 3 day weeks, 3 week months, etc

If we are talking thousands of $$ difference and I could easily live with 480p then maybe that's the way to go.

Sorry if my logic is going in circles. I'm sure everyone does this before seeing that single issue that bumps the decision one way.

Thanks for the feedback.

Cheers,
Chris

[Rosestar]

Knockout,
These decisions drive you crazy, don't they. If you can swing the Varicam, I'd go for it, if not the 900 is very good. Good luck.

Check out this article on posting with DVCPRO-HD. It really opened my eyes to some cool possiblities.

http://millimeter.com/e-newsletters/HD_Focus_4_26_05/

[Ralph Oshiro]

We used a DAT to record double-system. You could easily record into the camera but we wanted more flexibility because there was a lot of hand-held shots.
How did you get your SMPTE from your camera's TC-OUT to the ATR, or did you slave the camera from the ATR's SMPTE generator?. You used a wireless SMPTE transmitter/recever, right? Which brand, model? Did you use a SMPTE slate too? Those aren't necessary if your sending SMPTE to or from camera already, right?

Thanks.

[NoahK]

Haw- no idea as I'm not the sound guy. AFAIK they used a TC slate synced to the DAT deck with time of day timecode. All takes were manually synced in post off the slate. There was no correlation between cam and DAT for TC. We were moving too quickly and with multiple cameras. Worked out fine though more work in post for the editor to sync.

Noah

[Rocketeer]

Have you considered going with the 900 and a P+S technik adapter with a lens kit? Or would this just push you closer to running with a Varicam and HD ENG Zoom and Wide?

Or the 900 with the new Zeiss Digiprime Zoom 6-24mm on the front? Once again would probably push you up to the Varicam base rate.

To me the HVX200 is the first handycam that I would consider purchasing a P+S technik unit for. As the guys at NAB said "Ve vould be crazy not too!" (develop one that is)

[NoahK]

( The Varicam rents for less than a 900 already. 1,100 for the 900 body vs. $800 for the VariCam body. Plus Panavision lenses are $$$. If the point is to save money it's not going to be a 900.)

Whoops my bad- I thought a Sony F900 had creeped in here! The SDX900 rents for much less than the Varicam.

[thisiswells]

Interesting to note (not that I have ever used a single Panavision lens) are the new 2:39 anamorphic lenses announced recently for Super35mm (40% more image size than regular 35, but no anamorphic lenses available, instead you crop/matte Super35 for any type of widescreen.. mostly this format is used for commercials and television) This is a pretty interesting idea and there has been discussion about using these new lenses on a Panavision 900F. Thought it was sort of news worthy as this discussion has slid slightly into Sony/Panavision topics. Also, I thought it would be neat for anyone who likes to follow this kind of stuff. I know I do.

[Rocketeer]

The Varicam rents for less than a 900 already. 1,100 for the 900 body vs. $800 for the VariCam body. Plus Panavision lenses are $$$. If the point is to save money it's not going to be a 900.

Sorry, I meant the P+S or Zeiss with the Panasonic SDX900 not the Sony F900.
How does tha stack up as an option?

[NoahK]

I've found the P+S to be overkill with the SDX's already awesome lens support.

[thisiswells]

it's not so much the bodies as it is paying a high-end DOP and Tech that has experience with the Varicim.


I hear a lot of concern about the various set-up options on the Varicam.


Or maybe they know someone that can give us a primer.

VariCam is pretty easy to figure out. Pick up a Goodman's Guide to the VariCam or for that matter, also pick up a Goodman's Guide to the SDX900. A very talented guy created dozens of setup files for both cameras that mimic the look of specific film/processing/telecine cominations and it's incredibly simple to load in one of those looks and immediately have something that looks cool. You could also attend a Varicamp (www.hdexpo.net) and learn about the camera from the guy who created those setup files. I went to a Varicamp and it was a blast and I learned alot about the camera.. You could probably get very good results with using only the setup files but to really get professional level instruction on how to do everything else with the camera such as framerates and post workflow, head over to a Varicamp.

Hope this helps.

[Knock Out Films]

Thanks for all the info. On paper the Varicam rents for more than the sdx 900, but on a longer shoot I think I can get the prices down a bit on the Vari. I was looking into the Varicamp or I may try to do a short private lesson out of T.O. I found the Goodman's Guide info, and also the presets he recommends. I'm sure once we get in the thick of pre-production, we will get our heads around the Varicam, and in the end I may be happier that I went that way as apposed to trying to wait out the 200. The 2/3 chips and better glass will push the quality of image up several notches.

I'm general not a bleeding edge of technology kind of guy, but I am excited about the 200. In the indie world this is a major step up from DV. Just imagine hanging out a moving car getting a great shot, in HD no less. Quick setups, no tape or expensive decks to rent. Most of us already love our DVX's and it's production workflow. This camera (the 200) really allows us to keep that spirit but with a format very near full blown productions. As much as indie artists tell ourselves, "it's the art that will shine", not having to make excuses for DV will really take a load off.

Thanks for the input.

Cheers,
Chris