HD100 vs. HVX on the Las Vegas Strip

SPZ said:
Sounds interesting! A duel like in the Wild West Movies! Where's the Enio Morricone music? :)

The definitive showdown!

Don't forget, each one should have copies of each others footage in the end!
Click to expand...

Yeah... but which camera is Clint Eastwood, and which is Lee Van Cleef?

Just saw the "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" last night. Loved thzt movie!
 
And how about a Sony guy also? JVC, Panasonic and Canon seem to have very good cowboys handling them... Isn't there an experienced and confident shooter with the Sony Z1 up for the Challenge?
 
stabwound said:
Yeah... but which camera is Clint Eastwood, and which is Lee Van Cleef?

Just saw the "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" last night. Loved thzt movie!
Click to expand...

I'll be rooting for both the Canon and the HVX to still be standing after the shootout, since they are both in my purchasing plans...
 
Last edited:
It's much easier to clean a Video camera, and there really isn't a problem with dust.
The CCD's in a videocamera are placed behind the color seperating prism. The surface you see when you remove the lens is the front of the prism covered with a IR filter.
Because there is a long distance between this surface and the CCD, any dust will be way out of focus.

In a D-slr there is no prism and the dust can settle on the IR filter that's mounted directly onto the CCD, making any dust in focus at even moderate exposures.
 
I'll bring and operate a Z1U for a comparison shootout. Is this going to happen at NAB?
As long as I can also bring the most bestest <$10K camera ever... :love4:

e
 
Last edited:
Anders Holck said:
In a D-slr there is no prism and the dust can settle on the IR filter that's mounted directly onto the CCD, making any dust in focus at even moderate exposures.
Click to expand...

Having myself cleaned well in excess of 1000 digital SLR's n the past 3 years, virtually any dust on the sensor filter surface will be present on images captured...

Whether or not we see the dust on the images is determined by the depth of field, exposure used and colour of image being captured....
 
Smart Alac said:
Having myself cleaned well in excess of 1000 digital SLR's n the past 3 years, virtually any dust on the sensor filter surface will be present on images captured...

Whether or not we see the dust on the images is determined by the depth of field, exposure used and colour of image being captured....
Click to expand...

Exactly, but at large apartures (1.4-4) you really have to look hard to see it, and it's most obvious in large smooth gradients, like a blue sky. They look more like a faint coffie stain than a particle.

At smaller apartures (5.6-22) they become solid black dots. Almost like the pixels are defect.

I clean my 5D using sensor swabs, and even after a through clean, I just have to swap lenses a few times, and a shot of a flat surface at F32 still shows dust. Still it's not a problem as I newer use apartures below 8.
 
Anders Holck said:
Exactly, but at large apartures (1.4-4) you really have to look hard to see it, and it's most obvious in large smooth gradients, like a blue sky.
Click to expand...

Didn't I just state that exact thing in my last post?

Curious, what sensor swabs are you using? I've seen many consumers buy these expensive swabs...

I'll give you a tip.. I've been cleaning them for 3 yrs now (i'm a tech by trade) and its more to do with the environment you clean them in and the motion technique you use, rather than the type of swab... You should be able to get it perfectly clean if done correctly.. But keeping it clean is another topic!
 
Sure you did, that's why I said 'exactly' :-)

I just appended that it's definitely invisible at the largest apartures.

My technique is to blow the chaimber fist, then use a swab with a PecPad and eclipse liquid. I get a totally clean sensor, at least the first few days.
 
Anders Holck said:
It's much easier to clean a Video camera, and there really isn't a problem with dust.
The CCD's in a videocamera are placed behind the color seperating prism. The surface you see when you remove the lens is the front of the prism covered with a IR filter.
Because there is a long distance between this surface and the CCD, any dust will be way out of focus.

In a D-slr there is no prism and the dust can settle on the IR filter that's mounted directly onto the CCD, making any dust in focus at even moderate exposures.
Click to expand...

Duh!!

The light splitting prism, ofcourse!!

I had this dumb notion that if you took off the lens off a Canon XL1, you'd see the sensor, like a dslr.

I'm having a Homer Simpson moment... except it's lasting for years.
 
A question Barry. You were comparing sharpness yet you ended up uping the detail on the HVX200 (+7) and lowering it on the HD100 (-6). In other words, it seems like you ended up using the HVX200 at it's sharpest and the HD100 at it's softest. Why not put them both on their highest detail settings to see which is really sharper?
 
DavidBeier said:
A question Barry. You were comparing sharpness yet you ended up uping the detail on the HVX200 (+7) and lowering it on the HD100 (-6). In other words, it seems like you ended up using the HVX200 at it's sharpest and the HD100 at it's softest. Why not put them both on their highest detail settings to see which is really sharper?
Click to expand...

because that is not actualy recorded detail, it is edge enhancement, which brings out the recorded detail but can introduce a halo or line around certain areas that looks artifical. Panasonic and JVC have different approaches to detail enhancement. Personally I like the HVX at 0 detil level and the JVC at "Min" but that may not be where they match best.
 
DavidBeier said:
A question Barry. You were comparing sharpness yet you ended up uping the detail on the HVX200 (+7) and lowering it on the HD100 (-6). In other words, it seems like you ended up using the HVX200 at it's sharpest and the HD100 at it's softest. Why not put them both on their highest detail settings to see which is really sharper?
Click to expand...
Evinsky pretty much answered it, but I'll expound further: I *matched* edge enhancement between the two. I set them at levels where they both exhibited equivalent edge enhancement.

You have to stretch the HVX all the way to +7 to get it to match the JVC at -6. At those settings they add about the same amount of artificial edge enhancement to the image. They are not equivalent at other settings. I could have gone a variety of ways; I could have put the HVX at -4 and the JVC at MIN and that would have matched 'em too, but I put up the question over on the DVInfo forum about where JVC shooters were setting their detail level, and the responses all pretty much came back between MIN and -6. So I picked one (-6), and set the HVX to match it.

The point was to make them equivalent.
 
Man, Barry, if you needed somebody else to hold that HD100U or HVX200 for ya, you could have called me!:)

But yeah, I know, I'm a bit late on this thread. Been moving to my new Las Vegas house during the past week. It's not the choosing what of my stuff from California to be moved to the new house that was hard, it was packing and unpacking it all that's been the literal backbreaker.

But anyway, I've probably said this already before, Barry, but I'll say it again. The Sirens of TI tests you do are so relevant to everything we do here with our cameras. For those of you that don't know, the Sirens show displays many, if not all, of the possible shooting conditions a filmmaker could face in the field, with exception to daylight filming, they changed the show years ago to a night-time-only thing. Good work, Barry!

Looking at the shots, the HVX200 is a hands down winner for me. But not for the same reason everyone else may be thinking. I don't care all that much about the resolution difference, heck, the Sanyo HD1 is nice enough for me in my book. I like the way the HVX200 handled the colors in comparison. Though I'm sure the HD100U can get close to that level as has been stated and depicted in this thread, but I like that you'll get those colors right out of the box with the HVX200. Also, the explosions were handled very nicely by the HVX200 in comparison as well.

Still, it's a tough buy. All of these HD(v) cameras are very nice and work for many people. I think this was the last test to sell the HVX200 to me, if not RED, then I certainly now know which camera I'll be reaching for instead.

In regards to the shootout, curently I can basically help anytime that week if you guys want. If you want, I can bring my GL1 and a couple of "Felis-rigs" for whatever reason as well.:)
 
Jack_Felis said:
I like that you'll get those colors right out of the box with the HVX200. Also, the explosions were handled very nicely by the HVX200 in comparison as well.:)
Click to expand...
Yes Jack. I think you have it. The Panasonic's color pallete is beautiful right out of the box.



@B.Green. Can you parse the MXF's to the same shots you posted for m2t's and then post them please?
 
Not any time soon, out of town for the next couple of days and then working a DV50 HVX shoot the rest of the week. After I get back I'll try to sort them out, but it's going to be a bigger pain in the patootie because I did those comparisons in Vegas/Raylight, which doesn't let me access the uncompressed 1280x1080 frames, so I'll have to figure out Edius or FCP or something else to do it. And things are getting busy.

I do, however, have Raylight uncompressed PNG's, which should probably suffice. I know I can post those. I made those at the same time as I did the original comparison, so those are already done, I just uploaded JPGs instead.
 
Hey Barry...

Thanks for the still, it looks good... real good.

I was once an engineer and the pixel numbers of the HVX freaked me out, but (luckily) I know the difference between numbers and feel.

(Actually I did research on HD in the 80's when it was the rest of the world doing battle with NHK's 1125 line system... took them 3 one inch VTR's to play a HD signal! But even back then the Europeans were talking about progressive scan and how even in SD, it could almost match the subjective res of 1125!... and if you double the display scan rate to 120Hz, the subjective res goes up even more)...

.... so anyhow... so you can see how interesting the subject has become for someone like me.

Can you point me to a few secs of moving pictures from the panasonic?
 
There are several native-codec clips, look for wolves.mov in the "wolves" thread, that'll be raw dvcpro-hd codec stuff. Lots of other clips as well, Cassidy Bisher posted a 720p-native clip.

I don't know if anyone's posted native-codec 1080p stuff or not, I can't remember any offhand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top