HVX VS SDX900 w/ P+S Technic

Status
Not open for further replies.
sponester

sponester

Active member
Okay, Here is my delema.

I have a shoot coming up for a short film. We have access to an HVX and SDX900 for free. If we could out fit both with P+S technic 35mm adapter, matte box, rods, follow focus, etc....(same exact rental package) which one would you choose and why.

I would be shooting the HVX in 720pn mode

This Question is in regards to the cameras, not what adapter, primes, mattebox, followfocus, monitors, etc. Just the Cameras Mano e Mano with P+S technic.

If you have worked with these cameras Please give me advantages and disadvantages of each.

My feelings are:

SDX900
2/3 inch chip.
10bit sample rate
lower compression
straight to chip through adapter, not through lens then adapter, then to chip

HVX
more resolution
No tape stock
Immediate viewing on laptop

Our post workflow would be the same for both.
Master to HDcam and then color correct.

Please give me your insight, into which you would shoot with a 35mm adapter and why.

Also please enlighten me into any thing I am missing in the advantages of each.
I'm not the one making the decision. I need to convince the producers which is the better choice. I own a HVX200 and want to shoot the best thing possible. I have shot on the SDX900 many times, but never shot on either one with the adapter.

My goal is to make the best with what I have available.

Please answer ASAP, they will be making their decision within a few days.
 
Last edited:
From my experience so far there is only one reason to shoot the SDX in this situation, it is cleaner. If noise is your #1 concern the the 2/3" chip block is definately cleaner, but other than that the HVX is superior in every other important IQ area.
 
hvx200 is 8bit
SDX 10 bit

that is 256 shades of grey compared to 1028 shades of grey.


When shooting a lamp you can see the banding much easier on the hvx then the SDX
 
evinsky said:
From my experience so far there is only one reason to shoot the SDX in this situation, it is cleaner. If noise is your #1 concern the the 2/3" chip block is definately cleaner, but other than that the HVX is superior in every other important IQ area.
Click to expand...

Could you tell us why you think the HVX is superior in "every other important IQ area" I dont see it.
 
Bigger chips, superior glass, and the all important DOF for a narrative project... uprez that with a Kona 2.... I don't see it either Rex.

Tim
 
I see the resolution as a big problem.

When uprez SD to HD it softens quite a bit. The HVX in my opinion, although a little soft, looks better than up-rezzed SDX900. I have seen both.

I mean if you want it to look like a soft Robert Redford movie than by all means...use the SDX. But if you want HD--Use HD.
 
Without a doubt I would use the SDX900. Having a 2/3" chip makes a huge difference. Combine that with the P&S adapter and you get the best of both worlds. The 2/3" chip can handle/compensate for the 2 stop light loss you will get with the adapter. Just light your scenes a bit brighter. The SDX900 is native 16:9, 24P and is just a better camera in my eyes. You will have to buy a fair amount of tape stock though. But this decision is a no brainer.
 
sponester said:
straight to chip through adapter, not through lens then adapter, then to chip
Click to expand...
Not true, there must always be a lens between the chips and the adapter. On a removable-lens camera like the SDX (or XL2 or JVC HD100 or whatever) they add a special-purpose relay lens in place of the camera's normal lens. On a fixed-lens camera (like the HVX etc) they use the camera's normal lens for that purpose. But there must always be a lens.
 
sponester said:
hvx200 is 8bit
SDX 10 bit

that is 256 shades of grey compared to 1028 shades of grey.


When shooting a lamp you can see the banding much easier on the hvx then the SDX
Click to expand...
Again, not true.

The HVX's DSP is 14-bit.

The recording codec is 8 bit, yes, but that's on both cameras. Both cameras use the identical same DVCPRO50 mode, and DVCPRO50 is 8-bit.
 
sponester said:
hvx200 is 8bit
SDX 10 bit
that is 256 shades of grey compared to 1028 shades of grey.
When shooting a lamp you can see the banding much easier on the hvx then the SDX
Click to expand...

I have seen well photographed and CCd footage from both the HVX and SDX projected back to back on a 30' screen using a Christie 2k DLP cinema projector. There is no doubt that the HVX both resolves more and produces a more "Film Like" image in my opinion. There is a DOF diffrence between 2/3 and 1/3 but the AD converter in the HVX is 14bit and both codecs are 8bit so where are you getting 10bit? As far as the bulb, I have seen no banding in any properly exposed HVX footage.

Honestly, the SDX is a superior DVC-Pro50 SD camera, and only by a small margin, but it is not HD and will not compete with the HVX in an upconvert. In most shoting situations it's almost impossible to pick out HVX footage from Varicam footage.
They are that close!
 
Evinsky,

So what camera would you use? You get to pick either one with the same 35mm adapter set-up. Is there going to be shallower depth of field from the SDX than the HVX even if there are 35mm lenses on both.

Do you think there is a better adapter out there than the P+S one. Money is not an issue for renting the adapter.

Also, has anyone used the P+S technic on the HVX or SDX. Is there anything I need to be aware of when I get my rental package.
 
sponester said:
Evinsky,
So what camera would you use? You get to pick either one with the same 35mm adapter set-up. Is there going to be shallower depth of field from the SDX than the HVX even if there are 35mm lenses on both.
Click to expand...

I would use the HVX because it's real HD and P2 is a much better system than tape.
The 35mm adapter DOF and FOV (Field of view) will be the same on either camera.

sponester said:
Do you think there is a better adapter out there than the P+S one. Money is not an issue for renting the adapter.
Click to expand...

I've heard very good things about the current Redrock M2, personally I have never used one of these 35mm DOF adapters. I've always achieved my DOF shots in camera using force perspective, the long zoom and being creative.

sponester said:
Also, has anyone used the P+S technic on the HVX or SDX. Is there anything I need to be aware of when I get my rental package.
Click to expand...

Can't help you there.

sponester said:
what does 14bit A/D conversion and 19bit internal processing really mean.

What is it converting from.

Panasonics websit says that the sdx is 12bit dsp with no A/D conversion.

I apologize about the 8bit vx 10bit thing. I had some wrong info.
Click to expand...

Not a problem, what it means is there is actually more signal processing power in the HVX than the SDX. That makes sense since the HVX is a true HD camera. The SDX certainly has an A/D converter, all digital cameras do. But it dosen't need to handle the same data rate as the HVX does. What really makes the SDX good is that 16:9 2/3" chip block. But it will never record more than 480 vertical lines of resolution. No matter what, that's the limit of DVC-Pro 50 and DV.

As far as what it's converting from, well the HVX has three 960x540 pixel CCDs that use horizontal and vertical pixelshift to achieve a theoretical signal resolution of 1536x864 (Asuming a 30% bump per pixelshift direction). That is sampled off the chip by the 14bit a/d at 1920x1080 60p. From there the 19bit DSP either cross or down converts the image to whatever flavor of HD or SD you have chosen to record.

So you can imagine why the HVX has such an advantage here. It is starting with and can deliver a much greater volume of useable information than the SDX.

Please don't misunderstand me, I think the SDX is an amazing camera and I have personally shot on them on many occasions, but times change and the HVX is an evolutionary step beyond the SDX, with the SDX's larger chip block and lenses being it's only remaining advantage. Why do you think Pany just droped the price by $10k?
 
the sdx900 is a wonderful camera the 2/3" chip size will allow your cinematography to shine...

the best cinema is about what is out of focus often.

the 1/3 inch chip cams all tend to look too much in focus, foreground and background.
at the end if you upres to HD from the sdx900 you'll be happy....

all that dubs and transfers are a pain though

nice choice you have.
 
What about the PAL-version of the SDX900? With theoretically 575 lines of resolution it comes quite close to the real-world-resolution of the HVX. The only problem ist it lacks 24p - but 25p should work great, too.
 
Again even 525 lines is not HD. The HVX is, there is a visable diffrence in real world shooting (Not so much in charts). The HVX is able to resolve around 675 to 700 lines in 720 mode, maybe even 750-775 in 1080 mode. On a dvd the SDX may look a tad better because of the better DR and cleaner image but for projection I'd still choose real HD.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top