Walter Graff camera comparison review

Status
Not open for further replies.
Really interesting.

One thing that kind of depresses me is that there is not a single still where the HVX does not looks softer than the HD100.

Yeah, yeah, rez, sharpness and detail are not everything. Yawn. I still wish the HVX would be better at this.
 
Don't feel bad. this was depressing for me as well. I really really really want to get an hvx but stuff like this keeps showing up. Walt was trying to maintain his magnanimity but every friggen still was better on the hd. I try to comfort myself by repeating the mantra "but I want a tapeless workflow" and that doesn't even make sense anymore cause you can hook up a firestore to the hd and get the same tapeless workflow without all those goofy expensive p2 cards. someone please tell me I'm wrong so I can go ahead and get my hvx.
 
Geeez, Scrappy, I know what you're talking about. I've already bought some accessories for my upcoming HVX and still - I'm not convinced I'm doing the right thing.

One thing is right for sure - all cams are pretty close. I'd just like to get the one that is a tiiiiiiiiny bit better than the others :-)

My two favourite things about the HVX over the HD100 are: better form-factor for M2/steadicam/fig-rig operation. If you put an M2 with lenses in front of the HD100... oh, my god! Secondly I desperately try to convince myself that REAL HD means 1080(i). I'm afraid that is something what the marketing guys at Panasonic, Canon, Sony know as well. They sell us 1080 and know it is hardly better than 720... Sigh!
 
Last edited:
Yeah, it really is a matter of trade offs. I like the detail on the HD100, and the width of the HVX lens. I'm definately looking forward to putting the HVX on a merlin.

JanBee said:
If you put an M2 with lenses in front of the HD100... oh, my god!
Click to expand...

Would a HD100 give superior results to the HVX if both used an M2 (or G35)?
 
Depressing? Why? I thought in many ways the HVX came out on top. The images from the JVC tended to look OVERSHARPENED, very haloed... even where Graff discusses the "easily readable" blue letters in the grayscale, the ones from the JVC are blue with a white outline where the HVX example has natural blue. The JVC has the starnge problems with light streaking.

Sure, some of the JVC images look sharper. But, many of the HVX images look better - especially the night images. The JVC looks good, and is good, but I don't see anything in the article that would make me depressed about tyhe HVX... it looks great, too. And a tad more natural...
 
They are without question both wonderful cameras. I'm a dvx100a owner so I am partial towards the hvx and want to buy it cause of the frame rates, wide angle, etc. but getting to see the same pictures side by side, it's like, what am I going to believe, specs or my own eyes. the hd100's 720 still was better than the hvx's 1080. What's a poor loyal panasonic boy to do. what seems logical to me is, if the image quality is that close why would I bother with expensive p2 cards and hard drives for archiving when I can get a similar picture and save it on a $2 tape. Having said all that, I still want to get an hvx.
 
Would a HD100 give superior results to the HVX if both used an M2 (or G35)?
Click to expand...
Dunno! I have neither. I'd guess results would be as close together as everything else. My point was, that HANDLING an M2 with the HD100 could be a pain. Imagine the length of that combo! Wow. As long as we don't have an inexpensive solution that only uses a tiny relay lens - you have to go with the HD100's lens as a relay.

@Ullanta: I think Graeff is more than right with this: It really is a question of what you personally like. I do find the softness of the HVX a bit distracting (wtf: it drives me mad!) and would rather go with the crisper HD100 image. I don't think this is just a matter of detail setting. And I don't find the default details of the HD100 offensive in any way. But thaht's just my two cents.

@Scrappy: I had to laugh so hard reading you post, Scrappy. I feel so much the same, knowing all the drawbacks and still feeling attracted by this little HVX-bastard *ggg*.

Besides, the HD100 is €/$1500 less. I always add €/$1000 to the HVX because I WILL need 2x4GB cards. I don't want to be laughed at carrying a laptop on my back and try to hit the space button to start recording :-)
 
I thought the HVX images looked more organic and film-like compared to the HD100.

Like Stevet just mentioned about setting the HD100 detail to MIN, I hope I can acheive those softer images by doing this.
 
sigun said:
I thought the HVX images looked more organic and film-like compared to the HD100.

Like Stevet just mentioned about setting the HD100 detail to MIN, I hope I can acheive those softer images by doing this.
Click to expand...

I've read that assessment in the past, but not in reference to specific images in comparison. Can you point to anything specific in these images that makes one look more organic or film-like over the other? Is it just the soft focus or is it something else to which your are referring?
 
Well, I'd rather have as much detail as possible and soften in post, as opposed to not having the detail to start with.
 
Stevet said:
Well, I'd rather have as much detail as possible and soften in post, as opposed to not having the detail to start with
Click to expand...

Exactly. Again, for me "softness" hardly classifies an image as being filmic. Again, that's for ME.

Jan
 
what's the best method in post to soften the images?

a basic setting in an NLE?, or using Magic Bullet?
 
JanBee said:
Exactly. Again, for me "softness" hardly classifies an image as being filmic. Again, that's for ME.

Jan
Click to expand...


True.
If the plan is to transfer to film for projection, you won't need to worry about trying to make it soft. If anything, it may be to soft blown up.

If down rez to 480P DVD, this will also soften the image.

Of course, it depends what look you're trying to convey.
 
The HD100 is also the only one that lets you fully turn off the detail, which is very nice.

Pappas

sigun said:
I thought the HVX images looked more organic and film-like compared to the HD100.

Like Stevet just mentioned about setting the HD100 detail to MIN, I hope I can acheive those softer images by doing this.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top