Very good HVX vs HD100 article

The more I think it the more I tend to get the HVX as my ticket to HD. I mean I wont get married to it and after spending a lot of time here I´m convinced that the HVX will do it for a while, that it´s no crap at all. Somebody here called it "the Kalashnikow for the independent filmmaker" OK. I simply would call it "funky"
But anyway: Do´nt blame it on the cam if your footage does´nt look nice. If I would be obliged to work with a HD100 I would´nt take it amiss.
 
Well put Ted! I wonder.... on the other JVC or Canon Forums, do people post articles and threads designed to downplay that paticular camera and boost the HVX? When I go to the JVC and canon boards, I don't see HVX slanted articles and discussions... so why does it go on here?

Maybe there should be an "on the fence" forum for this kind of pissing match and discussion.... maybe that's the place for an open and free exchange, because most of the people on the HVX forum either own the HVX or want to.... That's what drew me to this site. I made up my mind and wanted some opionions from like minded people and from the experts like Barry and Jared.

Kind of seems like a buddhist walking into a christian church and screaming about the
Buddah. I dig him.. there's a time and a place for that... but certainly won't be met with warm and open arms!

TedRR said:
I just don't get it. If people think the other cameras compare to the HVX, why are they hanging here?
I've spoke to several people who recently purchased the other $3 to 6,000.00 cameras and every one understood the Professional differences of their camera and the HVX. The more professional they are the more they regretted not getting the HVX.


I'm not trying to get a pissing match going here, but I waste more time reading peoples down speak about the HVX.


I did my homework; I've been doing professional video for 30 years now. I understand the technical elements of the HVX and I've found the HVX to be the absolute best option for any level of production bar none.

If you don't like it, don't buy it. It's really SIMPLE.
But for goodness sake, don't try and convince people here of something we know better.
Please chill out.
Click to expand...
 
Interesting analogy.....
I put my money where my mouth is (was).....
I rented the Sony, JVC & HVX before buying the HVX.
Just the thought of digitizing tape again was enough for me
not to get the HDV cameras. The Sony & JVC made nice pics but I have digitized tape for over 10 years now. The thought of all the incompability, pre-roll, dropped frames, drop-outs - I had enough of that with DV. I shudder when people bring in a load of tapes now!
I am dedicated full-time to my new business and welcome anyone with any HD camera - as long as you do the digitizing!!!
 
so.. Mike has done his due-dilligence. It's up to all of us to do that kind of real-world testing. I've shot with the JVC so next it will be the Canon...

I too like that concept of an IT workflow.. and now that I have my system down and working well.... the thought of tapes and digitizing gives me the cooties... yuck...

But again... it's all subjective and I can understand why others would want a physical medium to shoot in... Personally, I can't wait to do underwater videography so that whole tape condensation thing is bye bye... and 20 minutes of footage is really all I'd do at any time in the water anyway before a break.. so short record times aren't that big a deal for diving or wakeboarding/surfing footage.
 
After reading the article, I too thought the HVX went to 11. It's not to say the JVC isn't a 10, but the HVX just seemed to have a little more. Not more to go around saying how bad the JVC is, but just enough for me to know my decision on which camera to buy. The things that push it over the top are variable frame rates and P2. If the Panasonic was just another HDV camera, the JVC would win out with it's interchangable lenses.
 
tak1108 said:
After reading the article, I too thought the HVX went to 11. It's not to say the JVC isn't a 10, but the HVX just seemed to have a little more. Not more to go around saying how bad the JVC is, but just enough for me to know my decision on which camera to buy. The things that push it over the top are variable frame rates and P2. If the Panasonic was just another HDV camera, the JVC would win out with it's interchangable lenses.
Click to expand...

Funny how one mans trash is another mans treasure. Personally I'd rather not have to deal with P2....it is a drawback to me. Not that I like tape but the cost of P2 and the need for archival solutions and mostly...the very short record time make me not like it as much. It seriously hinders some of my ability to shoot how I like.

What if the HVX had been HDV but still had variable framerate? Would you still choose the HVX?

I am running intp issues where I am being asked to do longer form ceremonies and events in HD and I cannot really pull it off by myself with the HVX. I have always had 2 distinct sides to my business. The independent film enthusiast who loves the HVX and the commercial/event guy who has issues with the workflow. I used to use the DVX for both. With the HVX, panasonic has clearly made the HVX more easily adaptable for film style shoots and less friendly for event/long form realtime recording.

Unfortunately you have to feed the family and the reality is my camera is bound to get used significantly more for the latter.....which is where the income comes from.

Whic is why I have begun researching other HD cameras seriously so that I could take on these jobs.
 
If P2 is your biggest worry, why not get a firestore 100? You'll get about 150 min of footage on it and you can still avoid digitizing. Later they'll release the cineporter that will let you capture to the HD nativly and get even more space out of it.

Tapeless workflow is REALLY exciting for many of us. Just imagining never having to digitize a tape again. Never having to worry if my footage looks bad because the head is dirty. Never having to worry how much quality I'm losing by watching the footage before I capture. Never having to worry about the possibly of the head or VCR in the camera breaking down and rendering it a 6k paperweight. Pure digital sounds fantastic.
 
I am in this boat as to which camera to get, and I thought the article was great. The only thing that really is wanting me to go for the HVX is the Frame Rates. I like the P2 concept, but most people forget that the HD100 has the DR-HD100 Hard Drive. The whole tapeless workflow debate between the cameras really doesn't exist anymore. At NAB, Focus announced they are going to be adding a Quicktime Wrapper so FCP can edit the files on the HDD natively.
 
DavidBeier said:
If P2 is your biggest worry, why not get a firestore 100? You'll get about 150 min of footage on it and you can still avoid digitizing. Later they'll release the cineporter that will let you capture to the HD nativly and get even more space out of it.

Tapeless workflow is REALLY exciting for many of us. Just imagining never having to digitize a tape again. Never having to worry if my footage looks bad because the head is dirty. Never having to worry how much quality I'm losing by watching the footage before I capture. Never having to worry about the possibly of the head or VCR in the camera breaking down and rendering it a 6k paperweight. Pure digital sounds fantastic.
Click to expand...

First thing is money. I don;t have that much. Like many articles have said all of these cameras are very close in quality. If all one can afford is $5500 then the JVC is the sure bet.

Secondly I don;t trust a hard drive solutiion yet. I can honestly say I have had more hard drive failures in the 10 years of video than tape problems. I hate hard drives.

Either way. If P2 was less expensive and larger in capacity I would be all over it.

As it is, I have 2 P2 4GB cards and find myself frustrated at how much time I have to spend offloading and backing up when I should be being creative. I do "IT" as my fulltime job. I don't want more "IT" in my creative projects. I want....more creativeness!!!
 
I was waiting for the HVX since the NAB 2005 and after testing it two weeks ago next to a sony Z1 well... the HVX wasn't 5'000 euros better (with some p2 cards or a hard drive)! Ok the colors were much better but the noise was very strong in the shades, the focus ring was much to "long "if I compare it to a pro lens and we can't edit the variable frame rate with FCP here in Europe. So I started thinking of maybe looking into the other cams and happened to find this article that gave me answers.
For my next shoot in may I will use a Z1 or a Canon XLH1 because no hard drive is available here in Switzerland and I don't have a portable Mac to download the P2 cards. But is I find a Firestore before I will for sure rent the HVX because I still think it's the best 1/3 camera available BUT... only to rent!

Steven
http://www.prog-pics.com
 
P2store is a little miracle for one man run and gun shooting. I have also recorded a full 3 hour concert with the P2store and 3 cards without having to even dump to the laptop.

I second the fact that harddrives suck. I also think that the harddrive for the JVC, which we used, is rather clunky and big... Just like I think the one for the HVX is .. and again- SOLID STATE RULES....

P2 cards really aren't that expensive either... Remember how DV tapes once cost 25 bucks a piece?
 
icicle22 said:
Secondly I don;t trust a hard drive solutiion yet. I can honestly say I have had more hard drive failures in the 10 years of video than tape problems. I hate hard drives... I do "IT" as my fulltime job. I don't want more "IT" in my creative projects. I want....more creativeness!!!
Click to expand...

I'm with you icicle22! I have an IT background as well and do not trust the HD solutions either. It seems that people with an IT background have a different take on the whole HD thing than others who don't deal with or haven't dealt with HDs on a daily basis.

I'm setting up an HD editing station now with a level 3 RAID array. Would I trust that data on a single hard disk? Nope! I'd feel far more comfortable with 32GB P2 than with an FS-100, but that's just me.... speaking from an IT background.
 
NOW it's become a pissing match.

Okay guys, no need to move it this far. Both cameras are pretty much equal.

Let's leave it at that before one of the mods pops up and the other cameras forum disappears again.
 
DavidBeier said:
Never having to worry if my footage looks bad because the head is dirty. Never having to worry how much quality I'm losing by watching the footage before I capture. Never having to worry about the possibly of the head or VCR in the camera breaking down and rendering it a 6k paperweight. Pure digital sounds fantastic.
Click to expand...

Yes, but with every new format comes issues unique to that format. P2 has its quirks as well, many of which we've yet to see. Even simple Word Documents suffer from data corruption and I'm positive as time goes on, we'll see some people freaking out over corrupt video files on their P2 cards. And what happens if a P2 card fails on a big shoot? You can be instantly handicapped with no viable alternatives other than to bottleneck the production by using only one card. In addition to this, archiving (which is mentioned quite often in these forums) is a huge issue to me. I agree with icicle22 in that hard drives are a very unreliable archiving system. I too, have had many more hard drives fail me than tape.

Although I'm still buying an HVX for now, this fall I may switch to the JVC HD250. The idea of recording to a Cineporter WHILE archiving your raw footage on-the-fly by simultaneously recording to HDV tape sounds awesome. Add to that SDI out, 4:2:2, multiple frame rates, and interchangeable lenses... the HVX no longer wins "Best Indie Camera" in my book.
 
Last edited:
By and large he seemed to find both cameras far more equal than apart in terms of "quality", and this is what came over to me in the stills as well. The biggest and most noticeable difference he found between them was in ergonomics - with the HD100 being far superior handheld, and I have to say this is my feeling after handling them both.

Second to that was workflow, with P2 being either a blessing or curse, dependent upon ones type of shooting, again a fair point.

So why have these aspects - the ones where he did find differences between the cameras - been little mentioned here, whilst the 'quality' comparisons - where he found little difference - been heavily discussed?

In so far as the article, whilst he found little difference between HDV and DVCProHD, then again this is focussing on this elusive 'quality' factor. I'd suggest that where big differences DO exist between them is in other ways. DVCProHD is far more editable (being I frame only), whilst HDV is a far lower data rate.
 
KingsReign said:
I am in this boat as to which camera to get, and I thought the article was great. The only thing that really is wanting me to go for the HVX is the Frame Rates. I like the P2 concept, but most people forget that the HD100 has the DR-HD100 Hard Drive. The whole tapeless workflow debate between the cameras really doesn't exist anymore. At NAB, Focus announced they are going to be adding a Quicktime Wrapper so FCP can edit the files on the HDD natively.
Click to expand...

Actually, it's not really tapeless. From what I've seen from friends who use the HD100, the Hard Drive is just like using a firestore with a DVX100. You to have a tape in the deck and if you deck ends up breaking down, it won't record. You'll also still be stuck with the files in HDV codec with 4:2:0 color space and no pure frames.

Yes, but with every new format comes issues unique to that format. P2 has its quirks as well, many of which we've yet to see. Even simple Word Documents suffer from data corruption and I'm positive as time goes on, we'll see some people freaking out over corrupt video files on their P2 cards. And what happens if a P2 card fails on a big shoot? You can be instantly handicapped with no viable alternatives other than to bottleneck the production by using only one card. In addition to this, archiving (which is mentioned quite often in these forums) is a huge issue to me. I agree with icicle22 in that hard drives are a very unreliable archiving system. I too, have had many more hard drives fail me than tape.
Click to expand...

Part of the reason P2s are so incredibly expensive now is because they are so durable. People are shooting in the artic with them or with explosions going off near by and they still don't fail. I'm sure more heads have gotten dirty or broken down on the HD100 than P2 cards have failed on the HVX200 (since I've heard of none). As for archiving, one can simply use the P2 store and then burn the data on to DVDs.

If you want to shoot a LOT of material without dealing with P2s and don't trust hard drives then I understand going for the HD100 but I'm willing to take the HD risk.
 
No one still answered this question: Does the HVX200 need any kind of P2 card or Tape to be in to record to the firestore hard drive?

Also, who sells them by the way?
 
Last edited:
DavidBeier said:
Part of the reason P2s are so incredibly expensive now is because they are so durable. People are shooting in the artic with them or with explosions going off near by and they still don't fail. I'm sure more heads have gotten dirty or broken down on the HD100 than P2 cards have failed on the HVX200 (since I've heard of none). As for archiving, one can simply use the P2 store and then burn the data on to DVDs.

If you want to shoot a LOT of material without dealing with P2s and don't trust hard drives then I understand going for the HD100 but I'm willing to take the HD risk.
Click to expand...

That was the part I have some questionmarks. Shooting in the artic is more then a reliable system in low temperature, shooting in the Irak war (embedded in the military) is more than handling explosions or dust.

Sure P2 is more reliable, no moving parts. But another problem rises.

I did research for a documentary shooting in the mountains and with extreme climbers (low temperatures and dust and heavy movements, strong winds) and find out that weight and battery use are most important.

If you need batteries to unload the P2 cards and to keep a laptop and a removable hard drive running, you need to carry that weight and you need AC power. (generator, solar power)If you are in the military, power is no problem..., those tanks have plenty, and solders are carrying laptops, the IT infrastructure is there. (take a look at the embedded doc)

But in an isolated environment, without power and the need to carry the weight, tape has its advantage. Tape is easy in harsh environments, low in weight, you only need batteries for the camcorder (small light) and with heatpacks you keep the camcorder working. Its done already, long artic trips with a camcorder on tape. Minus 50 Celsius.

So ergonomics and non IT based working can privilege sometimes, in a specific process.
 
IMO , tape is on its way out and eventually will be used for mainly backup copies.

The firestore option for capturing footage with the HD100 is reasonable and can hold hours of footage.

Having said that, I'm really happy Panasonic is offering a solid state memory storage solution. This is where we need to take our next step to.
 
KingsReign said:
No one still answered this question: Does the HVX200 need any kind of P2 card or Tape to be in to record to the firestore hard drive?

Also, who sells them by the way?
Click to expand...

No you can record to the FS100 without a P2 Card in the camera. And the very same Panaosnic dealer that sells the HVX can sell you the FS100.

Best,

Jan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top