HVX200 To good for me?

K

kezza

Active member
Hey all.
Im A student with a little money saved up.
I recently sold my HDR-FX1 and was thinking about getting the HDR-A1p Cam, just because i wanted a smaller camera.
But more and more i read about this HVX200 camera......I just won't one...
But the question is i shoot surf/snow films for fun, more like a hobbie instead of something serious.
Would it be a complete waste of money for me to purchase the HVX200?
I know its big like the FX1... but i think this camera is the big deal.
And i rate myself a 5/10 when it comes to HD camera's.


What do u reakon?

Thanks,

Mitch, Sydney Australia.
 
HDV is probably the way to go since being out snowboardin you wont easily be able to dump the P2 cards, but the HVX is better than them all :)
 
Cynic821 said:
HDV is probably the way to go since being out snowboardin you wont easily be able to dump the P2 cards, but the HVX is better than them all :)
Click to expand...
Oh ok.
How big is this camera compared to the sony FX1?
 
Never used an FX1 in person, so cant be sure, but its a pretty big beast.

The HVX does not shoot any HD at all to Tapes, only to P2 cards. So looking at 500 bucks for a 4gb p2 card which at 720pn mode can get you 8 minutes max at a time. 8 gb cards are around 1100-1200 for max of 16 minutes. About 1 gig per minute in 1080 mode.
 
Don't you get 10 minutes of 720PN on a 4Gb card, and 20 minutes on an 8Gb?

If you're on the beach and in the snow, the HVX is supposed to be really rugged when recording to P2 cards, since they're solid state. Don't go tossing it around though. I would say for what you're doing, an HDV camera is the way to go. Then again, the overcranking features of the HVX might be perfect for your needs...
 
Ummmm.
So this camera doesn't record HD to mini DV tapes or HDV tapes?
HD Record only to P2?
 
Yeah, HD only to P2 cards. But with the variable framerates, think how awesome those films will look at 60fps!

Granted two 4Gig P2 cards will only give you 8 minutes of filming at 60fps. But it is soooo worth it.

But, it is allot of money to shell out. Only you can really decide if the HVX is for you.

If possible try and find someone who has one that you can demo and see if it's the one.
 
I know many will argue this point, but I recommend the HVX for pro's only.
Pro defined as Filmmaker with a budget, or working professional.

Too many people jumped and bought this camera not realizing the additional cost to view HD in the field, in the edit and in storage and backup needs.

It's a great camera, but unless you are able to recoup 10-12K jump into real HD relatively quickly,
take a look at renting or buying something else.
 
I have to agree with esperman. It's like the boat my company just purchased to shoot in Louisiana swamps with. There was the boat price, fine. Then we had to add money for a cover, anchor, radio, GPS/Sounder, life jackets, extra kleets, water tight equipment boxes, etc. So it came out to be a lot more than the price of the boat for it to be functional.

After that, we had crew kick and bang stuff into the trailer lights, so we had to buy new ones and change them out. More money, more money, more money. Not to mention how much it costs these days to fill up a 40 gallon tank for every shoot.

The HVX200, as much as I love it, is NOT a camera to be used straight out of the box. There's a lot of extra stuff you need to make it viable. But if you have the budget, it's a very worth while investment.

For hobbiests, I'd recommend an HDV camera or the DVX100b.
 
If you have the money why not buy the HVX?
I know people who bought the HVX just to shoot for fun. They're certainly not pros at all.
That's like saying you should only buy a Ferrari if you're a professional race car driver.
 
There's always added expense no matter what camera you buy. Oh, I need a matte box, or a remote ff, or a fluid head tripod, audio and on and on. Believe me amex is about to propose marriage. In the end if you do the research it is pretty simple to figure out what the additional cost will be (and there are unique ones with the HVX) but if within your budget, go for it.
 
Again, I said if it's in your budget, get it! If not, go with DVX or some HDV solution. Simple as that.

Another point is, no matter what tools you have, the end product depends on your abilities, creativity, and skills as a film maker or videographer. A master carver can make a little duck out of a stick and a pocket knife. In the same situation, all I can make is a big mess of spliters, most of which would be in my fingers...
 
Just wait to see what Panasonic has coming up next with the AVCHD codec . There may be a smaller camera coming up for about half the cost of the HVX200 with similar features (24p, etc.) For what I heard the camera would record on SD cards which are less expensive and readily available. The camera may be announced as early as next month.
 
joeher133 said:
Just wait to see what Panasonic has coming up next with the AVCHD codec . There may be a smaller camera coming up for about half the cost of the HVX200 with similar features (24p, etc.) For what I heard the camera would record on SD cards which are less expensive and readily available. The camera may be announced as early as next month.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I want an HVX200, I also want to wait for a Canon XH A1. At this point in time, though, I can afford to wait to see what the announcements hold in the next month or so.

Do some testing for yourself. Not saying that the opinions here aren't good. But, you'll find out what you need and what you don't.
 
Kholi said:
Agreed. I want an HVX200, I also want to wait for a Canon XH A1. At this point in time, though, I can afford to wait to see what the announcements hold in the next month or so.

Do some testing for yourself. Not saying that the opinions here aren't good. But, you'll find out what you need and what you don't.
Click to expand...

Very good point.
Well money is a issue.... well i think it is to most people.
But i would rather spend a extra 2G if in the end i don't have to up grade... well anytime soon....i hope :)
But size is a big part to... cause i want to put it in the back pack and off i go.

Have we got any info on this new panasonic????

when will we hear about it.?


Thanks guys for your help keep ya comments coming.

Mitch
 
The HVX200 is about the same size and shape as the FX1 but a bit heavier. It produces a more filmic image but is worse in low light and requires expensive P2 cards for HD.
 
Bear in mind that the AVCHD codec is an MPEG-2 Long GOP based codec. That means more hastle ingesting and editing. I have MPEG-2 as an aquisition medium. It was originally developed as a distribution medium, which it does very well. And we've all been talking about how cool DVCPRO-HD is cause it's all I frames, not GOP based. So, the AVCHD codec to me is a step backwards, or just a conusmer format.
 
BenB said:
Bear in mind that the AVCHD codec is an MPEG-2 Long GOP based codec. That means more hastle ingesting and editing. I have MPEG-2 as an aquisition medium. It was originally developed as a distribution medium, which it does very well.
Click to expand...

AVC HD is MPEG-4 Long GOP 4:2:0, which has newer algorithms that should--in theory--offer even better compression efficiency than HDV. But not all HDV is created equal. From the Texas Shootout it was generally concluded that Canon HDV was noticeably better looking than Sony's or JVC's--especially 24F.

HDV isn't old MPEG-2 from 1994, it's based on newer methods that are probably closer in form to MPEG-4 than further from it.

Additionally, HDV is probably best thought of as an acquisition medium because intermediate codecs like CineForm or PhotoJPEG do a better job of maintaining quality through heavier image filtering in post.


And we've all been talking about how cool DVCPRO-HD is cause it's all I frames, not GOP based. So, the AVCHD codec to me is a step backwards, or just a conusmer format.
Click to expand...


We all agree that frame discrete compression (Intra-frame) is generally ideal for
acquisition and editing, but that doesn't mean that you will necessarily get better quality from DVCPRO HD. If I take an uncompressed stream of HD SDI from my XL-H1 and capture to DVCPRO HD, and also to uncompressed, but then take that second capture and encode H.264 (AVC HD) at 100% quality, the h.264 may actually look noticeably better, and probably very close to the same quality of DVCPRO HD at bit rates below 25 mbs.

I've also found DVCPRO HD can have a little trouble with saturated reds (depending on how the NLE does chroma smoothing) and low lit, noisy areas.

I would wager that a FXZ1/Z1 AVC HD successor could very well have image quality that rivals DVCPRO HD. It all depends on how good the encoder chip is however.

One thing I can guarantee is that AVC HD will probably require an ultra fast computer with graphics card MPEG 4 acceleration to edit the format with any kind of snappiness.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top