HD/SD? DVX100 vs HVX200 vs JVC HD110?

P

pixelator

Active member
Hello,

I've been using Sony 3 chip SD DV/DVCAM camcorders for about 10 years. They were good at the time but they always were soft images, overly contrasty, and lacking a decent dynamic range. Better than the old VHS 2 pc camera and VTR's I had to lug around, but nothing to write home about.

I'm looking to get a HD or a good SD camcorder soon. I'm 4 hours away from anywhere, so rentals and even trying equipment out is difficult. Looking at reviews, test footage, and what people had posted here I've come down to 3 choices.

DVX100b, HVX200 and the JVC HD110. I used a JVC HD1 for a week, and with all the bad press, I was surprised how good it looked. It lacked many manual functions or the work around was difficult, but it wasn't a bad picture. In fact, the color, dynamic range, lens was far superior to my Sony TRV-900 or VX2100.

Near term I'll be doing some online movies/shorts, so a DVX100b would be a good choice, but at $3,500 minus rebate in a gradualy HD world, is this buying a nice Model T when the 2001 model is already out?

Resolution vs resolving power:

My Sony's are of course 720x480, however on most posted charts the resolving power is to my eyes 400x350 max, probably less. The same person tested the DVX100 and the result was to my eyes 600x550. The Sony tests looked what I'm used to, so I'm fairly sure the Panasonic DVX100 has a better resolving power. Similar tests with the HVX200 is closer to DVX100 than anyone is willing to admit. Higher resolution sure, but not any more resolving power. It will look sharper, but fine detail isn't there as much as one would hope. The JVC100 series is closer to 800x750 or so. Of course there are more to pictures. Color space, compression, and with the JVC, GOP of 6.

Has anyone shot with the DVX100 and a HVX200 and watched the footage side by side on a HD monitor? anyone see a JVC HD100 in person?

The JVC HD1 I as I said looked surprisingly good, however the movement was far more stutery than any 8mm or 16mm that I ever shot. I bet because its 30fps is really 60, with each frame doubled, vs a movie projector that has 24 fps with equal number of black and the mind blurs the images. So that is why JVC has a motion switch for thier 24/30fps HD100? How is the Panasonic DVX100 at 24/30fps progressive?

All in all I like the footage that I've seen from the HVX200 in SD shot in DVCPRO-50 with very low compression and in native 16:9. I think that's the HVX200 strong suite. The HD looks OK, the JVC HD looked better. The DVX100b looked nice to, so to anyone who has one do they have buyer's remorse for missing HD? Or if the resolving power on the DVX100 is as good as it looks, does anyone really miss it on a HD monitor? Sure it's 4:3, but if it looks good, what does it matter?

thoughts, comments, suggestions?
 
from using the DVX100A extensively and the HVX200 for a bit now... the "resolving power" of the HVX is far superior, to my eyes. the image is just beautiful if you care to really get the most out of it. both cameras however, are not everyone's bag. it should be interesting to see how the new Canon HDV cameras look.

you might want to wait for that... the JVC HD100 (well now the HD110 soon enough) is apparently nice, but i haven't used it. i've seen the image up close and wasn't too thrilled with other aspects of the image. not my bag but it's purely subjective.

the new canon HDV without the jackpack will be $3999.99 or less, not much more than the DVX100B; it could have a great image considering it has the same glass as the XLH1. The nicest thing is you have choices... i'd suggest doing some research and finding out which one works best for your personal needs.

for me, it's the HVX all the way. no competition.
 
That is if you can afford a 6000 dollar camera. For those of us who cant I think the new Canon HD cam will be fantastic. Comparable to the H1, it will interesting to see how the H1 will do against the new HD cams if Canon still plans on manufacturing the H1. Also, with the ticket price about the same, and features on the same road as the DVX, I am thinking I might go with the Canon A1 instead of the DVX100. But I will have to do some research AFTER the A1 is released if its not already. (if i'm not mistaken, it will be in or around October).
 
I despise the JVCHD1 and think that while the HD100 isn't bad, it's not my cup of tea.

In SD, I'd actually take a DVX100 over an HD100. I really don't like JVC's colors which lack the filmic beauty I've seen in Pansonic's. It's a bit sharper in 16x9 sure but not enough to justify the unimpressive colors and weaker film-gamma to me.

In HD, I'd go with the HVX200. I've seen side by side comparisons and the HD100 really doesn't look any better to me. Look at Barry's tests. The JVC has more edge enhacment but I'm not seaing any more resolved detail. The HVX200 on the other hand has twice the color space (4:2:2 vs 4:2:0), not motion compression (so no artifacting), more filmic colors, more filmic gamma, and variable frame rates. There's also something a bit...off about the JVC's image. It always looks to me like the contrast is pushed way up.

The claim that the HVX200 produces no more resolved detail than the DVX100 is a bit hard to swallow for me by the way. I've seen the two cameras side by side and, even in SD, the HVX200 resolves more detail.
 
Last edited:
The answer is all the HD cams are great and a far leap from any SD cam period.

I have the Z1u the HD100 and recently have access to the Sony A1u...Sweet

All sweet....

I like Z1 ease of use and recently its imaging style is pleasing more and more.
The H100 has a great lens for the money and when you get good at it is more creative to use like going from a automatic car to manual more control.

The A1 is impressive for its size and price.

the lux levels can not be compared in the same manor as SD. I shoot weddings which always have low light conditions. the grain is much smaller so artifacts look closer to film grain than noise. customer don't seem to mind and due to increase dynamic range there is more information for you to work with in post. This means I never boost more than 6DB on tht HD100 and more than 9DB on the Sony Z1 ( niceer noise reduction chip) then boost levels in post losk great.

The 35 watt light on the cams is all in need.

The choice is really what features you need?
autofocus -ease of use all around great cam Sony Z1u
DVCproHD capture with P2 great for film HVX200
or manual should control JVC HD110-250
 
Have worked on both dvx and hvx.....

gotta say dvx is like having a kid that doesn't come first in every test but never misses a class. dependable and will get your job done unless you are into special effects where the color information on an hvx is far superior.

if the cost of P2 cards gets better sooner which it will as the higher capacities make their way early 2007 and the other manufacturers start to bring more HD prosumers cams out then I would say look at the hvx seriously.

the workflow becomes easier than dv tape really quick and it is a piece of equipment that has not come close to finding it's boundaries in the dark art of film.....hvx all the way.

.....d
 
It's also really important to understand that, if you're ending up on an SD DVD, then resolution for the HD cameras is a moot point. They're closer in sharpness then they are farther appart and when downrezed to SD you won't be able to tell any difference as far as resolution goes (though they will look a bit sharper and cleaner than most native SD cameras). That's why for the HVX200 is the clear choice in SD with it's higher lattitude, DVCPro with 4:2:2 colorspace, lack of interframe encoding which leads to motion artifacts, variable frame rates, and more filmish color and gamma.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top