Hvx200 vs XH-A1 lowlight

Elton said:
It drops some resolution. It simply does becaue of the process, but what the F modes offer is acceptable to the vast majority that use the cameras. So in the end, who cares? It's a value propositon at the $4K pricepoint: Is the HDV 24F detailed enough? Most who've seen it or shot material with it have responded with a resounding YES!

I think Barry's about right; it loses roughly 15-20% resolution.

The horse is dead.
Click to expand...
Tom Roper posted: 10.6%

LINK
 
delaro said:
how much resolution are we approximately loosing with 24f? 50%? 25%? less?
Definitely less. I'd say more on the order of 15% at most.
Click to expand...

Barry_Green said:
I've got footage from both that should definitively answer that, but haven't put it through the microscope yet.


Definitely less. I'd say more on the order of 15% at most.
Click to expand...

So its 10,6 %
Barry was snap on, on this one.
 
10%

I can live with that. It seems that "my" theory about half line scan and pixelshift is the most likely solution.

Remember that XL1 managed to get 360 lines i F mode. So almost 600 seems realistic for the A1/G1/H1 series.
 
Also interesting is the Canon HV10 resolution results:

784.5 Lines Horizontal
704.8 Lines Vertical

And still this 25p option:

LINK
 
just watched some of my A1 footage on a 50 inch HD TV and HOLY CRAP! This camera's image is absolutely incredible! I shot 1080i 24f and I'm simply in awe at the results that I saw. It was in both good natural light and in an indoor low light setting and wow, I fell in love with the A1. I would post some footage but I don't have FCP 5 yet so I can't import into the mac. : (


I also threw on the Letus35 adapter and (PUKE) it was so horrible. I now see why, I think it was, Barry said an adapter on an HD camera wasn't good looking.
 
coffee said:
just watched some of my A1 footage on a 50 inch HD TV and HOLY CRAP! This camera's image is absolutely incredible! I shot 1080i 24f and I'm simply in awe at the results that I saw. It was in both good natural light and in an indoor low light setting and wow, I fell in love with the A1. I would post some footage but I don't have FCP 5 yet so I can't import into the mac. : (


I also threw on the Letus35 adapter and (PUKE) it was so horrible. I now see why, I think it was, Barry said an adapter on an HD camera wasn't good looking.
Click to expand...

You have to contact Disjecta. He's using a letus and getting great results, Coffee. Also, try another adapter when you can. m2 or Brevis, preferrably.

And yes, the A1's image is soooooo clean. How do you compare the 24f to 24p, personally? Does it still look just as "film-like" or do you think it's the same "Video-feel" of the XL2?
 
Kholi, the overall look in my opinion is that the A1's 24f footage looks like the DVX's 24p filmish image but the A1 is soooooooo much better in quality. Today I shot some footage of my kids playing and watching tv with both cameras. I then hooked them up to my 50 inch HD TV and the difference in quality was huge. Of course it has to do with the HD factor but with it blown up to a larger screen the DVX fell apart compared to the A1 so the overall impression is that the A1 with the 24f footage can be played on larger sreens (theater size perhaps) and still hold it's own.
 
coffee said:
Kholi, the overall look in my opinion is that the A1's 24f footage looks like the DVX's 24p filmish image but the A1 is soooooooo much better in quality. Today I shot some footage of my kids playing and watching tv with both cameras. I then hooked them up to my 50 inch HD TV and the difference in quality was huge. Of course it has to do with the HD factor but with it blown up to a larger screen the DVX fell apart compared to the A1 so the overall impression is that the A1 with the 24f footage can be played on larger sreens (theater size perhaps) and still hold it's own.
Click to expand...

It's great to have another impression on the matter. It still looks just as 24p as the DVX/HVX to me, but the resolution and noise pattern are much more pleasing. It's really good to know that the A1 is standing tall against it's 10k counterpart.
 
That's one of the most exciting things to me. I was going to go with the HVS when it was released and was kind of depressed after I decided to hold off because I really wanted something HD. But now I'm so damn happy that I waited, the A1 at this price is a steal. To now be able to make a film with this quality in imagry at a $3500-$4000 is something that I never though would be possible anytime soon. I'm not downing the HXV, it's an awesome tool but for this price, thank god for Canon.

Kholi said:
It's really good to know that the A1 is standing tall against it's 10k counterpart.
Click to expand...
 
Hey Coffee,

If you really want to be blown away, try taking the A1 into a local home theater outfit and plug it into a new 1080p projector. Or just go to the local Costco or Circuit City with the A1 and plug into a new 1080p Bravia LCD from Sony. (Costco has the 46"model)

It's kind of funny when people are used to watching the Discovery HD looping demo, and then they watch some 24F HDV stuff and go "how come that looks so much better?".
 
Elton said:
Hey Coffee,

If you really want to be blown away, try taking the A1 into a local home theater outfit and plug it into a new 1080p projector. Or just go to the local Costco or Circuit City with the A1 and plug into a new 1080p Bravia LCD from Sony. (Costco has the 46"model)

It's kind of funny when people are used to watching the Discovery HD looping demo, and then they watch some 24F HDV stuff and go "how come that looks so much better?".
Click to expand...

It's so funny to do this with any HD camera. I did it with the HVX200 at Best Buy and people were coming over going "ooooooh that's HD!". I can only imagine what they'd say about the A1. Hehehe.

Really, the HVX200 is a great tool, as well. I'm just convinced that the A1 is the better picture. I think I've said that enough, though. So i'll stop. lol.
 
Can of worms Kholi! :) What sort of shooting do you do?

I used to own an xl2, and loved the picture, just not for narrative work (too much sharpening). I went with the HVX for pana's colours and softer look. I can do without the extra res (of the xlh1 and a1) - when will I ever need it? I love the looks I'm getting now, though it took a bit of learning to get there, and I do need to overlight...which can be hard without using HMIs.

With an adapter on the front that takes care of the oversharp issue, and may actually be a benefit for the Canon cams. What the A1 delivers for the price is impressive. I'm looking forward to seeing more footage from it - though at this stage I think I prefer the HVX colourwise.
 
Just a quick thought for shooter/producers: DVCProHD is considered a professional format, and cable networks here (NY) are on-board with it. While many want to own the source (ie: have camera masters), increasingly they're accepting hard drives as masters (the History Channel does).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but at present there is no real deck that handles Canon's 24f footage (Sony decks won't do it). Some just buy the Canon HV10 and use that as a deck, but I seriously doubt the plausibility of that workflow in an offline to online edit at a post house.

Also, virtually no cable outlet accepts HDV origination (except sometimes as a small percentage of an HD program--I think Discovery allows something like 15%, but I'm not sure).

I put this out there more as "food for thought" than an argument for or against any camera. Indie film and shorts are one thing, but for anything beyond that, you've got to consider who's buttering your bread...
 
thoughtsauce said:
Just a quick thought for shooter/producers: DVCProHD is considered a professional format, and cable networks here (NY) are on-board with it. While many want to own the source (ie: have camera masters), increasingly they're accepting hard drives as masters (the History Channel does).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but at present there is no real deck that handles Canon's 24f footage (Sony decks won't do it). Some just buy the Canon HV10 and use that as a deck, but I seriously doubt the plausibility of that workflow in an offline to online edit at a post house.

Also, virtually no cable outlet accepts HDV origination (except sometimes as a small percentage of an HD program--I think Discovery allows something like 15%, but I'm not sure).

I put this out there more as "food for thought" than an argument for or against any camera. Indie film and shorts are one thing, but for anything beyond that, you've got to consider who's buttering your bread...
Click to expand...

You can always ingest as DVCproHD. What it's recorded on doesn't matter as far as deliverables are concerned. It may not start out as 4:2:2 yadda yadda but it's not like you deliver DVCproHD directly on p2 Cards, anyway. You'll just be delivering your raw material on DVDs or something similar.

There are choices that you have as far as decks and the like. A tapeless workflow would be the Firestore-C, or you could use an HV10 which is hundreds/thousands less than any Deck. Regardless of it's a Camera or not... it's still a deck.
 
That's definitely the workflow I'd use at home with my Final Cut system, but often I'm nowhere near the post end of things. I'm definitely not saying that there's no way to make HDV work, it's just that I've just encountered some resistance from production managers and other non-technical producers when it comes to HDV.

While I doubt that they would articulate concerns about 4:2:0 vs 4:2:2 or Long GOP vs intra-frame compression, there seems to be a tendency to shy away from anything that might even remotely compromise the saleability of their shows (even though there may be reasonable workarounds). But who knows...things move so quickly that in a month or so the entire landscape may have worked itself out. Earlier this year I was virtually shouted down for suggesting the HVX and now it's being used by all over the place (from the mighty BBC to the not-so-mighty New York 1).
 
I have it on pretty good authority that the H1 and XH cams are accepted acquisition cameras for Discovery HD...even from mere HDV.

What is critical is the post process and basically delivering an uncompressed master from HDV footage. In other words, don't recompress HDV. With FCP it's just a matter of outputting via SDI or component analog HD to, say, D5 from a Kona/Blackmagic etc, rather than "conforming to HDV" and outputting to HDV tape.
 
Elton said:
I have it on pretty good authority that the H1 and XH cams are accepted acquisition cameras for Discovery HD...even from mere HDV.
Click to expand...
And what would that authority be? HDV is specifically not approved by Discovery, and cannot be used for more than 15%.

Are you referring to some circumstance where someone shot on HDV anyway and just didn't tell them? Because that would be far different than saying that HDV from a Canon is an accepted, approved acquisition format. The last public statement I saw from them specifically limited all HDV (Canon included) to no more than 15%. If you can point to a press release or updated documentation from them, I'm sure we'd all be interested in seeing it.

Here's what I've seen:
http://www.discoverychannel.ca/_includes/disclaimer/producers_guide/docs/HD_Prod_Specs_04.doc

In there they say that "no more than 15% of the final content may be originated in the HDV 1080 format." They also list HDV as an "unacceptable editing codec".

A later statement here:
http://www.discoverychannel.ca/_includes/disclaimer/producers_guide/docs/HDSpec.logo.doc

In there it reiterates "no more than 15%" for HDV.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top