HVX vs. the Canon XHA1

Status
Not open for further replies.
Barry.. thanks for taking the time to do this and for being so thorough and for also taking on those pointed accusations. It comes across as a very fair account.. and I used to be a canon owner... and I'd consider this camera but it's not in the same league... with the images I can see, the footage and also the workflow. But the canon would be great for some of my conferences where I'll shoot 10 hours of footage a day... and stuff like that. Now, shooting an Nike commerical.. I don't think I'm gonna go with the canon on that
 
ncje said:
Lastly, the responses have been kind to the DVX, maybe because we all loved this camera so much and have an infinite fondness for it, but I will state without reservation, if you have a few extra hundred bucks, the A1 blows the DVX out of the water and so it should.

:P
Click to expand...


Also Dont forget the A1 does NATIVE 16:9.... and has a lot more Dynamic range. When i got my HVX, the first thing i noticed was that the highlights just kept getting brighter without blowing out. Its a great thing. it really perfoms amazingly well. ( a1 having about identical Dynamic range to the HVX hence the direct comparison)

That alone makes the A1 a more attractive camera than the DVX.
 
Absolutely, and if you take time to make your own personal feature set to control the A1 in color an generally control -I never saw a cam in this class with so much user presets- you see you get a wicking cam. As I wrote in the "Color A1-HVX compare" article in the Canon A1 section here, you need to make the A1 personal and seek for colors.
 
I think Barry's article is great and should be taken as one man's opinion. The time and effort to put such work together for our reading is to be complemented. I really get tired of all these Canon XH A1 owners who make excuses for areas where the Canon falls short of the HVX. Think about what is being said. Tweak the A1 so it looks like the HVX. Is the HVX look the gold standard then? The A1 is a great camera for the price. However is not the end all for all camera users.
 
that happens on new cameras. When the HVX came out we were all trying to apologise for the Video noise, and a not to crisp picture. But eventually people stopped caring, and we all got on with making money/movies/videos.....
 
What I would like to see is the Panasonic HVX-200 go up against a Sony 1080i Cine Alta for a 720p sports broadcast for ESPN, Fox or ABC. Far too often these 1080i cameras are captured in 1080i and converted to 720p which results in a lot of destruction of picture quality. If a native 720p camera like the HVX were used for a ESPN sports braodcast the picture quality would probably be superior because no format conversion would be needed. 720p Sports broadcasters then could get rid of these 1080i cameras because there would no longer be an excuse not to offer real 720p because 720p is now so affordable.
 
yea but, a really good, 1080i camera puts out CRAZY resolution. it may actually down convert better than an HVX.
 
Well, boy am I late to post but this has got to be the most entertaining 11 pages I have ever read here.

Man o' man, there be some whiny b*t**'s comin' out of the woodwork on this one. Sounds like a lot of personal problems to me.

Barry, you did one hell of an article, Jared it was the right title. I loved every bit of it.

Your summation of P2 vs Tape is going to be my talking point when dealing with the p2 ignorant from here on out. All the little reasons I love to hate Canon we're brought forth, the 24 frame test movie you did was extremely helpful to those I referred, and I certainly would love to have some of the color temp controls the Canon has on my next HVX.

Was it a biased article? Of course. We're on DVXuser! Was it fair? Absolutely. I have been able to recommend the Canon A1 to 3 individuals and two just made purchases today. BECAUSE IT WAS THE RIGHT CAMERA FOR THEM. Your article confirmed it.

And of course the bottom line for both of them came down to economics. With the other holding out to check out a V1u.

Thank you again Barry!

:dankk2:
 
Last edited:
thanks Jarred. You said it was thinner. How is it to use without a tripod?

The DVX has 24p and 24pa. Does the Canon have something like that or just 24F?
 
It has both 24p and 24pa modes in DV. That said...once you shoot 24F HDV and make the transition to an HDV or intermediate HD codec workfow...you won't want to shoot DV all that often.
 
icicle22 said:
Barlow,
if that is indeed true, how do you convert it? I know, I know......using compressor on a mac. Any idea what the settings are so I can try to emulate that on some lowly PC software?

Peace!
Click to expand...

Go to "File/Export to QT"

Try exporting at 75% (4:2:2 YUV) or 100% PhotoJPEG (RGB 4:4:4--it forces rendering in this colorspace even if the source doesn't have the chroma info)

btw, the frame rate settings are for converting to 720 24p from an HDV 24F clip.

MpegStClip.jpg
 
I just hope the A1 doesn't have as much noise as the H1, coz that's one hell of a lot of noise... Sony FX1 is the less noisy option, right??
 
meh, i like noise, looks more like film grain. not the same kind of noise as in low light situations.
 
Nicolas said:
I just hope the A1 doesn't have as much noise as the H1, coz that's one hell of a lot of noise... Sony FX1 is the less noisy option, right??
Click to expand...

Well, my experience was that the A1 was noisier than the H1. This was in a poorly lit scenario however and there were variables involved that could have added to the noise. Take this with a grain of salt but I'd venture to guess they are actually about the same if setup right. If the A1 is better, it is a minor improvement so I wouldn't rush out and buy it instead of an H1 expecting massive differences in noise.

Funny how opinions differ as I find the H1 to be a very clean camera compared to DVX, XL2 and HVX. Coming from these cameras I am always blown away by the H1. Once man's trash........
 
Hello, I'm new to the forum!

I'm looking at buying one of these cameras in the next couple of weeks, and I'm still completely unable to choose which one. The P2 thing means I effectively won't have an HD camera until I can afford the cards AND the HDD or firestore; with the A1 I'm ready to go. Also, something Barry was asking - is there a single pic that clearly shows the A1 has more resolution? Well this is the other thing that's putting me off the HVX - look at the pic of the bug spray, the A1 image is clearly sharper, the real give-away being that you can read the word 'guaranteed', which is just fuzz on the HVX shot. So my choice is between paying out the extra for the G1 for the SDI output and trying some sort of direct-to-disk solution, or buying the HVX and firestore. I still can't decide!
 
This is not the first article I see comparing the HVX with another camera. I have seen many pictures about these things. At the end of the day, it comes down to one thing:

HVX has better color resolution


Thank you Barry for this article
 
I've only seen images from the A1 via the internet but the images I've seen on other forums have been freaking astounding and that's after beening here for a good while and seeing HVX images. When going into a review like this I always assume (an am usually correct) HVX/Panasonic bais. Considering I've only seen images from the web I make no claim to anything, but looking at m2t files and stills from this camera the images from this review just doesn't seem to jive with what's been shown. Even Sony nor JVC's colors look like what those photos show. I've seen a ton of footage over at DVI that it doesn't seem to match. I am in love with the Panasonic image but honestly can not afford the HVX price point. I could buy the A1 and the small consumer Canon for playback and still come out cheaper than the HVX + P2 + P2 store. Plus Canon's picture looks more modern.

I was trained in film and when video cameras started doing 24p it was a dream come true and I'll probably never see film as an aqusition format. If the P2 workflow was cheaper with more space this would surely be an option. I would probably never go back to tape as I like fast and ready.

Ironically nothing would move me from the decision of buying a Canon A1 quicker than seeing those photos. Problem is again I (and I guess many others) simply don't believe them to be accurate. I doubt Barry was trying to tint the results so I don't know what happened.

For a run and gun action filmmaker P2 is out of the question in it's current state. I shot an HK style fight scene in five hours on the DVX. While the DVX is boss of the three chip prosumer SD models my HDV camera has to provide me with the benefits of the DVX. The H1 would provide me with that plus HD quality.

Run and Gun Points:

Sound:
Yes, I used to get audio from both internal and external mic source. Currently we've found this to be unneeded as the shotgun mic delivers the best and cleanest sound. We haven't done this since out first film.

Zoom:
Never use the zoom. I prefer the Canon's iris ringt to a zoom ring. I just don't need one. I did had a DP do a crash zoom one time and it came out marvelous on the DVX but I can speed everything up to 500% in FCP and drop out sound with no problem.

I rarely use Zooms and Focus at the same time. I may dolly and focus but not zoom and focus. If anything I'll zoom in, set my focus then zoom out again for the shot and even that would be done on the rockers. This type of thing doesn't seem to be problematic on the XL2 so I wonder why it would be on the A1.

Picture:
The raw imaging and color representation I've seen online made me desire the A1 (probably having more to do with the shooters than the camera). I won't really know what I can do until the camera is in my hand but again I still have to question do those photos represent what I've seen with this camera. Again I make no claims to having used this camera.

And while the article was good I think a lot more good information can come out of a "good" versus thread with knowledgeable pros commenting. (And I think Barry knows that too so who knows). Either it was a good break down of what maybe missing.

P2:
In a controled environment P2 is probably outstanding. You have your P2 card/s, laptop or P2 store, person to load the P2 cards, and maybe a computer, etc.

On my sets I have me and the boom guy. No computers or such. We travel light. I do have a Macbook now and while I've considered direct to disk via FCP and a battery powered harddrive for action scenes the way I move with the camera it would be simply out of the question.

My crews are usually two man crews without a lot of set up or break down time. We furnish and break down shots before the shoot to save time. Even lighting sets up are moved through very quickly.

Usefulness:
All the cameras are useful and being used. Only dvxuer.com could classify the HVX as the clear winner when no one else seems to be able too. If it's the clear winner, I'd be changing my game and making plans for a HVX and P2 purchase. Years ago the DVX was the "clear winner". No other camera at it's price point came close to true 24p delivery and control in it's price point.

Is the HVX in the same class? HVX is a three 1/3 chip camera. By itself (without the fixings) it's in the ball park of many of the other camera. Now maybe one can say it's not the in the HDV class but one would have to also argue it's in a class of it's own. No other camera matches it at it's price point. True. But again HD is impossible without the costly P2 strategy. The better idea would've been, yes, a built in harddrive with no tape drive at all. You could also argue that considering the Canon G1 and can do uncompressed it's the clear winner. Why? The Canon G1 and Panasonic HVX are closer in price when it comes to using HD. (Remember you can't use Panny's HD minus close to $2000 worth or extras).

Many people find the fact that it doesn't provide an HDV sytle choice as an annoyance which have made some switch. If this were not so I doubt would be toying with the ACVHD option, which we all know will probably make it's way to an ACVHD DVX. If this camera finds it's way to the market with functionality of the HVX (an price point of the Canon) then consider Canon's butt officially kicked but until then Canon is holding strong with this model.

Overall I can buy the Canon + the smaller one and have a camera for B-roll and to edit from. While I know I'd love tapeless, tape is no problem to me. Over all cost + crew + time is a big factor. Being on my own time and putting my tape into FCP is fine for me because I'm used to it and it's never really been a big deal. Still better than cutting film.

-Nate
 
Last edited:
LearningVideo said:
HVX has better color resolution
Click to expand...

I know that looks true but is it technically true? I.e., doesn't the pixel-shift thing in the HVX mean it should have less colour resolution? Theoretically, an uncompressed SDI signal from the A1 should allow for much better colour grading than the HVX, surely?
 
NOPE... in a big bigtime way. There's a ton more color info on the HVX than HDV cameras. When we matched HVX footage to a few HDV cams we had to dial down the color on the HVX to match. Barry has gone over this at lenght in an article.

Not to mention what happens to HDV footage when there's a lot of motion. We shot some fast action in the wood and the HDV footage looked really really bad with the trees moving.. Terribly bad indeed!


Look at this footage and notice how the Red van looks in the side by side.... One looks bright and colorful and one looks not so much:


http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/xha1/24F vs 24p.mov
 
Justyn said:
NOPE... in a big bigtime way. There's a ton more color info on the HVX than HDV cameras. When we matched HVX footage to a few HDV cams we had to dial down the color on the HVX to match. Barry has gone over this at lenght in an article.

Not to mention what happens to HDV footage when there's a lot of motion. We shot some fast action in the wood and the HDV footage looked really really bad with the trees moving.. Terribly bad indeed!


Look at this footage and notice how the Red van looks in the side by side.... One looks bright and colorful and one looks not so much:


http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/xha1/24F%20vs%2024p.mov
Click to expand...


I absolutely agree about the HDV format - I've had to grade Z1 footage many times and it's a nightmare. But I'm talking about an uncompressed SDI signal recorded straight to disk in one of the kinder compression formats. Don't ask me which, because this isn't something I've looked into properly yet, just something that's been mentioned to me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top