Will EX-1 be leaps and bounds better than HVX?

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Morpheus_23

Active member
I just got my HVX last week. Then I read about the EX1 and I must say, on paper it looks good. But somehow I don't see it as being leaps and bounds better than the HVX or Canon for that matter. But certainly after spending this kind of cash, one would hope that one made the right decision and won't agonize over it night after night. Or would he....? Yeah, I probably will.
 
I think the key is "on paper" it looks good, but like you said probably not "leaps and bounds better" than the HVX.

I think the EX offers great potential and I feel it's exciting to see just how quickly digital cinema cameras are evolving.

However, I'm still impressed with what the DVX can do and the HVX even more over, so you should be just fine, for some time irregardless of the type of projects you're doing.
 
HDV looks good on paper too. but after 3 days with that i decided it was of no value to me!

________________
BTW - "irregardless" is not a word. "regardless" is what you were shooting for. while were here just as a side note, neither is "supposebly" or "heighth"
 
wgzn said:
________________
BTW - "irregardless" is not a word. "regardless" is what you were shooting for. while were here just as a side note, neither is "supposebly" or "heighth"
Click to expand...

Man, one of my pet peeves is people that feel righteous enough to correct the spelling and grammar of people that they don't even know. If the grammar and spelling is so bad you don't understand what's being said; that's an issue. However, if you understand what's being said then shut the hell up or go spend your time on a spelling and grammar forum.

We're living in a world of fast-paced forum posting, which is a pretty casual deal and prone to many mistakes. This isn't like writing a thesis.

I'll stop now before I get heated up.
 
Morpheus_23 said:
I just got my HVX last week. Then I read about the EX1 and I must say, on paper it looks good. But somehow I don't see it as being leaps and bounds better than the HVX or Canon for that matter. But certainly after spending this kind of cash, one would hope that one made the right decision and won't agonize over it night after night. Or would he....? Yeah, I probably will.
Click to expand...

Haven't seen the EX in real world situations, but making an educated guess (looking at the specs of camera. codec, lens, etc.)
I would say:

Straight out of the camera, recorded to XDCAM EX format- No, it won't be leaps and bounds better.

Recorded to the upcoming Convergent Design Flash recorder (100mbps+ mpeg2 intra at 4:2:2) trough HD-SDI- Probably yes.

6500$ plus convergent designs recorder ($5000)= $11500 for full HD 4:2:2 at 160mbs mpeg2- This on paper blows the HVX out of the water.

EDIT- Hey, guys, take it easy :)
 
What is the point of development if things doesn't develop?

The HVX is a mean beast, but initially I couldn't figure why Panny left good things out, particularily HD-SDI.

I still hate that!
But it has made business sense.

If one - just for a sec - stops looking at the HVX as the ultimate 16mm replacement cam, but more like the ultimate PD-150/170 killer for eng, then the picture seems... less muddy -;)

This is the market where thousands, not hundreds of cameras are sold.
And you defenitely do not want an HD-SDI tap for that quickie 5 on the streets interview...

The EX addresses that same market, with even better specs, for that market...
And this is the way they make money.

So, if panny doesn't come up with a HVX-250, next round goes to Sony.

Then you have more disruptive tchnologies and companies out there...

Just my 2c

Gunleik
 
insanityfw said:
I think the key is "on paper" it looks good, but like you said probably not "leaps and bounds better" than the HVX.
Click to expand...
Well, I recently had the opportunity to see both in close proximity at a trade show, so my thoughts are a little bit more than "on paper".

I'm sorry, Morpheus_23 - my conclusions were that on the face of it, in certain key areas it really is "leaps and bounds better". Most notably sensitivity and the manual lens.

Long GOP? Well, I-frame may have advantages on paper, but it comes at a price. Long GOP, and the bitrate savings it brings, is at last making solid state working viable for a lot more people than P2 and DVCProHD currently can. From what I've seen, the advantages of the lower S/N of the EX and it's manual lens far outweigh the long-GOP/I-frame issue. If long-GOP issues really were that crucial to me, I wouldn't be looking at any camera with 1/3" chips.

I may not instantly trade an HVX in just to get an EX, but faced with getting one or the other at the moment, it would have to be the EX.
 
harddrive said:
I'm sorry, Morpheus_23 - my conclusions were that on the face of it, in certain key areas it really is "leaps and bounds better". Most notably sensitivity and the manual lens.
Click to expand...

No need to be sorry. I can return my HVX and exchange for the EX. I just won't have anything in the interim. I'm still tossing it around.
 
Morpheus_23 said:
No need to be sorry. I can return my HVX and exchange for the EX. I just won't have anything in the interim. I'm still tossing it around.
Click to expand...
In which case my strong advice would be to go back, take the HVX with you, and run them up side by side, with the ability to see the outputs on a good monitor.

In particular, point them both somewhere not very well lit, ideally so you are forced to use gain. Then make up your mind.

And please do report back! :)
 
insanityfw said:
Man, one of my pet peeves is people that feel righteous enough to correct the spelling and grammar of people that they don't even know.

I'll stop now before I get heated up.
Click to expand...

Why I understand your "heated up" feeling, I welcome these observations. We are professionals here, and communicating issues of importance, especially to clients and on a troubleshooting board has to be done clearly.

I might be in the minority, but not all clients are the same. So it's always better to go with the highest possible denominator -- at least for me and I suspect others.

But it's your business, public presentation, and call.
 
This may be a tough decision for many, especially on a DVXUSER forum, but technology has been impoving over the last couple years.

The HVX200 is capable of producing some nice stuff. Just take a look around on this forum for all the nice stuff shot on the HVX200

Wer'e hearing from several current sources that the EX1's effective ASA is 800. This is real sensitive for a small HD camera. As hardrive mentioned, this should be decent in low light. This asset along with a camera capable of delivering fullo raster 1920x1080P and its resolving ability of 1000 lines, is going to be one heck of a camera.

Also, I'm also hearing that the SDI is capable of TRUE 10 bit. If this is the case, this benefit will open the doors to many of the "on the fence" buyers.
Also, the 1/2 sensors should allow a bit tighter control of DOF.

Having said this....
I doubt many HVX200 users will be selling their cam to buy the EX.
The HVX200 offers a lot. When used under controlled lighting, the HVX200 can produce some nice stuff.
 
Wow, if that's true, 800 ASA, that is a big deal. I will reserve judgement on the EX-1 until I can shoot with one.

I would hate to have to switch systems though. What is the FCS2 support for the format(s) that this camera shoots?

Dan
 
You know, I'd be really psyched about the EX if it didn't have a rolling shutter. Wobbly footage is balls on toast. I like everything else, but the wobbly footage makes it a no go for me.

P.S. If you do the math, the 1/2" chips in XDCAM cameras only have a slightly larger surface area than Super 8, so the DoF characteristics should be roughly equivalent. Check out some S8 DoF tables if you wanna get an idea of what your footage will look like.
 
Alex, is that confirmed? Someone has definitively stated that the EX-1 has the rolling shutter? Where did you verify that?

Dan
 
Last edited:
Yeah, Mikko Wilson reported on it a while ago when he saw the camera at IBC. He said it was only slight, but wobble is still wobble.
 
Oh I agree. I have seen the rolling shutter issue with the HV-20, it's not pretty. Okay, I am siding with you, I don't care how good the rest of the camera is, that is a limitation I can't deal with.

I was shooting helicopters flying around last week, I am heading to Florida to shoot boats and people in the water acting with lots of movement, can't deal with issue like that.

Thanks for the heads-up.

Dan
 
puredrifting said:
Oh I agree. I have seen the rolling shutter issue with the HV-20, it's not pretty. Okay, I am siding with you, I don't care how good the rest of the camera is, that is a limitation I can't deal with.
Click to expand...
Whoa, whoa, whoa. There are rolling shutters and rolling shutters. Don't judge all by the performance of one.

Hardly surprisingly, cheaper cameras show bad artifacts due to it, more expensive ones far less so. I believe the issue is due to data transfer rates, cheap=slow=takes a whole frame to read a frame. (Not good.) Expensive=fast=frame read out quickly and problem greatly reduced.
 
I think I need more education on rolling shutters and CMOS drawbacks and advantages. Isn't the main thing with CMOS the elimination of halos and trails when the imager overloads? The results I have seen (yep, only on the cheapo HV-20) were distorted bent straight lines on rapid pans and camera movement.

Just as I have experienced nasty pixillation on rapid pans and movment on various HDV products but many say they can't see any artifacting. I guess we all see different things just as in the HVX. Some see nasty digital noise, some see 500 ASA S-16 film grain, it's all in the eye of the beholder.

I would still be interested in testing the EX-1 when it becomes available. I think an EX-1 vs. HVX shootout would be a great article. Perhaps I just don't understand enough about the EX-1 to make an intelligent evaluation at this point?

Dan
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top