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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Anders Holck provides a good visual representation here of the difference in function between rolling shutter and mirror shutter on a film camera. The HVX, when using shutter angle, is supposed to be similar to a film camera, as I understand the function. I am not sure if the HVX does what it does, digitally, or by some physical/optical method, whilst the HVX's CCD takes a snap shot of all the pixels at the one time. I understand the Dalsa 4K camera employs a physical shutter in front of the CCD.

I wonder if repositioning and turning a CMOS chip 90 degree counter-clockwise would improve rolling shutting issues, whilst not eliminating them completely? :D
 
puredrifting said:
Isn't the main thing with CMOS the elimination of halos and trails when the imager overloads?J
Click to expand...

The absensce of vertical smear is a big improvement, particularly compared to the nasty smear that can happen with pretty much all of the CCD-based sub$10K HD cameras.
 
puredrifting said:
The results I have seen (yep, only on the cheapo HV-20) were distorted bent straight lines on rapid pans and camera movement.

..........., it's all in the eye of the beholder.
Click to expand...
Imagine going to order a beefburger. What do you think you are going to get served up?

The basic description tells you roughly what to expect, but (in my experience) what gets served up out of the freezer in a cheap cafe is a very, very different product to what an expensive restaurant may serve.

Same with much video technology. All rolling shutters are not equal. Don't judge expensive ones (eg Red) by your experiences with cheap ones.
 
So far, I have heard nothing but positives about Red. Frankly, I didn't even know that the Red had a rolling shutter. Must all CMOS cameras use a rolling shutter, is that how they work or could a CMOS based camera use the same kind of shutter that a single CCD camera uses?

D
 
I understand your thoughts Morpheus_23 I bought my HVX 2 weeks ago.

my 10 reasons for the HVX:

1. it is relyable and solid build because it is quite long in the market. I have had too many early adopters trouble in my past. and there is always a drawback in the first rev. I know this for sure we are doing hardware development for quite a while.
2. strong forum with a lot of posts. anything I want to know I get in a couple of hours.
3. a lot of support material Bootcamp DVD´s from Barry , Workflow from Noah. etc.
4. I never bought a CMOS cam before and was a bit afraid of. perhaps this is weird.
5. NLE support from the first day on. I use FCP 6
6. I don´t need SDI out
7. DVCPRO is a codec you can cut extremly fast even on not so high end hardware.
8. 4:2:2 color
9. I will shoot in 720/24pn the codec size advange is not a so big deal to me
10. the 1700 Euro difference between the HVX and the EX1 I will buy a pretty good lighting kit

my conclusion after the 2 weeks:

The EX1 ist a amazing cam - without a doubt.

But I would not trade my HVX in for the EX1. the HVX is a beast but if you know how to tweak (tame) all those settings you get amazing pictures out of it.
 
Thanks for the comments and much appreciated input. I have decided to keep the HVX. I really like the features on the HVX that aren't on other cams. And the overall quality of the HD is very good.
 
Yes,
well, you really can't go wrong with the HVX200. There's great resources here that can offer a lot of info on getting the best out of the HVX200.

BTW, the RED is really stirring things up. This is one heck of a camera and will only improve.
 
puredrifting said:
So far, I have heard nothing but positives about Red. Frankly, I didn't even know that the Red had a rolling shutter. Must all CMOS cameras use a rolling shutter, is that how they work or could a CMOS based camera use the same kind of shutter that a single CCD camera uses?

D
Click to expand...

No, CMOS could incorporate a global shutter if the manufacturer wanted to design the unit that way. But it's a more expensive option, and CMOS is all about cheaper manufacturing, so nobody makes a global shutter, they're all rolling.
 
By all accounts, the RED also has a rolling shutter. If it is possible to create a non-rolling CMOS shutter, I would have thought that they would have opted for that option.
 
THoff said:
By all accounts, the RED also has a rolling shutter. If it is possible to create a non-rolling CMOS shutter, I would have thought that they would have opted for that option.
Click to expand...
No doubt they would have done if all rolling shutters gave the same problems. But a better one doesn't, so why spend money changing something that is giving a good result?
 
There are benefits, smear is one of them.
Barry's own examples show this:

CMOS
CMOS-smear.JPG


CCD
CCD-smear.JPG


Once again, like hardrive has stressed, all rolling shutters are not equal.
 
Stevet said:
Once again, like hardrive has stressed, all rolling shutters are not equal.
Click to expand...
As, for that matter, neither are all CCDs!!

The smear shown there is nowhere near as bad as shown by early chips, even on the early pro CCD cameras. Some things shouldn't be generalised about, and whilst rolling shutters can be bad news, that's not true in general.
 
Hi all,

The EX should rock and sock. I'm waiting for some objective reviews and likely will be for another few weeks.

I don't think there's anything that is must have that makes me jump ship from the HVX. Geez, it's more than this cowboy can handle anyway.
 
David S. said:
Some have questioned the objectivity of that review

The guy is wearing a Sony shirt.
Click to expand...

:laugh:

That doesn't take too much thinking, huh?

It only makes sense that any "news" that comes out prior to January or February isn't really "news", but really releases - and there's a big difference between the two.

I think the thing can be a great camera in a world of great cameras. But I would like to see it with an objective eye.
 
Barry_Green said:
No, CMOS could incorporate a global shutter if the manufacturer wanted to design the unit that way. But it's a more expensive option, and CMOS is all about cheaper manufacturing, so nobody makes a global shutter, they're all rolling.
Click to expand...
Also, from what I've read, global shutters require additional circuitry, making global-shutter CMOS chips significantly larger than rolling-shutter ones for any given pixel count.
 
I didn't say anything about the review being biased or not, it is simply a review of some of the features of the camera, an easy way to check out some of the features and functions.

David S. said:
Some have questioned the objectivity of that review

The guy is wearing a Sony shirt.
Click to expand...
 
Andrew:

I've done dozens of product reviews. If it a review, then it has to be objective in my view.

That means objective. Otherwise, it is an advertisement.

But that is my view.

When the reviewer states:

"I just want to point out at this stage that the following information is not designed to ruffle any feathers or upset anyone, it is simply the truth and I am a firm believer in giving DVuser readers the brutal facts so they can draw their own conclusions; no glossy re-hashed press-release reviews or articles here. If the following information upsets any current P2 owners/users, for this I apologise, I'm simply putting across the facts."

I think those "FACTS" are his "OPINIONS."
 
Read the manual last night. Sony's own manual has a section on CMOS issues, and they point out that yes you're going to experience the partial exposure and skew/wobble effects. They also list another one, white flecks in the video. They say "these are not defects".

So take that however you want, but this optimism that the EX1 won't exhibit rolling shutter artifacts seems unwarranted when their own manual tells you it will.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top