Got a chance to put EX1 up against HVX

I'll post some stuff. As Barry and MANY other have mentioned, there's definately skew going on with quick pans.
But, under "normal" use, I'm not seeing an issue. I also shoot in 24P, so I use the typical 24 frame camera cautions (judder). Yes, before everyone gets keyboard happy, my normal use may not be yours.
 
Yah precisely there is no need to continually justify faults, 'normal' use is completely subjective, point is its faults are faults which is an issue no camera is without, and its good there now being made aware of so it can be truly evaluated.

Apart from the practical issues relating to ergonomics or the implementation of some controls (such as playpack and record delays) one gripe i would have, is simply the cadence or motion of the footage.

Technically it should be identical, but in ordinary pans and such like there is a video-esque quality to it that is less appealing.

I cannot help but think that the ex has going for it this singular high res native chipset, at the cost of a range of visual aesthetics, relating to colour and cadence. Even the graded footage of Philip Bloom while gorgeous was of the video aesthetic, compared to the footage i've seen on an HVX, I can't myself get as excited as say u stevet!

The footage bloom took of the park was very attractive but not very filmlike in its sharpness or motion (of which there was a distinct lack of!) in camera movement. Like someone said, it smacks of Discovery HD hehe, which is good for docs, but for the filmlook is dissatisfying.

So i'm not convinced yet, I would also be deeply unnerved by the possibility of some 'issue' occuring that was unforeseen (relating to the global shutter.)

Its almost as if too much emphasis in its design has been placed at getting the highest res chipsets into the cheapest cam for the best visual/marketing buck, which can look impressive in stills or zoomed in stills hehe, but has proven less impressive to me, when all is seen moving.

I think the guys that would love this cam are those excited by the sharpness of the resoluton, it can't be the colour reproduction, ergonomics, cadence or workflow (imo) and so it all feels very gimicky, it certainly doesn't feel very revolutionary.

Now that said, the EX is a plain 'evolution' of sony design, but for the time that has passed since the hvx, i think its plain to see that the sony designers of this cam were less influenced by the would be budget filmmaker than they were by the demands of a far broader market - one impressed by different qualities.

My company could buy an ex or two but i myself will go for another hvx, and (possibly an hpx body lol er, can i borrow one o u guys lenses haha.)

However what annoys me is some of these issues the EX has, because I would love to have something as 'sharp' as that for a lot of the corporate stuff i do, for big exhibition screens that merge graphics and animated logos etc and even for creative stuff (less movement orientated hehe but things where its strengths come into play.)

Don't get me wrong theres folk that obviously love the EX, (bar their naive fanboy appraisals) its all good too, but its not got me peeing in my pants and unless im missing something i don't still quite get what the fuss is all about!

That said im also dying to test it, im sure there will be some wow factors there, its annoying but an associate of mine (from pd150, 170 to the EX) is away on his travels presently. But soon oh soon ill get a chance to play with it!
 
Last edited:
You're right about faults, But -It's all about what faults you can live with . Noise and macroblocking are definately not mine, that'w why we ditched the HVX200 after using it for one month.
 
Ted Spencer said:
I'd be particularly interested in hearing what Barry makes of this particular clip.
Click to expand...
Er... well... let's just say that I'd love to see the original footage. I wouldn't want to comment based on a recompressed version like that. Obviously there's a bump and some wobble in there, but the res drop is massive and it would be unfair to characterize that as coming from the camera unless we could view the original MP4 file. But that's one nasty-lookin' clip; it'd be good to get to the bottom of what happened there.
 
Have you checked the still pics in that 2hands shootout?
The arial shot tells it all.
Yes, the Ex is sharper but what is that sharpness when you pay for it with color banding in the sky (here you see the merrits of 4:2:2) and the trees look like oil painting as on a old VHS?

I´m hugging my HVX every time I see that EX1 Material.

Frank
 
Stevet said:
You're right about faults, But -It's all about what faults you can live with . Noise and macroblocking are definately not mine, that'w why we ditched the HVX200 after using it for one month.
Click to expand...

This is very true. I have lived with it for 20 months but enough is enough. In good lighting conditions the HVX is fine. Film a wedding in a dimly lit 15th century church with only natural light and you are in serious trouble. the macro blocking is very unsightly.


lawriejaffa.
You say you are unimpressed by the EX1, yet you haven't yet had the opportunity to have a play with it. I am sure when you do get the opportunity you would be impressed. But whether or not its the camera for you only you can answer. Personally speaking, it fits the bill for me and does nearly everything I will use it for. And because of that its a step up from the HVX200, which failed pretty miserably for me on several occassions.
 
Last edited:
Most of the cine looks can be achieved in post-production. But 25 and 24p motion rendering don't!

What I saw of the EX1 motion rendering was worrying. But I merely had the camera for 15 minutes on a fixed setting, so maybe it was me setting it up wrong.

I was impressed with the DOF, the sharp picture, and lack of noise. Was this enough for making me change my HVX to an EX? No.

Panasonic's cinegamma is not merely color correction. I don't know how to explain it, but there's something to it that I've never seen in any other manufacturer camcorder footage.
 
Well maybe im just lucky lol but macroblocking is not something that happens commonly with my footage, i mean its hard not to notice it lol, i've never seen the topics of these forums filled with outraged minions going on about macroblocking in the hvx, so presumably this is no more a prob than on any cams!? (and far less a prob id think on many of the 25mg hdv cams personally.)

However I can totally understand why one would prefer the EX for wedding vids and docus where available light sources were more limited, particularly interiors with available light.

I'ts never crossed my mind really that the hvx was the best choice to make for videography, so sure for that the ex would obviously be far more forgiving to limited light sources.

As a filmmaker though I take care to light properly, and as such the hvx delivers a beautifully rendered filmic like image. Its not unlike how I might prefer a few years ago to use a Sony pd170 for videography/corporate and a dvx for film!
 
Last edited:
Difference was the PD170 is interlaced while the DVX is 24P.

The EX1 and the HVX200 are both interlaced AND Progressive.
 
Yah, well my point was that despite that fact, the difference is still marked as if it were a pd170 and a dvx i was choosing between... ;)
 
Does anyone think the Ex1 would be suitable for filming snowboarding?

Any idea if the rolling shutter artifacts, wooble or half exposed frame would come into play? Would the camera would half expose a frame if photographers were shooting the same action with flashes?

I've heard a couple people mention the camera to use for shooting snowboarding but after reading posts I figure its totally not suited to fast action, with high possibilities for vibrations and shooting simultaneously with flash photography. I am already imagining it being much to heavy to follow-cam with.

Any ideas?
 
Not sure about the rolling shutter artifacts, other than they do become apparent with flash, but I do know that the ergonomics on this camera are regarded as pretty poor for handheld shooting. Front heavy, side heavy and just basically a big box with a lens. Do you shoot snowboarding mostly handheld or on sticks or a jib?

Dan
 
That's a good question. It may not be suitable due to weight. As far as rolling shutter, you may have to ask around if anyone has put it through this test.

Rolling shutter artifacts are there when tossing the camera around. How pronounced they show will depend on each situation. I shot some action soccer with the camera with fast hard panning. There was some skew, but with the motion blur due to the fast move, it was not real obvious (shot at 720 60P). Also there was not a lot of skew at that given fast pan speed, but it was there. Now having said that, I imagine it would be more obvious at higher frame rates and shutter speeds where the action has less blur.
 
puredrifting said:
Not sure about the rolling shutter artifacts, other than they do become apparent with flash, but I do know that the ergonomics on this camera are regarded as pretty poor for handheld shooting. Front heavy, side heavy and just basically a big box with a lens. Do you shoot snowboarding mostly handheld or on sticks or a jib?

Dan
Click to expand...

mostly tripod, pretty much only handheld if i'm shooting with a fisheye.
i bet that thing would be a beast with a fisheye on it... way too heavy.
 
Stevet said:
Also there was not a lot of skew at that given fast pan speed, but it was there. Now having said that, I imagine it would be more obvious at higher frame rates and shutter speeds where the action has less blur.
Click to expand...
It's actually the opposite: it's more obvious at slower frame rates. If you did a 90-degree pan in 1 second, you'd see more skewing if you shot 24p than if you shot 60p. The faster your frame rate, the faster the shutter scans down the frame.

Higher shutter speeds or slower shutter speeds have no effect on the amount of skew/wobble etc. But the slower your shutter speed, the more likely you'll hide the effect under blur. It'll be equally skewed etc., but less noticeable because it'll be blurrier due to a slower shutter speed.
 
Dan, I agree. And you and I often agree, don't we?

"I trust Barry's eye". So do I. And I'm not a Barry Green ass kissing psycophant. I won't buy the EX over his review. Frankly, I'm waiting patiently for his RED ultimatum. His views will literally make me order the camera or not.

To me it's like buying a Ferrari. If Michael Shumacher says the car sucks, it sucks, and I don't need to test it further. My time is way too valuable to prove someone more capable than I wrong.

Thanks for the thorough test, Barry. And thanks for saving me a bunch of time on purchasing gear.

FYI - If Barry says that tomorrow the new hot deal is a JVC - I'll buy it. I am totally brand agnostic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top