HVX vs. PMW-EX1

Status
Not open for further replies.
Perhaps it was just me, but even after going through the entire Vortex EX-1 DVD and spending about an hour with the menus, I cannot get colors that are nearly as pleasing to my eye as my HVX. Not that Sony colors are bad, they are quite good but definitely not the same feel and look as the HVX, even with tweaking a lot. Tried some "recipes" that I found on some other EX-1 boards as well and well, nothing made me go, "wow".

But definitely looks sharper, cleaner and very different than the HVX as well.

Dan
 
Consider that the XDCAM EX Codec is a Full Raster Codec along the lines of the HF10, etc. It should appear sharper because you're not throwing away the extra resolution that DVCproHD does.

I seriously can't wait for the convergent box to test this theory out, but I'm banking on a very noticable resolution leap. Will that be true? Time will tell.
 
For some reason I've never gotten past the fact that the ex1 just plaine looks like sharp video to me. Even when people apply all the different filters and color corrections I'm still not impressed, and have yet to see a clip from it that makes me say this looks like film.

Koli I've posted this question already but will ask here since i've gotten no response yet. Does the canon a1 have more lattitude then the hvx 200a? It seems like the highlights tend to blow out quicker on the hvx opposed to the canon a1.
 
The answer to that depends souly on which gamma you're using on the HVX200(A). The most Dynamic Range you can eck out of the HVX200 is in CineD, second CineV. If you have an A1 and 200A I suggest comparing with the 200A in CineD as the noise floor is so low that it's useable here. Also try CineV, it's less noisier than CineD and then BPress which is the least noisiest of all the gammas.

Color Matrix may vary.
 
I recorded many videos with DVX100a and HVX200, now I recorded 2 videos with the EX1.
The EX1 is sharp, I had nice light setup with HMI's , kinos, etc and after tweaking about 1 hour the camera, trying all gamma, reducing detail, adjusting color matrix, lowering pedestal, blacks, etc, etc, etc, it looks like video.
I can't get the EX1 to look like film, the Pana colors are cinematic and the texture is nice right from the camera.
Of course I can tweak the EX1 image in Post.
It is strange, but EX1 colors look correct, a beautiful image, but nothing compared to the Pana texture.
The EX1 is a true high definition camera, easy to check all image details in a large HD monitor, but looks like a sony handcam camera, video in all aspects.
Nice to broadcast sports and high definition images.
I'm not convinced yet, that's all.

Thanks,
Ulisses
 
Kholi said:
Consider that the XDCAM EX Codec is a Full Raster Codec along the lines of the HF10, etc. It should appear sharper because you're not throwing away the extra resolution that DVCproHD does.
Click to expand...


And Kholi you have hit upon why Richard is seeing what he is seeing with the movement in the EX1 footage. There is so much data, a full raster with no elegant prefilter to get rid of the non-contributing high frequencies, and it still has to fit into a 35mb package. In other words, 40% more info than that required on the 355 XDCAM HD camera. The way any of the XDCAM or HDV long GOP algorithms work is if there is too much detail and too much motion, meaning that the changes on the individual Predictive or Bi-directional is more than the codec can handle, it has no choice but to give away resolution. That is its first plan of saving itself. The same would happen in AVCHD but the algorithm is different in the structure.

See in MPEG2 the picture is broken down to equally sized 8 X 8 blocks and the MPEG4 AVCHD is variable on a moments notice, 4 X 4, 8 X 8, whatever the picture calls for, very intuitive. This is why AVCHD needs a little more horse-power to run, but also explains why Sony said in their own white paper on the AVCHD codec that 9 mbs in AVCHD is equal to HDV. It is an awesome codec and when you start using the codec at 21mbs, it is amazing what it looks like, this is where the HMC150 should step in and be very competitive with any long GOP small camera.

Moving to the I-Frame, or what I like to call Frame Independent resolution cameras the codecs are vastly easier to predict what is going to happen with the picture. I mean you wouldn't find a filmmaker take a camera out and not know what his film stock is going to do to the images. I-Frame is very predictable, motion blus is motion blur. Between CMOS and the Long GoP codecs, you really have a hard time predicting what is going to happen. There is a music video posted under the EX1 forum and the music isn't bad but the video is all over the map. Not that it isn't whell shot, but the CMOS is like working hard to just crush the man's efforts. Its a video about a guy coming home from the service. Frankly I just don't understand how you work with a camera that calls to be the "director." It frankly needs to say, you have to shoot this in this way with this camera or you will have these artifacts. Crazy. In the DVCPRO HD or the AVC-Intra codec(this has the variable thing I mentioned before, but is I-Frame) that softness goes away and the CCD makes the outcome predictable.

Panasonic may come out with a CMOS camera because the customers that don't know are buying the CMOS cameras and one could lead oneself to believe that what is being purchased is accepted. I can only hope that they figure out how to control the rolling shutter.

And Richard, the HDV cameras do the same thing, I saw it the first time I saw the Z1 footage in Park City. It was a football game and the scrimmage line was good but the crown in the background grew mushy, then cleared when the action stopped. You should take another look at the HVX201, and figure out how to use like the firestore, or the 32 GB cards in 720P 24Pn are 1 1/2 hours each. None the less 32 minutes in full frame rate isn't bad either and the codec is as easy to work with as DV.

All the best,

Jan
 
Last edited:
Quoting Jan:

Panasonic may come out with a CMOS camera because the customers that don't know are buying the CMOS cameras and one could lead oneself to believe that what is being purchased is accepted. I can only hope that they figure out how to control the rolling shutter.

END QUOTE

This is worrying indeed, Jan. I hope you didn't confirm to us that the next cameras from Panasonic Broadcast on the HVX price range will follow the CMOS route...(after the HPX170...)
 
Not really, but sometimes things are out of my control and the factory does what it thinks it has to do. Many people and there are a good number of them seem to find the issue with the rolling shutter something that they can work around, sort of yeah "I brought the wrong film stock but I can make this shot work if we block it this way."

There is a lot of pressure for the resolution of a CMOS imager which you cannot get on a CCD. My take is that it isn't what you make it is what you keep that counts and that works with the audience I have in front of me but not to the thousands that aren't there to review the examples. People understand the simplicity of numbers but not the ramifications of them. I have many picture that show the artifacts, but it may be the "new" artifact of the CMOS era. I am not saying that it is a fact that we are getting a CMOS, but I just have been in the business long enough that I know better than to say never.

Best,

Jan
 
Jan_Crittenden said:
Not really, but sometimes things are out of my control and the factory does what it thinks it has to do. Many people and there are a good number of them seem to find the issue with the rolling shutter something that they can work around, sort of yeah "I brought the wrong film stock but I can make this shot work if we block it this way."

There is a lot of pressure for the resolution of a CMOS imager which you cannot get on a CCD. My take is that it isn't what you make it is what you keep that counts and that works with the audience I have in front of me but not to the thousands that aren't there to review the examples. People understand the simplicity of numbers but not the ramifications of them. I have many picture that show the artifacts, but it may be the "new" artifact of the CMOS era. I am not saying that it is a fact that we are getting a CMOS, but I just have been in the business long enough that I know better than to say never.

Best,

Jan
Click to expand...

Well, at least we know the care for a filmic image, the cinegamma technology and the fantastic codecs (avc intra and dvcproHD) will continue to give an edge in the cmos driven era...

Sincerely, the EX1 and 3 were in my radar for a very long time, but the Sony video look is just not acceptable for me.

Its true you can do wonders in post, but there's just an organic uniformity to the Cine D Picture of the HVX/HPX that I can't find in other video cameras on the price range. Its the way the colors are handled, the highlights, the dinamic range and even the bokeh of the stock lens.

This Jan, we can expect, even if Panasonic goes the Cmos route, right?
 
Some years ago I thought about using a Digital Photo Camera to record movies, using the nice resolution and DOF, probably Red was thinking about it as well :)

Rolling Shutter should be critical in some situations, but what we mainly see are tests making rolling shutter visible.
I really don't think today EX1 rolling shutter is too bad, I recorded 3 videos with the EX1 and didn't get any visible rolling shutter problem.
Maybe Barry could release a Rolling Shutter Pan Speed Table :)
It is great to have the extra resolution to work on post, even for chroma-keys.
So cmos can be a personal / project preference, but should be nice the"DVCPRO HD on 1/2inch CMOS with Panasonic filmic look" combination as an option.

Ulisses
 
Wow, all these issues to be squabbled over.
Whats a few pixels here and there,,,,,,geez I love my DVX! Just so simple.
Prosumer HD is soooo immature its not funny!
 
Questuion for Panasonic's Jan

Questuion for Panasonic's Jan

Is there a release date for the HPX 170? I want to buy one even if the wise men of the world vote on the EX1.
please reply, if you donn't mind, to falves1@hotmail.com
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top