HPX170 with SDI recorder

Code Rad

Code Rad

Active member
Forgive me if this has been covered.

Will the HPX170 in conjunction with one of the up coming sdi recorders produce significantly better images in 1080p than DVCPROHD in cam?

I mean I know the resolution would be higher 1960 vs 1280, but can the chipset really perform at 1960h? Or is it 1280 native?
 
Read Here: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=134256

Lots of speculation by me. No one can say just yet whether the addition of a nanoFlash unit will be beneficial to the HPX170 as far as full-raster recording goes.

I have been suspecting so but who really knows for sure?

I think the MPEG-2 Compression Scheme worries some people, I am admittedly ignorant as to why it would be a deal breaker and hope to learn more soon.
 
The MPEG-2 Compression scheme is a problem in that it uses the Long GoP compression scheme which tends to cause what has been termed "jellovision" in fast pans, action footage, or where anything moves even moderately fast. From my research, I think it's due to the VBR function and the fact that the compressor can't keep up with so much moving data.

Pros, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, 'cause I probably am... this is just what I've picked up over the last five weeks of research on HD compression schemes.
 
davbeisner said:
The MPEG-2 Compression scheme is a problem in that it uses the Long GoP compression scheme which tends to cause what has been termed "jellovision" in fast pans, action footage, or where anything moves even moderately fast. From my research, I think it's due to the VBR function and the fact that the compressor can't keep up with so much moving data.

Pros, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, 'cause I probably am... this is just what I've picked up over the last five weeks of research on HD compression schemes.
Click to expand...

I don't think that Jellovisiion has to do with the compression scheme. It's from the Rolling Shutter.

The Sony Codec has the ability to be Long-GOP or I-Frame as well with the nanoFlash. Perhaps it was just a low-bitrate deal.

NanoFlash will allow up to 100mbps Long-GOP and 160mpbs I-Frame, both greater than XDcamEx or DVCproHD and both Full raster.

That's why I got confused on why MPEG-2 might be a bad choice if it's higher bitrates to begin with.
 
Thank you Kholi for that link. After reading the thread, what really stuck out was that, according to Barry, the HVX/HPX chipset can produce about 1400 X 800. That is what was worrying me about this new recorder/camera combo. Dont get me wrong, i like my HVX just fine, but the thought of full raster 1080 X 1960 is very desirable.

Perhaps there is another camera out there that could optomize the 1080 X 1960 SDI recording better than the HPX170. I believe most Canon/Sony Prosumer CCDs put out only 1080 X 1440 right?

What I'm really looking for is a chipset that has true 1080 X 1960 resolution, handles 24p, and is NOT cmos.
 
Oh you and me both. I want Full Raster myself, every bit of information I can eck out for my money is always going to be desirable. the main thing is to figure out how much better this is going to be versus DVCproHD.

Is the difference noticable A and B, is it worth the price tag?
 
Code Rad said:
What I'm really looking for is a chipset that has true 1080 X 1960 resolution, handles 24p, and is NOT cmos.
Click to expand...
HPX3000, at $48,000.

Nothing short of that. You can't pack that many pixels on the chip and have progressive readout, on a CCD. That's one of the main reasons CMOS is becoming popular in small-chip HD cameras, is because it does allow for that pixel density.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top