HVX200 vs HMC150 - what kind of user needs what?

F

filmguy123

Veteran
So I have an HVX200, but as I look at the HMC150, I'm actually wondering if I should sell my HVX200 to get this step down. Even if I don't, I'm wondering - what kind of user needs what (even if they can afford both)?

DVCPro-HD records at 100 megabits a second, versus AVC-HD which does 13-24 megabits per second... but Barry, you said this is irrelevant, as the bit stream depends on the codec... so a lower bitrate w/AVC-HD looks better than the same bitrate with MPEG-2 (HDV)...

So the question is, how does 13-24 megabit AVC-HD compare to 100 megabit DVCPro-HD? Is DVCPRO-HD noticeably better? If so, *how* noticeably? What kind of users need DVCPro-HD? What kind of users could use and be completely happy with AVC-HD? Is the quality difference likely to really be that noticeable?

Will editing AVC-HD require significantly more processing power (but less HDD space & bandwidth)?

Oh and also, what is the difference between long-GOP frame compression VS intra frame? I know intra compresses within a single frame and GOP is group of pictures... but what does this mean practically? I don't REALLY get how it plays out, affects quality, etc.
 
We can't answer your questions yet. All we have to go on is a press release. Nobody's seen a working model or footage or even a finalized specification sheet yet.

The only question I can answer clearly is yes, AVC-HD requires much more computing horsepower than DVCPRO-HD, and requires more horesepower than MPEG-2/HDV.

As for the GOP vs. I-Frame, there's tons and tons and tons written about that. It's not the easiest question to answer because it depends on the length of the GOP. I-frame is always consistent no matter what, and it is the easiest and fastest to edit, and all professional formats have always been I-frame-only; XDCAM is the first foray into a professional format to actually use a GOP. Interframe can cause mild to serious problems with blocking and artifacting whenever too much changes from frame to frame, but it also depends on the bandwidth and the quality of the codec. Early Sony FX1s and JVC HD100s could be pushed into totally falling apart in many circumstances; the new EX1 is actually quite robust and it's difficult to put it in a situation where it falls apart. I expect AVC-HD to be comparably resilient when run at high bitrates (20 to 24mbps) but -- we won't KNOW until we see it.
 
Last edited:
filmguy, I understand your concerns. I share them. I will be in a position to buy and am considering hvx200 and hmc150. I am going to have to wait until we can see how the footage will compare.

I didn't know about the increased processing horsepower to edit avchd. Will a macbook pro with intel 2.33 core 2 duo and 2 gigs of ram work for avchd?
 
On the flip side, it requires much less HDD space and HDD bandwidth... so you may spend a lot less on storage...

But I need to do some research on the editing stuff and problems with editing GOP compression apparently.
 
After hanging up my camera for several years and working in a broadcast facility I have spent way to much time focusing on bitrates and GOP Structure. In all this time I have never heard it put into the simple, easy to understand way Barry just did.

My opinion, having viewing literally Hundreds of thousands of Digital Videos, is we will not know until somebody here gets one and uses it.

Am I gonna postpone buy 2 or 3 new DVX-100B's. Maybe? Either way you cut it the HVX and DVX are here and are time-tested, but the near future looks fun!
 
pitstain said:
Will a macbook pro with intel 2.33 core 2 duo and 2 gigs of ram work for avchd?
Click to expand...
Depends on what software you run on it. If you're running EDIUS Neo under Windows, yes you can probably get a stream of AVC-HD in realtime. If you're running FCP, you're stuck with FCP's lame implementation where they require you to transcode to ProRes 422, which is really just ignorant because the transcode is going to take a long time and will drive your file sizes up by something like 4x to 8x.

Let's hope Apple gets native AVC-HD editing so their silly little workaround won't penalize AVC-HD users by requiring them to spend extra time importing, and lots of money on extra hard disks.
 
filmguy123 said:
On the flip side, it requires much less HDD space and HDD bandwidth... so you may spend a lot less on storage...
Click to expand...
Yes, when implemented in a proper native-codec way. But if you're forced to transcode the footage to a new codec, then it'll take up a lot more space.
 
Barry_Green said:
Depends on what software you run on it.
Click to expand...

Now I have an updated version of FCP 5 from final cut studio. I hope to be able to upgrade to the new studio 2 at the time I have to purchase the camera.

Hopefully this workaround will be fixed by then. I'm also wondering if the hvx update [whenever that is] incorporates avc intra or if it sticks to dvcpro. If it sticks to dvcpro and avchd isn't as nice a deal to work with,...then my decision is easier.
 
I really hope the next HVX version allows DVCPRO-HD, AVC-Intra, and AVC-HD, as well as supports use of either P2 or SDHC cards. I can see they might not include AVC-Intra, but as for the other stuff, why not include it? It's a higher model, it should allow you to shoot more space/cost efficient if you desire.
 
no way would I sell my HVX for that camera. (Contemplating a Red One purchase anyhow)
I would however jump ship for the successor to the HVX. I would imagine the next gen HVX would be BADASS considering the leaps forward in technology. Just looking at this camera, slated as the replacement to the DVX, the replacement HVX should have us all drooling.
My only hopes are that P2 is going to be utilized still in some way down the road.
 
P2 supports bandwidth of up to 640Mbps, for reasons of offloading and editing multiple streams straight off the P2 card. Recording wise, 100Mbps is as high as it gets with either AVC-Intra100, or DVCPRO-HD.

What bandwidth does SDHC support?
 
I'll just go on record and mention that the AVCHD spec lists 24Mbps as the max. The HMC150 in PH mode does this (actually 21Mbps+audio)
 
As an Apple user, I wouldn't touch this format until Apple updates FCP to work with it more efficiently. I have read user reports and tests where, as Barry said, you end up needing a TON more processing power and HD space. I have a PPC G5 that won't even handle Pro Res 422 so for me to use this format, I would have to lay out another $3,500.00 for a new Mac Pro as well.

HPX-170 for me!

Dan
 
puredrifting said:
As an Apple user, I wouldn't touch this format until Apple updates FCP to work with it more efficiently. I have read user reports and tests where, as Barry said, you end up needing a TON more processing power and HD space. I have a PPC G5 that won't even handle Pro Res 422 so for me to use this format, I would have to lay out another $3,500.00 for a new Mac Pro as well.

HPX-170 for me!

Dan
Click to expand...

Your comment is correct in that the FCS Log & Transfer requires an Intel Mac but you don't really need a new computer to use an HMC150. You can use Toast 9 on your G5 to transcode the HMC into the HPX170 codec (or any other of your choice).

If you are already invested in P2 that is one thing... Yes, with an HPX170 you would save time on ingest not having to transcode but the hard drive space required would be identical if you edit in DVCProHD. Myself, I have more time than money so I am willing to do a few workarounds or wait for updates or whatever it takes... Plus I love having the "bleeding edge" latest camera that computers have not caught up to yet! :Drogar-Love(DBG):
 
mmmm.. that's interesting about Toast. I'm going to be buying that for the disk spanning feature and it's currently I believe one of the only ways to make a blue-ray disk...


I can tell you though that most 3rd party software options are really slow... and as far as the price difference, drifting.. if you bought the 150, with the price savings.. you'd be able to buy that 8 core mac pro and what a combo that would be....
 
If your system can't handle prores, it probably needs an upgrade as it is. Log & Transfer to ProRes would be a great way to go with the HMC150 footage, just as it is with HDV footage.

When you factor in the extra cost of HPX-170 + P2 over that of the HMC150 w/comparable storage AND a new computer along with it, you're looking at the same ballpark.
 
filmguy123 said:
If your system can't handle prores, it probably needs an upgrade as it is. Log & Transfer to ProRes would be a great way to go with the HMC150 footage, just as it is with HDV footage.

When you factor in the extra cost of HPX-170 + P2 over that of the HMC150 w/comparable storage AND a new computer along with it, you're looking at the same ballpark.
Click to expand...

Yes, but my old chugger PPC G5 with the Kona 3 will live very happily with the HPX-170. For my clients, DVCProHD is more than high enough quality, I have not yet felt the need to move to ProRes as few of my projects are graphically intensive.

I get depressed at the thought of having to transcode every card shot anyway, that steals all of the fun of shooting solid state for me anyway. It's a drag already having to wrap the P2 media in QuickTime for FCP, but RayLight mitigates that issue for me.

You guys have fun with the HMC, my HPX shows up on Wednesday according to UPS.

Cheers!

Dan
 
puredrifting said:
I get depressed at the thought of having to transcode every card shot anyway, that steals all of the fun of shooting solid state for me anyway. It's a drag already having to wrap the P2 media in QuickTime for FCP, but RayLight mitigates that issue for me.

You guys have fun with the HMC, my HPX shows up on Wednesday according to UPS.

Cheers!

Dan
Click to expand...

Congrats on the purchase! I'm jealous.

It is highly probable that FCP will support native AVCHD editing with it's next major release which is due to come out sometime soon.
 
puredrifting said:
Yes, but my old chugger PPC G5 with the Kona 3 will live very happily with the HPX-170. For my clients, DVCProHD is more than high enough quality, I have not yet felt the need to move to ProRes as few of my projects are graphically intensive.

I get depressed at the thought of having to transcode every card shot anyway, that steals all of the fun of shooting solid state for me anyway. It's a drag already having to wrap the P2 media in QuickTime for FCP, but RayLight mitigates that issue for me.

You guys have fun with the HMC, my HPX shows up on Wednesday according to UPS.

Cheers!

Dan
Click to expand...

Congrats on your HPX170! It's truly an awesome camera and no question superior to the HMC150. Regarding transcoding and ProRes: as suggested already, this is just a temporary symptom of the HMC150's newness. CS4 edits AVCHD natively very well and others will surely follow.
 
puredrifting said:
You guys have fun with the HMC, my HPX shows up on Wednesday according to UPS.

Cheers!

Dan
Click to expand...

Well don't get me wrong, I was just trying to show you the options! :) I actually won't be having fun with the HMC150 as I am a HVX200/P2 owner myself. I'd love to upgrade to the HPX170 so I'm jealous!

Also as a side note, I did see that Panny is offering a free utility that transcodes the AVCHD files to DVCPRO, so actually, you could still even work with DVCPRO files in editing if that was an issue.

True, you'd have to transcode, but that's also part of the whole saving tons of money deal. And really, it's not that big of a deal. On a good computer, it doesn't add that much time to the ingest of the footage anyway, and it's still faster than tape.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top