HVX200A and HPX170 "noise" testing results

I used the HPX170 on Cold Calls (granted it was Barry's camera) and it was spotless....

But you know what? Ive gotten REALLY clean footage from the HVX for years. The trick is to expose it right. And im not talking keep everything above 30 IRE. I'm talking Use the entirety of its Dynamic range and making sure the middle tones in reality are middle tones in the camera. Highlights be damned. If you add fill, and use bright lights you can lower the shooting contrast to one that looks natural on camera, and gives the camera what it needs. Light.

I turned the Coring off on my cameras, always. Drop your Chroma level to -4, Keep the master ped in a normal state Where "black" hits 0 IRE, and youre fine. Regardless of Gamma. Brpess, CinelikeD etc... it looks Razor sharp, and full use of the DR gives the DSP somethign to work with.

WE reviewed footage on my Panny Monitor the 900a and it was gorgeous. Watched Cold calls in 1080P on JAcks consumer 1080p TV.... Gorgeous. Hey guess what... parts of Cold calls was shot with... GASP.... +6 Db gain! CAn you tell? no. ( and its not the parts you would think i would need it either....)

Infact BArry made fun of me for thre days callign me 10 IRE civan, because of some of backgrounds on the low key shots were hovering at 10 IRE... but the actors were always properly exposed..... jack brought it down in post to make it look dark.
 
Some people see differently, that's just going to be it. I certainly don't think it's anywhere near noiseless. Cleaner, but nowhere near. Well exposed or not the camera is always noisey. But, there are others that will see differently and be extremely happy with it. That's a good thing!

EX1? Not noiseless, but definitely cleaner.

RED? Well, maybe I'm just used to daylit 320 ISO...

I guess everyone will see something different.


Alex -- Check out some of the TwilightFest entries. The EX1 has the best opening shot. Can't remember the short, but it was probably the best looking shot in the fest, for me anyway.

EX1 plays really well with RED, there are some scary things about it but after this HPX170 thing I'm reconsidering heavily. Not the hammer, the carpenter yadda yadda mantra. It's not a significant step forward in image quality. Functionality? Yes. I think I might be griping MORE because I was planning to shoot a feature early next year with Ultimate + HPX170 strictly because of how much faster I can move with the setup. I'm not even going to bother and just grab a RED and some Zeiss ZFs on a barebones setup... or I'll be kicking myself in the ass in the end.

Oh well, Horse is on its way out. Probably just let it die in peace.
 
well dude.... i guess you asking for unrealistic expectations on technology right now. At least at the 5,000$ price point.

Sure a $90,000 F900s looks Clean... but its the 90,000 $ part i take issue with.....

I think the EX1 and the 170/200a are more than AMAZING for the price. Be happy you hae these options. S16 isnt really any cleaner than a HVX200... maybe 100 speed film... or 64 Asa film.. but nothing thats 400 ISO and up. the combination of sensitivity, and ease of use... I just cant complain about a tiny smidgen of noise in an image.
 
kholi I think we share the same ideas as far as both cams are concerned and well here is my humble conclusion, ex1 is razor sharp and almost noiseles and gives you non filmic look, 170 is more filmlike stock, now hold on I personally think that both cams are for different kind of people cuz some people want(need) a image that is clean and sharp and "noisefree" they don't care about the image looking filmlike they go with the ex1, I know a lot of people in this situation and there is the people looking for an image that may not be noisefree and renders colorsndifferentpy they go with panni, regarding red well I don't want to piss anyone off but take that nick cage movie kholi mentioned, it looks friken good because it was tranfered to 35 mm after the DI point is that to my eyes red footie has unique look to it,not filmlike not videoish, somewhere in the middle and could very much be the look of the future... Only time will tell
 
Timur I thought you wanted to buy an ex1 for urself, has that changed?


TimurCivan said:
well dude.... i guess you asking for unrealistic expectations on technology right now. At least at the 5,000$ price point.

Sure a $90,000 F900s looks Clean... but its the 90,000 $ part i take issue with.....

I think the EX1 and the 170/200a are more than AMAZING for the price. Be happy you hae these options. S16 isnt really any cleaner than a HVX200... maybe 100 speed film... or 64 Asa film.. but nothing thats 400 ISO and up. the combination of sensitivity, and ease of use... I just cant complain about a tiny smidgen of noise in an image.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
i do. but im poor.... f'now...... (crosses fingers while eating sardines and ramen)

(actually i want both.....)
 
TimurCivan said:
well dude.... i guess you asking for unrealistic expectations on technology right now. At least at the 5,000$ price point.

Sure a $90,000 F900s looks Clean... but its the 90,000 $ part i take issue with.....

I think the EX1 and the 170/200a are more than AMAZING for the price. Be happy you hae these options. S16 isnt really any cleaner than a HVX200... maybe 100 speed film... or 64 Asa film.. but nothing thats 400 ISO and up. the combination of sensitivity, and ease of use... I just cant complain about a tiny smidgen of noise in an image.
Click to expand...

When did I say the Ex1 wasn't fine? It's certainly better than the 170. I'm not expecting anything but the same clean image that was in the 200A. Has zip to do with price.

And has nothing to do with much more than having expected the 200A image. It's really not a difficult concept. If you're happy with the image and happen to think it's clean then great!

Horse is dead. New cams are right around the corner so no big deal. As long as the camera makes money Its doing its job.

Keep doin what ya do.
 
Last edited:
Okay, Jan sent my 170 back, it arrived yesterday. I looked at it and didn't see much change in noise. Jan sent me screen grabs that showed the 170 at least as quiet as a 200A, especially with coring at +2, yet I wasn't seeing much difference in person. I wanted to wait until I could do a side by side with a 200A. Got the 200A, waited for my 1700 to come back from rental today, connected all via component, switched via Extron RGBHV switcher.

Here are my findings:

My 170 is noisier via HD SDI than component. This is something Barry called early on as a
possibility.

The 200A and 170 are now the same sensitivity wise, as Barry and Jan said they are.

Using component, the noise is very similar, my 170 for the first time can look quieter when
coring is at +2, but it looks a tad softer to me than the 200A with coring at 0.

The cameras are difficult to match, have to use color temp. at +2 on the 200A, and even with both in Cine D, Film Cam, Filmlike Matrix, matched blacks, etc, there is still some difference in tonality. No big deal--the good news is the noise is very, very similar. Until I monitor the 170 in HD SDI, then it gets noisier.

So, Jan's reset of scene files and user files brought sensitivity and noise down and component out is quieter than HD SDI. Both cameras are noisier than I'm used to with my 2/3" cameras, but no surprise there.

Thank you to Jan and Barry once again, I believe I have a camera that is representative of
what other 170's look like and can feel good about offering it to my clients.
 
Yes, that is the big question. A couple of weeks ago I recorded various charts with both cameras, got high res. screen grabs of each camera and chart and I couldn't tell the difference, nor could Adam Wilt. Sometimes the 200A looked better, sometimes the 170 looked better. This was before my camera was reset.

I will do test records again, but want to look at the footage in real time vs. stills.
 
I just checked the new videos out. I still can't figure out what the better/cleaner gamma setting would be. Anyone have an opinion on this? I sorta felt like the B Press was the best.
 
Sorry but how do I reset my 170 to factory settings? couldn't find the "little button" neither the place on the menu...
 
BXL said:
Sorry but how do I reset my 170 to factory settings? couldn't find the "little button" neither the place on the menu...
Click to expand...

No reset button, just menu control of scene file and user file reset.

I looked at charts split screened in FCP between 200A and 170. With both cameras in Cine D and coring at 0, the 170 had sharper noise, so coring on the 170 a +2 is a better match to a 200A with coring a 0, just as Barry said.

I do not feel, however, that my 170 is natively sharper than a 200A, just that the camera looks sharper due to detail circuit when coring is at 0 on both cameras.
 
Is chroma noise worse on the 170 than on the 200A all settings manipulation aside? And if so, but you can tweak it to look the same as the 200A, won't that leave you with less of a range of play than the 200A without adjustment?
 
No, noise is similar on both, assuming coring at +2 on 170, 0 on 200A. HD SDI out from 170 allows more high frequency detail and noise from detail circuit. Chroma noise is similar on both viewed in component and on NLE.
 
Sorry to bother and resurrect the dead horse.

I tried viewing Barry's video tests (200Avs170-noise/-12db) on a CRT monitor and a LCD monitor. On the CRT the 200A is noisier. But the on the LCD, the 170 is noisier.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top