First Shoot Impressions of HVX200

[stabwound]

Joelnet:

Now that you've compared the Z1 and the hvx side by side, can you comment on other aspects while it's fresh in your mind?

Other than noise, how well does the Hvx compare resolutionwise, and colorwise?

I'd love your opinion.

Is your z1 buddy blown away by the HVX, or is he doing the ho-hum?

Thanks

 

[joelnet]

Other than noise, how well does the Hvx compare resolutionwise, and colorwise?
Is your z1 buddy blown away by the HVX, or is he doing the ho-hum?

I'm new to the HVX - I just got it 2 days ago... add huge grain of salt now.

To answer your question - as far as the overall image quality I think he was doing the ho-hum but he did think it was more filmlike. Truthfully, the Z1 looks really good - but it has other problems. No 24p being just one. He listed off a handful of issues that he doesn't like about they Sony while we were talking. He's definitely looking for his next camera right now. This guy has been shooting for 10+ years and just got done shooting an Indie feature with an F900. He's got a critical eye... moreso than I do. I just know what I like and don't like.

The noise on the HVX clips has always bugged me, but it's starting to grow on me and I'm not sure you'll see it at normal viewing distances in real world situations. Your content will kickass or it won't.

I like the color rendition on the HVX better. I preferred fairly flat color settings. He got the Sony into the same range, but I don't think it was as accurate. We had a pretty tough little color torture test lit by a Kino set up and I think the HVX rendered the colors well across the board. I thought the Sony was more contrasty and shifted some colors more but we didn't have a DSC Labs chart there.

I did feel the Sony was a much better low light performer. You can call the HVX "faster" all you want... but when you can crank the gain on the Sony and still not introduce much noise it's a full stop and a half faster than the HVX. We'll probably do some more structured tests... but side by side there seemed to be no doubt. The Sony is clean, clean, clean... even on my Dell 2405 which some have been saying shows the noise "too brutally". Again, that was component input and not HDV recording.

The HVX still handles relatively low light pretty well... but it sure seems a lot happier with a lot of light.

I've got another friend with the HD100... I've played with it too. My impression on it so far is it seems sharper than the HVX, is probably less noisy, but has more CA and breathes a lot when you rack focus. The HVX doesn't breath much at all when you rack. Can't comment on the JVC color rendering yet. The HVX has an awesome macro... the focus works better than I thought and there's even a little "Spot Meter" function built in which I think is AWESOME but no one talks about much. You can use that to quickly evaluate the constrast of an entire scene right in the viewfinder. Very Kewl. The ND Filters are very useful too.

If you're a DVX100 fan and want an HDized DVX then I think the HVX 200 is that.

Now... I wish I knew someone with the Canon XLH1 near me... (hint) - I could put together the kinda 4-way shootout I'd like see...

 

[Justin_Kirch]

If there's noise, I'd just crush the blacks a little more so the shadows pop out more. I wouldn't care about this unless I was doing a film out.

 

[Emanuel]

the HVX noise is way less noticeable than with the DVX, in my opinion.



true, 1/2" gives better performance in low light. but this Sony XDCAM HD in the article you point to is essentially a $30,000 HDV camera: 35mbs (for 1920x1080) long GOP MPEG-2, 4:2:0 color. if it were I-frame only and a much higher bit rate, it would be much better. but it's $17,000 for the body and $12,000 for a HD lens.



i think the HVX image would blow up pretty well. i saw some 1920x1080 projected on a big screen and it looked great. it was professionally lit and shot. otherwise you could wait for the upcoming:

"The new AJ-HPC2000 is equipped with three HD resolution 2/3” CCDs and 14-bit A/D processing, offering exceptional dynamic range and low light recording in the 720p or 1080i HD and 480i SD formats. The 2/3” CCD imager allows the use of widely-available professional quality lenses and accessories. The camcorder offers high sensitivity (F10 at 2000 lux), and can capture images at a minimum illumination of 0.032 lux (at +62dB), addressing the most challenging requirements of broadcasters."

-from news at Panasonic.

at a price comparable to the 1/2" XDCAM HD, in november.

Thanks for your input!

Regarding F330 there is the $17,000 version L (without lens) and the $22,000 version K (with Canon HD lens) -- not $30,000 lens combo

 

[Emanuel]

If there's noise, I'd just crush the blacks a little more so the shadows pop out more. I wouldn't care about this unless I was doing a film out.

That will be a great problem if blown-up to big screen. The main doubt it is if a noise reducing program can solve the problem at post without to loose resolution [?].

Will it be possible?

 

[stabwound]

If you're a DVX100 fan and want an HDized DVX then I think the HVX 200 is that.

Now... I wish I knew someone with the Canon XLH1 near me... (hint) - I could put together the kinda 4-way shootout I'd like see...

Thanks for answering my queries.

While I'm a bit down with the res and noise aspects of the HVX, it's still the camera I want to buy.

Keep them comparisons a'comin, Joelnet. I look forward to reading them.