HVX vs JVC noise - Panic in Pany town?

[jdv]

The noise level of the HVX is now, seemingly, becoming a really big deal.

Barry says that the JVC is noisier than the HVX, yet I have heard little to no complants from us JVC users.

I don't find there to be a lot of noise w/the JVC- but I haven't really put the camera through it's paces yet.

So, what gives? Guys, what's your perception on this issue?

John

 

[dashwood]

I haven't had an opportunity to compare the HVX200 with the HD100 yet. However, my general impression is that the HD100 is less noisy than the DVX100 after the HDV footage has been downconverted SD, and both sources are played on an NTSC monitor.

 

[Stevet]

I have not done a side by side, but from what I've seen, I believe the JVC is cleaner. We almost ran that test today, but got wrapped up shooting footage.

 

[jlames]

We tested all of the cameras side-by-side under all conditions including low light requiring gain. My checkbook speaks for itself. We selected the JVC with basically no limit on the purchase price motivating my guys. They tested and tested and tested under every imaginable condition and purchased 5 JVC 100s with another 5 or 6 on order. That's $25,000 + $25 or $35,000 more that I spent with my productions company's name on the line. If we don't produce the best possible look and feel, we don't sell our shows, period. So what else do you need to hear? For us, JVC is the best product out there which is why the committment was made...and it's no small committment. NBC is following suit although, as NBCshooter will tell you, they're also ordering a couple of the the HVXs but the majority purchase is JVC. 'Nuf said?

 

[Emanuel]

Well, I liked hear you Jonathan. And your convictions, as well. Until June, no later than July, I must have a decision on my table.

My favourite pictures are from the HD100. But because my work it will be always to film-out@big_screen, I'm thinking in Canon 'cause the resolution. I'm afraid that 720p cannot be enough to blow-up. That's why I also have the Sony's XDCAM-HD as potential solution. What do you think?

Concerning to noise issue what's the difference level comparing 1/2" 1440x1080 chip with the 1/3" 120x720 chip of the HD100 to low lighting purposes?

The AF possibility to run & gun doc work will be appreciated and despite the manual controls of the JVC, unfortunately, it doesn't have choice. HVX, regarding the nature of my work, only if there will be a noise solution that I'm not sure of that achievment so soon. Before a CCD set replacement to other one more powerful. Although the nice pictures that produces.

But the resolution concern is to me the major one considering the goal of my HD purchase. With a 1280x720 workflow will there be rez enough@35mm?

 

[joelnet]

But the resolution concern is to me the major one considering the goal of my HD purchase. With a 1280x720 workflow will there be rez enough@35mm?

You're going to have to test that one yourself. But on the noise, I'd say the JVC is either less noisy or less noticeable for some reason. I think the way the Panasonic noise swims in one part of the exposure but not another might be what's catching everyone's eye.

 

[Emanuel]

You're going to have to test that one yourself.

Yeah, yeah but I'd like hear you all...

 

[filmguy1974]

My favourite pictures are from the HD100. But because my work it will be always to film-out@big_screen, I'm thinking in Canon 'cause the resolution. I'm afraid that 720p cannot be enough to blow-up.

You're kind of cutting off your own nose to spite your face by looking at things this way...

None of these sub 10k cameras can actually fully resolve even 1280x720, so concerning yourself with how a 1080 blowup will look vs. a 720 blowup is kind of mute. Additionally, the Canon can only deliver higher resolution than the JVC in one operating mode: its native 1080i format. If you're shooting on the Canon for filmout, you'll be using 24f, which deinterlaces the image on the fly, effectively reducing it's vertical res from 800 lines to about 500. If your main consideration for filmout is resolution and resolution alone- the JVC will actually be the better option for you at the end of the day.

Also bear in mind that Panasonic's Varicam has a very, very good reputation as a filmout camera, and it shoots native 720p.

 

[stephenlnoe]

Also bear in mind that Panasonic's Varicam has a very, very good reputation as a filmout camera, and it shoots native 720p.

Yes and no.

Yes the Varicam is a great camera and has a great reputation.

No it is not native 720p. It's format is 720p derrived from 960x720.

The ProHD spec is full 1280x720 (albeit a different colorspace). This full rez ProHD is why people are chomping at the bit to see what the GY-HD7000 brings to the table. ProHD was genious and we are waiting to see what surprises there are with the codec at NAB.

 

[Ralph Oshiro]

NBC is following suit although, as NBCshooter will tell you, they're also ordering a couple of the the HVXs but the majority purchase is JVC. 'Nuf said?

The show I shoot for has five DVX100As. We are buying one more DVX100B and one HVX200. I know that MTV bought a bunch of HD100s, and that Wire Image just bought three HD100s. Our show hasn't purchased any HD100s. Which unit of NBC did you hear purchased HD100s?

 

[Ralph Oshiro]

Concerning to noise issue what's the difference level comparing 1/2" 1440x1080 chip with the 1/3" 120x720 chip of the HD100 to low lighting purposes?

All else being equal (which I know, they're not) a 1/2" CCD will be more sensitive and have less noise than a 1/3" CCD. Even given those pixel spec differences, I'm sure the 1/2" CCD will produce superior (quieter) pictures to any 1/3" CCD.

 

[filmguy1974]

Yes and no.

Yes the Varicam is a great camera and has a great reputation.

No it is not native 720p. It's format is 720p derrived from 960x720.

The ProHD spec is full 1280x720 (albeit a different colorspace). This full rez ProHD is why people are chomping at the bit to see what the GY-HD7000 brings to the table. ProHD was genious and we are waiting to see what surprises there are with the codec at NAB.

Sure- it has to conform to the DVCProHD 720 spec- I wasn't looking to bog the post down with too many more numbers, though.

In the end- we're just combining to bolster the point even more that there's no reason to favor any of the sub $10K 1080 cams over the JVC simply because of the 1080 vs. 720 debate. If resolution is all that Emanuel cares about- then he needs to know that it doesn't do him any good to blow up a 1080 image from the Canon with a measurable vertical res in the ballpark of 500 lines when the JVC can get you closer to 700 lines on a 720p frame size.

The Canon's an awesome cam when you're playing to its strengths- I'm just not so sure that 24f for filmout is really one of them...

 

[jlames]

That was me, NBC shooter. Everyone errors somtime and this time it was my turn. I confused you with another ENG shooter on another network show I know. You were speaking of the Panny 100As NBC just bought. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[stephenlnoe]

In the end- we're just combining to bolster the point even more that there's no reason to favor any of the sub $10K 1080 cams over the JVC simply because of the 1080 vs. 720 debate. If resolution is all that Emanuel cares about- then he needs to know that it doesn't do him any good to blow up a 1080 image from the Canon with a measurable vertical res in the ballpark of 500 lines when the JVC can get you closer to 700 lines on a 720p frame size.

Exactly, you'd have to pay out a LOT more money in order to get a better filmout camera and if you're talking straight 1080p (not interpolated) then you going way up the food chain. For the money it's impossible to beat the HD-100 right now for a budget film workflow.

I agree..

 

[filmguy1974]

Exactly, you'd have to pay out a LOT more money in order to get a better filmout camera and if you're talking straight 1080p (not interpolated) then you going way up the food chain. For the money it's impossible to beat the HD-100 right now for a budget film workflow.

I agree..

I've been lucky enough to be able to demo an HD100 over the last couple weeks, (I'm starting to wonder if our A/V rep has forgotten he dropped it off, not that that would be such a bad thing...) and I have to say that I'm just completely in love with it. It just feels right.

Heck, I have to be careful- my wife's starting to get jealous and I haven't even bought one yet...

 

[Emanuel]

Thank you all for the input.

You're kind of cutting off your own nose to spite your face by looking at things this way...

None of these sub 10k cameras can actually fully resolve even 1280x720, so concerning yourself with how a 1080 blowup will look vs. a 720 blowup is kind of mute. Additionally, the Canon can only deliver higher resolution than the JVC in one operating mode: its native 1080i format. If you're shooting on the Canon for filmout, you'll be using 24f, which deinterlaces the image on the fly, effectively reducing it's vertical res from 800 lines to about 500. If your main consideration for filmout is resolution and resolution alone- the JVC will actually be the better option for you at the end of the day.

My background is the film and not even as cinematographer. My tools are the writing, as well, the financing and the directing. And my point now it's to enter@HD. Although I've had all the way to do it with DV but the only video that I've known, it was Sony's Betacam as producer and nothing more than that, to the national TV network where I'm coming from.

But all the transfers that I've seen from DV if they doesn't appeal to my work, at least they have captured my attention and approval to upcoming HD.

If you are saying that these cams -- I presume 1/3" CCD ones, they don't resolve even 1280x720, even if, as matter of fact, I don't know your background, what I can say...

In the end- we're just combining to bolster the point even more that there's no reason to favor any of the sub $10K 1080 cams over the JVC simply because of the 1080 vs. 720 debate. If resolution is all that Emanuel cares about- then he needs to know that it doesn't do him any good to blow up a 1080 image from the Canon with a measurable vertical res in the ballpark of 500 lines when the JVC can get you closer to 700 lines on a 720p frame size.

The Canon's an awesome cam when you're playing to its strengths- I'm just not so sure that 24f for filmout is really one of them...

Regarding Canon's lower rez@F_mode, actually, I had the same opinion as you. After reading the rez reports, my idea was that 50i it would be better than any other Canon's mode. But Barlow Elton -- who's background I have enough information, he has been to tell me that's not true and 24F it's the best way to go to 35mm from Canon (LINK). If Scott Billups and David Newman they were getting a film-out from the 24F mode with excellent results: http://cineform.blogspot.com/2006/02/canon-xl-h1-filmout-results-awesome.html

My «main consideration» it's not just resolution or definition, as well. But to blow up to big screen maybe yes. And if 1440x1080@24F it will confirm as rez enough to film-out, JVC wouldn't be lesser than that?

While HVX film-reports they have qualified the footage as better or similar than Super16, I remember concerning that recent LA & Chicago film-out test, reporting HD100 footage as 16mm -> 35mm. However, as JVC's HD100 lover I'd like check-out these subjective conclusions. And I can tell you that's because I'm doing consulting to arthouse feature production here, I'm prepping to a 35mm film-out during next May/June. My major problem is to get all the cams to test them. Diogo's (Athouguia) HD101E it will be the JVC rep. [We don't have more than a local JVC rep, not the brand itself. I'm sorry but not demos or film-out sponsored tests around the corner. Sony is the only brand directly represented here among us.]

Perhaps with a more pleasant filmic image -- my favourite one (undoubtly and it is why I'm here) but without this major requisite that unfortunately we must care if we are going to 35mm at a large screen -- or am I wrong?

Also bear in mind that Panasonic's Varicam has a very, very good reputation as a filmout camera, and it shoots native 720p.

Maybe in the US but in the Europe I don't know nor even one sample/example. CineAlta rules.

 

[Emanuel]

Exactly, you'd have to pay out a LOT more money in order to get a better filmout camera and if you're talking straight 1080p (not interpolated) then you going way up the food chain. For the money it's impossible to beat the HD-100 right now for a budget film workflow.

I agree..

Regarding my last post (Barlow statement according Billups/Newman tests), I'd like hear you, my friend. You are my favourite filmic footage poster, as you well know. I read all the film-out report(s) that you writed. The pro and the cons. Reliable above the line to anybody despite your HD100 commitment.

Can you answer me that one unpleasant doubt:

money aside (as you well and wisely mentioned) -- but to my business to spend $6000 or $10,000 or even $20,000 it's not so different, to 35mm film-out, what's the higher option among JVC HD100 vs. XL-H1 vs. PDW-F330?

For sure there are so many variables and Sony's is totally unknown, yet. But what's your rez significance bet?

 

[athouguia]

money aside (as you well and wisely mentioned) -- but to my business to spend $6000 or $10,000 or even $20,000 it's not so different, to 35mm film-out, what's the higher option among JVC HD100 vs. XL-H1 vs. PDW-F330?

Emanuel, the problem here is that you can't find a HD camera for $20.000. There are these affordable ones for less then $10.000, but the next step is around $30.000 plus lens. At this level you'll have the new JVC, the Grass Valey's infinity and (who knows) the Red Camera. Lets wait for NAB and see the news.

I can get a FX1 and a XL H1 if you whant. Also 2 HVX as soon as they'll be available in Europe.

Liga-me se quiseres. Abraço

 

[Emanuel]

Emanuel, the problem here is that you can't find a HD camera for $20.000. There are these affordable ones for less then $10.000, but the next step is around $30.000 plus lens.

Nope. Sony's PDW-F330K (lens included) at $22,000.

At this level you'll have the new JVC, the Grass Valey's infinity and (who knows) the Red Camera. Lets wait for NAB and see the news.

:thumbup:

Liga-me se quiseres. Abraço

Ligar-te-ei assim que possível (tenho estado ausente).

 

[filmguy1974]

OK Emanuel- as far as Canon's 24f mode is concerned- Adam Wilt's 4-cam shootout article at DV.com sums it up pretty well:

[FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica]"In 60i, vertical resolution was a solid 700+ lines; in 24f mode, we thought it looked like half-resolution material on the monitors, consistent with what you'd get with field-doubling. Looking at the captured clips, especially the Combi-2.3's bullseyes, I'd have to say that it certainly looks like field-doubled vertical sampling, with about 540 TV lines usable, although certain aspects of the image "feel" sharper."[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]

If you haven't read through this article yet, you can do so here:

http://www.dv.com/news/news_item.jhtml;jsessionid=JFSYXUOYRHTBCQSNDBCCKH0CJUMEKJVN?articleId=177103305&_requestid=474865

You'll have to register to view material on this site- but it's worth the time, as there's a lot of good information on the site for you.

With regard to Elton's post about 24f and the DIGIC processor, etc.- there simply is no magic, no tricks to be done here. You can't produce a 24p image from interlaced CCD's without deinterlacing and interpolating your image, and you can't do that without throwing 1/3 to 1/2 of your vertical resolution away- certainly not on the fly.

With all that said- I'm not trying to use this space to bag on the XLH-1- not at all. I'm positive that the guys at Cineform are dead-on in their appraisal of the Canon's film-out footage- I'm sure it is quite beautiful. I've seen filmout footage with my own eyes produced from the Sony Z1U that looked amazing. But in your earlier post, your main concern seemed to be the fear that 720p wouldn't be a high-res enough format for filmout compared to 1080f, and what I'm trying to get across to you is that those numbers are all imaginary in the first place. The Canon, (as is the case with all 4 of these sub $10k cameras) is not able to remotely approach a measurable res of 1080x 1440- so it's kind of a mute point that it even records at that res.

In interlaced mode, it's res has been measured in the 700-800 line range, and in 24f, it's been measured at around 500-550. That's it- that's what you're getting. It doesn't matter at that point if the format recorded to tape is 720x1280, 1080x1440, 1080x1920, or a 3k Cineon file- the vertical res of your base image is in the range of 500 lines. At the end of the day, that's what you're blowing up to film with.

The 1080 vs. 720 debate for filmout doesn't really mean anything right now, because the Cinealta is the only HD camera on earth that can clearly demonstrate any improvement over 720p's resolution on the vertical axis in a progressive frame environment.

Despite what it may look like- I'm not really trying to push you away from the Canon or toward the JVC- I just hate to see someone with talent and good intentions get caught up in the 1080 vs. 720 numbers game and make a decision as important as this one based on all the wrong factors. What you really need to do if at all possible is get some time in with both cameras- rent them if you have to. See which one feels better to you- see which one says 'Emanuel' the most. At the end of the day- all this number crunching and technical talk won't matter nearly so much as that.

[FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica]
[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]