1080/24p Is More Detailed Than 720 Mode

The Panasonic is definetely lower res. The format can do better in a camera that do not use pixel shifting. Even the small HC1 from Sony is very impressive in resolution with its 1920x1080 sensor when enough light is available. Low light and night clips general look really good on the Canon. The CityPan series was impressive. I think Elton also did those?

Perhaps there is a extra step between SD and HD. Lets call that MD, medium definition and include some cameras in that category:)
 
How about adding a FN category, for financial nightmare option, and I'm sure you could put the Canon and it's ailing sales into that category. Maybe for the 9k, besides the aweful lens and terrible viewfinder, they'll throw in a free steak from the Ground Round.
 
limo991 said:
1080p is better for many reasons. Nyquist is higher and alias should be lower. More chroma is recorded in 1080p (640 compared to 480 horizontal pixels). And even if the ccd is 960x720, with pixelshifting you can get a lot more luma than 720p can record.

...Luma is not everything. HVX200 has the best color quality in 1080 so far (no artifacts). Not to mention its color precision. Too bad we don't measure color in these cameras. HVX200 is slightly better than the Sony (which is very good in that department) and a hell of a lot better than the Canon. On the Canon you have to color correct every single scene. Every daylight scene I have seen so far is totally wrong and needs tons of CC to look natural and get close to reality.
Click to expand...

I think those are important points. As a relative inexperienced person I want to get the best image out of the box I can get. 1080 should have more chroma though deriving it from a, maybe, smaller sensor.

A cuestion about sensor-size: In that shootout with slight movementes a few weeks ago the HVX reached abot 550 lines (or was it 540?) That´s a resolution a PAL-sensor would reach. So higher luma resolution would be derived by pixelshift but the sensor would be big enough for full (or almost full) chroma-resolution even at 1080 resolution. Well... maybe this is just BS...:embarasse
 
The chance of getting a good non-fixed lens on a camera package had always been rather small:) This also applies to my JVC and they don't even sell lenses! I don't see Canon bundling any still camera with a lens worth more than 10% the price of the package so why would they do that for a video camera? The problem is we don't really have any lens options with 1/3inch cameras. 1/2 inch lenses are not very good either and certainly not cheap. The real solution is to change the sensor sizes. Lets wait and see.
 
The SD cameras do not really reach the theoretical resolution. They certainly don't get 576 vertical lines in resolution charts.

Pixel shifting resolution increase is visible in resolution tests. It's true luma resolution.

Using PAL sensors would do about 400 vertical chroma pixels since there are no anamorphic optics and the sensor would have to be cropped. So it wouldn't even cover the 720p format (720 vertical chroma pixels).
 
while this is an interesting post of mental/pixel masturbation I don't see how it could possibly matter in any real world scenerio. Has anyone seen HD TV? It is so compressed and bastardized prior to distribution nobody but the editor is ever going to see the pristine picture.

I have the HVX and the DVX. I have shot and sold a film into major distribution using the DVX. I plan to do the same with the HVX which runs circles around the DVX. In color correction and Digital Effects alone it blows my mind how much I can get away with.

If your audience is looking at the missing pixels or minor "noise" on your project what ever it may be, then you should seriously re-consider your subject matter or execution because the audience is BORED!

IF you plan to blow up to 35mm film out (lol) then you would be a fool to use this cam or anything but the very best... unless you can't afford it. IF the HVX is all you can budget and you get lucky and need a film out. Guess what? It will look great. Will it look as good as the CIneAlta? NO. Will it look as good as the Genesis? NO. Will it look good enough for an audience to watch and appreciate your story without low rez video distractions? YES.

We should focus our energy to find ways to push this camera into areas never imagined rather that burn so much energy trying to find it's faults.

This cam will let you realize and tell your story in ways you could never imagine using the DVX it's up to you to take that challange and make your mark. 16:9 and 4:2:2 color space people... come on... smile! I don't care if it's got 720, 220 or 110 CCDs
Hell I don't care if it has a unicorn inside there rendering the image with an etch-i-sketch. ME LIKE PRETTY PICTURES.

Panisonic is a janky company for many reasons (customer support) and most likely should be sued for something, but this just isn't one of those reasons.
 
holditnowfilms said:
while this is an interesting post of mental/pixel masturbation I don't see how it could possibly matter in any real world scenerio. Has anyone seen HD TV? It is so compressed and bastardized prior to distribution nobody but the editor is ever going to see the pristine picture.

I have the HVX and the DVX. I have shot and sold a film into major distribution using the DVX. I plan to do the same with the HVX which runs circles around the DVX. In color correction and Digital Effects alone it blows my mind how much I can get away with.

If your audience is looking at the missing pixels or minor "noise" on your project what ever it may be, then you should seriously re-consider your subject matter or execution because the audience is BORED!

IF you plan to blow up to 35mm film out (lol) then you would be a fool to use this cam or anything but the very best... unless you can't afford it. IF the HVX is all you can budget and you get lucky and need a film out. Guess what? It will look great. Will it look as good as the CIneAlta? NO. Will it look as good as the Genesis? NO. Will it look good enough for an audience to watch and appreciate your story without low rez video distractions? YES.

We should focus our energy to find ways to push this camera into areas never imagined rather that burn so much energy trying to find it's faults.

This cam will let you realize and tell your story in ways you could never imagine using the DVX it's up to you to take that challange and make your mark. 16:9 and 4:2:2 color space people... come on... smile! I don't care if it's got 720, 220 or 110 CCDs
Hell I don't care if it has a unicorn inside there rendering the image with an etch-i-sketch. ME LIKE PRETTY PICTURES.

Panisonic is a janky company for many reasons (customer support) and most likely should be sued for something, but this just isn't one of those reasons.
Click to expand...
Ditto dude - content is always king.
 
But is that unicorn up to true unicorn status. I heard it's horn is only.... fill in the rhetoric. Man, I was hoping to get away from math and all that too. It was either filmmaking or auto shop.... Seeing as how popular these grease monkey reality shows have become, I should have gone into auto shop reality TV production.. with a minor in crash test dummy sculpting....
 
Justyn--don't kid yourself. You don't choose filmmaking it chooses you. You never stood a chance.

BTW- I hear small engine repair is the way of the future.
 
Justyn said:
I feel that the Canon people must feel like Red Headed step-children constantly having to justify their purchases and views because they aren't sought after... they are on deales shelves sitting idle.. and certainly their isn't a clammering collection of filmakers after them... either now or when it was released. The local dealer has not sold ONE. He even let's it go out on demos overnight and still no sales. I was in his office and even heard a guy say, "hmmm the canon was nice, but I'll put my name on the list and wait for the Panasonic".
Click to expand...

Interesting. The market isn't always right, but usually speaks with pretty good authority.:thumbup:
 
You are correct.. it did hunt me down. I'm just friggin fortunate to have married a woman who has a medical degree and I can live an an artist-in-residence at my own effin' residence. I'm glad I found a woman to support me.. instead of just "understanding me". Ahhhh, she's a patron of the arts.


You are right about small engine repair... But I think the real future will be working on those pesky Flex Capacitors... and/or cars that run on used veggie burger oil.
 
steindj said:
Interesting. The market isn't always right, but usually speaks with pretty good authority.:thumbup:
Click to expand...


Very true. I've heard Canon upped it to a box of steaks.. and/or they'll fix your windshield for free with a purchase of their camera. It also comes in a kevlar wrapped diaper for added support. I'll put that next to the Apple Cube.
 
Oh man I have seen beautifull broadcasting with the Canon, the do not hype or pooh like 'others' are doing, but just deliver.
 
I'd maybe choose the Canon if I was in Montana shooting Grizzle bears at 12K feet, but down here in reality.. I'll choose the HVX and continue to LOL at the Red-headed canon brethren.
Click to expand...

Hey, for some of us that is reality! :thumbsup:
 
Justyn said:
You are correct.. it did hunt me down. I'm just friggin fortunate to have married a woman who has a medical degree and I can live an an artist-in-residence at my own effin' residence. I'm glad I found a woman to support me.. instead of just "understanding me". Ahhhh, she's a patron of the arts.
Click to expand...

Same here. My wife was attracted to the sensitive artist type I used to be. Just waiting for my HVX.
 
Good job there then HVXguy....

Shaw, I know it is a reality.. that's why I put it. I just worked a gig with a cameraman down here who traps and videotapes grizzle bears every summer in Montana. He has an XL1 and he puts a 500mil canon lense on it.. and with the multiplication it becomes a 3500 mil lens. I never bothered to do that to my XL1 since I didn't need that kind of throw.... I could only imagine the DOF though... wow.. and how the hell would the camer jockey ever be able to pick up his subject....
 
Instead of poo pooing.. they drag their heels... Then release the XL1 and wait years and years and years while everyone is catching up and exceeding the canon ( i bought mine when it was the hottest cam out there in 1998/1999) and then in successive years they come out with the XL1s.. and then the XL2 and then the HD cam. So sure they don't brag.. but then again they didn't stay up with the times and keep me as a loyal video guy....

Now, on their digital side, I'm still there with them and absolutely love the Rebel I've had for years.. and the 20D as well. I'm not vacating the canon on the digital side... especially since I hate Nikon. Now, only if they threw in a box of steaks with their photo stuff... ahhhhhhhhhhh...
 
kevinM said:
I shot a couple of quick tests with my HVX at 1080 30p and 720 24pn (native). The clips show a range if materials, finishes and dark black to white - Zoom form 20 to 55 on the HVX zoom ring - both shot at f2.8 - imported into Final Cut Pro in DVCPROHD and output to a Quicktime file also in DVCPROHD so there was no recompression throughout the whole process.

Both clips are saved into a .zip file at this link. The file is 68Megs. Try not to blow up my server!

http://www.ifoliohd.com/HVXsamples.zip
Click to expand...

Whew! That took about 8 hours to download at something like 2K per second with lots of stalls... kind of old-school and fun.

Anyway, yes, this test clearly shows much more resolution in the 1080p image. What is that resolution? Who knows, it's not a chart (thank g-d)! But 1080 shows far more fabric detail, most noticeable in the furthest-zoomed-in shot, near the top of the image.

Unfortunately, the exposure is a little different - the 720 shot is darker, so it's tough to get a perfectg feeling for the differences... but the fabric detail differences are extreamly clear; there are large sections on the 720 image where you see mush, but in 1080 you see clear weave.
 
Barry_Green said:
The HVX was used to shoot pickup shots for the foreign theatrical release of Spielberg's five-time-Oscar-nominated "Munich."

the HVX200 was used for pickup shots in an Oscar-nominated seventy-five-million-dollar Steven Spielberg film! And not just pickup shots, but compositing shots. Ten technicians used to working with 2K film scans worked on the footage, and they chose to shoot it on an HVX.
Click to expand...

So which one is it: pick-ups only or also compositing shots?
Is this another marketing gimmick?
The movie was shot last summer!
Are you saying that Spielberg & co. went back to shoot some more in last November with prototype hvx?
And then rushed back to make a new version of the movie?
They had to begin to make release prints in December, because it premiered in Europe in January in almost every country. Thousands of copies was needed.
 
toke lahti said:
So which one is it: pick-ups only or also compositing shots?
Is this another marketing gimmick?
The movie was shot last summer!
Are you saying that Spielberg & co. went back to shoot some more in last November with prototype hvx?
And then rushed back to make a new version of the movie?
They had to begin to make release prints in December, because it premiered in Europe in January in almost every country. Thousands of copies was needed.
Click to expand...
It is a few seconds "adjustment" to the release in Egypt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top