16:9 & the DVX100B

D

Dave Alvin

Member
So I am seriously considering buying the DVX100B very soon, but I am concerned about the lack of true 16:9. It seems to have everything else I want, but I need some feedback about this one issue. 16:9 televisions are everywhere now and I am also interested in transfering my work to film, so the aspect ratio seems to be a critical issue right now.

I know I can crop the image, but how much will the loss in resolution really affect the final image? I know I could use an anomorphic lens, but that seems too expensive and difficult for me right now.

A Sony ZU1 is another option, but I'm not buying into HDV as a format and its damned expensive. And I just don't really like the Canon XL-2, mainly because of the design. Does the HVX200 shoot SD in true 16:9, or does that only apply to HD on that camera?

Reccomendations... opinions... answers? Help I'm lost- too many options.
 
Hi Dave,

I'm in the same boat as you. The camera I really want right now is a 16:9 DVX. I think Panasonic didn't put it on the B model because they wanted people who wanted 16:9, to be forced into the HVX. I'm still hoping that now that the HVX is out and sold boat loads, they'll give their flagship DV camera a face lift so it can keep up with the Canon XL2. I'd buy it .

People say just get a HVX. But you lose light sensitivity, latitude and the HD cams only equal SD quality if you record in HD then down convert. If you just shoot SD on a HD cam it'll be softer then if you shot it on a DVX (there is also the argument about which is noisier). So, here comes the est. $20,000 price tag of the HVX (new Mac, P2 cards, HD monitor, new more powerful lighting kit) to really make it work.

A 16:9 DVX would really help us low budget filmmakers and those of us that have $20,000 can have the HVX. Hey, Canon didn't worry about a 16:9 SD cam cutting into it's HDV cam sales, why should Panasonic? Plus, it would make the "INSTANT HD" packaged software make sense because...there are no 4:3 HDTV's.

Panasonic is said to listen to their customers. I've read numerous people asking for 16:9 and bemoaning the fact it wasn't included on the B model. I really hope Panasonic does listen and doesn't forget about the people that put Panasonic on the DV filmmaker map (it was all Sony's and Canon's before the DVX came along).

How about it Jan? Could you at least give us the heads up if it ain't in the cards. A - "it'll never happen" or "there are no current plans..." would even be appreciated and help us make our choices. Thank you.
 
Okay, so I am not crazy with the concerns I have then, right?

So, if you HAD TO get a camera in the next month what would you suggest?
DVX 100B, XL2, ZU1 or here is a wild card; the Sony pdx10 (it has true 16:9), or is there some other model to look at?

This would be for shooting indie films, both feature and short form. Any feedback would be appreciated.

Thanks again!
 
Everyone talks about transferring to film but in the real world that is a huge longshot. I have had 2 projects (out of THOUSANDS) bumped to film and one was 4:3: they just transferred the full 4:3 frame inside the film frame (think black bars on the side.

Most high end pros will tell you the more rez the better for film out but I tell you... if you are on a budget, pick the cam you can afford because a film out will cost WAY more than any camera and your content is what might compell someone to pay for such...



ash =o)
 
The HVXs sensor is a SD resolution sensor, so I don't see how it would be a bigger problem shooting in SD when the sensor it's self was made for 16:9 SD. HD is uprezzed from the SD resolution. The HVX will completely replace the DVX in a year and half when the FCC switches all broadcasts to HD material.

"Panasonic moved ahead with the decision to use a 960 X 540 progressive imager in conjunction with the Horizontal and Vertical Spatial Offset strategy. This strategy provides the HVX200 with the low light performance and the dynamic range that we’ve heard from customers was critical in their applications."

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=47570&highlight=sensor+Size
 
Last edited:
thanks ash, good point- but what about 16:9 televisions? that seems like it should be a big concern, no?

i personally don't have a problem with the 4:3 aesthetic, as i used to shoot a lot of 16mm and the SD stuff I shot looks great IMHO. Maybe i'm just obsessing about resolution too much?

anyone have a camera suggestion? anyone?
 
PunkMetalDrummer17 said:
The HVX will completely replace the DVX in a year and half when the FCC switches all broadcasts to HD material.
Click to expand...

there will be no FCC switch to HD, it is a switch to all-digital, though your neighborhood Best Buy salesman will try to tell you otherwise in order to get you to but that $2K HD TV..
 
agentjonny said:
there will be no FCC switch to HD, it is a switch to all-digital, though your neighborhood Best Buy salesman will try to tell you otherwise in order to get you to but that $2K HD TV..
Click to expand...

I'm simply saying most broadcasters will not choose 480 for anything; when they can supply 720 and 1080, 480 isn't worth it. Sure, you could use the DVX for DTV broadcasts, but I highly doubt broadcaster will accpect it since most broadcaster see DTV as specifically HD broadcasting. I have yet to see any 480P channels on Digital Cable; The only good thing that would come out of SD material on DTV is the ability to multicast (multiple stations on one channel.).
 
I truly don't understand this line of thought. No 480 channels on digital cable? There's practically nothing BUT 480 channels on digital cable. Here in Vegas I can get about two hundred and fifty 480 channels on digital cable, but for high-def? There's about five. Plus the local stations. That's it. There's over 250 standard-def digital broadcasts on digital cable, and about five high-def channels. Not counting the premium pay channels like HBO and Starz, I'm talking about UniversalHD, InHD, Discovery HD, ESPN HD. There's only about five of them.
 
So, to get back to my original purpose of this thread- 16:9 is more important than HighDef AT THIS POINT IN TIME, right? So what camera is best to get NOW. DVX 100B, even though it has no true 16:9 or something like the HVX. XL2, Z1U or a PDX 10 (all of these have true 16:9 in SD)? I'll worry about HD in a couple of years when its all worked out.

BTW, I know there's no absolute answer to what I am asking, but I would definitely value the opinions of you all.

Thanks again!
 
HVX200 or Z1U in my opinion. True, the Z1U is buying into the HDV format but you don't have to shoot in HD(v) yet. Plus, the HDV from the Z1U is quite nice if used correctly, heck, they've used it on a TV show and people have made great looking independent films on it. Look at "Broken Arrow" (not sure if that was the right name) for example, it looks great!

The HVX200 would ultimately be the overall best choice as you get a theoretical HD DVX out of it.

I've never been much of an XL2 fan, I think it requires too much tweaking for my taste. But the results are phenomenal if done correctly. The PDX10 is a good deal, but it's a bandaid camera at best, plus, no 24p.
 
You wont get many XL2 recommendations in this forum but perhaps rightfully so. To really make an XL2 make sense you need to get another lens or two for it and it is a harder camera to use, requires better tripods, jibs, stabilizers, etc.

If 16:9 is a must, then go for the HVX or FX1 if the XL2 intimidates you.

I know it is off topic but this whole federal HD thing is nonsense. We are no less than 5-7 years away from HD programming overtaking SD programing and it could very well be longer. There are serious bandwidth issues for delivering that much HD for one thing and there are SOOO many syndicated programs that wont ever be available in HD and many others that will have to justify the expense ot a new transfer. Yes, HD is the future but it is not coming as soon as many think, at least on the delivery end.
 
Hasn't HD technology existed since the early 80's? It's just like when we went from B&W to color tvs, they took way longer and made crappy NTSC to accomdate people...man I wish they would just cut the ties of people who don't adjust to HD...it's the only way to make progress in a timely manner!
 
You will still have a great picture if you uprez a cropped 4:3 picture with 24P.

Or you can buy the anamorfic adapter and get a full rez picture.

Its the progresive, cinegamma and cinecolor picture that will give you the great picture.
 
In reality it is the end result that matters. Even with no native 16:9 DVX wide format looks good. Better than PDX10 for sure. Theoretical resolution is not the only thing to look for.
 
DerrickTempleton said:
man I wish they would just cut the ties of people who don't adjust to HD...it's the only way to make progress in a timely manner!
Click to expand...

[rant]

Brother, please! I'm not poor, I got a bit of money stashed away, and I was able to afford a good computer and a DVX, but I don't have the ch-ching for even a teeny-tiny HDTV. I have to budget myself not only as a filmmaker, but as a consumer. I don't own a laptop or use wireless Internet, I don't have bluetooth-anything, and my cell phone is the cheapest model available. I don't have those things so that I can afford a DVX and so I can fill my car with gas. HD is inevitable, but not for years, years I tells ya!

Right now, I have no reason or desire to buy an HDTV, so why should all broadcasters be forced into producing HD? The programming isn't there, and Blu-ray isn't even out yet! I mean, all your DVDs are in SD, and they still look great, right?

HD is a good thing, but it needn't be forced on anyone just because it's better, there's just no reason to do it yet. The early adopter market will do it's thing, and slowly, programmers and producers will be able to afford HD production, and slowly after that, consumers will be able to afford HDTVs and hi-def video formats. But by that time, we'll all be able to afford our HVX300As. But until then, it doesn't make sense to upgrade before the tech is affordable.

NTSC has it's faults, but if instead they developed a broadcast standard that wasn't compatable with old B+W signals, it would've been another 30 years or more before color TV was in every home. HDTV will work the same way, but the format isn't as limited in terms of backwards-compatability, so we'll have it a little better in the end this time around, but on the flipside, it may take longer to take hold.

HD, when it happens, will be wonderful, but for now, I'm perfectly comfortable with DVD, my DVX, my SDTV, and some money in my pocket.

[/rant]
 
Okay guys, you all came through for me big time. I woke up this morning to all these fantastic responses. Great information/feedback/opinions. Tonight I'm going to go out and get drunk, tomorrow I'll enjoy a day of rest and contemplation and Monday I'll decide on my new camera and head to B&H... by Wednesday I'll be world famous.

Cheers & thanks again!

:dankk2:
 
Noble Robot - I definitely see your side to this issue. HD really isn't practical for a lot of people. But what killed me, really KILLED ME, was that I got to borrow my friend's HVX, shoot a short movie, and have to screen it to my school on a DVD playing through a projector. It looked like total garbage. It would have made no difference if I shot it with a DVX.

If everyone just took the plunge, HD's price would go down a lot faster! It's stuck in a cycle because no one wants to pay for it, so they aren't selling enough. At this rate we'll destroy the earth from overpopulation, greenhouse effect, and war before we get the type of technology I dreamed of as a kid. I want my hovercars and really cool TVs that bend all around my head and look better than real life. And I don't want to be old and senile when it happens!

...yeah mine was a rant too.
 
Dave,

Unless you need the camera immediately, I'd wait. Work on your script, do your pre-production. By the time your ready to shoot maybe one of these companies WILL give you the camera you want. On the DVX News thread here, people are also asking why there isn't 16:9 on the DVX.

Jan is silent.

There are continuing rumors that the Sony FX1 has been discontinued, dealers are selling remaining stock and a replacement (maybe AVCHD) is near. Maybe Sony will pull their head out of their corporate a** and finally give us 24P. To quote John Lennon: "You may say I'm a dreamer - but I'm not the only one."

Hate to confuse you and put you in the same holding pattern Japan has me in but I thought you should know.
 
So John, you're right- if I just wait longer, hopefully there will be the perfect camera, but I have a lot of work I need to get rolling on now, so I'm probably not going to brake the bank on this purchase, but I have to get some new gear. An artist needs his tools. I'm just accepting the reality that in a couple of years I'll have to get another camera again.

Also Derrick, I hear what you are saying, but HDV is already on its way out, probably quicker than SD, as that transition (SD to HD) has a LONG way to go in my opinion. That's why everyone isn't jumping on the band wagon IMHO. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm going to wait that one out.

Finally, I think we all know why all these camcorders all seem to lack one crucial feature or another. The companies are basically saying 'well if you want it all then mortgage your home and buy $50,000.00 worth of gear and you can get 2/3" chips, HD, 16:9, etc.' It's all business and marketing. They have us all chomping at the bit, anticipating and dreaming about the "perfect" camcorder that's right around the corner, which will never arrive. There are however some excellent cameras out ther and basically I guess you just have to pick the one that you think you can work best with.

We're screwed, but at least we get to make movies. I'll take it!

Cheers!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top