4-cam comparison -- initial response

Thanks for answering my questions Barry. You're right, I think stills will tell the story.

I learnt something new today, which is what it's all about :-)

I look forward to the article, it sounds like you have just about everything covered in an unbias way..... 'ohh your right champion', as my nan would say.

Karl
 
After reading all these reviews, no i think, than I dont like any of the cameras. None of them have enought quality for going to HD, maybe because of codecs, maybe because of lacking real 24/25p, maybe because they deliver a lot of noise or the lenses are not good enought.

Also, editing is a real problem now.

I am going to start missing the "old" days of DV. I had everything i needed with a dvx100 or a XL2.

Now, if i want to go to film or HD film, i would save money and rent a 2/3 camera.

But my real concern is: can we buy one of these new small HD cameras to shoot better SD? Will that make sense?
For me, having a bigger frame lets me crop and reframe the image, as well as much more color sampling to play.
But editing becomes a problem.
 
Barry_Green said:
Highlight handling is unrelated to sensitivity; the HD100 had a nicer rolloff and the ability to retain some detail at the higher end before blowing out to white.
Click to expand...

Man, I thought the HVX handled highlights superbly after seeing
Kaku's taxi footage. So what should the JVC look like? That is a surprise to me...
 
Barry_Green said:
...(I should leave this up to Adam to explain) there seemed to be some chroma subsampling visible in the vectorscope on some of the cameras...
Click to expand...
Is Adam going to explain these things somewhere?
Did you shoot any blue/red, green/black etc. charts?

Barry_Green said:
Well, keep in mind that resolution is expressed in terms of lines per picture height.
Click to expand...
Yes, my mistake. It was just a bit confusing when people are using xxx X yyy notion.
Still if 1080 mode gives 1100x600 (not lph) and 720 mode 960x600, I don't think that 15% increase is worth of 2.5 times storage consumption.

And thanks to you Barry & other crew for your great efforts!
Report from this test would be something that I would be glad to pay for and we are getting it for free! I think we are a bit too used to that everything is free in the internet and maybe I should try to find other ways to contribute than just ask questions, but somehow I feel that I'm quite good at it...:)
 
macgregor said:
But my real concern is: can we buy one of these new small HD cameras to shoot better SD? Will that make sense?
For me, having a bigger frame lets me crop and reframe the image, as well as much more color sampling to play.
But editing becomes a problem.
Click to expand...

I think I quote Barry when I say that these cameras beat the living snot out of any small SD camera. Makes sense also. Sensitivity seems about the same. And the HVX does DVCPRO50 in true 16:9. So I think you're safe on that one.
 
I dunno man, I was talkin' on the phone.

Really...I spent a lot of time helping with the nuts and bolts, trying to facilitate Jay and Adam. I tried to get a look at every chart from every camera, but I wanted to keep things moving more because I knew I could look later when stills are posted.

I think every camera did well, except for the Sony. Even my fav, the JVC, fared better than I thought it would against the XLH and the HVX....I'm not thinking of selling my HD100 anymore.

So far I agree with everything of Barry's that I've read.
 
macgregor said:
After reading all these reviews, no i think, than I dont like any of the cameras. None of them have enought quality for going to HD, maybe because of codecs, maybe because of lacking real 24/25p, maybe because they deliver a lot of noise or the lenses are not good enought.
Click to expand...


I'm sure everyone at this particular shoot would agree when I assure you that you can't decide on whether a camera is one thing or another by reading any reviews.

Not only that but I haven't read anything that would substantiate any of the things you're claim here.

Don't get stressed over technical advances.
Life is too short.
I think the clear and simple message conveyed by Barry as a "preliminary" assesment is that any of these cameras will in fact deliver real HD images and perform very, very much better than any SD offering.

Is that a good use of double "very's" Barry ? ;)
 
toke lahti said:
Is Adam going to explain these things somewhere?
Click to expand...
Adam is working on an article for DV.com, and will publish a more in-depth article in DV Magazine

Did you shoot any blue/red, green/black etc. charts?
Click to expand...
No, we shot what we had -- the Chroma DuMonde and the Ambi Combi-2.


Still if 1080 mode gives 1100x600 (not lph) and 720 mode 960x600, I don't think that 15% increase is worth of 2.5 times storage consumption.
Click to expand...
Well, you'll have to see it in context. I think we're looking at up to 25% in each direction, so maybe 30% to 40% more res overall. On a bang-for-the-buck comparison then no, no way will you see 2.5 times as much res for 2.5 times as much space, no. But it is higher res. Another thing to factor in is comparative noise; I think it was Luis Caffesse who said that he thought 720 looked a little less noisy than 1080. I haven't tested for that but I guess I could think of a theoretical reason why, as the 1080->720 downscale may be hiding a bit of noise in the process, so that could be a factor in someone's decision as well. But I don't know that that's the case.
 
Isaac_Brody said:
I'd like to hear more from Barry, Adam Wilt, Jay Nemeth, and also Nate Weaver's experience.
Click to expand...
I am looking forward to hearing from all of them as well. Adam is working on an article for DV.com so there should be some good info in a few days!
 
***NOTE FROM THE MODS***

Let's keep these discussions on topic and professional. The point is to discuss the technical information as presented, not to turn this into some ridiculous conspiracy thread that runs for 800 posts and makes it impossible to find any relevant information. If anyone wants to discuss personalities and other off-topic stuff, please PM a buddy. Thanks.
 
I would have no problem shooting 24F, it seemed just as smooth as 24P. It's the highlight rolloff I really dislike.
 
macgregor said:
I dont like any of the cameras. None of them have enought quality for going to HD (...) because they deliver a lot of noise (...)
Click to expand...
Yup...I follow you...too much noise, too much!...and to much blowing - videoish - highlights (Evin is right regarding XL-H1, however, HVX doesn't convince me at all, as well...) but...
I am going to start missing the "old" days of DV. I had everything i needed with a dvx100 or a XL2.
Click to expand...
...I thought that you were happy with FX1E (plus G35 = better than George Lukas, right?) or am I wrong? At least to me, with its clean image (far away from noise) and price, it seems to me that it's the best 1080i indie filmmaking deal if 1080i -> 24 progressive@post it will be an acceptable resource. :cry: (I hate the SONY's arrogance!) :) Sanjin Jukic, after all the footage@PC_side available that I could see until now, with or without your philosophy's degree (:engel017:Congrats, man!), you're right!...sorry, Pana guys!...sorry, DVX guys!...sorry, HVX pre-order guys!
Also, editing is a real problem now.
Click to expand...
Why?...let us to know if you're already editing your marvelous HD filmic clips!...

Miguel, como já te disse através de mensagem privada e em resposta à tua pergunta, não há mistério e aportar à memória do teu nome não é difícil depois de Europolis... :thumbup: ...e depois de Secret Garden, Clown, Morning, Similo, se precisares de um produtor ou co-produtor, sabes onde me encontrar... :thumbsup:
 
He finally decided on the Sony DSR 2/3" SD camera. I am hoping to do some tests with him in the future as well, if nothing else just for more learning purposes.
 
I seriously got caught up in the hype that the HVX is the missing link that'll make the big shot studio executives run for cover. Don't get me wrong, I'm buying the camera no matter what. It's the best tool I can afford and I'm sure I (I mean "We, Goose"... Top Gun reference) can make magic with it. My point is, no matter how you look at it, you're taking sacrifices when you spend less then 10 grand on a camera. There aren't many miracles in life. You usually get what you pay for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top