4-cam comparison -- initial response

Ok,
(And most expensive way to fly is with Saturnus V... :-)
So Venom's price is about $430/GB.
Any bets could it get lower than p2's price?
 
You asked, I answered... :)

... and yes, I'll gladly take that bet. I think SD memory card prices are going to drive prices on P2 cards down way, way faster than Venoms will.
 
So venom has something different inside than sd cards?
Maybe it has 16 p2 cards inside configured as raid0...

Anyway it seems that p2 is the most expensive memory which has volume manufacturing. I heard that in the end of last year there were under 10 venoms in the world.
 
P2 costs almost exactly the same, per gigabyte, as a straight compactflash memory card. The 4GB SanDisk Extreme III costs $599 retail, the 4GB P2 card costs $650 retail. And the P2 card is rated 4x as fast.

Sandisk Extreme III: http://sandisk.com/Products/Catalog(1024)-SanDisk_Extreme_III_CompactFlash.aspx

Sure you can buy cheap smaller compactflash cards, with slower performance, but as for trying to find something at least comparable the P2 card is priced competitively. It's not fair to compare Hyundai pricing against Maybach, and it's not fair to compare a Best Buy $19.99 32mB compactflash card against an 80mB P2 card. The Extreme III is the closest thing out there since it's the same capacity, and it's the fastest compactflash card made. It's still not 1/4 the speed of a P2 card, yet it's almost exactly the same price (at retail MSRP).

And P2 hardly counts as volume manufacturing. How many cards are there in the world? 5,000 maybe? Maybe 10,000? Versus how many SD cards -- who knows, 10 million or more? 20 million? I wouldn't even know how to go about guessing on that.
 
PAL Film look? re: Part II, the JVC HD100

PAL Film look? re: Part II, the JVC HD100

Hi Barry,

Now, for a really dumb question. I was re-reading in Part II...

For film-style, the JVC and HVX both offer genuine 24p, but the HVX offers it in two HD formats vs. just one for the JVC. The Canon simulates it, and the Sony has a horrid CF24 mode. You can juggle around and shoot PAL 50Hz CF25 and convert it in post, but -- why do that when you don't have to? We're talking workability here, right? Just flip the switch and go, vs. having to screw around in post to try to simulate something that should have been there in the first place.
Click to expand...

That makes a lot of sense, but it looks like I'll have to get the PAL version of the HVX in order to conform to local standards, yet I still want to bring a film look & feel to the events and stuff I'm planning to shoot - i.e., especially to NOT look "real" even though it may be. ;º} Is all video (digital or otherwise) in Europe exclusively constrained to the non-film, video look? I have the sneaking feeling I'm missing something here :embarasse . Do I have to shoot 50Hz and convert in post? If you or anyone else has discussed how to shoot PAL film look with the HVX in the forum, please point me in the right direction. How would it be done? No offense, but surely not by buying the esteemed HD100? The PAL HVX version costs another price point up in dollar equivalents over here (you can hear the groans from THAT thread all the way over here.:laugh: ) It sure would be nice for the film look to come naturally, rather than through hours of number crunching in post! I've gotta be missing something...

Thanks, Barry.

David
 
davidas said:
It sure would be nice for the film look to come naturally, rather than through hours of number crunching in post! I've gotta be missing something...

Thanks, Barry.

David
Click to expand...

I'm not Barry :embarasse but that's an easy one. You will shoot 25p for a film look with a PAL (there are very few people on earth that tell the difference between 24 and 25 fps). If you are doing a film out, you slow down it down to 24p with a slight audio tweak as many have been doing in PAL land for many years.
 
Barry_Green said:
P2 costs almost exactly the same, per gigabyte, as a straight compactflash memory card. The 4GB SanDisk Extreme III costs $599 retail, the 4GB P2 card costs $650 retail. And the P2 card is rated 4x as fast..
Click to expand...


thats nonsense your comparing one compact flash card to four sd cards...

try 4 compact flash cards to four sd cards more fair...or better yet try comparing four sd cards to pana four sd cards...

i have done it time and time again and panasonics always comes out more, everytime, but it should, its there technology and they can put any price they want on it to cover R&D

this information is from October so prices may have come down for both but back then this is what i found, by the way the sd cards are "zero defect rated"

4 gig p2 card msrp $400 vs actual bnh streetprice $ 2,099.95
(msrp per sd card 1gig 133xrated $124)

8 gig p2 card msrp $800 vs actual bnh streetprice $ 2,199.95
(msrp per sd card 2gig 133xrated $203)

16 gig p2 card msrp $2800 vs actual bnh streetprice $ NA
(pretec makes a 133xrated 4gig card $699msrp times 4 cards, not sure if its zero defect rated)
 
wow i just did an update of the prices and it seems they have come down even more

8 gigs of sd zero defect memory would cost you $680 bucks at $170 a 2 gig card

BnH still selling the p2 8gig card for $2,200....

thats $1,520 difference, i would say that some expensive p2 housing...

at the end of the day at $680 for my company p2 is still too much, i don't make movies so i guess for those folks it makes perfect sense...
 
maybe these prices are more sort of like NASA prices = metal screw $37 , metal screw at ACE hardware .10 ... NASA toliet seat $3700 while at home depot 29.95.
maybe like NASA they have to have a slightly different spec which then there is only one manufacturer that makes it !!! = if only one persons makes it then they charge what the market will bare ..
so panasonic may get their parts from X and they are NOT paying the price that i would pay if i went to same flashcard maker.. it is panasonic that holds the P2 housing and electronic's to make it run = they'll charge what the market will bare till competition comes along = when other storage comes along that cuts into P2 sales then P2 prices will drop .. IMO right now there is a high profit mark up on P2 cards ... as of now it appears nobody else see's any $$$ in producing P2 type cards ...
 
Film look in PAL land

Film look in PAL land

stephenvv said:
I'm not Barry :embarasse but that's an easy one. You will shoot 25p for a film look with a PAL (there are very few people on earth that tell the difference between 24 and 25 fps). If you are doing a film out, you slow down it down to 24p with a slight audio tweak as many have been doing in PAL land for many years.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Stephen!

I appreciate it. You're right. That should have been a no-brainer. Now that you mention it, I've seen discussions on that film out solution in the forum - I just wasn't to the point where I grasped the terminology. I'll go search for the posts.

Cheers,

David
 
donatello said:
IMO right now there is a high profit mark up on P2 cards ... as of now it appears nobody else see's any $$$ in producing P2 type cards ...
Click to expand...

Well, basic economics would say that these two statements are contradictory. If anyone thought they could profit by making P2 cards, I'm sure they would. More likely it's an emerging market where Panasonic is HOPING to make some profit, but barely covering development cost now if at all... until there are lots more P2 devices, P2 will not be a big profit maker!
 
Barry, have you looked at the HVX's SD?

Barry, have you looked at the HVX's SD?

I'm sure I'm not alone in wondering how a HVX will match on location shooting alongside a DVX100, when working SD.

That is, for anyone currently shooting SD while waiting for larger, cheaper P2 cards, is the HVX a viable option for SD work in the meantime? Does it equal the overall look and quality at SD of a DVX?

I'm hoping it could be made to look close enough to intercut well, but perhaps be even better so it could be used as the "A camera," since DVC 50 Pro is an option during recording, not to mention all the other features.

But there's the downsampling, or however it does SD... And the much smaller pixels.

Is it as light sensitive? How's smear, etc?

Thanks!

Stephen Gagne
Westwood Creek Productions
 
After messing with it this week I can tell you that the SD footage in 16:9 BLOWS AWAY the DVX squeeze footage. It cuts excellent, even in same length shots, with the XL2.

ash =o)
 
AshG, thanks for this. My crew is shooting 4:3, however, which I'm thinking is common with the bulk of the current DVX owners.

For the large group of of us that already own a DVX, shooting 4:3, it'd be great to learn if it's viable to buy a HVX to work in partnership on DVX shoots, running 4:3 DV or dvc50Pro, while we wait for P2 and HD post costs and technology to settle down a bit.
 
4:3 to MiniDV will not look worlds different, the 100a will surely be more noisy. If you record 4:3 to DVCpro50 I am better the difference will be very noticeable. I saw some SDX900 footage blown up to HD last week and it was AMAZING.... I could not tell the difference from the Varicam footage it was cut with.


ash =o)
 
dvxStephen I feel you brother, I've submitted this to Barry on this same thread, and I've seen various others post this same question. To me it's a critical buying point which may even need it's own thread??
Barry fare enough had his plate full with six cameras, so Barry this is not at all a gripe at you. But it would be good if anybody out there in the mystical hvx owners land could post a shot both done on dvx and hvx, and hopefully a 100b as the noise was supposed to be improved on this model, and maybe include 4:3 as I think it would prob go without saying that the native 16:9 of the hvx would cane the squeeze of the dvx
 
I very briefly compared HVX & DVX100A in SD last week.
They looked very similar to me.
Probably very easy to intercut.
However the DVX was 2/3 - 1 stop slower and the field of view is not as wide.
No doubt these are the consequences of a wider and denser chip.
In a sense this gave the advantage to the DVX for 4:3 miniDV shooting.
Noise looked comparable but I didn't spend enough time on it.
At first it looked like the HVx was noisier, but I think that was just settings.
It made me want to get a wide angle adapter for 4:3 SD shooting.

Offhand it looked that 16:9 was probably much better with the HVX which also makes sense - many more pixels making the image.
 
skyonic said:
thats nonsense your comparing one compact flash card to four sd cards...
Click to expand...
Nonsense? I'm comparing a 4GB storage device against a 4GB storage device. How is that nonsense?

It matters not what the things are made of. It could be made of SD cards or CF cards or MemorySticks or whatever. All that matters is that the finished product is a 4GB memory storage unit, and runs at 80 megabytes per second, and it costs the same as a 4GB CF memory storage unit that runs at 20 megabytes per second.
 
dvxStephen said:
I'm sure I'm not alone in wondering how a HVX will match on location shooting alongside a DVX100, when working SD.
Click to expand...
I'm getting there, but not with enough info to definitively answer. I took a 100B and an HVX outside and shot some shots, but without a monitor, so I set 'em on the same settings and they did not deliver an exactly color-matched look. I'll have to take the monitor into account and A/B them to see how close they can match.

That is, for anyone currently shooting SD while waiting for larger, cheaper P2 cards, is the HVX a viable option for SD work in the meantime? Does it equal the overall look and quality at SD of a DVX?
Click to expand...
Oh easily, yes. But not the exact same look. The HVX appears to offer a wider wide-angle, better 16:9 sharpness, and comparable noise performance, so yes it's a DVX, but a better DVX.

I'm hoping it could be made to look close enough to intercut well
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure it can, I just have to go through and A/B it to get it as close as possible.

Is it as light sensitive?
Click to expand...
No. In progressive it's about 1 stop slower.

How's smear, etc?
Click to expand...
Seems very good in high-def mode, as compared to other high-def cameras. Haven't tested smear in standard-def yet.
 
doumm said:
But it would be good if anybody out there in the mystical hvx owners land could post a shot both done on dvx and hvx, and hopefully a 100b as the noise was supposed to be improved on this model, and maybe include 4:3 as I think it would prob go without saying that the native 16:9 of the hvx would cane the squeeze of the dvx
Click to expand...
I did a noise comparison shot between an HVX/DV and a DVX100B. I'd say they're very comparable, with the HVX being perhaps a couple percentage points less noisy, or it's just a different perception because the HVX noise has a different texture to it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top