Barry_Green
Moderator
I'll assume you meant to say the HVX was 1 stop slower? In 4:3 the field of view may not be as wide, but in 16:9 the HVX field of view is notably wider than the DVX/squeeze.Lenilenapi said:However the DVX was 2/3 - 1 stop slower and the field of view is not as wide.
In terms of sensitivity and 4:3 FOV, that's probably true.In a sense this gave the advantage to the DVX for 4:3 miniDV shooting.
Agreed.Noise looked comparable but I didn't spend enough time on it.
On comparable settings I think they're very similar.At first it looked like the HVx was noisier, but I think that was just settings.
In 4:3 the field of view on the HVX is narrower than it is in 16:9, and I frequently used a w.a. on the DVX, so yes it might come in handy for 4:3 on the HVX.It made me want to get a wide angle adapter for 4:3 SD shooting.
Completely agreed.Offhand it looked that 16:9 was probably much better with the HVX which also makes sense - many more pixels making the image.