Barry -Any reason not 2 buy?
- Thread starter jdv
- Start date
Barry_Green
Moderator
Each has substantial feature differences from the others. For some, those feature differences could be dealkillers.
For dramatic narrative feature production, I don't think the HVX has any drawback that would cause anyone to pause, unless it's the ultimate telephoto length. The JVC is capable of a lot more tele, and the XLH1 is capable of even more.
The HVX has the best audio recording of any of them, but double-system sound could overcome that if one really wanted to use one of the others.
There are some advantages to the others for certain circumstances, but not necessarily for narrative filmmaking. For example, if you need to record six hours of documentary coverage per day, you may find the others more amenable to that, what with the tape situation. But that's not a factor for narrative filming; any job that could previously have been shot on film could easily be handled with 4gb cards or the occasional 8gb.
Film is a whole different beast. It's the most sellable format, it blows up well, it's archival quality inherently. Regular 16mm is not what you'd want to consider though, you'd have to go at least Super16.
Basically, the new high-def cameras are at the point now where the low-res blowups are not going to be a distraction for theatrical work anymore. Even a DVX is close to good enough; there were several films last year shot on the DVX that got theatrical distribution (including Lonesome Jim, Murderball, The Aristocrats, and of course November). The HVX is like a super-turbo DVX, and frankly its high-def picture would blow away the DVX, so if a DVX was good enough, the HVX is more than good enough.
The only thing about the HVX that should give anyone pause would be: can you work with the recording times of the P2 media? If you can, I'd say it's an excellent choice. If you can't, then there's the future firestore, I guess.
Well, that and price. An HVX plus two 4gb cards is around $6500 or so; a DVX is half that.
Last year we shot a feature-length movie ("Siren") on the DVX. Unquestionably if we were in the same position right now, we would choose the HVX. It's everything the DVX was, and a whole lot more.
For dramatic narrative feature production, I don't think the HVX has any drawback that would cause anyone to pause, unless it's the ultimate telephoto length. The JVC is capable of a lot more tele, and the XLH1 is capable of even more.
The HVX has the best audio recording of any of them, but double-system sound could overcome that if one really wanted to use one of the others.
There are some advantages to the others for certain circumstances, but not necessarily for narrative filmmaking. For example, if you need to record six hours of documentary coverage per day, you may find the others more amenable to that, what with the tape situation. But that's not a factor for narrative filming; any job that could previously have been shot on film could easily be handled with 4gb cards or the occasional 8gb.
Film is a whole different beast. It's the most sellable format, it blows up well, it's archival quality inherently. Regular 16mm is not what you'd want to consider though, you'd have to go at least Super16.
Basically, the new high-def cameras are at the point now where the low-res blowups are not going to be a distraction for theatrical work anymore. Even a DVX is close to good enough; there were several films last year shot on the DVX that got theatrical distribution (including Lonesome Jim, Murderball, The Aristocrats, and of course November). The HVX is like a super-turbo DVX, and frankly its high-def picture would blow away the DVX, so if a DVX was good enough, the HVX is more than good enough.
The only thing about the HVX that should give anyone pause would be: can you work with the recording times of the P2 media? If you can, I'd say it's an excellent choice. If you can't, then there's the future firestore, I guess.
Well, that and price. An HVX plus two 4gb cards is around $6500 or so; a DVX is half that.
Last year we shot a feature-length movie ("Siren") on the DVX. Unquestionably if we were in the same position right now, we would choose the HVX. It's everything the DVX was, and a whole lot more.
Thanks Barry. Still weighing all the options...
I guess the main question was is there any major 'defect' in the HVX (like JVC's SSE problem)?
Having done most of my work in 16mm, I'm sure whatever grain issues the HVX has/doesn't have will pale in comparasion to most of the 16mm footage I've shot...
John
I guess the main question was is there any major 'defect' in the HVX (like JVC's SSE problem)?
Having done most of my work in 16mm, I'm sure whatever grain issues the HVX has/doesn't have will pale in comparasion to most of the 16mm footage I've shot...
John
Zack Birlew
Veteran
Great question jdv! I too would like to know the answer to that one.
So far, the HVX sounds like it's not for everyone at the moment. However, for all those people complaining about the lack of PC software, if any, should wait a bit. Newer versions of software are coming out and should be displayed at around NAB time. I'll be one of the ones there to report since I go to school in Vegas and all. So far, all anybody knows is that Premiere and Final Cut Pro are getting upgrades and Canopus is releasing their new Edius Broadcast stuff, AVID may surprise people and who knows what other software's coming out. The DVFilmmaker guys are coming out with Raylight or something like that, that's supposed to convert the P2 files to another readable format for other NLE's.
However, the issue now is what's this camera all about? Any problems? Any Holy Grails about it? Seems to be the questions everybody else has. When you're done testing and all that, Barry, let us know! =)
So far, the HVX sounds like it's not for everyone at the moment. However, for all those people complaining about the lack of PC software, if any, should wait a bit. Newer versions of software are coming out and should be displayed at around NAB time. I'll be one of the ones there to report since I go to school in Vegas and all. So far, all anybody knows is that Premiere and Final Cut Pro are getting upgrades and Canopus is releasing their new Edius Broadcast stuff, AVID may surprise people and who knows what other software's coming out. The DVFilmmaker guys are coming out with Raylight or something like that, that's supposed to convert the P2 files to another readable format for other NLE's.
However, the issue now is what's this camera all about? Any problems? Any Holy Grails about it? Seems to be the questions everybody else has. When you're done testing and all that, Barry, let us know! =)
Barry_Green
Moderator
I haven't seen a "defect" like the SSE on any camera other than the JVC.
The "noise" and 16mm thing gives me an idea though, I should go get a roll of Vision2 and side-by-side it with the HVX, just to see how its noise compares to the grain of 16mm. I plan on doing a lot of film simulations with the HVX, hopefully some scene file settings that match it, so that would be a good reason to perform such a test. I think people would be a little surprised (if not floored)...
The biggest thing about the HVX is the recording time. That's the workflow issue that people have to work with. Other than that, hopefully we'll discover any other differences/superiorities/defects in comparison next week.
The "noise" and 16mm thing gives me an idea though, I should go get a roll of Vision2 and side-by-side it with the HVX, just to see how its noise compares to the grain of 16mm. I plan on doing a lot of film simulations with the HVX, hopefully some scene file settings that match it, so that would be a good reason to perform such a test. I think people would be a little surprised (if not floored)...
The biggest thing about the HVX is the recording time. That's the workflow issue that people have to work with. Other than that, hopefully we'll discover any other differences/superiorities/defects in comparison next week.
darwinandpaine
Well-known member
I will be shooting a narrative feature with this camera shortly after I get it. We were going to shoot it last Spring/Summer and decided to wait for this camera.
As a festival goer, I've seen quite a few movies shot on the DVX and transfered to 35mm film, and the quality always blows me away. No, it's not 35mm, but for $3,500.00, the image is amazing!
Given that, and how much I LOVE my DVX (my first feature was shot on and XL-1s -- which I came to hate), the HVX is a dream come true. It's everything the DVX is with more resolution, better color space, true over-and undercranking, native 16:9, P2, etc... for less than double the price of my beloved DVX.
So, while people are obsessing about pixel-count, noise levels, etc..., I'm polishing my script and trying to think of the most interesting ways I can use all this great new technology to make my movie even better. I guess I just feel lucky to be alive at a time where our biggest problem in life is whether to buy the HD camera from Panasonic or Canon. Life is good!
http://15minuteslatermovie.com/
As a festival goer, I've seen quite a few movies shot on the DVX and transfered to 35mm film, and the quality always blows me away. No, it's not 35mm, but for $3,500.00, the image is amazing!
Given that, and how much I LOVE my DVX (my first feature was shot on and XL-1s -- which I came to hate), the HVX is a dream come true. It's everything the DVX is with more resolution, better color space, true over-and undercranking, native 16:9, P2, etc... for less than double the price of my beloved DVX.
So, while people are obsessing about pixel-count, noise levels, etc..., I'm polishing my script and trying to think of the most interesting ways I can use all this great new technology to make my movie even better. I guess I just feel lucky to be alive at a time where our biggest problem in life is whether to buy the HD camera from Panasonic or Canon. Life is good!
http://15minuteslatermovie.com/
16mm noise level vs HVX noise...
16mm noise level vs HVX noise...
Thanks Barry. There seems to be a lot a worry about the noise level in the blacks and the possibility the HVX up-rezzes to get 1050. I first got out of 16mm becuae I hated the grain (and just couldn't afford supper 16)....But I still find it hard to believe the HVX could be noisier than 16mm.
If there is noise, is it "film-like" noise? I find completely noise free footage to seem video-like, even if actually shot on film.
Have you seen any film outs of the JVC or HVX? If so, was the noise level bothersome?
Thanks again Barry,
John
16mm noise level vs HVX noise...
Barry_Green said:
Thanks Barry. There seems to be a lot a worry about the noise level in the blacks and the possibility the HVX up-rezzes to get 1050. I first got out of 16mm becuae I hated the grain (and just couldn't afford supper 16)....But I still find it hard to believe the HVX could be noisier than 16mm.
If there is noise, is it "film-like" noise? I find completely noise free footage to seem video-like, even if actually shot on film.
Have you seen any film outs of the JVC or HVX? If so, was the noise level bothersome?
Thanks again Barry,
John
Barry_Green
Moderator
I have seen no film transfers from either. From my experience with the HD100 I'd say it's noisier than the HVX in normal circumstances; not sure about extreme torture test circumstances because I didn't try it under those cases.
Film never looks noise-free. The times when you see noise-free footage is like on HDNet, shot on a $70,000 2/3" camera. And yes, it looks completely unfilm-like, it looks like hyper-real video. Not to say noise is good! Not saying that. Just saying that film grain is noise of a type, and if you want the film look, you're not going to get that from a noise-free image.
They all have noise in their signals. Next week I should be able to get to the bottom of how the noise of each one compares to the others. I expect the Z1 to be the cleanest, the other three all have more visible noise.
Film never looks noise-free. The times when you see noise-free footage is like on HDNet, shot on a $70,000 2/3" camera. And yes, it looks completely unfilm-like, it looks like hyper-real video. Not to say noise is good! Not saying that. Just saying that film grain is noise of a type, and if you want the film look, you're not going to get that from a noise-free image.
They all have noise in their signals. Next week I should be able to get to the bottom of how the noise of each one compares to the others. I expect the Z1 to be the cleanest, the other three all have more visible noise.