bought dvx and unhappy

S

snpx

Active member
hallo,
iam new to this forum and dont speak english very good, sorry. could you please help me.

i owned the dvx 2 weeks ago and now many people adviced me to sell the camera, because of hd. but i have not the money for the hvx.
something like the canon xh-a1 is cheaper, but hdv. because i have often fast movements in my videos, i dont know, if i get lucky with the gops (mpeg2) of the hdv standard because of motion artifacts?
so, icannot earn a hvx and the a1 is no solution (?), could it be good, to buy a anarmorphic 16:9 lens for the dvx and upres it with thomething like reziser (digital anarchy)?
or for that hdv is even the "better" solution (motion artifacts)?

i would be very happy for an answer

regards
thomas
 
The DVX is actually the reason I have NOT made the jump to HD...

What do you dislike about the camera? I prefer my DVX to just about every HDV camera I have used to date...
 
The DVX is a very capable camera. If you don't need HD, then you should be very happy with your purchase. It is still the SD camera. Don't sweat it.

Regarding 16:9 - you can do the "simulated" version in camera or just film your stuff with the 16:9 aspect ratio in mind and crop or letterbox it in post. I don't know what is the preferred method amongst folks who use the DVX, but I am sure some can chime in on that specific aspect of your question.

Jason
 
You didn't tell us what you'll be using the camera for. If you're shooting for clients who want HD right out of the box, then you'll not be happy with the DVX. If you are planning to shoot documentaries or narrative films, you would do very well with this camera, as long as you learn to use it to the best of its abilities.

I was blown away by "Iraq in Fragments", a documentary that I expect to be in the running for an Oscar. It was shot entirely with a DVX 100 and a DVX 100A and then up-rezzed in post. It is absolutely gorgeous, even blown up on a big screen. If not having an HD camera had prevented the filmmaker from making this incredible documentary, that would have been truly sad. And, in fact, the added encumberances of shooting in HD might have prevented him from getting the intimate and spontaneous footage he got.

In the end, it's all about how well we can tell a story and how well we can use the equipment we have available to us. If we don't know how to do either of those things well, then doing it in HD isn't going to matter in the least.

Get out there and start shooting!
 
thank you very much for reply. and excuse for my bad english, please. thanx.

i have rent the camera a month ago for a theater performance and loved it from the start. low light and latitude and colors plus handling.
i do art stuff, too mostly for my own. i have a small teacher job at university, but i have to do video work for clients because of earning money, too. i was ill for 5 years, so iam starting again. clients are asking for hd, its a hd hype, i cannot stop.
i do not like hdv, because of motion artifacts when i do my own artistic stuff, there are fast movements, wich i postpro with apple shake, a compositing program.
my idea is now to uprez dvx footage and sell it as hd, most people only scream hd, because of marketing, but they cant see.
when i would have the money, i would go hvx200 and dvcprohd codec. but so i have a little bit of horror with the hdv mpeg2 gop artifact thing. i cannot purchase a dvx plus hdv cam.
whats about the idea to buy a used anamorphic 16:9 lens and upres it, when necessary? could this work?
i wonder the ccd of the hvx200 have 540 lines as the dvx100 and upres it internally, am i right?
why is the dvx a reason not to go hd?

confused , regards
thomas
 
Last edited:
Can the DVX pass for HD footage?

The answer is no. Even with an upres.

From your post you have clients ASKING for HD. So if they are willing to pay for HD then why not give it to them? I would have an issue asking for something HD and be given SD, even upres.


korimickster said:
The DVX is actually the reason I have NOT made the jump to HD...

What do you dislike about the camera? I prefer my DVX to just about every HDV camera I have used to date...
Click to expand...

Cant be talking about Canon there or the JVCHD100 for that matter. They simply blow the DVX out of the water. But so they should.
 
snpx said:
thank you very much for reply. and excuse for my bad english, please. thanx.
Click to expand...
only if you excuse mine.

P04417.JPG
 
:2vrolijk_08:

I just wet myself a little after that one. Just a little.

Okay, seriously though, the DVX can do no lag, but you have to give up the 24 or 30 fps to achieve it. Actually, I like shooting 30p fps when I'm moving faster, but it isn't as "clear" as interlaced.

If you have clients who are looking for HD, I'd recommend the HDV cameras for sports, reality and news - anything that needs to look "real". I've achieved some amazing footage in the Z1U and XLH1, but it never looks narrative.

For narrative HD, in the 1/3 form-factor, there is simply no equal to the HVX in my opinion. Gamma and cadence are unequaled.

Good luck and please fill us in a little more on your client's requirements!

e
 
I prefer The Babys.

b0014459_18554247.jpg


Midnight Rendezvous

Driving faster than you want me to
Can't help myself when I'm alone with you
Alright
Alright
I've passed the limit and there's no way back
Your kind of love gives me a heart attack
Alright
Alright
Cause baby can't you see
We need to spend some time alone
We need to see some dreams come true
I wanna feel me touching you
We need a midnight rendezvous
On the freeway with the throttle down
You drive me crazy as we drive around
Alright
All night
The way you look tonight you aim to please
The dress you're wearin' is way past your knees
Alright
Alright
Cause baby can't you see
We need to spend some time alone
We need to see some dreams come true
I wanna feel you touching me
We need a midnight rendezvous
Midnight
Midnight rendezvous
Midnight
Midnight rendezvous
Midnight
Midnight rendezvous
Midnight
Midnight rendezvous
Yeah yeah
All I really wanna do
Spend some time alone with you
Yeah
A midnight
(Baby baby cant you see)
(Baby baby you and me)
(Baby baby cant you see)
(Baby baby you and me)
A midnight rendezvous
Yeah
All I really wanna do
Oh I really wanna f___ you
Oh
Midnight rendezvous
 
snpx said:
hallo,
iam new to this forum and dont speak english very good, sorry. could you please help me.

i owned the dvx 2 weeks ago and now many people adviced me to sell the camera, because of hd. but i have not the money for the hvx.
something like the canon xh-a1 is cheaper, but hdv. because i have often fast movements in my videos, i dont know, if i get lucky with the gops (mpeg2) of the hdv standard because of motion artifacts?
so, icannot earn a hvx and the a1 is no solution (?), could it be good, to buy a anarmorphic 16:9 lens for the dvx and upres it with thomething like reziser (digital anarchy)?
or for that hdv is even the "better" solution (motion artifacts)?

i would be very happy for an answer

regards
thomas
Click to expand...

Unless the people who are advising you to sell the DVX are your clients, you might be just fine with SD for a while to come. Go do some work with your DVX and save towards an HVX (or whatever HD camera you want). If you can afford it, you may want to keep your DVX even if you get an HD camera.
 
ncje said:
From your post you have clients ASKING for HD. So if they are willing to pay for HD then why not give it to them? I would have an issue asking for something HD and be given SD, even upres.
Cant be talking about Canon there or the JVCHD100 for that matter. They simply blow the DVX out of the water. But so they should.
Click to expand...

you are right, when the client is asking for hd, he or she have to get hd for a higher price, of cause.
mostly, the clients want a dvd. this means sd in the produkt in the end. but looking at the camera asking, is it hd, hd is better and i have to explain.
thanks
 
overlandfilms said:
:2vrolijk_08:

For narrative HD, in the 1/3 form-factor, there is simply no equal to the HVX in my opinion. Gamma and cadence are unequaled.

Good luck and please fill us in a little more on your client's requirements!

e
Click to expand...

yes, the hvx. sad. it is to expensive to me.
the dvx is ok for my own artistic stuff, for my clients it would be better a hdv-cam.

mostly my clients think, hd is better, even it ends at a dvd...
thank you.
 
sorry, dont know, how to quote different messages, so my 3 postings.

i would like to ask:
what are your experiences with the motion artefacts by using hdv, cause of the mpeg2 algorithm using in the 12 (sony) or 16 (canon) GOPs?

is the 16:9 lens any good or is it better to rezise in post?

would be nice to hear from you.
thanks
 
canon uses a 6gop Structure. ITs much better than the Sony 12GOP. You probably wont be disapointed with the canon. I almost bought it, but got the HVX instead be cause the HVX is FAR more flexible and User controlable as to its recording capabilities.
 
Terry_Lasater said:
If you can afford it, you may want to keep your DVX even if you get an HD camera.
Click to expand...

can you tel me the reason for this?
is it because of better lowlight capatibilities or other reason?
thanks.
 
TimurCivan said:
canon uses a 6gop Structure. ITs much better than the Sony 12GOP. You probably wont be disapointed with the canon. I almost bought it, but got the HVX instead be cause the HVX is FAR more flexible and User controlable as to its recording capabilities.
Click to expand...
thats true, my mistake. of cause 6 not 16, as i wrote, sorry.

and with the hvx the user can record in dvcpro codec and this use intraframes. so no gosting in fast movements.
have anyone experients with the gosting (motion artefacts pf the hdv mpeg2 codec) of the canon xh-a1 or any other hdv cam? specialy in fast movements?
thanks
 
hdv doesnt ghost. it macroblocks and has a 6 frame stick on very slow moving details, like grass and leaves on trees.
 
Just going to jump in here real quick. I've read through the entire thread. Let me say, it sounds like your clients end product is ending up on an SD (Standard Definition) DVD. In this case, there is no reason at all for you to switch from the DVX at this time. If you shoot it right, the DVX can look just as good on a SD DVD as HVX footage. I just shot a 45 min. long film on the DVX, and it's destined for DVD. It doesn't look worse than HD films I've seen on DVD, because it's Standard Definition DVD's, not HD-DVD's. I'd say stick with the DVX if your end product is SD-DVD's right now.
 
snpx said:
can you tel me the reason for this?
is it because of better lowlight capatibilities or other reason?
thanks.
Click to expand...

I'm just thinking that your clients wanting HD will pay a premium price for it, but some clients may not want to pay for HD and will be satisfied with SD at a lower rate. However, the decision should be based on the demand for work in your area and your own finances.

Good luck with your decision. :thumbsup:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top