Comments on HVX

dwstudio

dwstudio

Active member
I was recently asked what are the negatives of the HVX-200 and seriously, I couldn't come up with one.
I was so used to the DVX that the HVX is just so much superior in so many ways.
It has performed above my expectations and the P2 workflow is incredible.
So, to those still thinking about, jump in, and strap on!

BTW here's my work with the HVX200.
It is the Theatrical trailer for ASH WEDNESDAY: CAPITULO UNUS
which we're still shooting with HVX and editing with AVID...
Any criticism is welcome....
Thanx for watching, enjoy.
Ricardo Mendoza
13 MB download
http://www.digitalworkstudios.com/ash/santacaca/Ash Wednesday Capitulo Unus Trailer LG.wmv
 
The world hasn't caught up with MXF yet. P2 Viewer is buggy on my PC. I would like a way to rename MXF files and have that renaming also automatically rename the linked audio files. I would like a way to add metadata and be able to search via database. Would be nice to be able to rename "Contents" (such as Contents_1, Contents_2) folders so they could be added to the same folder structure.

As a PPro2 user, I can only hope Adobe will wake up and bring this functionality to Adobe Bridge.

Other than these things, MXF rocks and tapeless is amazing.

These aren't negatives specific to the HVX-200, but they are realities of tapeless (in my world) at the moment.
J
 
I used to fret about that myself... about the whole organization thing.
What I do is make a txt file in the MXF folder.
Inside this TXT file I keep a log of each folder.
Each day is a different folder, so consequently for example folder #25 will be 08-12-06 (scene #45, 46 and 47)
I just order every MXF file (in avid) by creation date and reference whatever I want very easily.
It is a very low-tech solution but it works for me.
 
Ok, keep in mind I love the HVX200 and am very happy I purchased one. That said, every camera has negatives:

-P2s are pricey and Pansonic along with the industry isn't embracing them as fast as they should. I was really frustrated that Pansonic didn't decide to include a P2 port in their new HDX900. More people using P2s would mean prices coming down faster and more support. That hurts us HVX guys. As for other options, the FS-100 won't do native recording and the cineporter keeps getting delayed (when is it coming out now?) I love the idea behind P2s and I love the workflow but we need more support.

-CCDs could be sharper. While I'll argue that the HVX200 is just as sharp as the Z1 or HD100 when you use it properly, it's not on par with the XLH1 in 1080p. I realize that this was done for more sensitivity but it's still frustrating. I wonder how much it would have cost to use 1/2 chips since that could have given us more resolution, more film-ish DoF, and kept the light need low. I'll still take the higher lattitude and more sensativity of the HVX200 over the sharper XLH1 any day but it would be nice to have my camera be the best at everything :D.

-Low light performance could be better. The Z1, even though it's inferior in just about every other respect, handles low light much better. Once again, I wish my camera was the best at everything.

-LCD is just too damn blurry. The DVX100s looks sharper to my eyes.

-You can't name your clips. It gets to be a ***** in post.

-No 480i 24pN or 1080i 24pN. Would save space and make life easier in editing.

-More NLEs need to support MXFs. To be fair, I think this is the NLE makers fault though. MXFs have been around for a while and I think they are a great format (always prefered them to OMF in Avid) but it can still be a hassle in anything but Avid or Cannopus.

-No interchangible lenses. This really doesn't bug me since I couldn't afford them anyway and am fine with the zoom lense (don't ever bother with 35mm adapters) but it bugs some people.

-No SDI out for uncompressed recording to a deck like the XLH1. Like the lenses, not my problem but another thing that bugs some.

-Doesn't do as much image enhancement as HD100 or Z1. I personally thing this is a good thing since it avoids the digital look but some people like it to be really sharp (fake sharp) and look like crap.

That's every possible con I can think of. Good day.
 
Side LCD could be higher res/sharper

Being able to name the P2 cards individually (like roll numbers) and then have said "folder" on the card with a name/rool number download to the P2Store...or a computer. Would not only help make organzing easier and faster...but it would make the P2Store a real viable option for dumping on set. I refuse to use them until a system like this is in place. And the whole marrying info up with the SD isnt worth the time or effort.

No P2 Viewer for mac out of the box.

A very wonky component HD out...be nicer to have ? HDSDI...or a least a more solid feeling connector.

The are more I'm sure.

Great camera, yes. Could it be even better? yes. Does it have flaws?yes. Is there a truly flawless camera? no.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top