Comparing frames from FX1 against the DVX100A

G

gzabetas

Member
At this following link:
http://www.filmguideseattle.com/hdr-fx1.htm

I dowloaded the "Interview" clip and noticed that the contrast looked much better to my eyes on the FX1 clip.

I don't know if this is an honest test or not but take a look and tell me if the man's shirt and highlights and skintones not look better on the FX1. The contrast also.

Please share your inputs.
Thanks
 
I agree, not a good DVX image, looks like it isn't using the DVX gamma and settings are standard, image is "flat". In other hand, by nature, FX1 should have more resolution.

Ulisses
 
thanks for your input ulises,
I don't have a DVX100A yet, so I didn't know if that flatness was normal.
That FX1 just pops out it seems.
 
Hmmmmm.

The DVX100 interview footage of the man looks nothing like the DVX should look. It look's flat and it appears to have some tweaking in camera. The trees outside have desatuarated appearance; the natural reds found in the wood grain appear muted. Did they even do a proper White Balance?

And check the focus; did they even focus on the dude wih the DVX100? It appears almost as if the chair is in the focal plane and not the man.

What's with shooting 24p and then rendering out NTSC? This is degrading the image. At least render it out properly. Anytime there is movement you an see the interlace artifacts playing catch up. Perhaps they should have shot 60i to compare apples to apples.

Honestly gzabetas; HD is going to give you insane resolution over any SD camera. If your intention is filmmaking howver; I'd go with the DVX100a anyday over any other camera on the market right now.

Thats just me; pimping the DVX.
 
thanks John,
Actually I am not concerned at all about resolution as post and delivery do not help me. It was the texture and tone that I saw lacking in this clip.
I have seen other wonderfull DVX clips, just couldn't tell if next to the FX1 they paled in comparison.
I am glad you noticed the same effects. I am almost ready to buy the DVX100A, and just want to make sure the FX1 is not better in contrast.
 
gzabetas said:
I am glad you noticed the same effects. I am almost ready to buy the DVX100A, and just want to make sure the FX1 is not better in contrast.
Click to expand...
"better" in contrast is a subjective question. The FX1 is certainly contrastier. But the DVX captures more dynamic range. The two are mutually exclusive. More contrast = less dynamic range, more dynamic range = flatter contrast curve. There's no escaping that.

Of course, you could tweak the DVX to deliver a much contrastier picture too. You can create almost any look you want, entirely in-camera. I've been posting this picture everywhere, but it seems to answer a lot of your questions. Note that all of these shots were taken at the same place on the same day by the same DVX, the only difference is in the in-camera settings (i.e., no post-processing or color correction of any type):

TwelveMPLooks.JPG
 
thanks for those pics Barry. I hadn't seen them yet.
That definetily sheds some light on the in-camera range of contrasty looks you can get.
That FX1 clip also had a bit of "glow" on the shirt highlights --almost like a diffusion filter effect. If that was in camera it looked good.
Alos there was some redness on the man's cheeks that I didn't see on the DVX side. Then again the light might have chaged its angle and the camera settings also.
 
ouch...

the Fx1 footage looks so much better than anythinh else in this comparo.
might be the operator ?

It seems to have a ton of dynamic range even compared with the 2 shouldermount big camcorders !!! It looks smooth, defined, hi rez. The colors seem tight.

I really like the FX1 hi rez/low contrast image, and it still looks better in SD mode.

hmmmm. i'm beginning to think it is a really great camcorder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top