Comparison footage of four cams

Any chance you could seed a Torrent file? I'll put it up on my webserver if you create a trackerless torrent. Email: im.[remove]thatoneguy@gmail.com
 
torrent link sent to your email, at the moment 5 people downloaded the file and 5 more is still loading, i am satisfied with that number of sharing that huge file and keep it open to download for today and than tomorrow is closed.
 
Also tonight? Until when? 'cause I'm @home (dial-up) but I'll be @university tonight. What do you think? And just for the case not to have problems with your bandwidth... Thx for share it.
 
About torrent file, sorry, my ignorance 'cause I know what it is but not yet @practice. Is it possible to download it as a traditional file? Like the others here. The conection speed@university is high, something like 10 min.s for a 100Mb file. So?... Thx again.
 
Panasonic is fighting to catch the low cost HD race with HVX200. Sony FX1/Z1 is not low at all. Don't forget that Sony is a film company making movies and stuff like Cine Alta and Panavision HD Genesis film cam. Panasonic is a broadcasting equipment maker company and desperately want to catch the step for high end filmmaking equipment. To conclude is to say that Sony knows what to do with film and TV and Panasonic knows only for TV broadcasting. But the quality of a both Sony and Panasonic low end HD cams is about close to the same. Sony has advantage because you can hook your FX1E/Z1 to HDCAM or HDCAM RS studio or mobile recorder the same as CineAlta or Arri D20 and you can achieve a high quality of 8 bit uncompressed 4:2:2 with 1440x1080 square px or 1920x1080 rectangle px. Than you are step closer to high end HD postproduction. With Panasonic I still have to check it out that kind of high end HD workflow.

SJUSER
__________

http://www.sanjinjukic.com/
 
as long as HDV cannot do variable framerates they are left on an island for serious production in any filed. the slomo and quicker motion cannot be achieved in post and it doesn´t matter if you shoot a feature, nature, sports or a wedding....you will use the variable framerates once you have them.

if you need a "cheap" uncompressed studiocam the canon is great with that output opton. but if you need a cam for everyday use in the studio, on the mountain or in the streets you are better off with a HVX and a 1.6 converter IMO.

my 2 cents.
 
alpi69 said:
as long as HDV cannot do variable framerates they are left on an island for serious production in any filed. the slomo and quicker motion cannot be achieved in post and it doesn´t matter if you shoot a feature, nature, sports or a wedding....you will use the variable framerates once you have them.

if you need a "cheap" uncompressed studiocam the canon is great with that output opton. but if you need a cam for everyday use in the studio, on the mountain or in the streets you are better off with a HVX and a 1.6 converter IMO.

my 2 cents.
Click to expand...
to get professional "variable framerates" you start with Varicam and finish with Arri D20. HVX200 needs advertising that's the reason that you get leftovers of "variable framerates". All you can get also with other low HD cams in post. Everything is about the money, if I would like to spent 10 000 to 15 000 €/$ for the cam than I will go in the next class of 2/3" inch cams like AJ-HDX400. I was in Panasonic presentation of HVX200/AJ-HDX400 last week here in Vienna and saw a great Panasonic AJ-HDX400 cam. HVX200 looks like a toy. You should not spent more than 5000 €/$. Better to invest in accessories like matte boxes, 35mm adapters, Nikon manual lenses, separate audio recording, lighting equipment etc...Don't forget that are all 1/3" cams and all limitation of that, fast movement, less sensitivity, a low dynamic range od CCDs etc...

SJUSER
--------------------

http://www.sanjinjukic.com/index_panasonicHD_P2.html
 
SJUSER said:
to get professional "variable framerates" you start with Varicam and finish with Arri D20. HVX200 needs advertising that's the reason that you get leftovers of "variable framerates". All you can get also with other low HD cams in post. Everything is about the money, if I would like to spent 10 000 to 15 000 €/$ for the cam than I will go in the next class of 2/3" inch cams like AJ-HDX400. I was in Panasonic presentation of HVX200/AJ-HDX400 last week here in Vienna and saw a great Panasonic AJ-HDX400 cam. HVX200 looks like a toy. You should not spent more than 5000 €/$. Better to invest in accessories like matte boxes, 35mm adapters, Nikon manual lenses, separate audio recording, lighting equipment etc...Don't forget that are all 1/3" cams and all limitation of that, fast movement, less sensitivity, a low dynamic range od CCDs etc...

SJUSER
--------------------

http://www.sanjinjukic.com/index_panasonicHD_P2.html
Click to expand...

hey fellow austrian ;-)

well of course a 2/3´´ cam is a different league (like the Varicam etc) and of course the HD400 is an awesome cam - in 1080i. it all depends what you do and what your budgets are. if Heineken asks me to make an international spot for them: hell yeah i get an ARRI 35mm cam, 30 people on set and Heidi Klum as my talent. but if my local beer-brewer wants an imagefilm (in HD just to make sure) or i try to get my script out onto the screen then the HVX will offer me a great bang for the buck and my client will be more than happy with the result.
if you buy HDX400, the mattebox, the filters, the lightgear, the opticals, the tripod, the steadycam, etc etc you are well over 15.000.

is 1/3 a problem? yes it is. but there is nothing in that priceleague that comes close. i have read horrible reports about the SONY HDV cams that are out now (not the cams but the HDV format they use!!) and of course they might counter with a tremendously good cam at NAB in spring (and that we do not know yet; and if it is HDV i will not even read the reviews).
history has shown that waiting for the next best thing to come out will only stop you from doing what you ought to do: go out and shoot with the best available gear for your budget NOW. the Canon looks superb and were it not for the variable framerates and HDV then I would buy it over the HVX and live with 25f. but to get 48fps, intraframe keyframes and 25p (especially the way Panasonic makes 25p look with its cinelike settings) in 720p for less than euro 8.500 is simply unbeatable NOW.
 
Your local bear customer will order SD for sure. HD even with HDV or DVCPRO HD on HVX is expensive for that local fish. But exceptions are always possible.

Sony HDV is a really good enough (starting with €2000 Sony HDR-HC1E, than Sony HDR-FX1 €4000 and Z1 €6000, and forget all that variable frame rates, do them in the post because you are anyway limited wirh artifacts of 1/3' inch CDDs and CMOS, and have a look at the site that shows use of 35mmm adapter on FX1E, looks amazing.

http://personales.ya.com/autodrome/

And HVX200 will not be available in the 50 region countries till end of March and I'll wait, watch and read all the tests, reviews etc. Till than will experiment with my FX1E and Micro 35 lens adapter. Stay tuned for these results on my site at

http://www.sanjinjukic.com/

SJUSER
-------------
http://www.sanjinjukic.com/index_panasonicHD_P2.html
 
Until now at 2 PM local time, Vienna, Middle Europe, my server deliver 15 full download of heavy 224.2 MB h264 file footage and that is 3363 MB. Very good.
 
SJUSER wrote: to get professional "variable framerates" you start with Varicam and finish with Arri D20.
HVX200 needs advertising that's the reason that you get leftovers of "variable framerates".

Ahh, but the variable frame rates that you get with the HVX are actually the ones that are used most often on the Varicam, 12,18,22,26,30,32,36,48,60. And in watching the footage that Barry and Jay Nemeth shot, doggone convincing.

>All you can get also with other low HD cams in post.

This is where you are totally mislead. Not to be confrontational but rather to clarify. The primary differenence between the HVX and the others is that this one is based on DVCPRO HD which is a frame independent resolution algorithm and the others are based on HDV. DVCPRO HD was designed for HD production. HDV was initially designed as a broadcast transport stream and then moved into a consumer camera. Completely different set of expectations. Withe DVCPRO what you see through the viewfinder is what you get on the recording. Not so with HDV, especially if there is a lot of motion and detail.

>Everything is about the money, if I would like to spent 10 000 to 15 000 €/$ for the cam than I will go in the next class of 2/3" inch cams like AJ-HDX400.

Well the HDX400 in the US is $32,000, so while it is a next class up, it is a significant budget class up.

>Don't forget that are all 1/3" cams and all limitation of that, fast movement, less sensitivity, a low dynamic range od CCDs etc...

Then you really didn't play with the HVX, the dynamic range is better than the DVX, fast motion doesn't bother it or the algorithm at all and the minimum illumination is 3 lux, all of this is a class above the HDV cameras.

Best regards,

Jan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top