Comparison footage of four cams

SalaTar said:
The forum Name is DVXuser that may be a bias
Click to expand...

yeah.. and Barry wont test it against a DVX :)

And just so you know, for the HVX test Me and Barry didnt try and make the other cameras look bad.. we just stand around and let the poor DP's like Evin operate all 3 cameras while we swear at each other and call each other names. I guess one of us could of at least turned around and read the signs.
 
Wow the clips look really good. I think I prefer the HVX200 footage to them all at first glace... it feels more crisp and defined. Wish we could see the same scene shot with each camera but what you posted in itself is very nice, thanks!
 
Side by side a neutral and scientific test desperately needed for January/February if it is possible because to clear up our indie 'film style' camcorder purchase decision. Also still think that PAL version of the camcorder is better for film transfer just because you can have a clear confirmation of 24 fps later in postproduction than NTSC version that can make 23.976 fps direct from the cam. A FILM SPEED as we all know well is 24 frame per second. 24 fps in NTSC countries (Japan+USA) is a pure advertising trick. THEY WANT TO SELL that I can understand. But you buy what you want. You want a real 24 fps in post later you buy PAL, or you want a fake 24 fps (23.976 ) you buy NTSC version of the low budget HD camcorder. If you want a pure 24 fps you buy a high end HD camera. That's it.

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

http://www.sanjinjukic.com/index_panasonicHD_P2.html
 
SJUSER said:
You want a real 24 fps in post later you buy PAL, or you want a fake 24 fps (23.976 ) you buy NTSC version of the low budget HD camcorder. If you want a pure 24 fps you buy a high end HD camera. That's it.
Click to expand...

You know this is really an unbelieveble bunch of nonsense. 23.976 will give you 24 frames to work with. Saying that you have to go with a PAL camera to get a true 24P is also outstanding nonsense.

Best,

Jan
 
SJUSER said:
If you want a pure 24 fps you buy a high end HD camera. That's it.
Click to expand...

You are aware, aren't you, that Lucas used 23.976 for the last two Star Wars movies, and the same with Robert Rodriguez for all of his digital movies, including Sin City shot on HDCam SR? True 24fps is an option on the CineAltas, but is not commonly used. The 23.976 workflow is very valid for filmmaking.

Regards,

Jim Arthurs
 
Jan_Crittenden said:
You know this is really an unbelieveble bunch of nonsense. 23.976 will give you 24 frames to work with. Saying that you have to go with a PAL camera to get a true 24P is also outstanding nonsense.

Best,

Jan
Click to expand...
I apologize and I am terribly sorry if I was writing a nonsense!!!?.

But let us think once more and now in a way of A PURE LOGIC. It is only about: 24 FPS is not 23.976 FPS, it is very clear. Numbers are talking by themselves!!! I do not say that you cannot work with 23.976 like 24P. But once more 24 FPS is only 24 FPS. Speeding or slowing 1 or 2 % is simply physically or wider thinking like a scientifically NOT THE SAME. Just because technically speaking it is a bit expensive to implement A PURE 24 FPS in this small cam and Panasonic or who else should not sell TO US (poor consumers) a product that in the advertising description has a story about film like 24 FPS. And it is not 24 FPS it is 24P or it is 23.976 FPS. Maybe it looks like almost 24 FPS but it is not 24 FPS. Sorry product managers but also the consumers are learning fast...

Mixing the concept(s) in advertising produce sometimes a wrong image and for my point of view that's it what we have with HVX200!!! Would be NICE and correct to explain the customer some problematic technical issues as they exhists to offer more and tell them about the speed LIKE YOU WOULD GET A NEAR TO FILM 24 FPS with 24P and that is exactly 23.976 FPS. It is what the cam can achieve technically for that MONEY that we (the customers) pay for it.
By the way you can find it in the technical brochures of major high end HD cameras options like 23.976 FPS and 24 FPS that stands next to each other and that is how it should be. Also the BROADCAST MARKET (NTSC) use (23.976 FPS) and a FILM MARKET A-L-W-A-Y-S use (24 FPS). Otherwise it is not a FILM. Just because of need to deal with the TECHNOLOGY ISSUES. It is a very simple.

So what I want to say is that Panasonic should be honest to the customers and explain and offer them the truth TECHNICAL info about HVX200. Already I was asking for a native pixel size of CCDs and it was just one forbidden and banned info from Panasonic WATCH DOGS!? Some dogs are very dangerous and I am affraid!! So now I don't ask any more about active sensor pixels, 23.976 fps and 24 fps etc. Don't wave the water too much. Shout up and everything would be OK. And I say OK too, hehe, hehe! Smiling is always the best weapon!

However if it is a picture quality like it is shown on my comparison footage I am going to buy this camcorder. About HVX200 native pixel size and 24 fps BIG mess I am going to deal by myself. It is a poor consumer destiny anyway. These days consumer always suffer. Please, correct me and tell me another story...

Also I updated the test 2 footage again (some correction and grain size polishing) on my server and now everything is OK.

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

http://www.sanjinjukic.com/index_panasonicHD_P2.html
 
Sanjin, for all intents and purposes 24fps and 23.976fps are indeed the same. You're talking about a speed difference of 1/10 of 1%. There is nobody living or dead who could tell the difference between them.

24.000 fps is only ever used for filmout. 23.976 is 99.9% the same speed, and filmout is done on a frame-for-frame basis. I don't really see where you're coming from with this -- it's like you're trying to make a mountain out of a molehill, but you don't even have the molehill.
 
Barry_Green said:
Sanjin, for all intents and purposes 24fps and 23.976fps are indeed the same. You're talking about a speed difference of 1/10 of 1%. There is nobody living or dead who could tell the difference between them.

24.000 fps is only ever used for filmout. 23.976 is 99.9% the same speed, and filmout is done on a frame-for-frame basis. I don't really see where you're coming from with this -- it's like you're trying to make a mountain out of a molehill, but you don't even have the molehill.
Click to expand...
Barry,

thanks and OK. It is like it is. I cannot change it. I was not about a PURISM, it was ALL about a CORRECTNESS. I as a consumer would like to know for what I am paying. Description and ingredients are very important for us.

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

http://www.sanjinjukic.com/index_panasonicHD_P2.html
 
Jarred Land said:
And just so you know, for the HVX test Me and Barry didnt try and make the other cameras look bad.. we just stand around and let the poor DP's like Evin operate all 3 cameras while we swear at each other and call each other names. I guess one of us could of at least turned around and read the signs.
Click to expand...

I thought you guys were testing 4 cameras (Panny, Canon, JVC, Sony), but there's only 3 cameras in the picture. Is that because the bipod only holds 3 cameras at a time?
 
Sumfun said:
I thought you guys were testing 4 cameras (Panny, Canon, JVC, Sony), but there's only 3 cameras in the picture. Is that because the bipod only holds 3 cameras at a time?
Click to expand...
Don't be confused, it is not the dvxuser's official side by side camera test that we are looking forward to get soon. It is just SJUSER unofficial test that consists the clips in 1080p of 3 cams and it started with four in 720p but now is off the server as irrelevant. This one is a valid and

to get download visit
http://www.sanjinjukic.com/index_3Cams_1080p.html


This file is on my official and professional server that is much much faster and a number of downloads is unlimited.

FTP download of 720p longer file is OVER by Saturday Night, December 10 at 23.30 PM.


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

http://www.sanjinjukic.com/index_panasonicHD_P2.html
 
SJUSER said:
Don't be confused, it is not the dvxuser's official side by side camera test that we are looking forward to get soon. It is just SJUSER unofficial test that consists the clips in 1080p of 3 cams and it started with four in 720p but now is off the server as irrelevant. This one is a valid and

to get download visit
http://www.sanjinjukic.com/index_3Cams_1080p.html


This file is on my official and professional server that is much much faster and a number of downloads is unlimited.

FTP download of 720p longer file is OVER by Saturday Night, December 10 at 23.30 PM.


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

http://www.sanjinjukic.com/index_panasonicHD_P2.html
Click to expand...
Hot spot GIRLS (http://www.HotSpotsOnline.com) are really HOT. Like them. Should move in Florida. Ahh... to many Hurricanes, sorry not now maybe later, Formentera and Ibiza are enough for me at the moment.

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

http://www.sanjinjukic.com/index_panasonicHD_P2.html
 
Jim Arthurs said:
You are aware, aren't you, that Lucas used 23.976 for the last two Star Wars movies, and the same with Robert Rodriguez for all of his digital movies, including Sin City shot on HDCam SR? True 24fps is an option on the CineAltas, but is not commonly used. The 23.976 workflow is very valid for filmmaking.

Regards,

Jim Arthurs
Click to expand...
Also I must quote the famous example that the production crew of Steven Soderbergh's film FULL FRONTAL (2002)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0290212/
that is partly shot with Canon XL1 and it is used PAL model JUST BECAUSE OF THE ISSUE TO FILM TRANSFER. The conclusion: if you want to deal with a CLEAN and a PURE FILM LIKE footage TAKE PAL CAMERA. 25 fps to confirm or slow down 4 %. YOU'VE GOT IT CLEAn. All other stories about 24P/p etc., or else are just for the video KIDS only. I must check it out this info with George Lucas using 23.976 fps.

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

http://www.sanjinjukic.com/index_panasonicHD_P2.html
 
SJUSER said:
The conclusion: if you want to deal with a CLEAN and a PURE FILM LIKE footage TAKE PAL CAMERA. 25 fps to confirm or slow down 4 %. YOU'VE GOT IT CLEAn. All other stories about 24P/p etc., or else are just for a video KIDS only. I must check it out this info with George Lucas using 23.976 fps.
Click to expand...
Sanjin, that's nonsense. Complete nonsense. "Full Frontal" was shot before the DVX was on the market. They used PAL because it made a sort-of 25p, whereas the NTSC camera would have made a completely unusable sort-of-30p.

This is old, old, outdated information. This was before there was such a thing as 24p.

24p (and yes, 23.976) is the ultimate mode for transferring to film, especially when looking at the high-def cameras. There's a partial argument that could be made that PAL 25p would transfer better than NTSC 24P, but there's no way anyone could say that a European 1080/25p transfer would be BETTER than an American 1080/24p transfer.
 
Also by the way of all this FPS mess I quote ARRI D20 technical description page where is written about fps:
"Fps: 1 to 60 fps, including the standard HDTV speeds of 23.976 fps, 24 fps, 25 fps, 29.97 fps, 30 fps."

get it from here at

http://www.arri.de/prod/cam/d_20/tech_spec.htm

Conclusion: If 23.976 fps would be the same as 24 fps there would not need to mention one of them there. Would be 23.976 or would be 24. What is a difference? They (Panasonic) said almost no difference, you get only 1% slow down or in another words: Hey guy, you can work with 23.976 fps like 24 fps, don't ask why!!!. Now I am getting dizzy slowly. WHY NOT TO TELL THE TRUTH. PEOPLE LIKE IT EVEN IF IT IS NOT LIKE PANASONIC WOULD LIKE. Variable frame rates from HVX200 not includes 24 FPS like it is implemented in other high end HD cameras. (A painfull truth!!!) But tell them-customers the real story that IT IS A BIT EXPENSIVE for that price tag cam. They would understand and anyway they would buy the cam because they like other performance beauties of the cam.

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

http://www.sanjinjukic.com/index_panasonicHD_P2.html
 
Barry_Green said:
Sanjin, that's nonsense. Complete nonsense. "Full Frontal" was shot before the DVX was on the market. They used PAL because it made a sort-of 25p, whereas the NTSC camera would have made a completely unusable sort-of-30p.

This is old, old, outdated information. This was before there was such a thing as 24p.

24p (and yes, 23.976) is the ultimate mode for transferring to film, especially when looking at the high-def cameras. There's a partial argument that could be made that PAL 25p would transfer better than NTSC 24P, but there's no way anyone could say that a European 1080/25p transfer would be BETTER than an American 1080/24p transfer.
Click to expand...
Barry,

please answer the question:

"Should I as PAL (EU_AUSTRALIA) independent shooter buy PAL or NTSC HVX200 model? I WANT TO HAVE A FILM TRANSFER(S)!!! What should be the best to ACHIEVE a film like-style picture with that low cost camcorder? With PAL or NTSC model or 50 region or 60 region, what ever you want to call?

That is a big dilemma here in Europe about HVX200. There were coming my friends from US here in Vienna and telling me that they have 24 fps cam. I did not have, oh SCHEIS...I was p...st. I payed the same price. They got it and i did not. I am fed up. Let us solve this issue now.

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

http://www.sanjinjukic.com/index_panasonicHD_P2.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top