Discussion of dv.com results

[MattC]

Well now.....

Thank god, I can still wait this all out. Given Canon's glass this doesn't surprise very much. But the issue for me is still how to record the output and HDV doesn't do it for me... NOW, if a decent recording/storage solution came out for 2-3K??? I think I might be leaning towards the Canon.

As far as motion goes (and I just read a post by Jack Fellis on this issue - again) some folks just don't believe that it can work. I was and still am a bit, skeptical of 24f, time will tell. But there are folks who don't believe that the 24p of the XL2 is the same as the 24p of the DVX and I know that to be true. How? Because I accept Barry Green's word to me that it is indeed the same.

Matt

 

[Kholi]

Well now.....

Thank god, I can still wait this all out. Given Canon's glass this doesn't surprise very much. But the issue for me is still how to record the output and HDV doesn't do it for me... NOW, if a decent recording/storage solution came out for 2-3K??? I think I might be leaning towards the Canon.

As far as motion goes (and I just read a post by Jack Fellis on this issue - again) some folks just don't believe that it can work. I was and still am a bit, skeptical of 24f, time will tell. But there are folks who don't believe that the 24p of the XL2 is the same as the 24p of the DVX and I know that to be true. How? Because I accept Barry Green's word to me that it is indeed the same.

Matt

Just read the same exact post by Jack_Fellis. And it's also pretty cool to see that at least SOMEONE realizes that a tapeless solution is coming for the Canon. People keep screaming p2, but it's not going to be the only tapeless solution for long.

It's all going to come down to the person whom makes the next praiseworthy 28 Days Later with either camera. When that happens, a real-world study of camera performance, that's when we'll really get results. =D

 

[doccutter]

So you'll be comparing both tapeless options, right? Which means that you'll still be comparing uncompressed.

Mmmm, not exactly. If I was to use a firestore or similar device with and of the HDV cameras, what would be going to tape would be HDV, NOT uncompressed. Ergo, I would like to see HDV output compared to HVX output, that's all I'm saying. As for whether the test was based on recorded footage, it sounded to me as though "recorded" did not specifically mean recorded to HDV tape, then captured into the mac, rather "recorded" appears to mean captured via HDSDI uncompressed. Two entirely different animals.

 

[ullanta]

Actually Adam said the results are based on both live and recorded footage, so I don't see what you mean.

It was a great read. I guess that's the ultimate result of that test. Can't get any better than Adam Wilt's opinion.

Well, he said that, indeed. But "recorded" footage was not recorded by the cameras, but through an external system. And the cameras interfaced to said external system in different ways - some digital, some analog. And said external system is very expensive and very non-portable. So anyone who wants to shoot with a camcorder (rather than with a tethered camera) has not seen much that's useful about the actual footage they'll generate with these camcorders.

He touched on DVXProHD footage just a bit... but made no mention of HDV footage from any of the other cameras.

And, the whole test kind of looked the other way regarding the codec issue which is such a point of contention and would have most benefited from comparison... how HDV stands up to lots of motion, vs. DVCProHD.

Not to say I don't appreciate all the work, and there's certainly some valuable information. But I don't think it's really enough to influence a decision much. Especially when we've got such wildly different SUBJECTIVE opinions from the testers who were actually there. I mean, Green says the HVX really kicked ass, and Wilt thinks the HVX was defective and needs an update?

Anyway, as has been said, it's actual footage of dramatic scenes, in motion, that will make the issues clear. Noone really had an issue with DVX resolution until looking at this res-chart testing. Nothing in the testing seemed to address chroma res vs luma res, which, e.g., Barry's red-eyed monster pics showed can make a huge difference. And, of course, all these charts do nothing for "mojo".

I wish someone would set up a few real-world side-by-side tests in various conditions. Can't Kaku work three cameras at a time while riding his bike?

 

[soarprod]

Are all the HVX grabs 60i? WTF - why not try a rez chart in 24p? The XL1h will do much better in a 60i bakeoff than 24p.

 

[Justyn]

I gathered that too and will wait till Barry discusses the natively recorded formats.

I also am not sure why so much press was given to how the Canon suffered from not having a techie there.. and all that business. Kind of unfortunate to have a disclaimer that would cover and protect the canon and it's potential faults. You would think that it would be the HVX getting the disclaimers as it's only been out a month. Disclaimers at the begining of articles can sometimes be quite manipulative in their effect.. And personally I try to avoid them.. but I understand this test was a lot to pull off. And we have been waiting eagerly for any news....


I'm solid on what the HVX will deliver for me and what I'm doing. Glad finally that the noise stuff will go away. Didn't he say that the canon was noiser?.. but certainly his word choice gives away his fondness for the canon with even downplaying the merits of the others.

 

[Mediacre]

Well, he said that, indeed. But "recorded" footage was not recorded by the cameras, but through an external system.

Actually there was tape recorded in the tests and I remember Barry saying he had them and then after all the backlash, he said he gave them to Adam Wilt, so I think his opinion is also based on recorded tape, meaning HDV since the HVX200 is P2.

But I don't think it's really enough to influence a decision much. Especially when we've got such wildly different SUBJECTIVE opinions from the testers who were actually there. I mean, Green says the HVX really kicked ass, and Wilt thinks the HVX was defective and needs an update?

Honestly, could you see Barry saying otherwise about the HVX200?

 

[Kholi]

I gathered that too and will wait till Barry discusses the natively recorded formats.

I also am not sure why so much press was given to how the Canon suffered from not having a techie there.. and all that business. Kind of unfortunate to have a disclaimer that would cover and protect the canon and it's potential faults. You would think that it would be the HVX getting the disclaimers as it's only been out a month. Disclaimers at the begining of articles can sometimes be quite manipulative in their effect.. And personally I try to avoid them.. but I understand this test was a lot to pull off. And we have been waiting eagerly for any news....


I'm solid on what the HVX will deliver for me and what I'm doing. Glad finally that the noise stuff will go away. Didn't he say that the canon was noiser?.. but certainly his word choice gives away his fondness for the canon with even downplaying the merits of the others.

You know what? I have a feeling, but I'm not assuming, that if they would've had an experienced tech on the scene for the Canon... then there would've been no mention of handicaps. And someone on these boards would've came in to say "Well the HVX has only been out for a month!". But, that's hypothetical and knowing that... maybe that was a manipulative factor to you.

They outright said this wasn't a battle for first place. It was a test to see how all of the cameras can do, a case-study for the community.

And he didn't say the Canon was noisier... the article says it shows more noise than the other cameras when going into skin detail, if I recall that right.

And he outright told you that the Canon did NOT handle highlights well. So what's the problem? Doesn't look like he's showing preference over one camera or another.

People on these boards use noise as an excuse for "film-like grain". That's apologizing for a handicap as well.

 

[MattC]

Well, I had an issue with DVX resolution, that's one of the reasons I bought an XL2...

BUT, Ullanta, you're right - DVCProHD kicks ass. My biggest struggle is I love the codec that Panny developed - Love it! I'm not a fan of P2 cards right now, but you don't have to be and I'm a huge fan of tapeless recording so I'll give a big thumbs up to P2 figuring I would use another storage device. I also like Panny's gamma curve. My problem is I don't really like the feel of their cameras or the glass they use so much. I love Canon's glass and I like the feel of their camera better (I'm comparing the XL2 and DVX - this might not be true when I get my hands on an HVX). I don't love the feel of the canon, but I do like it better. I love Canon's manual lens and, once you own it and and don't need to try to make the 20x behave like a manual lense, you even figure out what the 20x is good for, and it's good for a lot. I also like the color controls of the Canon better. Oh, buy I hate the idea of compressed audio, which the Canon uses when recording HDV... So if I could buy the Canon with P2 cards and DVCProHD and they made it in the shape of the JVC, I'd be in heaven.

But no one did that.....

Matt

 

[Lenilenapi]

I'm a confusd by these tests ( and of course disappointed that HVX showed poorly in the resolution department.)
I guess so far as I understand it I concur with Ullanta - I'm not sure what they showed us.

Adam says :
"Some material was recorded to the native recording format of the cameras under test: 720p or 1080i HDV, or DVCPROHD on a P2 card for the Panasonic. We also captured clips of every test in uncompressed 10-bit format to hard disk using a PowerMac G5 with AJA Kona LHe card, using Final Cut Pro as the capture application."

First- how did they record the uncompressed images from the Sony, JVC & Canon. Canon I know has SDI, but I thought the others had to go HDV.
Also is this a viable way of capturing from these cameras in the field?
On the Canon - how easy is it to record SDI, I was under the impression that it is expensive.
If the tests are not reflecting the HDV codecs at work, then are we seeing anything resembling a real world comparison? ( I'm not trying to push the Panasonic here, I honestly don't get the point.)
Likewise at least regarding the Sony many of the complaints I've heard have to do with how well the codec/recording handles certain kinds of movement in contrasty and dark situations. That was not explored either, but it is very important.

I thought we were going to get a comparison of RECORDED images on this. Did we or didn't we?
If not , its just the begining of real comparisons, almost more interesting from an engineer's perspective than a shooters.

 

[ullanta]

Didn't he say that the canon was noiser?.. but certainly his word choice gives away his fondness for the canon with even downplaying the merits of the others.

Oh, let's not go there! I really DON'T think that is at all the case. I think there's a lot to be disappointed with in the amount of testing that can be achieved for 6 cameras in a short time. But I don't think we shoud be disappointed in the testers, who did the best they could in impossible circumstances, and seem to be giving very fair answers. Unfortunately, the answers based on testing and the answers based on everyone's real-world experience with the cameras are very different, emphasizing the limits of the testing.

Again, though... I think we'd all appreciate it if Adam would emphasize recording formats a bit more, and perhaps supplement the article with at least some results from that standpoint... since he does have HDV footage...?

 

[ullanta]

Actually there was tape recorded in the tests and I remember Barry saying he had them and then after all the backlash, he said he gave them to Adam Wilt, so I think his opinion is also based on recorded tape, meaning HDV since the HVX200 is P2.


Honestly, could you see Barry saying otherwise about the HVX200?

Sorry, but you're misreading. Adam's article clearly describes what he's looking at, and it's footage recorded through a kona. Please re-read the article. Yes, there was footage shot in HDV, but no, nothing in the article referred to it as opposed to the uncompressed footage.

 

[mochouinard]

I wish someone would set up a few real-world side-by-side tests in various conditions. Can't Kaku work three cameras at a time while riding his bike?

Ty Rap them all to a broom stick and shoot away

Is barry Hiding ?? I want his input on the Res, is it true, or a focusing problem or something else ?

I will still go with the HVX200 even if it that bad. But I agree that if I didnt preordered, I would start reconsidering the XL H1. I will buy the HVX200 as a long term investement, a camera that technologies wise should last me the next 15+ year as still be a high end camera. The memory can be increases as new P2 card get release, which make it better than other on-camera recorder options.

Now XL H1 have SDI-HD, it does bring the point that you can have the best footage uncompress. But frame independant recording option for the SDI-HD doesn't sound a near future option at under 10k$.

But the resolution does bother me... I really wish it would be closer to the XL H1.

Now after looking again, I saw the fact that in 24f mode, XL H1 goes down to 540 Vlimit. I really, really hope HVX200 show better res that what we saw.

The part that scared me is that Barry actually set it up, and I would find it hard for him to not have setup at it potential...

A small note also, I see alot of RED and BLUE in the XL H1 edge of any sharp line. Doesn't look good to my eye.

I will stick with HVX200 but let hope those res get alittle higher, maybe 700 ?

 

[Luis Caffesse]

It shouldn't be a massive shock that the HVX didn't shine in terms of resolution.
If it could kick the snot out of the other cams in terms of resolution then Panasonic would have released the ccd specs, which they haven't. But, I would keep in mind that resolution alone doesn't make a great camera.

In my opinion there was a very important missing player in the 4-cam comparison and that is the DVX+Andromeda.

I agree - that would be a killer addition, which is why I've been talking to Juan to see if there is any way I can get an andromeda system to add to Mike Curtis' upcoming test here in Austin. I haven't heard back from him yet, but he does know that the test will be happening, and he knows we're interested in adding the andromeda into the mix.

Hopefully we can figure out some way to make it happen.
:thumbsup:

 

[Kholi]

Ty Rap them all to a broom stick and shoot away

Is barry Hiding ?? I want his input on the Res, is it true, or a focusing problem or something else ?

I will still go with the HVX200 even if it that bad. But I agree that if I didnt preordered, I would start reconsidering the XL H1. I will buy the HVX200 as a long term investement, a camera that technologies wise should last me the next 15+ year as still be a high end camera. The memory can be increases as new P2 card get release, which make it better than other on-camera recorder options.

Now XL H1 have SDI-HD, it does bring the point that you can have the best footage uncompress. But frame independant recording option for the SDI-HD doesn't sound a near future option at under 10k$.

But the resolution does bother me... I really wish it would be closer to the XL H1.

Now after looking again, I saw the fact that in 24f mode, XL H1 goes down to 540 Vlimit. I really, really hope HVX200 show better res that what we saw.

The part that scared me is that Barry actually set it up, and I would find it hard for him to not have setup at it potential...

A small note also, I see alot of RED and BLUE in the XL H1 edge of any sharp line. Doesn't look good to my eye.

I will stick with HVX200 but let hope those res get alittle higher, maybe 700 ?

Why are you calling Barry out to confirm the resolution tests? You think the guy lied about them or something? Barry was right there, wasn't he? And he's experienced. I'd like to think he tried his best to get the communities the best possible results out of the one camera that everyone wants to get their hands on.

The HVX still looks good for it's price. They said it-- You can get half-way decent HD with these cameras and they all weighed in very close.

 

[ullanta]

I will buy the HVX200 as a long term investement, a camera that technologies wise should last me the next 15+ year as still be a high end camera.

Oh man, you're sure to be disappointed... 15 years on top... that doesn't happen in the electronics world.

Except maybe my Milennia preamps... ;-)

 

[Justyn]

I think this will be a bloated thread.. 10/15 pages for sure. I do feel good though looking at those frame grabs of the chick. The cinealta looks awesome. I think the JVC and the Panny look good as well. Canon looks bland.. and that last one. What's that camera?

 

[D_and_G]

That report was certainly a reality check.


I still need to see :

1.Real world footage, escpecially low key lighting +low
light.
2. Film blowup footage of the relevant cams, and
if possible an XD CAM F330.


I think the most important thing Adam Wilt said was that there was NO clear winner. All the cameras had their plus' and minus'. You should decide on the form factor and workflow. As far as codec etc..., since I've seen the HDV taped footage go through the AJA to DV100, I'm not to concerned with that anymore, especially since their will be tapeless storage "ease" for both the Canon and HVX.

As far as the noise issue is concerned, I think that until I see a filmout comparison it's hard to come to a definitive conclusion. Which type will be more aesthetically acceptable etc ...?

Every camera has its drawbacks and workarounds, NLE questions, wait on hardware support development, and onwards. The HVX doesn't seem to be the revolutionary camera some predicted (or hoped) > it is just another choice in a comparable field of competitors.


That's cool...pick one and make your own revolution :beer:


Cheers.

 

[MAS]

I`dont mind numbers, but if i buy a native 1080p cam, i want more resolution than a 720p one. maybe i am totally wrong, but isn`t the purpose of 1080p to be far superior to 720p?
i shot a short with the jvc and i really liked it, but i expected the hvx to outrule it in every way (except interch. lens). the only real artistic advantages are the codec and variable framerates. so i am really dissapointed. now it`s clear to me why panasonic is keeping the specs a secret.

cu MAS

 

[Kholi]

That report was certainly a reality check.


I still need to see :

1.Real world footage, escpecially low key lighting +low
light.
2. Film blowup footage of the relevant cams, and
if possible an XD CAM F330.


I think the most important thing Adam Wilt said was that there was NO clear winner. All the cameras had their plus' and minus'. You should decide on the form factor and workflow. As far as codec etc..., since I've seen the HDV taped footage go through the AJA to DV100, I'm not to concerned with that anymore, especially since their will be tapeless storage "ease" for both the Canon and HVX.

As far as the noise issue is concerned, I think that until I see a filmout comparison it's hard to come to a definitive conclusion. Which type will be more aesthetically acceptable etc ...?

Every camera has its drawbacks and workarounds, NLE questions, wait on hardware support development, and onwards. The HVX doesn't seem to be the revolutionary camera some predicted (or hoped) > it is just another choice in a comparable field of competitors.


That's cool...pick one and make your own revolution :beer:


Cheers.

Seconding that. :thumbsup: