Discussion of dv.com results

EDIT TO ADD: a recent example of the an awkwardly Heavy CA (deep purple/ deep green) anomaly shown by the XLH1 has surfaced on the DVI boards.
I threw this together real quick to show the consistency of this anomaly from one test to another.
======================================================
======================================================

XLH1%20ca%20anomoly.jpg


When comparing the samples below, The H1 appears to exhibit the least amount of common CA/"light purple or blue fringing", while the Panny appears to have it the worst. The Z1 and HD100 weren't too bad. Target areas to look at are along the edges of any high contrast area, i.e. light source and highlight reflections.

======================================================
======================================================
main%20lineup%201%20copy.jpg
 
Yes, the Canon was not tweaked as well as it could be and it still showed the best "numbers". That truly is impressive. I just wish these tests involved recording to P2 and HDV. This will make a huge difference.

Now a few other things (again my HVX is on order).....

1. Let's remove this tapless workflow argument. You can get HD recording for the other cameras now and you can record to tape and HD at the same time, giving you a very nice instant backup of your HD data.

2. The fact that the HVX has less resoltuon at 1080 than the JVC at 720 is dissapointing.

3. Why are the specs hidden from us by Panasonic? Doesn't that say something about the company?

4. The one solid conclusion I made from these tests is that the VariCam is a huge wate of money. That camera is not worth 1/2 the price and is no where in the same league as the Sony 900.

5. For me, transferring to an intermediate codec is probably going to happen regardless of the format. I'd love to see a test of HDV and DVCPRO HD as source, converted to CineForm and then compared.

I am lucky that I have no brand loyalty. I'm not publishing a book for any camera company, I don't receive free equipment from any company, etc. I'm just a film maker and I want to pick the camera that will give me the best image for the best price. I want the option to show it in native HD or put it to 35mm film.

I think it's important for everyone to pause and forget the "bells and whistles". Start looking at what is inside these cameras and what type of image they can produce when recorded to the media you would use 90% of the time. Foget uncompressed for now.
 
Digigenic said:
IMO, The H1 appears to exhibit the least amount of CA/"purple fringing", while the Panny appears to have it the worst. The Z1 and HD100 weren't too bad.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but in those shot, the HVX200 grab look better than the XL H1. I keep seeing this blue/red displacement. I dont know... different people like different look better ;)
 
FullRez said:
5. For me, transferring to an intermediate codec is probably going to happen regardless of the format. I'd love to see a test of HDV and DVCPRO HD as source, converted to CineForm and then compared.

I am lucky that I have no brand loyalty. I'm not publishing a book for any camera company, I don't receive free equipment from any company, etc. I'm just a film maker and I want to pick the camera that will give me the best image for the best price. I want the option to show it in native HD or put it to 35mm film.

I think it's important for everyone to pause and forget the "bells and whistles". Start looking at what is inside these cameras and what type of image they can produce when recorded to the media you would use 90% of the time. Foget uncompressed for now.
Click to expand...

That's probably what MOST people will be doing, anyway. I'm with you on that. I don't have a favorite brand or anything. So i'm on the saaaaaame boat.

But I'm all caught up in the stupid comparison hype as well.

Blah.
 
Barry? Jan? Yo?

Edit. Sorry, Jan , just read posts on other sites, sorry about your broken kneecap. Pure misery.
 
Kholi said:
That's probably what MOST people will be doing, anyway. I'm with you on that. I don't have a favorite brand or anything. So i'm on the saaaaaame boat.

But I'm all caught up in the stupid comparison hype as well.

Blah.
Click to expand...


Yeah the compression might make the difference, as well as the sampling, 4:2:2, etc. The test doesn't cover this at all. However, the JVC is suppose to use half the compression as normal HDV because of how they record the image. Their "ProHD" method.
 
How about some real world perspective? I have been playing with both the XLH and the HVX for over a week. While I agree in general with most of Adam's findings I can tell you that the XLH, like the XL2, does not perform its best with the stock settings which were used. Setting it to NR2 and a low knee dramtically reduces noise and increases the range. It has less noise than the HVX in all equal environments, period endstop.

The resolution seems on par with what I am seeing. 24F looks exactly like 24P, no difference in motion. While a rez chart does show a reduction in rez in 24F, this is not percieved while watching... weird... it still is as sharp or sharper as an HVX.

The HVX is still pretty awesome, great colors (prolly the reason for the chroma noise) great range and very portable.

As I predicted before touching either camera or seeing a single test, we are back where were were with the DVX/XL2 argument... Both are good enough, one has notably more resolution, one a nice color curve. One is more expensive but has a longer slightly better lens. One is a shoulder cam, the other a truly anywhere anyhow cam...

After messing with both I think either is good enough for most.


ash =o)
 
Purdy disappointing in resolution. Well guys, at least we know why PANASONIC has not released their chip details. Why did Jan fib the details of the res. I remember a while back that she said the camera recorded at 700h 700v. Barry or jan (hope you're better jan) can you please tell us why we're seeing this ?

It doesn't really matter none. I still think the HVX produces better images than the contendors. The other cameras look too videoy in my opinion.

Hogwash
 
Digigenic said:
]IMO, The H1 appears to exhibit the least amount of CA/"purple fringing", while the Panny appears to have it the worst. The Z1 and HD100 weren't too bad.
Click to expand...
Well...what is it possible to say? Maybe for to balance the Z1 softness and the bad quality HD100 lens... (and by now, my option would be Z1/HD100 bundle better than any other bundle purchase, for sure! If it's better to buy two for the same price of one sole camera...)
 
Well I don't know, I just download to video comparisons of blown up res charts from the cameras. If any of you have seen this off of DV.com you know what I am talking about. The HVX res looks like crap compared to all of the other cameras. The H1 is clearly the winner in sharpness and res, cleeeeearly, it looks so much sharper and cleaner, but the real-world images look mediocre in my opinion. I am really shocked to see how fuzzy the HVX looks compared to the other cams, need I say, miniDV-ish?? it looks that bad.. now I'm worried... its all making sense now.. Panny's tight-lips about res, etc. etc. ....

hogfarts
 
Well if the same set of charts are used on all cameras to report the resolution then there was nothing wrong with the Panasonic. Unless....

A. The forumla used to compute resolution was wrong. Then in that case all the other cameras are wrong and they have even higher resolution.

B. The Panasonic was not setup correctly. However, to my understanding a very experienced HVX user was there (Barry?).

C. The Panasonic was bad. Sounds like an easy excuse to me.

I don't want chart specs from Panasonic, I want it from an independen test such as this one. The Panasonic is WAY too low.
 
rgdfilms said:
Well I don't know, I just download to video comparisons of blown up res charts from the cameras. If any of you have seen this off of DV.com you know what I am talking about. The HVX res looks like crap compared to all of the other cameras. The H1 is clearly the winner in sharpness and res, cleeeeearly, it looks so much sharper and cleaner, but the real-world images look mediocre in my opinion. I am really shocked to see how fuzzy the HVX looks compared to the other cams, need I say, miniDV-ish?? it looks that bad.. now I'm worried... its all making sense now.. Panny's tight-lips about res, etc. etc. ....

hogfarts
Click to expand...

Yeah, the scary thing about those tests too is they came from uncompressed HD sources. I wonder how much more the DVCPRO HD codec gives you over HDV (as a capture format - not editing) when it's recording such a lower resolution image?
 
ullanta said:
Well, he said that, indeed. But "recorded" footage was not recorded by the cameras, but through an external system.
Click to expand...
I had originally said that E-E (uncompressed recording) would be of much less interest than recorded format, since the users of these products are going to be using them to actually record footage. I know Adam was very interested in reviewing the live footage. We did have the ability to record uncompressed and did record uncompressed. I don't know how much of the HDV and DVCPRO-HD-recorded footage Adam used in his article. I sent him the footage, I will assume that he used the recorded HDV/DV100 footage in reaching his conclusions.

I have copies of the three cameras' footage, but not from the Canon; Adam has the Canon tape.


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.
Click to expand...
It's not that anyone wanted to "look the other way", it's that it's just such a ridiculously complex process! In the future I'd advise people to try to test TWO cameras. Three is just too complex, four is nuts, and six -- well, with six you should just admit yourself to the insane asylum, it'll save a lot of time. So we wanted to do all those things, but the task was just too big. But you are correct, the tests shown here do not take into account color sampling or motion rendition or any of the other issues that have been mentioned regarding codec formats. I do expect that they will address those issues in their February "Texas Shootout".

I mean, Green says the HVX really kicked ass, and Wilt thinks the HVX was defective and needs an update?
Click to expand...
My opinions about the HVX are based on using one for about two months or so, and in that test it really did hold up to the others. Nobody came out of there saying "wow -- the HVX looks soft" or anything. But Jay and Adam and I, at least, were all puzzled about the vertical res performance on the chart, which is why we wonder whether the sample we had is truly representative. It didn't seem to make sense -- how could a 540x540-on-the-chart camera look just as sharp as an 800x540? Yet it did. It was curious, and I said back in the first report -- I'm not sure what to make of that. I'd like to see another sample on that same chart to verify whether the sample was representative or not.
Anyway, as has been said, it's actual footage of dramatic scenes, in motion, that will make the issues clear.
Click to expand...
Jay Nemeth put it this way -- "yes charts are interesting, but I can't remember the last time someone went to the movies to enjoy a good test chart." Even so, as a numbers-head, I'm still curious about the chart numbers. And Adam and I both agree that chart readings are subjective, and we didn't necessarily agree on our readings of the charts.

Noone really had an issue with HVX 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".
Click to expand...
Well, there is definitely truth here. The HVX resolution, as measured on the scene we shot, looked great. Whether that's due to the double color resolution making up the difference, or that for some reason the HVX just didn't work well with the chart, the fact is that the scene looked totally high-def, just like all the other cameras did. I would still like to test another unit though.

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?
Click to expand...
That's coming, from the "Texas Shootout".
 
soarprod said:
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.
Click to expand...
None of the HVX grabs should be 60i. The XLH1 should be mostly 24F grabs, but I do believe we tried 60i at some points because, hey, you gotta know, and you have to be able to quantify the difference. But the HVX delivered the same res in 60i as 24P so we used 24P for the HVX.
 
The thing is, nobody can fault the testing gear, it was top of the line testing technology under very good guidance by very talented people.....

This means the tests were very sound than any other to date. Though the H1 was not anywhere near tweaked to its full performance. It did very well.....

I guess for me and my people the debate is over. The hard part is now picking either the HVX or the H1. I'm still leaning towards the HVX, which is crazy to those who know me. I'm a resolution whore, I admit it. Not because I like ultra sharp films, more to do with my need to start out with the highest res acquisition image possible i can; and then work down from there in the grading stage if desired. As said, they all have great images.


Michael Pappas
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
PappasArts & Arrfilms Main site

CONTACT VIA AOL INSTANT MESSENGER
AT { PAPPASARTS2 }


XLH1 and HVX200 frame grabs and news here:
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms

http://www.PappasArts.com
http://www.Myspace.com/PappasArts
 
MattC said:
Hey Ash,

What's the latest on possible recording devices for the Canon?

Matt
Click to expand...

For now I am going to do HDV and HD-SDI out to an HD1200A deck when in studio. I have heard of at least 2 different HD-SDI HDD solutions being worked on so, well see. Remember NO AUDIO that way though!


ash =o)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top