DVX vs HVX

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Ronster

Well-known member
I have an odd question:

what is better the dvx or the hvx?

hvx seems to have a higher resolution but at a cost

here are some of the disadvantages:

doesn't work as well in low light

seems way more difficult in post ( in terms of dealing with the footage in editing and this whole dissolve issue etc.)

in the end when you watch your project on dvd don't you just down convert it anyways? if so....wouldn't it just be better if you shot it on dvx?

I'm trying to figure out the advantages of HVX over DVX....

HVX seems like a lot of hastle for a product that is almost the same as DVX....am i way off?

i've seen stuff on the hvx and it looks great, but the dvx looks great to me too....the quality looks comparable between the two cameras...but the HVX seems to have a lot of post issues (down converting, editing problems, etc).........

I own a dvx and want to buy an HVX but am just not sure if it is really worth it

could I get some reasons why the hvx is vastly superior....and could someone address the whole issue of having to down convert to burn to dvd....because if that is the case and you shot hd and down convert to standard def to burn a dvd...how much quality difference is there between the hvx and dvx in that respect?

I want to compare hvx to dvx
 
HVX = You've got 16.9 - 4.1.1 to tape (same as the DVX)- 4.2.2 SD/ HD and can still shoot in 4.3 SD.
That right there makes it a better way to go if you are trying
to gear up for the changes going on in video production. The HVX is
the swiss army knife of cinema style video cameras! Don't get me wrong, I love my
DVX and will use it till it drops or wears out!
 
what edit problems?
I've read you can edit 720p 24pn on a Mac quad as easy as dv- it just takes up more drive space.
 
Variable frame rates allow you to do slow-mo in camera, so it'll look better than slowing down footage in post. Same goes for timelapse footage. It looks solid when you run at 2fps.
Yes, the HVX is a lot of money, and if you don't really need HD or variable frame rates, it's not really necessary. But I love mine to death. If you have the option or getting one, I'd go for it.
And as far as the editing issues go, I actually find it a heck of a lot easier than shooting on tape. Having the shots already split into separate files, and not having to manually log and capture everything is GLORIOUS. There are differences that you have to get used to, but I have no doubt that I made the right decision in getting the HVX.
 
Don't need a quad either !
A G4 1.67 pb with a fw 800 raid works for me. Though I'll add that 1080 isn't so much fun.
Don't get me wrong a G5 quad would be great - I'm waiting for later on in the year.
 
Comparing the 2 isn't even practical is it ?

The DVX is Sd
The HVX is Sd and HD

The HD part just isn't comparable at all.

We've all seen both camera's in action and it appears most think they both kick ass and the majority do not seem to be having post issues.

I'm closing this thread as there are just 4 million exisiting threads on this subject.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top