DVX100B vs Sony HDR-FX1 (SD format)

W

WildLion786

Member
guys i have a question... if the image quality of the DVX100B is compared with the HDR-FX1 (downconverted into SD resolution) which one would have the better image quality...
 
interesting...so lets say i have 1 hour HD footage that i want to downconvert into SD through the camera, how long will be the process?
 
well if your method is just dropping the footage in an SD timeline, it depends what your down converting too, and your computers specs.
 
done through the camera, it takes 1 hour to downconvert 1 hour of HDV.
I once did a downconversion on the timeline to DVpal, on my G4 laptop and that stole my afternoon rendering a couple of minutes, which was however under heavy stress of zMatte keying. note to myself: buy a beefed-up computer
 
Oh well, the DVX still has superior color and dynamic range, but the color sampling of downrezzed HD is better than native SD I think. I would still go for SD from the DVX, because of the native 24/25/30p.
 
MiniMan said:
Oh well, the DVX still has superior color and dynamic range, but the color sampling of downrezzed HD is better than native SD I think. I would still go for SD from the DVX, because of the native 24/25/30p.
Click to expand...
Color sampling would be better if downrezzed outside of the camera, but if downrezzed in-camera then no, the color sampling will be reduced to DV.
 
myfriendimage said:
downconverted HD to SD of the FX1 will destroy the SD footage the dvx produces.
Click to expand...
This is a very bold statement.

If you're talking about downconverting in-camera to DV, I would dare say this statement is grossly inaccurate.

If downconverting outside of the camera and never going to DV again, you can retain some sharpness and gain some color sampling. But then what do you do with it?

I did some side-by-side FX1/DVX/XL2 tests and downrezzed the FX1 using Vegas and put them all on a DVD, and I would say the FX1 most definitely did not "destroy" either of the other cameras' footage. At all. It was cleaner in noise, but slower and contrastier.
 
I still like to believe that my z1e gives a hint of bigger chipped DV-look, that is only my experience compared to the XL1 and PD150. But without talking bad about the DVX100b, which looks different again in another way. My blue screen results kicked ass by the way with HDV compared to DV, that's for sure
 
MiniMan said:
Oh well, the DVX still has superior color and dynamic range, but the color sampling of downrezzed HD is better than native SD I think. I would still go for SD from the DVX, because of the native 24/25/30p.
Click to expand...

uh, how does the dvx has superior color?
 
MiniMan said:
Oh well, the DVX still has superior color and dynamic range, but the color sampling of downrezzed HD is better than native SD I think. I would still go for SD from the DVX, because of the native 24/25/30p.
Click to expand...

A z1 can essentially do 25p and 30p, the fx1 can essentially do 30p. The ony thing they really do poorly is 24p but that can be done in post. The cf25 and cf30 modes aren't all that bad, especially when downconverted. Look around people are doing it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top