EX1 / Ultimate Job Follow-up Part 2

[GaryinCalifornia]

I thought Letus was making a relay... heard like $9k... $4.5k for Ultimate and then another $4.5K for the relay...

Wondering if P&S is adapting their MiniC for the Canon and JVC for EX3...

 

[Dino]

Hoping to see the Letus B4 Relay out this month. Hien told me what the delay was and it should be worth the extra wait--well other than the $4500 part.

I would rather shoot with an HDX900 than any palmcorder for most shoots, especially handheld vs. a palmcorder with 35mm DOF adapter, but like Tim, I agree that 2/3" just doesn't have the shallow DOF and I hate the look of palmcorders without 35mm DOF adapters.

Tim, I can do the test you were talking about--EX1 w/Ultimate vs. HDX900 w/Fuji HA18X7.6, except I only have Nikon primes. Even with a Panasonic 1700 720p LCD display, the EX1 was sharper with or without detail on at 1080/24p, so I would think it would look even sharper on a native 1080p display. However, and I'm not sure why, the 900 really came out on top as far as sensitivity at 1080p vs. the EX1.

The thing I forgot to mention is that the Letus achromat for the EX1 optimization kit, which is the same as for the HVX-200, had better edge to edge sharpness than I found to be the case with the HVX200A. The 200A/Ultimate
had three focus points, center, corners and compromise. The Ex1 had one optimal focus setting using the exact same achromat.

 

[Ted Spencer]

Did you have Letus's HVX-optimized spacer ring along with the achromat? Only the achromat is the same as the EX1 - the spacer must be the HVX-optimized one for it to work properly. I have one and it's quite sharp edge to edge. Not perfect, but pretty darn good.

 

[Dino]

Ted,

I bought the HVX200 optimization kit, so I would assume the spacer is included.
Will have to look at it again. The three focus positions for HVX200A/Ultimate equate to one focus number apart, for example; center fccus is 35, corner focus 36,compromise focus is inbetween, which doesn't register numerically.

EX1 edge to edge with the Ultimate is definitely better.

 

[Dino]

Tim, I just did the test you mentioned, except no ZF lens--HDX900/HA18X7.6 vs.
EX1/Ultimate/Nikon 50mm 1.4 prime on a wedge chart, shutters at 180:

Matching exp. levels-HDX900, 720/24p, 0db, F4/EX1/Ultimate, 720/24p, 0db, F2.8

900 looked soft in the corners with obvious CA in the corners
EX1 was sharper in all zones, including corners, very little CA, 1 stop slower

On Edit: Yesterday the cameras looked very similar with regular lenses at 720p, the only difference
being that I had detail off on both, today with detail on, the EX1 was sharper even with the Letus,
so it could be that the detail was higher on the EX1, I will do the same test with detail off.

HDX900, 1080/24p, 0db, F5.6/EX1/Ultimate, 1080/24p, 0db, F2.0

900 again soft in corners with CA in the corners, a bit better due to F5.6
EX1 sharper in all zones, very little CA, 2 stops slower

So, even with a Nikon prime vs. Zeiss F-mount, the EX1/Ultimate combo was sharper even at 720p at the wide focal length used on the Fuji HA18X7.6 in
order to shoot the chart close enough for the 50mm SLR lens to be full frame.

Other than needing more light, 1-2 stops, depending on resolution chosen, the
EX1/Ultimate is a very sharp, clean combination. The difference is DOF is huge,
the 2/3" at a wide focal length is not even close to the Ultimate for shallow DOF.

 

[Dino]

Here are some screen grabs I did in 2006 to show DOF differences between 1/3",
2/3" and 2/3" w/Pro35 DOF adapter. Exposure is the same, focal length is the same, cameras were DVX100A, DSR-450WS.

Left upper is the DVX100A, right upper is the DSR-450WS, left lower is the DSR-450WS with P+S Pro35. Big difference!

 

[Tim Naylor]

Damn,

That's eye opening. I knew it was damn sharp on my last gig but didn't think it would exceed the 900. I wonder what the Ultimate's Rez loss is?

 

[Tim Naylor]

Thanks for all the testing Jeff. If you've the time, I'd like to see a EX1 with and without ultimate. Curious as to how much rez is lost. Concerning the sensitivity, the 900 with bigger chip and fewer pixels should and does have a distinct advantage. So let me get this right, the light loss between HDX 900 and EX / Ultimate is 1 stop at 720 and 2 stops at 1080?

I guess the last test I'm sure you'll get around to is the EX1 w/o adaptor vs HDX 900. My guess they should be close in sensitivity and the EX will stomp it in sharpness. The stock Fuji lens is quite amazing. HVX has a bit of catching up in that department. The other question is the only difference in bit rate between EXDCam HQ and DVC PRO 24 PN is only 5mb?

With convergent design around the corner, this should take care of color gap and even widen the noise gap.

 

[Dino]

Tim,

I found that my previous findings with detail on are not valid--the EX1 detail was higher than where I had my 900 set. I have now re-tested with detail off on both cameras and the EX1/Ultimate combo is softer than the HDX900 at 720/24p, similar sharpness at 1080/24p.

It looks to me like the Ultimate is only accounting for less than 10% resolution loss. The HDX900 is 1/2 stop faster than the EX1 at 720/24p, 11/2 stops faster at 1080/24p. With the Ultimate add 1/2 stop more loss.

Regarding codecs, DVCPRO HD is an oldy but a goody, it is a DCT compression based codec that is I Frame only. XDCAM HD is a Long GOP(like HDV) codec based on MPEG 2, which is 2.5 times more efficient than a DCT compression codec such as DVCPRO HD and HDCAM. Therefore, it could be said that the 35Mbps VBR of XDCAM HD is more like 87.5Mbps or more. However, the color sampling is 4:2:0 vs. 4:2:2, and most editors would prefer I Frame vs. Long GOP structure. Also, the 40MBps bit rate of DVCPRO HD at 720PN is only recording 24 frames vs. recording 60 frames, including redundant frames not needed for 24p and having to do a 3:2 pulldown in post, which needs a higher bit rate, just as DVCPRO HD would need 100Mbps for 60 frames. So, if XDCXAM EX doesn't have a native mode for 24p, the 35Mbps VBR has to compress 60 frames at
at 35Mbps VBR vs. DVCPRO HD 24P Native only having to deal with 24 frames--but XDCAM HD and EX is a more efficient codec to begin with, but
part of that is the Long GOP method for dealing with motion. The above formats are 8 bit, vs. 10 bit for Panasonic's AVC Intra or HDCAM SR.

Interestingly, the HDX900 supposedly has a latitude of 9 stops vs. 7 stops for EX1 and HVX200.
I do like the DRS circuit of the 900 and the HPX170 has it, but not at 24p.

The EX1 is so quiet that shooting at +3db is similar in noise to a 900 at -3db, so this would even out the sensitivity difference, actually making the EX1 more sensitive at 720/p. There is no doubt that the XDCAM EX coded is recording more information than DVCPRO HD, except in color space.