Hd film camera or Hd video camera

S

sandhaamarai

New member
hi,
I was wondering how HD cameras should actually be called....HD film camera or HD video camera...

Should we call the real HD as HD FILM CAMERA

and HDV as HD video camera.

thanks

venkat
 
I guess it depends on the kind of camera really. The HVX200 for instance is really designed to act like and behave like a film camera. It has progressive chips for true film 24 motion. It has variable frame rates like a film camera. It has the most filmic colors and gamma for my money. And its controls are designed like a film camera (controlling shudder speed in degrees and such). It does have some videocam features but, for the most part, it's designed like an HD film camera. In a recent issue of Event DV, the reviewer refered to the HVX200 as a digital film camera since, as he put it, that's really the best way to describe how it looks and behaves.

On the other end of the spectrum, we'd have the Sony FX1/ Z1. It uses interlaced CCDs. It's controls and menus are much more like standard video cameras. The image it produces looks WAY more video-ish than any of the other HD cameras in it's price range. It's frame mode is an attempt to be a bit filmish but just ends up looking weird and losing resolution. It's much more what I'd call an HD video camera.

Cameras like the XLH1 and HD100 seem to fall in between those two extremes.
 
DavidBeier said:
On the other end of the spectrum, we'd have the Sony FX1/ Z1. It uses interlaced CCDs. It's controls and menus are much more like standard video cameras. The image it produces looks WAY more video-ish than any of the other HD cameras in it's price range. It's frame mode is an attempt to be a bit filmish but just ends up looking weird and losing resolution. It's much more what I'd call an HD video camera.
Click to expand...

The HVX, no matter how good it is at imitating film look, cannot be call a "film" camera because it doesn't shoot film. Visually no one would mistake it for a film camera, and neither would the FX1/Z1. That's really not the point. I get really annoyed everytime someone take potshots at the FX1 for no reason. The final image that a camera produces is a combined factor of skill and proper lighting, not entirely on the camera itself. And that's not taking into account post color correction, deinterlacing etc.
 
Last edited:
jade8472 said:
The HVX, no matter how good it is at imitating film look, cannot be call a "film" camera because it doesn't shoot film. Visually no one would mistake it for a film camera, and neither would the FX1/Z1. That's really not the point. I get really annoyed everytime someone take potshots at the FX1 for no reason. The final image that a camera produces is a combined factor of skill and proper lighting, not entirely on the camera itself. And that's not taking into account post color correction, deinterlacing etc.
Click to expand...

I'm speaking how the camera performs and functions. The HVX200 produces an image much closer to film where as the FX1 acts and gives a very video-ish image. Hence, I'd be more comfortible calling the HVX200 a HD film camera and the FX1/Z1 a HD videocamera. Yes its quite subjective but I'm not the only one who sees this distinction. Perhaps it is pointless to make since anyone wanting to decide between the two should do a lot more research than just what the common slang is. And while there's a hell of a lot more to the image quality than the camera, I think it's hard to deny that the HVX200 makes getting a film-like image a hell of a lot easier (not to mention that, even though I've seen some great things that I wouldn't have thought possible with post work, I've never seen something from the Z1 or FX1 on that level).

And I'm not all for the (can't call it film without film) since that's the rational that gets Robert Rodregieze to call his stuff "flicks" now.
 
i break em into 3 catagory's
video camera = sensors up to 720x480
HD camera = sensors up to 1920x1080
digital cinema camera = sensors larger then 1920x1080
 
DavidBeier said:
And while there's a hell of a lot more to the image quality than the camera, I think it's hard to deny that the HVX200 makes getting a film-like image a hell of a lot easier
Click to expand...

You'll get no argument from me here. The HVX indeeds provides better tool for getting that film look.

DavidBeier said:
even though I've seen some great things that I wouldn't have thought possible with post work, I've never seen something from the Z1 or FX1 on that level
Click to expand...

BUT in the end the camera itself is just a tool. Just because you haven't seen that level of quality with the FX1/Z1 doesn't mean that the cameras themselves are incapable. People shouldn't think HVX=automatic film look and FX1=cheap video look. It depends on the user.
 
Sorry but this question is a total waste of time? Also why do you not consider HDV hd?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top