HD or not; that is my question

L

lucy lone dog

New member
I'm looking to film outdoor sport activities, i.e. snowcat skiing, climbing, Mt biking, fly fishing, etc. I'm doing this with my new small production bussiness. So my end product for purchase will be a DVD for my clients. I'm thinking the dvx100B is sufficient, yet I dream to have the HVX 200. I have also heard a lot of positives on the canon Hv 20 HDV. I mean really, what might be my most $$$ efficient choice for outdoor filming, edited w/ final cut express and put onto DVD? Is HD a necessity or a complication until our world turns Hd/blue ray?:embarasse
 
Does FCE even support HD editing?

I would pick up a DVX any day of the week. It is a fantastic camera and makes great dvd's. It has great audio (something the HV20 doesn't have) and DV edits easy as pie on anything compared to HD material.
 
If it were between an HV20 and a DVX, I'd take the DVX every time. But, if you move up to the HVX, well, that's a different story...
 
I'm leaning towrds the DVX but I'm not sure if it's the right camera for outdoor lighting and I also wonder if not having 24p ablity is a big handicap for what I'm filming. Is the HVX a real impressive noticable difference? I'm not sure about the whole P2 card for memory storage, It seems complicated to make sure it's compatible with my FCE program.
Thanx for the imput!
 
Last edited:
From your post you sound like you are under the impression that the DVX does not do 24p? It does. It was groundbreaking for that very reason :).

And it turns out wonderful footage in daylight.
 
Awesome, no I did not realize that. Sounds like the DVX is probably the right camera for me!! thanx for your help. I've been overwhelmed with the whole camera search.
 
I have a question about SD vs HD as well so can someone help me out on this topic??

so my question is
when I play my DVX footage on my old TV I know the video quality is SD (480 lines) but when I play footage that was shot on the HV20 or HVX200 (1080) it should still show as SD (480lines) right?
since my TV is not HD everything should be shown as SD (480) right?
but I can say the footage from the HV20/HVX looks way sharper and it has a totally cleaner look to it then my DVX.....now why does this happen if they are both show as SD (480lines)?

...I guess what I'm trying to ask is, "why does the footage from the HV20/HVX look like it's HD when it's shown on just a regular TV?"
 
Last edited:
"why does the footage from the HV20/HVX look like it's HD when it's shown on just a regular TV?"
Click to expand...

While your TV can't show anything better than SD, the higher the quality of the source, the better the SD image will look.

Anything shot in HD is going to be VERY SHARP compared to something shot in SD. WHY? Because the source is sharper than the SD camera.

I hope that helps...

Bob Diaz
 
BobDiaz said:
the higher the quality of the source, the better the SD image will look.
Click to expand...

but even if it's in a higher quality source it will be scaled down to 480lines. so wouldnt that make it the same quality?
or were you trying to say it is because the HD camera has a sharper/newer chip so that makes it just a cleaner/sharper look?
 
What Bob was saying is that any HD image/video downsized to SD will be sharper .Because the source, HD, has a much higher pixelcount then SD.
 
Everts said:
What Bob was saying is that any HD image/video downsized to SD will be sharper .Because the source, HD, has a much higher pixelcount then SD.
Click to expand...

However, doesn't the chipsize of the camera you're using also figure into this? For instance, if you shoot with an SD camera that has a 1/2" chip, won't that come out better in SD than an HD camera with a 1/3" chip?
 
BobDiaz said:
While your TV can't show anything better than SD, the higher the quality of the source, the better the SD image will look.

Anything shot in HD is going to be VERY SHARP compared to something shot in SD. WHY? Because the source is sharper than the SD camera.
Click to expand...

Hi Bob,

You're a bazillion percent smarter than I, but to keep apples with apples, the one thing that has to be added is "all things being the same."

Not all HD sources are the same and they don't get to SD targets using the same encoding software, and all that matters. A highly compressed source going to a poor encoding algorithm might yield a poorer SD image than an average original decent SD source.

Nyquist's theorem dealt with bandwidth - the thickness of the pipeline only. Encoding the content is a separate issue that has to be considered as a aberration, and also a possible introduction of artifacts. At least, I think so.

If "all things being the same", then absolutely, HD in any case would be significantly better.

My best,

Mike
 
hey "lucy long dog" hears a thought/suggestion which is the way we did it; start with the dvx100b (we actually started with the pro looking DVC60 which takes great images too and looks professionally hot to clients) then makes some dvd's and some money then you let the business bankroll the "next move" that is, get the experience and the adventure at the lower priced dvx100b will mistakes won't be so obvious and the sale of those dvd's will then fund your hd move.

the move to hd - then when your ready for that move, look around and study. you may find that your editing system doesn't support P2? or, you may find that you just want easy to use and archive tape? or you may find that you want solid state?

we let our business evolve and pay for itself and found along the way that there all kinds of advanatges to tape, solid state, and both, but we let the business dictate that as the types of productions and the mission critical nature of them will determine you media workflow. for us most all of our productions are mission critical, meaning simply that if we miss it, lose it, or damage it we are in serious trouble (weddings, events, tv broadcast, etc.) and thus we went from tape to solid state and back to tape as we sought mission critical archiving. therein, both solid state and tape there are gads of options and panasonic has a gad of options also.

but all-in-all, the dvx100b shoots by far the cleanest SD image on the market and in the sqeeze mode for wide screen makes the most gorgeous looking "semi hd" look i've seen. now that said, i would never ever use the 4:3 wides screen version again (16:9 on the 4:3 screen) because it looks way below a palmcorder IMHO and why there is a difference i don't know but i'm sure there are some techy's that can explain it . . however, even there depending on your edit system there are issues, i.e. you shoot in 16:9 squeeze but want to output to 4:3 and your editor doesn't allow resizing or cropping, etc.

hope that helps and if you are looking for a dvx100b later this year keep us in mind we'll have two to go as for 2009 we move to 100% HD - which by the way HD apart from cameras alone is a learning curve in itself and much harder than almost point and shoot SD
 
If you buy an SD camera now you'll be stuck with that until you pay even more to buy an HD camera later, so why limit yourself? Better to spend a little more for something like a Canon XH-A1, Panasonic HMC150 or Sony FX1000 than get stuck in SD right at the end of its 50-year run.

SD is on its way out, and HD recording is becoming the standard for professional videography work - even if the intended delivery is SD. Among other things, being able to deliver proper widescreen SD is something you can't do well with most DV cameras.
 
lucy lone dog get a hv30, carrying around a dvx is a pain. plus the hv30 looks better than the dvx and close to the hvx plus its alot cheaper
 
It is my understanding that you have to trick the HV20 to correctly set gain, shutter and exposure. This would most likely be bad for your type of shooting so both HVX and DVX would most likely be better. On the other hand the HV20 is smaller and lighter which is most likely good in your situation.
 
I see it as there is no question.

HD or bust.

for the people here who say 'go for DVX,' I say, why not BetaSP?

thats all I got



ps HD
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top