Hdv test

C

collie

Member
This isnt the test that I spoke of in the last thread,there is a new test where the fx-1 and varicam was shown to be toss up as to the better look on the big screen when audience members were polled in the theather.I will post the test when it becomes available online. I love the panasonic cameras (sdx900 is my favorite)but I feel some great hdv films will be made on the big screen
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=31738
 
Well, you have got to admit, so far it looks like that.

We haven't seen the picture quality yet, but from JVC we can expect good quality (if you think about the DV500, and so on...)...

BUT, the reason to think they will slay the competition: they finally designed a camcorder with al the functionality and options XL1(s) users have been begging for for years now....
 
I have seen materials from Varicam vs Cinealta vs Z1 on a high resolution screen in London. Even without Zeiss Primo a child will see that Z1 has way way way worse image than those two. I will not belive that FX1 has better image quality.
 
I have not seen the test But remember

1. Different digital projection will,give different results,this test was not filmout

2.A standard for digital projection is still being worked on. Results may vary from different test

3. Fianlly ,your talking about 30k 0r 75k dollars versus a 3k dollars camera,the fact that fx-1 is even in the same ballpark in a test is fantastic.

p.s I dont think you would get a sony $300 handcam for free,Bluespider
 
We're talking about the internet here. You're willing to put credence in an internet post when you're not present to judge how a Varicam looks beside the FX1. Don't believe everything you read.
 
Total agree with the last post,we have to see it for ourselfs, post ,should start next month with hd110 footage, from what it seems I feel JVC is going to hit a homerun with this camera
 
lol reading that thread now, funny ****...

4. Varicam 720p60 with Zeiss prime lenses

5. Same but downconvert to 720p25
Click to expand...

Eh? Variable frame-rate, hello? Why not just choose 25p?


Varicam 25p look good but no perfect. We give 62.5% mark.

Varicam 60p look amazing... We give 65% mark.
Click to expand...

It is soo amazing! We even rate it 3.5% higher, woot!

Sony FX1 25p look good, look sharp but no perfect; the Varicam 25p look better. We give 57.5% mark.

FX1 50i look better, give 62.5% mark.
Click to expand...

Wtf? 50i from FX1 looks as good as 25p from $60k Varicam?
 
I've handled a Varicam with my own two hands and I must say that when I go in to the Sony store at Ceasar's Palace or the Apple store in the Fashion Show Mall and play with the FX1 for a bit to hold off my hunger for HD, the FX1 doesn't even come close to the beauty of the image quality that I saw through the Varicam's viewfinder.

However, using the Average Joe-side of my brain, I could see where someone wouldn't notice a difference. My family and friends can't see a difference between the video shot on my GL1 to video shot on the FX1, it just doesn't register unless you actually know what to look for and are actually looking for these technical differences when veiwing something.

But I've seen the footage from the HD100 and I'm struggling with whether to buy that instead of the HVX200. I did get some video of the video shot on the HD100 when I went around NAB filming everything with my GL1 but even if I went through all the trouble to upload it to the net, I'm not sure you could tell. Plus the school internet is capped on uploads so I couldn't put the video up even if I wanted to. =P
 
Jack_Felis said:
I could see where someone wouldn't notice a difference.
Click to expand...

I completely agree with you. Remember all those sweet cameras setup at Panasonic?

dvxvaricam.jpg

Besides the fact that one is stretched in this picture, can anyone here really see a difference between the DVX100a on the far left and the VariCam right next to it on the right?

How well a camera performs in "less-than-ideal" conditions is better assessment of performance where the more visible differences are obvious. For example, in the 3-way camera tests, the DVX is three times as sensitive than other cameras and the visible difference is obvious--when you're shooting in low light conditions. I would expect the DVCPRO-HD codec to handle things like a whip pan or fast zoom much better than a HDV camera.

As always... Do you need improved light sensitivity or a more motion-robust codec?
I have no idea what your needs are.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top