How does HVX200 compare to DVX100A/B in SD?

L

Lenilenapi

Carbonite Member
I asked this question earlier and nobody responded so I am trying again with slightly different wording.
It seems like a basic question that no has yet addressed, and gives us all a basic point of comparison.
Haven't any of you guys who already have the HVX put the cameras side by side?

So here goes:
How does the basic SD image out of the HVX200 compare to that from the DVX100A or 100B.
Is the basic speed (sensitivity) similar?
How about sharpness, noise, and luminance range?
Viewfinder quality ?

Have they improved on the playback shuttle mechanism that was always a pain in the butt on the DVX?

Most of us will still have to use this camera as a standard DV camera.
I've held off on a DVX purchase assuming the HVX would kick its butt, not to mention the HD and DVCPro50 optiions.
 
This question has actually been discussed as thoroughly as possi ble with about 3 known cameras in the field. Search around...
 
Where are those discussions?
If it is on this forum I haven't seen it.

I'm not talking so much about design as how the picture looks, Its a very different chip.
For example the Sony Z1 is much slower than the previous DV cameras were.
Is this true for the HVX as well?
 
The prerelease HVX is about the same speed as a DVX in progressive mode, maybe a little slower (1/4 to 1/2 stop, but not more than that). Can't speak about the final production model 'cause I haven't got one.

The HVX should be at least a stop faster than the Sony, with at least 2 stops more dynamic range.

As compared against a DVX, I would expect the HVX to do better in many categories: 16:9 CCDs for one, a sharper lens for another, and DVCPRO50 recording for SD. Even in DV I would expect the HVX to hold an edge, but that's expectation and not verified tested results; those will have to wait until I can get my hands on a production model.
 
I think the Green Barry's summed up everything useful we know... but for the record, I think most of the earlier discussion was scattered in the "First Impressions" thread, and some somewhere else on the extreme benefits of DVCPro50 over 25/DV in SD, if that interests you...
 
Thanks,
Actually I though Barry already had one so I was hoping for confirmed results, but the pre-release stats are pretty valuable. I was curious as to whether the denser chip might have the disadvantage of being slower.
On the DVX, progressive was about a stop slower than 60i, so that I often had to shoot the DVX at shutter speeds of 1/30 or even 1/24 at night to get enough stop for real world low light or street situations. If the HVX is comparable that's great - I expect everything else will be superior.
 
The pre-release HVX is in that ballpark but does seem a bit slower, maybe 1/4 stop slower, maybe as much as 1/2 stop. It's not a tremendous difference, but it is there.

But that has no bearing (necessarily) on how the production model performs! That's why I'm not making any claim of any sort of definitive ISO rating at any particular f-stop; that would have to wait until getting the production camera for testing.
 
Lenilenapi said:
I asked this question earlier and nobody responded so I am trying again with slightly different wording.
It seems like a basic question that no has yet addressed, and gives us all a basic point of comparison.
Haven't any of you guys who already have the HVX put the cameras side by side?

So here goes:
How does the basic SD image out of the HVX200 compare to that from the DVX100A or 100B.
Is the basic speed (sensitivity) similar?
How about sharpness, noise, and luminance range?
Viewfinder quality ?

Have they improved on the playback shuttle mechanism that was always a pain in the butt on the DVX?

Most of us will still have to use this camera as a standard DV camera.
I've held off on a DVX purchase assuming the HVX would kick its butt, not to mention the HD and DVCPro50 optiions.
Click to expand...



lenilenapi,
this might answer your questions about sd.

Maurice,

Just shot some 50. It looks really good. I think you'll be really pleased. Again, don't use the gain. You might as well forget that that switch is even there unless you're looking for a grainy look. Hope this helps.

It seems to me like this camera is more of a film makers camera than a run of the mill regular camcorder for everyday use. I think with the proper light it can do wonders. Without light, well, you know.

Even though I got this camera to shoot HD, I wouldn't have a problem of shooting 50 all day long with this cam. Longer shooting times and a great picture. Can't beat it. I had no intention of shooting 50 until now.
 
Alvise Tedesco said:
Maurice, any side by side test of that to post (hvx dv50 vs. dvx dv25)?
Thanks
Alvise
Click to expand...

sorry Alvise, been away for awhile. to answer your question, after having seen dvcpro50 24p footage from the sdx900 and if the hvx comes close to the sdx, then the hvx dvcpro50 vs dvx mini dv look in my opinion will be like high def vs standard def. like night and day.
 
HVX200 will probably not look as good as the SDX900 in SD.
People seem to forget that the recording medium is only one part of the quality scenario.
$15,000 worth of engineering, glass and a 2/3" chip separate those cameras. The SDX900 looks great at DVCPro25 as well.
However the HVX does have a denser chip as well as newer engineering so that may make it come closer. It probably will be noisier at the least though.
I expect the next thing from panasonic will be an HVX type P2 camera with 2/3" chips that will have the full range of recording options.
That camera will be a monster.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top