HPX500 vs. HVX200 Film-Out

Jack Daniel Stanley said:
The only difference I can tell is that the HVX short is SHARPER.
Click to expand...

Jack I believe what youre seeing, but if thats the case, blame the DP. I could bring up a list of ten people I work with regularly that would tell you quite clearly the HPX is sharper (for the record using pretty much standard canon or fujinon ENG zooms), seriously less noise and the dynamic range gap huge - one of the BEST going around and one of the main reasons I invested in this technology - take a look on a wave form for comparison.

Once again if you didnt see this blame your DP and I make NO bones about that.

But your main point I agree 100%.
 
Last edited:
I can tell you why it's sharper. Because one was run and gun with a crap zoom lens shooting 8 pages in less than two days with no AC and because the other was entirely on sticks shooting 8 pages in 4 days.

I know the HPX is sharper. I know, I know.

Mostly I think it was the zoom lens because even the shots that seem in focus aren't as sharp. It's like they have thicker lines or something.
 
Jack Daniel Stanley said:
I can tell you why it's sharper. Because one was run and gun with a crap zoom lens shooting 8 pages in less than two days with no AC and because the other was entirely on sticks shooting 8 pages in 4 days.

I know the HPX is sharper. I know, I know.

Mostly I think it was the zoom lens because even the shots that seem in focus aren't as sharp. It's like they have thicker lines or something.
Click to expand...

Sounds like your back focus was off on the HPX.
 
Well it will be interesting. Mr. Green will have a chance to look at both shorts in full 1080HD on a giant plasma at Abel Cine Tech this week and will be able to offer his expert opinion. The Back Focus thing sounds plausible.
 
I've also noticed that the 500 isn't very good at the wide end of the lens. The kit lens I mean. When I first got the camera I believe I set the back focus about 20 times while I was trying to shoot a wide time lapse of downtown Atlanta with the camera. I was fine tight and medium.
Fine detail wide just never looked sharp. Ran into a bit of the same issue shooting a 5 camera P2 music video. 2 500s, 2 200s on stage and 1 2000 wide in the balcony.
The 2000 was noticably crisper then 500s as you would expect. The 200s on stage weren't as far from the 500 as you would think based
on sensor size difference.
I'll get in trouble again if I go much further.

I just think you've got to be careful what you ask this camera to do on the wide side. At least with the kit lens.
 
David Jimerson said:
Given the specific camera involved, I don't think it's backfocus.
Click to expand...

Why? Every 2/3" camera loses backfocus sooner or later. Sometimes from going form the cold trunk of a car to a warm interior, once your camera acclimates, your back focus maybe off. Whether it's a Varicam, Viper, F 900, I'm always checking backfocus on a daily basis or when the climate changes. Ever shoot digi primes? You'll adjust backfocus at least 10 times a day.

Unless you have a lens that's out of whack or a cheap non CAC SD lens, I don't know how the HVX can be sharper, unless you back focus went off.
 
Tim, I understand that, and I don't disagree. :) But for that specific HPX500 (the one used in Jack's films), in this particular instance, I have reason to doubt the problem was the backfocus.

I don't know exactly what the issue was -- it was likely a combination of factors, many of which mentioned by Jack.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top