HV30 vs FX7?

J

janixpacle

New member
Hi all, i'm torn between the HV30 and FX7. Actually, what I want is the HMC150, but it's way over my budget. So as I start, I use one of the two. But which one? HV30 has it's advantages over FX7, but FX7 is better with manual controls. HV30 is cheaper and has 24p. FX7 is bigger and better chips(?) so it is better in low light(?) i think. But i'd use Beachtek on both anyways.

I'm doing mostly events and weddings, and will be moving on to bigger productions.

The camera will be paired with SGBlade.

Thanks for the inputs in advance.
 
As i have both cams with the hv30 most recently i will give you my take , they are different in many ways, the hv30 is a small consumer cam the fx 7 is classed as prosumer .the hv 30 weighs 535 grams body only the fx 7 1.4 kg body only,i use my hv30 for most of my filming as for me the fx 7 is a bit big to lug around [not that it is large compared to the semi pro range of cams]
also i find i dont get stared at so much with a small cam.
Picture wise the hv 30 is very good with less noise and i prefer its color performance myself ,the fx 7 has Far better on cam controls and this is where a small consumer cam loses out, the hv 30 does progessive as well as interlaced but i dont like progressive in video myself, the fx 7 is interlaced only.For nature which i do at times the fx 7 is great as the lens is 20x 748 mm 35 m equivalent and it has a D extender to give 1.5 times more zoom as well, the hv 30 lens is 10x and 436 mm 35m eqivalent.So as i said they are different cams in so many ways but the fact i use my hv 30 mostly now says a lot.The fx 7 is no better in low light.

As a note i find using the canon i need more support ie better tripod or brace for quality footage than with the sony.

Also some say the hf100 blows the hv30 away performance wise i have owned avchd cams and used the hf100 and no way is the picture any better and for editing hdv is a breeze compared to avchd.
 
Last edited:
The new FX7 was intended as a replacement in Sony's line-up for the FX1 and will run about $2k.

Even though it's a 3 CMOS camera, the sensor isn't as high a resolution as the HV30 nor as big.

The HV30 has a 1/3" sensor that's a full 1920x1080 signal that compressed into the 1440x1080 HDV format. Even then its still a 1.5 megapixel image.

The FX7 is only a 1.12 megapixel sensor so you are starting off with a loss of about 25% of data you get in HDV. ( I had an FX1 and can definately tell you it was a much softer image than the HV20.)

The 1/4" sensor also provides less bokeh so there is less DOF control. However, the HV30 is only 10x, while the FX7 is 20x.

I think there is another camera to consider in that range.

The XH-A1 produces beautiful DOF control from about half way zoomed in on to full zoom. (DOF is controled by zoom + sensor size + aperture.) At that much zoom you don't even need a 35mm adaptor for DOF control.) This is a XH-A1 image with no adapter using a preset in very low light.

attachment.php


You will definately want the manual controls if you have a choice and the A1 has those. The XH-A1 plays nice with the HV30 too. Colors can be adjusted to match and the HV30 will play 24f files just fine. The A1 is MUCH better in low light too, like 10x better than the HV30. The A1 does require you to learn about gain control, presets, gamma and manual controls to get the most out of it.

If it was my $2k I'd get a used XH-A1 for the combination of the 20x zoom, bigger sensor, and presets that neither the HV30 nor FX7 have. Or add a few hundred dollars more and get a new XH-A1 while a few are still available for between $2.5k-$3k.
 

Attachments

  • A1-bucket15-Pnutbutter24half.jpg
    A1-bucket15-Pnutbutter24half.jpg
    41.4 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
I sold my DVX100 to buy a HV30 and i must say i'm very impressed. I even managed to make a friend of mine sell his DVX100 to buy one.

I also bought a cheap but effective DOF adapter for my HV30 & a couple of lenses.

Here's a still from a fishing trip with my HV30 & adapter. No colour correction, just flipped in post.

 
Derkoi said:
I sold my DVX100 to buy a HV30 and i must say i'm very impressed. I even managed to make a friend of mine sell his DVX100 to buy one.

I also bought a cheap but effective DOF adapter for my HV30 & a couple of lenses.

Here's a still from a fishing trip with my HV30 & adapter. No colour correction, just flipped in post.

Click to expand...


Hello! I'm curious what DOF adapter you purchased as I'm in the market for one with my HF200. Thanks!
 
Duke M. said:
The new FX7 was intended as a replacement in Sony's line-up for the FX1 and will run about $2k.

Even though it's a 3 CMOS camera, the sensor isn't as high a resolution as the HV30 nor as big.

The HV30 has a 1/3" sensor that's a full 1920x1080 signal that compressed into the 1440x1080 HDV format. Even then its still a 1.5 megapixel image.

The FX7 is only a 1.12 megapixel sensor so you are starting off with a loss of about 25% of data you get in HDV. ( I had an FX1 and can definately tell you it was a much softer image than the HV20.)

The 1/4" sensor also provides less bokeh so there is less DOF control. However, the HV30 is only 10x, while the FX7 is 20x.

I think there is another camera to consider in that range.

The XH-A1 produces beautiful DOF control from about half way zoomed in on to full zoom. (DOF is controled by zoom + sensor size + aperture.) At that much zoom you don't even need a 35mm adaptor for DOF control.) This is a XH-A1 image with no adapter using a preset in very low light.

attachment.php


You will definately want the manual controls if you have a choice and the A1 has those. The XH-A1 plays nice with the HV30 too. Colors can be adjusted to match and the HV30 will play 24f files just fine. The A1 is MUCH better in low light too, like 10x better than the HV30. The A1 does require you to learn about gain control, presets, gamma and manual controls to get the most out of it.

If it was my $2k I'd get a used XH-A1 for the combination of the 20x zoom, bigger sensor, and presets that neither the HV30 nor FX7 have. Or add a few hundred dollars more and get a new XH-A1 while a few are still available for between $2.5k-$3k.
Click to expand...

AS i gave my verdict there are a couple of points not correct here i dont care about the 1/3 and 1.12 sensers and i am talking about resolution from tape playback [ what good is 1920x1080 from live hdmi]there is no way the hv30 much as i like mine has more resolution than the fx7 on tape play, check the camcorderinfo test they gave the fx 7 more.Also there is MORE DOF WITH THE FX7 and the on cam controls are a breeze and it is not like carrying a sack of potatos around like some of the bigger cams.The fx 7 has full presets.
But i like my hv30 and use it mostly now but it is each to their own.
 
thanks for the insights...

actually, i am siding on the HV30. But from where I am, clients look at the equipment first rather than the quality. When I talk to clients they ask first what equipment I use, and when I say a small consumer camera, they already frown and dosen't anymore bother to listen to my explanation. So with a tight budget, I am really have to give this a serious thought.
 
flinty said:
AS i gave my verdict there are a couple of points not correct here i dont care about the 1/3 and 1.12 sensers and i am talking about resolution from tape playback [ what good is 1920x1080 from live hdmi]there is no way the hv30 much as i like mine has more resolution than the fx7 on tape play, check the camcorderinfo test they gave the fx 7 more.Also there is MORE DOF WITH THE FX7 and the on cam controls are a breeze and it is not like carrying a sack of potatos around like some of the bigger cams.The fx 7 has full presets.
But i like my hv30 and use it mostly now but it is each to their own.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid the numbers are correct and I'm not talking about HDMI direct for HV30. Also you mention there is more DOF on FX7, that is correct off of a 1/4" sensor than a 1/3" sensor, all things being equal. But what you want is less DOF for DOF control

However, the FX7 has 20x zoom and the HV30 has 10x zoom, so the FX7 wins there. But the A1 has 20x zoom and the 1/3" sensor and wins over both the HV30 and FX7. They tie when the A1 is throttled back to about 15x, which makes it easier to use indoors.

The FX7 is a 1/4" sensor and only 960 pixels wide. It interpolates (creates) the rest of the image. It loses minute details because the actual data from the FX7 sensor is only 1.12 megapixels.

The HV30 is a full 1920 wide 1/3" sensor (about 2 megapixels from HDMI) that is then cut down to 1440 wide for about 1.5 megapixels when recorded to tape.

The XH-A1 is a 1440 wide interlaced sensor with a green channel offset to interpolate the interlaced signal into a progressive signal (24f). For interlaced it has the same data in the image as the HV30. For 24f it has about 10% less data. Both ares still significantly higher than the FX7. Also, the A1 is a CCD camera and doesn't suffer from rolling shutter skew the way both the CMOS FX7 and HV30 do.

The FX7 isn't a bad camera. It does have manual controls and 20x zoom. Plus, the HV30 is difficult to use under low light conditions (see the cell phone trick to lock gain.)

Both the FX7 and HV30 only have 1/8" mic jacks which tend to be noisier. Plus you can turn the audio gain off manually in the A1. The $300 you save for buying a good preamp like the juiced link for proper XLR use with the FX7 would make up the difference inprice between the FX7 and used A1.

All I'm saying is that for the cost of a used XH-A1 you can have the best of both worlds and have XLR inputs.
 
Last edited:
Duke M. said:
I'm afraid the numbers are correct and I'm not talking about HDMI direct for HV30. Also you mention there is more DOF on FX7, that is correct off of a 1/4" sensor than a 1/3" sensor, all things being equal. But what you want is less DOF for DOF control

However, the FX7 has 20x zoom and the HV30 has 10x zoom, so the FX7 wins there. But the A1 has 20x zoom and the 1/3" sensor and wins over both the HV30 and FX7. They tie when the A1 is throttled back to about 15x, which makes it easier to use indoors.

The FX7 is a 1/4" sensor and only 960 pixels wide. It interpolates (creates) the rest of the image. It loses minute details because the actual data from the FX7 sensor is only 1.12 megapixels.

The HV30 is a full 1920 wide 1/3" sensor (about 2 megapixels from HDMI) that is then cut down to 1440 wide for about 1.5 megapixels when recorded to tape.

The XH-A1 is a 1440 wide interlaced sensor with a green channel offset to interpolate the interlaced signal into a progressive signal (24f). For interlaced it has the same data in the image as the HV30. For 24f it has about 10% less data. Both ares still significantly higher than the FX7. Also, the A1 is a CCD camera and doesn't suffer from rolling shutter skew the way both the CMOS FX7 and HV30 do.

The FX7 isn't a bad camera. It does have manual controls and 20x zoom. Plus, the HV30 is difficult to use under low light conditions (see the cell phone trick to lock gain.)

Both the FX7 and HV30 only have 1/8" mic jacks which tend to be noisier. Plus you can turn the audio gain off manually in the A1. The $300 you save for buying a good preamp like the juiced link for proper XLR use with the FX7 would make up the difference inprice between the FX7 and used A1.

All I'm saying is that for the cost of a used XH-A1 you can have the best of both worlds and have XLR inputs.
Click to expand...

Wow a job to get my breath back after all that duke, i dont know where to start if at all i dont know where the minute loss of detail the FX-7 loses goes because it certainly does not show[check camcorderinfo test it even had more res than the A-1]the one place the FX wins plainly over the HV is if i am filming country views the FX will pick up detail on the horizon that the HV blows out even without adjustments, the HV30 could possibly be adjusted a bit iris etc but in bright daylight far from easy,
regarding the lens what i like about the 20x on the sony is the fact it has a lot more at the max zoom compared to the A-1 of course it loses on the wide end.
Sound using my rode stereo is as good as i need with the FX but there is some tape noise with the HV30
I forgot to say the HV30s soft jerky 25p pal is not for me.
 
Last edited:
You really need to read that article more closely. Here's the link.

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Sony-HDR-FX7-Camcorder-Review/Performance.htm#

For example: "The saturation levels are distinctly higher in auto mode than the Canon XH A1."

and

"It also has to do with the higher contrast than the XH A1, which gives a greater apparent resolution. Again, even with the Contrast Enhancement feature turned off, edges were sharp as a tack."

They shot the A1 in the default auto mode. This is similar to the cinemode in the HV20. It is a deliberately desaturated, unsharpened, low constrast, flattened gamma mode designed for color correction. It wasn't designed for auto mode footage to be viewed without CC.

Keep in mind, we've seen shootouts where they've managed to make Red One footage look terrible. It's the operator not the camera.

Look at the image I posted above in low light with the A1. It's nicely saturated, warm colors, nice gamma curve. This image is without CC or external changes (except reduced in size). The HV30 can't do it in that low light.

Sorry, but you just can't compare test chart scores or images unless both cameras have been optimized. That sounds more like a marketing ploy or being unfamiliar with the camera. Or, if you wish, the A1 has a steeper learning curve.
 
Last edited:
Duke M. said:
You really need to read that article more closely. Here's the link.

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Sony-HDR-FX7-Camcorder-Review/Performance.htm#

For example: "The saturation levels are distinctly higher in auto mode than the Canon XH A1."

and

"It also has to do with the higher contrast than the XH A1, which gives a greater apparent resolution. Again, even with the Contrast Enhancement feature turned off, edges were sharp as a tack."

They shot the A1 in the default auto mode. This is similar to the cinemode in the HV20. It is a deliberately desaturated, unsharpened, low constrast, flattened gamma mode designed for color correction. It wasn't designed for auto mode footage to be viewed without CC.

Keep in mind, we've seen shootouts where they've managed to make Red One footage look terrible. It's the operator not the camera.

Look at the image I posted above in low light with the A1. It's nicely saturated, warm colors, nice gamma curve. This image is without CC or external changes (except reduced in size). The HV30 can't do it in that low light.

Sorry, but you just can't compare test chart scores or images unless both cameras have been optimized. That sounds more like a marketing ploy or being unfamiliar with the camera. Or, if you wish, the A1 has a steeper learning curve.
Click to expand...
http:// yes i read it a bit different,anyway the FX7s can obviously adjust color to suite from vivid to black, so they say it gives the sony higher contrast good i would have thought coming from a canon biased site,i only mentioned resolution between the two, and the sony wins in that dept ,low light well it loses big.
Anyway i like both my cams they may not be in the EX3 class but will do me for now,
 
Last edited:
janixpacle said:
probably... but zooming in to gain DOF will change the perspective of the image, and it will be harder to stabilize the footage when the cam is zoomed in...
Click to expand...

Zooming for DOF will change the perspective of the background, but since the idea is to blur the background that's kind of a moot point.

And zooming on any camera without a good tripod is an invitation to seasickness. With a good tripod it's no problem.

Camera movement, like a crane, dolly or slider can't be done easily with a lot of zoom, but generally DOF control is to create emphasis on particular subjects. If you're shooting a romantic couple in a tratoria and want to emphasis them, and not the crowd behind them, you'll want to see their faces and their expressions. Zooming in helps that too.

Nothing says you have to use the full 20x zoom, just as nothing says you need to reduce your DOF to 6". Usually you don't want the DOF too small or part of the subject will be out of focus. Then you have those ridiculous shots where the nose is in focus but the eyes aren't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top