HVX 200 versus 300

No, it makes Quicktime able to import MXF files. So you don't have to do *any* file conversions whatsoever. It just adds to Quicktime what Quicktime should already have.

There are three tools that I know of that do it, one is from Calibrated Software, one is from MXF4QT, and one is from DVFilm (Raylight). I have seen the Calibrated one editing AVC-Intra on an MBP, and using the QT player as a file viewer. I don't know for sure if the others can handle AVC-I, I would guess that they would.
 
I'll leave the tech aspects to others, but comparing 1080 footage from a HVX200a and the HPX300, the 300 is, hands down, clearly superior.

I was not involved in the production of any of this footage; I'm working as a kind of consultant on the job. But the (locked down) studio AVC-i footage of the 300 is sharper, richer, all the way 'nicer' than the DVCPRO HD from the 200a. It must be a combination of the full raster chip, lens and codec, but every person involved was partial to the footage acquired by the HPX300.
We were looking at a JVC monitor (forgot to check the model) with SDI input from a Kona 3 running on a 8 core Mac Pro.
The edit its happening on ProRes (not the footage evaluation), so I can't speak about system performance.
 
jameswmulryan said:
Conclusion:
The 300's ergonomics and AVC Intra rock and more than make up for the CMOS shortcomings and AVC Intra bandwith and storage issues.
Click to expand...
Jumping into this tread a bit late..

The ergonomics of shoulder cams in general are in most situations far superior to any handheld camcorder. The handheld's often is a good supplement to a shoulder mounted, not the other way round. Ofcourse there are exceptions, but in general i favour shouldercam. With a pro lens there also are room to avoid the compromises needed to get a lens as small as needed for hvx200/hpx170.

CMOS might be an issue for some types of shooting. Storage and archive will be a challenge regardless of what manufacturer you choose, except jvc which can shoot in small flimsy SD cards. A tape streamer from the "it world" wont cost that much, and just a fraction of what a dvcprohd deck cost. I feel like I've juste started over again with video gear after my switch to P2. The only problem are Avid's lack of handling(or more mixing) 50 and 25fps media, no possible way to mix without using third party tools.

In my world the 200 vs 300 would be a no brainer unless the work calls for a small camera, and I don't se Avc-i as the most important part of that equation, but nice to have it to. I went down the 2/3" lane with 500, but still it's a Pansonic:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top