HVX In DV Mode

R

Rextilleon

Active member
Has anyone had a chance to shoot with the camera in the DV mode? If I purchase one, I would certainly want to shoot in that mode and would love to hear how it holds up. Maybe a comparison to the DVX100 would be in order?
 
in 4:3 it is very close to dvx100
In 16:9 it is you see the difference. Sharper, more res. Overall picture is better compared to dvx. This is what I heard.
 
The HVX is a better DVX than the DVX is, in almost all ways (which you'd expect, given the $2,000 higher price tag). There are two things that the DVX does better than the HVX; it has the CINE-LIKE gamma curve which the HVX doesn't, and it's a stop faster in progressive mode (and two stops faster in interlaced!)

For 4:3 it's quite competitive, both deliver a very comparable picture. The DVX in 4:3 is a bit wider-angle than the HVX in 4:3. In 16:9 it's no contest, the HVX is noticeably significantly sharper, and also has a wider angle of view.
 
And the HVX at its widest setting has dramatically less barrel distortion than the DVX.

-filmstox
 
Barry,
You answered a question for me & raised anopther one. In the DVX I noticed that when you go into progressive after being in interlaced, you immediately lose almost a stop.
But in the HVX that's not true and if anything it goes the other way. Progressive is faster than interlaced. I've been puzzled about that but I think you just confirmed it above. Am I right about that?
Any idea why this would be different on the 2 cameras?

This doesn't auger well for my hope that the HVX would be a replacement for buying a DVX as an SD camera on ordinary video shoots ( esp docs). Because in SD interlaced it seems much slower.
 
Lenilenapi said:
In the DVX I noticed that when you go into progressive after being in interlaced, you immediately lose almost a stop.
Click to expand...
Correct. Interlaced scanning lets it take advantage of row-pair summation which increases sensitivity by 6dB (or a full stop).

But in the HVX that's not true and if anything it goes the other way. Progressive is faster than interlaced. I've been puzzled about that but I think you just confirmed it above. Am I right about that?
Click to expand...
Correct. On the HVX, progressive is the fastest mode; interlaced is about 1/4 stop slower. On the DVX progressive was slower than interlaced.

Any idea why this would be different on the 2 cameras?
Click to expand...
Yes, because the HVX is a progressive-only system. The DVX can scan its CCD in either interlace or progressive, but the HVX is only ever progressive; it scans its CCD at 1080 res at up to 60Hz (or whatever frame rate you've selected). Then if you are in interlace mode it slices two progressive frames up into fields and records that.

The reason you lose a little sensitivity apparently has to do with the CCD discharge time. You can't get a full 1/60th shutter speed because there has to be time for the CCD to offload its charge. So the maximum shutter speed is a little bit slower. You'll see a similar sensitivity drop when you choose 720/60p instead of 720/48p; at 720/48p it can execute a full 1/60th shutter speed, but at 720/60p it can't quite get that full shutter speed because it has to reserve some time to offload the charge in the CCDs.

This doesn't auger well for my hope that the HVX would be a replacement for buying a DVX as an SD camera on ordinary video shoots ( esp docs). Because in SD interlaced it seems much slower.
Click to expand...
My guess is that SD interlaced on the HVX is about 320 ASA. On the DVX it's more like 1000 ASA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top