HVX not "True" progressive??

ripupthehwy

ripupthehwy

Well-known member
Hey has anyone seen this article:

http://www.showreel.org/memberarea/article.php?172

its on M2 redrocks site. These guys tested the HVX alongside the JVC 110, Canon XL H1 and Sony Z1

A couple things I wanted to bring out:

We did find the HVX200 the noisiest of the cameras,
Click to expand...

Which they attributed to the fact its CCDs are only 960 x 540.

My current choice for narrative drama out of the systems currently available would be: the JVC HD100 (in large part because of its true progressive mode)
Click to expand...

I may have missed something here but in the article I get the impression their claim is that only JVC is a progressive camera from end to end, no in camera conversions taking place. Is this true? I thought he HVX was natively progressive as well.

None of them match the filmic feel of the HD100's true progressive mode.
Click to expand...

Anyway, interesting article/review there.

ps. One final note. they mentioned the Split screen problem with JVC has finally been fixed. Well, I have been working with a studio that just bought 2 new HD110's. THey are been flawless..that is until I took one of them out on a remote one night. Yep that nasty split screen reared its ugly head, so don't think they are out of the woods 100%.

I'd speculate that they (Panasonic HVX 200) needed a progressive chip to do variable frame rate. They do this very impressively and I'd like to check it out further. The fact that it has fewer pixels means more noise and lower resolution, but less heat – so no split-screen effect. But it does give variable frame rate, and I think the resolution decrease is worth it in this case.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Well despite the incenuation of the article, the HVX is "true progressive" in every sense, just as much as the JVC is. I think they emphasize it on the JVC because that particular strength is what the JVC model relies upon to distinguish itself from most of the competition, whereas the HVX has more of a "Swiss Army knife" of features that doesn't make any single feaure stand out as a bullet type of selling point.

Yes, the HVX has true progressive chips and true progressive recording into a true progressive format - DVCPro HD 720p. If you want to get technical about it, the HVX is even more of a "True Progressive" filmlike camcorder in that it can bypass the interlaced NTSC or PAL signals altogether and record directly to disk in a "True Progressive" storage format on P2 cards. Something even the JVC cannot do.
 
Article's just plain wrong. The HVX is true progressive and always has been. And the noise level of the HVX is no different than the noise level of the HD100.

Split screen hasn't been "fixed" and it can't ever be truly "fixed". It can be calibrated to match much closer, and JVC has been much much better about taking the time to calibrate the cameras much better, but as you experienced it can still happen.
 
I've also shot with the JVC and I'd use that bugger to keep the drafts out or maybe as anchor. Grew to hate the lackluster images and the muted colors and just simply aweful handholding cam..

There seems to be more emphaisis on knocking down the HVX than applauding the many attributes of the others. Maybe its' because for a year and half it was the only camera that was really moving off the shelves and certainly only one I ever saw on professional shoots. It's good to now have options, but I wouldn't change the two years I've had with my phat camera for anything, even if I do buy something else this year. It's been simply the best camera I've ever owned.. so faux progressive or not, it's a beauty
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top