HVX, perhaps the wrong camera for me?

F

filmguy123

Veteran
So I really love my HVX, but I've begun to realize that there are a few things I really wish I need/had that the HVX doesn't. I do a lot of live event coverage that is informal or where I just need to run-n-gun, point and shoot. For this there are two key things I wish I had:

1.) A longer zoom-through lens, I'd like about a 20x optical like the XL2 has. I've looked at the Telephoto lens for the HVX, but none of them are zoom through, and I really need the ability to go from full wide to full telephoto...

2.) LOW LIGHT!! The HVX is absolutely beautiful with plenty of light or proper lighting, but when either of these things are missing, I find it becomes miserable quickly. Anything indoors, even in what seems to the eye as decent lighting, it just fails miserably. A handicam picks up better looking footage in this case. And often I need to shoot indoors without having to rig lighting.


Yet, I would hate having to give up everything else the HVX offers that other cameras don't, most notably solid state recording and the HD DVCPRO codec. Did I perhaps choose the wrong camera for me? What may be a better fit in the same price range, or is there a camera coming soon that will fit what I need most? Again this is:

- Excellent Low-light
- 20x optical zoom
- Solid State / Direct to Disk Recording
- HiDef in a non-HDV format (DVCPRO HD or something else as good as it)
- Pro level features such as XLR inputs, manual controls, and manual zoom ring
- Excellent auto-features (focus, exposure, etc.) for when I need to run-n-gun and point-n-shoot
 
Canon XH-A1 has all you need, except is HDV. HVX looks to the best fit for you. Sony XE is months away.
 
The 'low light' issue is going to be a problem with virtually any 1/3" chip HD camera.
I don't think its an issue with the HVX specifically - but the 'nature of the beast' when you cram that many pixels onto a tiny chip.

As far as the recording medium - you could always get a DTE drive like the Firestore to use with virtually any camera out there...so the camera needn't specifically offer direct to disk recording.
 
marketmd said:
Canon XH-A1 has all you need, except is HDV. HVX looks to the best fit for you. Sony XE is months away.
Click to expand...
Actually, the XHA1 doesn't meet any of the specifications on his list except the 20x zoom. And the EX's zoom is 14x, whereas the HVX's is 13x, so you probably wouldn't see any difference between those.

The HPX500 would meet every requirement on that list except for the autofocus.

Frankly, as Luis said, you're not gonna find an inexpensive HD camcorder that's good in low light, or as good as the old SD camcorders were. Look at the Z1, it's two stops slower than the PD170. The HVX is two stops slower than the DVX (when the DVX is in 60i mode). The V1U is about two stops slower than the HVX! The HV20 is two stops slower than the HVX. The XHA1 and HD100 are about the same as the HVX, which puts 'em both at two stops slower than the DVX/PD170.

The EX won't be any better, initial reports show it as being about HVX/XHA1 speed. It has slightly bigger chips, but they're densely populated and they're CMOS, so that cancels out the advantages of the larger size, ending up at about the same sensitivity.

If you want great low-light performance you'll either have to pony up the big(ger) bucks for something like an HPX500, or step back to SD with a DVX or PD170.
 
Yes. The HV20 delivers images at about 80 ISO, whereas the HVX is about 320. To get comparable brightness without gain, you'd need to quadruple the amount of light or open up the iris by two stops.
 
Interesting, thanks Barry. So what do you predict the future will hold for HD cameras? Will 2/3in CCDs come down in price and become the mainstream anytime soon, or is the only option to spend a lot more to get decent lowlight now?

The HPX500 looks amazing. What do you mean it does everything but the auto-focus? Does the camera not have an auto-focus, or is it just not improved over the HVX-200s?
 
The A1 is a great cam, but it truly is not an HVX,
it doesn't have all that the HVX has to offer (Not going to mention all the features)

Each camera has it's advantages and disadvatages you just have to know why you want it
and regardless of what happens around you stick to that, master it and when you have then think
about moving on.

It's funny because I was told that the Canon H1 can do 4:4:4 color space
when using SDI out. I doubt it, because I have seen uncompressed from the cam and the color space was only 4:2:2. In this case it would be the Canon XHG1 I know it's outside his budget but is the exact same cam as the A1 with the exception of the SDI OUT.

Would buying the HPX be worth just to have the edge the SDI gives?

filmguy123 said:
Interesting, thanks Barry. So what do you predict the future will hold for HD cameras? Will 2/3in CCDs come down in price and become the mainstream anytime soon, or is the only option to spend a lot more to get decent lowlight now?

The HPX500 looks amazing. What do you mean it does everything but the auto-focus? Does the camera not have an auto-focus, or is it just not improved over the HVX-200s?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
filmguy123 said:
Interesting, thanks Barry. So what do you predict the future will hold for HD cameras? Will 2/3in CCDs come down in price and become the mainstream anytime soon, or is the only option to spend a lot more to get decent lowlight now?
Click to expand...
Trying to predict the future is crazy, but the current trends seem to indicate a number of things:
1) Sony is selling smaller chips and claiming they're just as good as bigger ones (hence the 1/4" V1U priced to compete against the 1/3" XHA1, and the 1/2" XDCAM priced to compete against 2/3" cams).

2) Sony is also selling bigger chips and claiming that bigger is better (hence the 1/2" EX1 pitted against the 1/3" HVX, XLH1, etc.)

3) Smaller/newer manufacturers are trending towards a single-chip CMOS design, so they can make larger chips with shallower DOF. Examples include Red and Silicon Imaging. But single-chip designs have traditionally been relegated to the cheaper/consumer side; professional cameras have always embraced the three-chip design. So this is a curious trend.

4) CMOS has some advantages; you can pack 'em more densely with pixels and run them at faster frame rates. They can also require less power and therefore generate less heat, AIUI. So you'll see more CMOS from some manufacturers, primarily Sony and Canon.

5) CMOS has some disadvantages, primarily the rolling-shutter effects of Skew, Wobble, and Partial Exposure. For motion tracking or for shooting in circumstances involving vibration or a lot of motion, CMOS will likely be at a decided disadvantage as compared to CCD. It remains to be seen how significant the effects are on the more-expensive cameras; on the consumer models the wobble can destroy some types of shots.

6) Then there's Foveon, which seems like the holy grail. You can have one large chip, with the same color accuracy as a three-chip system. But Foveon's not ready for video implementation.

So -- short-term trend, I expect we'll see more CMOS in the consumer cameras and some penetration in professional cameras, and I expect CCD will stay quite current. Long-term? Who knows? Something like Foveon would be ideal because it lets us have our 4:4:4 cake and eat our shallow-DOF too.

What do you mean it does everything but the auto-focus? Does the camera not have an auto-focus
Click to expand...
Broadcast lenses don't have autofocus at all. It's always been the realm of the fixed-lens camcorder, and one of the chief benefits of a fixed-lens camcorder design is that it can implement autofocus.
 
rhetorical question from me .

rhetorical question from me .

Does it mean that once focussed the focus follows the zoom (I think not)? If not how can you zoom and keeping it focussed. I assume zooming with the right hand on the rocker and with the left hand on the focus ring? Is this easy or does it require a lot of praktice especially because focussing in HD is even more difficult.

Concerning left eyed persons, I was at the IBC and tried the HPX but the evf could not be shifted enough to the left to align up with my left eye. Are there any extention tools to increase the EVF left-right adjustment?


Broadcast lenses don't have autofocus at all. It's always been the realm of the fixed-lens camcorder, and one of the chief benefits of a fixed-lens camcorder design is that it can implement autofocus.[/quote]
 
Yes it'll hold focus throughout the zoom range, you don't have to refocus. If your backfocus is set properly (and you must take effort to make sure that it is) then you can zoom in, focus, and zoom out and it'll stay in focus throughout the zoom range.

Not sure why you had trouble with the VF; I'm left-eye dominant, and I use the HPX500 with the viewfinder slid out to the left and it works fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top