HVX statement

Barry_Green said:
I have three guys in mind for doing the shooting and/or judging, all working professionals. I haven't asked two of them yet, because I don't know what the date will be yet.
Click to expand...

Besides the shooting and the judging, it's also important to choose good situations to shoot, that means to cover the big world of videography and filmography as broad as possible. (Of course I don't have to tell you this - I'm sure you already have ideas for many scenes that will show the whole capabilities of a camera).

This would mean:

A) different light situations:
1. too much light (Las Vegas at noon, brilliant surfaces etc.)
2. very low light
3. low contrast
4. much contrast
5. mixed light (e.g. sun & artificial light)
6. special light (neon, fireworks, fire)
7. backlight (window, into the sun, etc.) , stage, etc.
8. snow, beach, stars
9. screen

B) different color challenges:
1. natural colors (earth, sand, mineral, plants, sea, sky, sunset)
2. human skin
3. mixed 1. & 2.
4. architectural colors
5. neon&fluorescent colors
6. big color contrasts / big variation and smooth of single colors

C) movement
1. camera moving in still landcape
2. scene moving with still camera
3. scene moving & camera moving
4. different rhythms/speeds of action

D) angles (e.g. for detail check)
1. close-up / macro (e.g. skin detail)
2. wide-angle
3. ...

F) sound
1. bult-in micro for concert, interview, atmo
2. external micro for concert, interview, atmo

I'm sure, Barry, you have a better plan - this just what I would do with different cameras to compare footages. Of course the cameras stand either on one single tripod with removable head (for same angle) or side by side the very same moment/situation. Another question is the values: will the settings be free to get always the maximal performance a camera can do? (including gain and detail)

It's not easy to work scientifically because man can never be 100% objective... But as man is shooting with the HVX and man is watching the videos and films, man should also be the one who shoots and judges the footage. It's certainly a very good idea to let a handful of experts judge the footage without letting them know what camera with it was shot. Perhaps with 4 monitors side by side. This gives us the idea of further problems: what resolution will the screens have and will they be LCD or plasma or beamer or laser or tube? What will be the terms for judging the footage? Both - contact between the juges during the judgement or no contact might be helpful - one allows disscussing the footage for an individual judgement afterwards and one leaves the judgement alone to each judge who will probably oversee a detail that another would consider important...

Objective science is not easy and as soon as the objectivity lacks, there will be endless arguments in here about the judgements. (Won't there be arguments anyway? :huh: ).

I'm looking forward to reading the judgements of your men, Barry! - Thanks for your patience and good-will!

Cici
 
I agree with you, I think that'd all be great, but I can tell you right now, that's not gonna happen. To do it properly, that would take two weeks.

I mean, to properly shoot a res chart you should shoot each one at different focal lengths and at different apertures. How many combinations does that add up to? Say you choose three focal lengths and four apertures. That's 12 combinations. Times six cameras. That's 72 setups right there. And that's for one chart. That's probably two hours right there.

Now you want to take 'em inside and outside, in different lighting conditions, making sure that each one is set properly and is properly white balanced and the gamma is set and the right exposure is set and you're in the right frame rate and you've got the right shutter speed and you're on zero dB of gain and ... and... and you can't possibly miss any of this because it will royally foul up everything else and ruin the entire comparison.

So you do one outdoor scene, and you check each one on the waveform, and -- well, now guess what -- the sun's moved, it's behind some clouds, and the lighting's all different now. And you still have five more cameras to go on this one scene. And you have to take the effort to make sure each and every shot is properly QC'd, or why did you even bother trying?

Nope. Won't happen. We will probably get some charts, do the basic objective tests (res, latitude, sensitivity, etc) and maybe an indoor scene or two. And by that time the day will be over.

If you're talking two cameras (which is probably what we should do, if we're honest with ourselves -- I mean, who cares about the JVC and the Sony for this comparison, they've been around for months, it's the HVX/XLH1 that everyone wants to see...) but with two cameras you could do a lot. With more than two it starts to get exponentially harder each step you add.
 
Your absolutely right! If the results are clear enough, then I agree with some short chart-tests. And my next suggestion in this case is to take AFTRER THE TEST and judging the two best performing cameras (hopefully one of them will be the HVX200) and go on with the big test. ANy test with 2 or more cameras can give you / us informations. And the more planned the tests are and the more different situations the tests cover, the more they tell about the cameras. Might take 1 week, or even 1 month... But the recovery would thank each single minute spent for the test.

The detail you mention about the sun behind the clouds: that's the situation where the cameras need to bee placed side by side then ANY of them would get the same footage. In the studio I'd rather prefer one tripod and a removable head.

But much more important than all this chatting is to DO it - and you can do it - I can't...

Thanks, Barry!
 
Barry_Green said:
If you're talking two cameras (which is probably what we should do, if we're honest with ourselves -- I mean, who cares about the JVC and the Sony for this comparison, they've been around for months, it's the HVX/XLH1 that everyone wants to see...) but with two cameras you could do a lot.
Click to expand...
For the sake of simplicity/maximum effectiveness of a test, I'd be more in favor of a two-way with the HVX and H1, too. The Sony isn't even a progressive camera and doesn't much compare to the needs of people on this forum, and the JVC has pretty much been eclipsed by everything the HVX and XL H1 can do. If anything, I'd love to see a three-way shootout with those two cameras and the Varicam, to show us just how much we get from 1/3" vs. 2/3" chips, and how the HVX stacks up frame for frame with it's big brother. Of course, whatever you can get will be great... but if time and number of cameras are the issue (which is always the case), I'd go with those.
 
well.... as I said: perhaps it's best to have a quick chart-test to eliminate some of the 4-6 candidates and then proceed e.g. with larger tests of 2 cameras only. Seems to me like in sports: the best and easiest to see how strong the HVX is in certain shooting situations would be to test "her" all alone with one competitor in a large serie of shots, trying not to neglect ANY aspect that could bother any videographer.

Another way is just to wait the couple of users who will make tests for their own and look at their results. If 99% say that the HVX-footage looks brighter or smoother or anything than camera B, then I belive them corresponding to the amount of people who testet this. For me this means, I won't trust any private guy or videomagazine unless I know exactly how trustful the test was. And a lot has also to do with personal taste. Especially with HD. So the last judge before I buy the camera will be my own eyes.
 
Actually, please include the JVC HD100 !

That camera produces some decent footage.

I would like to know how its latitude, res, and sensitivity, noise fair against the others.

thxs, Steve
 
Also would like to see the JVC HD100 in this field, its a good example for HDV and progressive. A shootout like Barry promised the last big event: let unbiased but enthusiastic shooters try to shoot a scene/cards in two ways.

1. with exact parameters for all cameras
2. with the best adjustment a camera is capable off

All without the need of extra filters etc.
 
sigh......Thank you Barry for taking the time to shoot footage in a controlled situation between several cameras....especially for this tough crowd.

Everyone....come back to earth here please....and give Barry a break. If people are so worried...then rent the camera once it's available to shoot some tests under whatever conditions you'll need it for...and see for yourself.

I would guess 75% of the people in this forum couldn't even view DVCPRO-HD in any flavor anyways....so take a breath and stop complaining...
 
I'll give you immediately the winner list of 4-to-7 way low-cost HD camera tests because I did one 4 cam comparison footage 7 times before.

Here is the list:

1. Canon XL H1 (HDV)
2. JVC GY HD100 (HDV)
3. Panasonic HVX200 (DVCPRO HD)
4. Sony Z1 (HDV)
5. Sony FX1 (HDV)
6. Sony HVR-A1 (HDV)
7. Sony HDR-HC1 (HDV)

I would like to ask DVX100 user base to not get disappointed and "offended" with this list because we are NOW IN HD. SD times are over for us I hope so. Also DVX100 can now play as HD too with Andromeda and it should be included one day in this kind of tests. Maybe than Panasonic would win but with DVX100+Andromeda and not HVX200. Also could be interesting to see Andromeda from HVX200 vs Andromeda from DVX100 test. This could be THE TEST OF THE TESTS.



SJUSER
--------------------

http://www.sanjinjukic.com/index_panasonicHD_P2.html
 
Andromeda is soft by comparison. I think the XL H1 is good in sharpness, s***ty in lens distortion and color quality. So if the HVX is softer - who really cares? So far, the HVX has really good color, sweet options, better recording tech, lower cost and best of every world. Some say its noisy - so is the DVX - which can be worked around. The DVX is softer than the XL2 but guess which camera is better IMO? DVX wins with better color/filmic image.
 
Don't mean to get off topic if I am right now, but I looked at an XL-H1 during a trip to L.A. last week at Samy's Camera. They also had a DVX there, no HVX, that I got to play with for the first time because Stockton, CA and Las Vegas, NV don't have any place with DVX's. But I looked at the XL-H1 first since it was the new camera on the block. The image was great, clear and sharp and miles better than the XL2's image, which I used to think was sharp but really "fake" looking, must have been the color or something. The viewfinder was a major improvement over the XL2's because it was simply bigger and worked a lot better when you flipped the eyepiece up to use as a usual LCD. However, I noticed something very disturbing about the viewfinder, I'm hoping this isn't on all XL-H1's, but when there was movement, there was noticeable ghosting of the movement! It was like my dad's old Betamax camcorder when the image would get burned in temporarily, like if you stared at a lightbulb for a few seconds and blinked the purple impression for a while, yeah it was pretty disappointing to see that in such a modern camera. But I don't know if it was just this one camera or what, any ideas? Anyway, then I tried out 24F, it looked good but looked very artificial in comparison to the other 24p stuff I've seen here. People are very correct in the comparison to Frame Mode because it does look funnny like that, I had my GL1 back in the hotel room so I knew later on that it was pretty similar in feeling. It also was terrible for panning, though that is a typical flaw of 24p anyway so I don't hold it against the camera itself.

Then I played with the DVX100B, it turned out to be the new B model by the way, I was at first surprised by the size of the LCD display, it was HUGE in comparison to my GL1! Then I switched to 24p mode and everything just stopped. How could this be? The DVX's 24p looked amazing, it was even better than the XL-H1's. It may not have been as sharp or clear looking but it looked like film movement right off the bat, I'd heard that DVX cameras were like this, ready to shoot right out of the box, but whether it was the weird viewfinder or the strange implementation Canon used, Panasonic's 24p solution was incredible. That's when I knew that if I were to get a 24p camera, it would be the HVX200, which is the HD DVX, and not the XL-H1.

This is just my opinion and I realize the comparison between the XL-H1 and DVX is a little unfair but it shouldn't be since the underdog kicked some arse in my mini-comparison-review. Substituting the HVX for the DVX shouldn't be entirely innacurate since it's the same 24p implementation if I'm not mistaken.

Yet again, sorry if this was off topic.
 
"Panasonic's 24p solution was incredible"

Yes it is. I sold my DSR-300 DVCAM after
getting my DVX over 3 years ago!
3 wonderful years - filled with beautiful 24P
images. I sometimes forget to keep
selling my services!! I am afraid that once
I get my HVX I may be having so much fun
I may not shoot for anyone else!!
 
Any chance, another day, taking a break from getting into a new chapter and relaxing thru a banal side by side beetween dvcpro50 and dvx?
Apart from what you can do about that, really thanks for so many knowledgeables replyes and posts.
Alvise
 
Jack_Felis said:
This is just my opinion and I realize the comparison between the XL-H1 and DVX is a little unfair but it shouldn't be since the underdog kicked some arse in my mini-comparison-review.
Click to expand...
Honestly, if there was no HVX on the horizon, I would keep my 100A absolutely over buying an XL H1. The colors on that camera are simply unparalleled. The biggest incentive to move up to the HVX for me is P2, and now with 4 gig cards hovering at almost $600, it's a no brainer for me. I'm excited about the variable framerates, too, though that means I'll be stuck with 720 shooting for the most part. One think I'm really curious about Barry's tests is how much the 1080 mode actually gets you... because up until now, everything has been unsubstantial and inconsistent.
 
Haakon said:
I'm excited about the variable framerates, too, though that means I'll be stuck with 720 shooting for the most part.
Click to expand...

I've been trying to map out a high-def workflow in my mind. I think that if I shoot in 1080 24p for the best quality, I can shoot in 720p for the variable frame rate modes when called for. With Avid Xpress Pro HD (and higher), you can mix multiple resolutions on the same timeline. Plus Avid offers their DNxHD codec which maintains superior HD quality over multiple generations but requires far less storage space than other HD codecs. So I think mixing 1080 and the occasional 720 on the same timeline would work out just fine (in most circumstances).
 
Boomerang said:
Can you mix multiple res with FCP?
Click to expand...

I have mixed DV and DVCPRO HD in one timeline and FCP can playback in realtime on the Quad G5. I tried DV scaled up in a DVCPRO HD timeline, and also DVCPROHD downresed inside a DV timeline. And finally 720p in a 1080 timeline or 1080 in a 720 timeline. All are acceptable for realtime playback, but requires rendering to see the footage exactly how it will look.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top