HVX vs. Canon HDV

It is more processor intensive to edit HDV but todays processors ARE extremely powerful with all the dual and quadcores... Also, I have seen very nice A1 edits with CC, what is, is that indeed the red or more the 'flashy trendy' colors seem to bleed. A yellow safety jacket or alike is not so naturel as with the HVX.
 
Kholi said:
That's weird, because, I've been seeing XH-A1 footage Color Corrected and the results seem to be a lot better than the macro-blocky HVX footage.

Not that it's not fine. But, I don't know how much better CCing it really is. Maybe for chroma work.
Click to expand...

Any other HV X users experience "macro-blocky" footage from the HVX? This is my # grip with DV so I'd like to know if the HVX has a problem in this area.

much thanks
JohnG
 
Anyone have access to both cameras and want to shoot a locked down shot with each for CC tests? It would be interesting to REALLY see what claims hold up in that regard.

Compositing tests would also be very interesting. :)

I'd do it myself but don't have access to both.

And dang it, what we need is a cineform hard drive recorder like the wafian but portable like the Firestore....... I would kill to have that!
 
Last edited:
I've certainly never seen macroblocking in HVX200 footage. At least not unless it was pushed way beyond any realistic CC. Even doing selective color changes in FCP it held together remarkably well.
E.
 
You can get excellent results with either camera. All of the features and bullet points have been debated ad-nauseum.

I am currently testing an A1 and I can tell you that it is a wonderful product. It's everything the Sony's should've been. (given the HDV format) It even performs better than the XL-H1 in some areas. It has a lens as wide as the HVX, but with much more telephoto, which can come in handy in lots of situations.

If you need the simple safety of tape acquisition, but want a film look for some projects, the A1 will deliver. Also, it's HDV codec is the class of the category;motion compression just isn't a real world issue with this camera. If you look over here :http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=77926 you will see that the A1 is very CC friendly too.

If you're o.k. with using the camera as a deck (like your previous GL1) you can get your feet wet and make some money with it--then buy the HV10 or get a Firestore and bypass tape acquisition altogether. And if you're still hankering for the HVX200, you can sell the A1 with minimal financial loss.

Honestly, it's a cheaper entry into "affordable HD" and an excellent performer too.
 
Last edited:
I had the canon xl-h1 before the hvx200. My only complaint was the 24f compatability issues with final cut pro. Not sure if there's the same issues with that model though I would assume there might be.

J
 
We shot a TV spot with the HVX200. We also have a DVX100a. The footage, when lit with Kinos and the like, was noisey and you don't need to go staring into the screen to find it.

There are other users that will vouch for that claim. It's fine for others, some will not accept the noise levels. Either way, it exists.

Evin's just too good of a DP, and knows how to light well to avoid it. =P
 
noise

noise

kholi,

Yeah thats the problem I'm having with the hvx even in bright conditions. Not what I expect to see from a camera at this level or with these reviews. Kind of disapointed with that.

J
 
This is in a HVX forum so I can understand the affinity being displayed for the HVX200 , I for one am certainly fond of it. But as an user of the Canon Xh A1 also I can tell you there is some misinformation going on here.

For one personally I have never had a problem with the HVX in low light, neither on the A1 - except when I was intially performing tests to get the best results and this goes for both cameras. Both cams also have limitations in this area.

Then, certainly the A1 and HVX200 have a general difference in look - some prefer one over the other, but to say the Canon is not as filmic? Once again I can tell you that in MY ACTUAL use of the A1 it does have a very filmic quality when used under the right circumstances, lighting etc. The bokeh on this camera is one thing I can tell you out of the box I feel is superior to the HVX.

Editing woes? I havent had one from the XH A1 - I get real time CC (no render time) - I use FCP Studio.

Not true progressive? I would suggest its using a different method, and achieving the same result.
PROGRESSIVE
Pete and I tried to clarify what exactly was going on. The answer we got is:
[*] The chips are interlaced but the cam is reading the chips progressively.
[*] They are pixel shifting the green CCD.
[*] They are slowing down the CCDs as they change the frame rate.

Quote: It's a full frame not 1 1/2 like the XL1s"
Click to expand...

The HVX does shoot a higher color range, the HVX does have variable frame rates. I havent seen any footage to suggest it has a better dynamic range, in fact thus far I have been truly excited about what the A1 is putting out.

The deck issue? People worry far too much about this. Im using my A1 and I will continue to do so. I used my DVX for same purpose - never a drop out. The only reason I would find this an issue is if I had a client with me - the p2 looks more pro as far as workflow goes.

Now back to the original question: Here is what I would truly consider.

1/ What are you using the camera for? Are you going to shoot weddings, street doco or not studio eng? Then the A1 is a superior choice.

2/ Is the higher color space and a less compressed format (untested as to how this actually appears as a difference in the end product at this stage I would suggest a DVCpro format does) more important to you? Then the HVX is the better choice.

3/ Is variable frame rate important to you? Then the HVX is the better choice.

4/ Do you want a cam that has telephoto? Then the A1 is the better choice.

5/ Do you want a cam that has 1/3 - 1/15000th shutter speed? Then the A1 is the better choice.

6/ Do you want a cam that has a simple p2 offload and not a long capture process? Then the HVX is better.

You can see what I am getting at here. These are some of the functions each cam has. I would investigate those on each side and make the decision that fits your requirements.

Now to price. The A1 has it all over the HVX in terms of the cost of purchasing the cam, in terms of shooting HD format, in terms of NLE operation system specs and space requirements. In terms of upgrading from an exisitng 72mm front lens threaded piece of equipment such as the DVX.

Both are great cams, check em out, drive them and then see what fits you all around considering your personal position. I hope this serves to help you make the right decision for you. Either way your going to end up with a decent piece of equipment.

evinsky said:
I've certainly never seen macroblocking in HVX200 footage. At least not unless it was pushed way beyond any realistic CC. Even doing selective color changes in FCP it held together remarkably well.
E.
Click to expand...

Same.
 
evinsky said:
I've certainly never seen macroblocking in HVX200 footage. At least not unless it was pushed way beyond any realistic CC. Even doing selective color changes in FCP it held together remarkably well.
E.
Click to expand...

E

Can you describe under what conditions you've seen macro blocking in the HVX? Any posted clips?

:dankk2:
JohnG
 
ncje,

If you have both cameras, could you please post some grabs with each set to get the max cine colour/gamma look available from each model. I want to see if the Canon can match the Panasonic film look. To be honest, I'll be surprised if it does. Surprise me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top