HVX vs. DVX vs. HD100

O

onmi

Active member
Hey,

Is there any difference in SD between dvx100b - hvx200?
I dont know much about hvx, but does it record that HD video to minidv tape?
Are there any other differences than HD between dvx and hvx?
(Does all of these hvx, dvx, hd100 record same quality video in SD mode?)

And about that JVC HD100, is there difference in video quality between hvx and hd100? I saw some footage of HD100 and it looked great. I would like to get cam which makes just crisp and clear videos like HD100 does. Can DVX do that?
In those HD100's clips everything that were far far away looked very clear and crisp edges..
Will DVX make everything look more blurry than HD100 when the object is ~20-40meters away?

Also, I have heard that GL2's video is slightly sharper/cleaner than DVX, and Im looking for camera which would be better (=higher quality video) than GL2. Is it worth it to go from GL2 to DVX? Or would it be more worth it to go from GL2 -> HD100/HVX?

Im on tight budget, so I could buy now DVX or if its worth it to wait longer, I could buy HVX or HD100. So... are those differences between DVX and HVX so big that I should wait longer to get HVX or HD100?

I hope that someone could answer to all of my questions, thanks :)
 
My advice to you is to read previous posts about this topic, specifically from users like Barry Green and Evinsky - Then, if you're still not convinced that the HVX is the shiznit, go and rent all three cameras and test them yourselves
 
Yes I have searched all kinds of posts of those subjects, but still I havnt got pure straight answer to those questions..

But..my main question is:
"I have heard that GL2's video is slightly sharper/cleaner than DVX, and Im looking for camera which would be better (=higher quality video) than GL2. Is it worth it to go from GL2 to DVX? Or would it be more worth it to go from GL2 -> HD100/HVX?"

I was dissapointed when I got my GL2 and everybody hyped up that cam as "best cam you can get". I really dont want to make that same mistake twice: to go after some hyped cam and realize that its blurry noisy crap just like GL2..
 
no offense but this subject has been talked to death here. Just these from putting hd100 in the search function and quickly grabbing a few. SD comparison between
hvx and dvx have been discussed as well. Asking if the HVX can shoot HD to tape shows you have not done the basics. I think folks here will be very helpful with a little more effort.

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=64821&highlight=hd100

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=61431&highlight=hd100

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=50288&highlight=hd100
 
There's no simple answer so go do your research. I will say that the GL2 certainly isn't any better looking than the DVX100. The XL2 vs. DVX100 is debatible but the GL2 has nothing on it.
 
^
Are we talking about the same camera? The Canon GL2, 1/4 chip (as opposed to the DVX's 1/3, with no 24p, or great film-like gamma and colors of the DVX?
 
You'd probably get more mileage out of the HVX200 as it is 4:2:2, which is useful for greenscreen work, it's an HD DVX, and it's a step forward no matter what because it will basically be a 16:9 DVX at the very least and, if you're wanting to stick to SD for a certain project, better if you film in DVCPRO50. But do realize that P2 cards or recording straight to laptop will be necessary for anything higher than the DVCPRO25 mode.

Honestly, I think the JVC HD100-series is the next most logical choice, it has some great looking video coming out of it, HDV "limitations" regardless, it's just that good.

If you'll look at some of my previous postings on the subject, I'm not much of a fan of the Canon XLH1, it just didn't seem to look like it was doing good default footage when I looked at it the first few times. However, I didn't tweak around with it to get it looking right, nor did I have a quality monitor to check out what I was actually filming. But after seeing some footage made by DVXUsers and DVInfo.net users, I've gotta say that the XLH1 has proven itself to me as a real workhorse when you set it up right, but the price still is a big issue. If you're interested, maybe you should take a look at the upcoming Canon XHA1 or even XHG1, they may be pretty darn good if you set'em up right. :)
 
DavidBeier said:
^
Are we talking about the same camera? The Canon GL2, 1/4 chip (as opposed to the DVX's 1/3, with no 24p, or great film-like gamma and colors of the DVX?
Click to expand...

Now you really lost me

A DVX100 without 24p ?

I'm asking about the GL2 compared to the DVX100 in any of the 24p Modes
 
Maybe I used a double negative or something: He said that he heard the GL2 was sharper and cleaner than the DVX100. I'm saying that the DVX100 is better in every respect since it has a bigger CCD (1/3 vs 1/4), true 24p, and better looking colors and film-gamma.
 
Guys, I must take onmi's side. He said that the GL2 was sharper than the DVX cause he read it somewhere on this forum, I don't remember who wrote it, or where. But I too was suprised when I read that. Maybe the tread-GL2 & DVX or something.
 
Well, just because one camera is sharper than another doesn't mean it's better. Heck, if you want razor sharp video, get an old JVC HD1 to tide you over, it's $1400 or so new depeding where you go. The footage is much sharper than the DVX's footage, but is that a good thing? The XL2 can produce some pretty sharp footage too, so could any of the Sony cameras, HDV or SD.

If you want sharp footage, there's more cameras to choose from than the DVX, but if you want film-like footage or footage with generally accurate colors, then the DVX may just be for you. I own a GL1 and I've gotta say that it can do some great stuff, especially if I add a 35mm adapter onto it, but would I choose it over a DVX? Heck no! For starters, the DVX has a lot more pro features such as XLR's and a good focus wheel, it aslo has much more resolution and flexibility with its image, and it has 24P.

But this isn't what Onmi was asking. The question was whether to go from a GL2 to a DVX or from a GL2 to an HVX or HD100U. Obviously, he'd get much more going to HD than to go, by today's standards, a small baby step to the DVX. The debate over the GL2 having sharper footage is a moot point, I've seen both cameras and yes, I could say that the GL2 was sharper, more so than my GL1 and a tad more so than the DVX, but is the DVX as blurry and noisy like a lot of GL-series video can be? No, but any camera will have noise issues, we're not to that crystal clear noiseless point yet, if you don't want noise, then you need to light appropriately and make sure your exposure and whatnot is set up correctly.
 
One advantage I think the HVX has over the HD100 is the real-time slow motion. I've been working on a documentary for several weekends, and being able to show up with my camera and a laptop, get footage in slow motion and watch it back in real-time, that to me is an awesome feature. Fast motion, slow motion, all of this is available in real-time due to the P2 system.
 
^
Sorry I still don't get how the GL2 is sharper (I assume we are refering to actual detail here and not just edge enhancment) when it has a smaller CCD.
 
I'm no Barry Green, so I can't give you any specific technical details, but what I meant by sharpness was more along the lines of the sharp edge enhancement look, if that's what you were asking about then the DVX definitely wins in detail sharpness, at least to my eyes.
 
How about [SIZE=-1][SIZE=-1][SIZE=-1][SIZE=-1][SIZE=-1][SIZE=-1]Canon XH A1, can it be compared to HVX200 or HD100?[/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE]
Everybody says that HVX200 is best of those cams, but what XH A1 is missing in its image quality compared to HVX & HD100?

Is XH A1 better than DVX? Are those colors in XH A1 natural looking?

If Im correct, that XH A1 costs about same amount as DVX100b, which one would "be better"?
 
Nobody has seen a frame of XHA1 footage so nobody knows what it will look like. People are assuming that it'll look like the XL-H1, but considering that it has a different lens, it'd be prudent to wait and see.

If the XHA1 delivers all the features and look o fthe DVX, plus high-def and a 20x zoom lens, at the same price, then that's a no-brainer, of course the XHA1 would be better in that circumstance. But we can't know those answers until we get ahold of one and put it through its paces and see what it actually does.
 
Jack_Felis said:
I'm no Barry Green, so I can't give you any specific technical details, but what I meant by sharpness was more along the lines of the sharp edge enhancement look, if that's what you were asking about then the DVX definitely wins in detail sharpness, at least to my eyes.
Click to expand...

Not trying to single you out but it's a bit a shame when people quite a camera as being "sharper" for having more edge enhancment. Too much EE looks video-ish, un-natural, and just plain bad. More importantly, it greatly increases the noise (making the poster's statement that it's "cleaner" completely absurd) and can be done in post if really wanted.

The DVX100 and GL2 both have 410k pixels so technically have the same resolution. The DVX100 uses a 1/3 chip however (instead of 1/4) which will mean a cleaner image, better low light performance, highter lattitude, better sensativity, ect, not to mention all the other stuff I already talked about. As I said before, the XL2 is comparible to the DVX100 but the GL2 is inferior in just about every way. Be a shame if some guy got an GL2 expecting it to be an XL2.
 
sounds like you're after a good SD camera right? you asking if the HVX200 is worth buying as an SD cam? Am I right? If so, though I don't own one, I think the HVX, with its dvcpro50 mode and wide lens, qualifies as aguably the best sub 10k SD camera around...provided p2 suits your workflow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top