Hvx Vs Sdx-900

J

jermcdee

Member
Just a quick question. I know the HVX is HD, but is panasonic's AJ-SDX900's 2/3 inch progressive CCD going to produce a better image. Thank You for your thoughts.
 
I'd go for the SDX900 without hesitating at all. Yes, the HVX is sharper, but it still has 1/3" CCD's, records on expensive and low-cap P2, and it's a really small cam. The SDX has the very nice 2/3", interchangable lenses, better size and records to DVCPRO50 (right?).

I think the SDX produces a much more pleasing and organic image, and they say it bumps very nicely up to film too. :)
 
If I had the budget I'd definitely go for the SDX. Quoted a complete system a month ago: Cam, Viewfinder, Lens and Recorder it was 30k+ Completely different price range.
 
Screw that. Get a firestore and a 35mm adapter + shoot 1080p instead of 720p that will add what you need. 30k is crazy right now. The HDX is a better option also. After all the HD sets they sold on black friday hd will be everywhere in 2 years. Anyone with a SDX sell get the HDX.
 
Unless you need the variable frame rate capability of the HVX the SDX is going to be a better camera in nearly every situation. The low light capability alone will more than justify it. Add to that the inherently shallower DOF that the larger imagers have (without the poor resolution of an "adapter" solution) and its hard to justify the smaller camera. The difference in setup time (in terms of lighting requirements) between shooting a 2/3" camera and shooting with an adapter equipped 1/3" one is considerable.

I had a number of fellow dvxers on a project a month ago where I was shooting with the SDX. They all, without exception, were amazed at how much better the SDX was than any of the 1/3" camera's that they were used to using.

I wish I could justify owning a SDX but unfortunately I can't, so when I get a project that justifies it (and can afford using it) I rent a package that includes glass, sticks and head and a view finder.

If you have never used the SDX, rent one and see for yourself. I think you would be hard pressed to fault it in any area.
 
A great example of "you get what you pay for". The 2/3 chip is a HUGE advantage. It is a different class for sure. Of course it all depends on use. If you are a professional who works in the real world (especially Broadcast) every day, go for it, it will pay for itself. If you are a independent movie/doc maker, a student, or aspiring to one day make a living exclusively in production then stick with the HVX because it is a great camcorder and does have tremendous bang for the buck. (Of course that is not to say that you cannot be a professional and use the HVX, but most pros I know do not use it exclusively, they also shoot with 2/3 cameras) There are also a lot of people like me who own the HVX and shoot with a wide asortment of 2/3 cams that I rent according to different clients needs.
 
jermcdee said:
Just a quick question. I know the HVX is HD, but is panasonic's AJ-SDX900's 2/3 inch progressive CCD going to produce a better image. Thank You for your thoughts.
Click to expand...

Well you have to compare the SD images produced by both cameras and yes the SDX will produce a better image than the HVX. However being that the SDX does not produce an HD image then the HVX wins there. If you are only shooting SD then go for the SDX if you can afford it.
 
Without any testing to backup my statement, I'd probably choose the SDX over the HVX for a 35mm tape to film transfer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top