Have to agree the A1 OIS is exceptional. I do some shoulder mounted work and some recently with the A1 and its been great.
HVX vs. the Canon XHA1
- Thread starter Jarred Land
- Start date
- Status
HappyGobo said:
Had to laugh at that.
snowleopard
Well-known member
Hey Elton, can you PM/e-mail me? I notice you edited your post, and would like to discuss regarding Canon OIS. - Phil
Mike Parker
Active member
The big problem with the HVX (and why I haven't bought one) is most of the stuff I shoot is "shoot and ship" where I hand the tapes to a producer and never see them again. With my DVX or the XH A1 I can continue to do this: SD with the DVX and HDV with the XH A1. If I'm shooting HD with the with the HVX, I can't just hand over a half-dozen P2 cards and hope to get them back someday.
I'm not going to argue the merits of 100mbs HD verses 25mbs HDV, but my clients are more than satisfied with HDV, so who am I to argue? HDV is "good enough".
Mike Parker
Fort Lauderdale
I'm not going to argue the merits of 100mbs HD verses 25mbs HDV, but my clients are more than satisfied with HDV, so who am I to argue? HDV is "good enough".
Mike Parker
Fort Lauderdale
Barry_Green
Moderator
For your uses, the P2 system is probably not appropriate. HDV may or may not be, it depends on whether your client has appropriate HDV playback gear. But yes, that is one area where the HVX doesn't have a fully-fleshed-out workflow path. The only way I can think of that that might work is if the client rents the cards, you shoot on 'em, and the client takes them away with him.
Now that the CinePorter is talking about removable hard disks, perhaps that would give HVX users a way to compete in that type of marketplace.
Now that the CinePorter is talking about removable hard disks, perhaps that would give HVX users a way to compete in that type of marketplace.
KyleProhaska
Veteran
I've read all of these comments, read everything on the internet that I can and I still can't make a decision im confident with. I'm not a PRO so some of the features aren't really a need like even DVCPRO HD. Thats great to have but I think most people who even own an HVX (and I could be wrong) dont even require the codec. I'm sure its nice but idk if I really must have it. I'll be outputing to DVD myself and internet. The 25mb/s on the A1 HDV might be way less than the DVCPro when you simply look at 100mb vs. 25mb but the image is unmistakable to me. Even in motion the thing screams HD to me. HVX has that soft 16mm look but now ive seen A1 users practically match it, not completely but its as close as I think ide ever want to get anyways.
Tape, ah well people have been using it for years and haven't seemed to have much issue. Now if your a pro and need that extra time instead of capturing I understand but im sure alot of folks love the tapeless feature but dont even gain much time using it. Copying 8GB to an HD for me takes slightly less than 20mins. Maybe a little less depending on the person and computer. I'm on a macpro so the copying is pretty fast but even in comparison, I would have probably plugged in my cam, captured my footage or been close to completing to do so, and be ready to go almost just as fast as copying off the card, importing into FCP, etc. Now you have to account for splitting the clips apart but from what ive heard the A1 splits your shots up almost exclusively as you capture which is nice. So where is the advantage besides being able to dump the card and use it again? I know having the codecs obviously ont he P2 is the advantage but seriously for those that aren't in broadcasting is it really that big of a deal? Color correction and the 4:2:2 is great but people before the HVX did some seriously great stuff with even their DV DVX so the ability to do things faster with the new colorspace doesn't mean someone with HDV and 4:1:1 would be much worse. There is a big difference sure but people got along well without 4:2:2 for ages and now they turn it into this thing like they wouldn't be able to make their film without it.
P2 is awesome but is it really that necessary? P2 is basically a firestore in card form that allows the recording of the specific formats and codecs. I dont own a laptop so its tough to unload efficiently but I have found out about the OTG drives. Audio issues with the A1 aren't that much of an issue even if I shoot serious work because I know many who do the same with the XL2 (which im sure is limited more than the A1) and have no problems with audio.
Variable frame rates....mmm..mmm...awesome to look at but if I can shoot 60i and make it looks almost as good why spend the extra 1500+ that ide be spending for HVX? Sure the HVX its instant and you can see it right away but if I dont mind rendering, is it worth the dough? (other than the super undercranked and overcranked footage that is, A1 can't really do that even in post)
The real thing that is the thing holding me back is the P2 and format choice. Sure P2 is great but being able to immedially see your shots and delete is very cool. I can see what I shot without rewinding, that to me alone might be worth the extra dough just for convienence since rewinding tape is a pain in the ass. Deleting a shot that wasn't right is also a plus. Having an 8GB card of just the good shots can stretch pretty far. People look at the 20mins in 720p 24n (pretty sure I got that right) and say "OMG THATS IT!!" but they aren't taking into account the advantage of being able to keep exactly what you want and toss out the rest. If I was just shooting a personal film and only had to dump the card when I filled it with good shots, my lord it would take a while im sure, even 20mins of perfect shots would take anyone a while. 15mins to offload onto an OTG drive (according to Barry's guess) isn't so bad for an 8GB Card.
Long term recording, o boy losing that is a burden...well not really. Firestore is always possible but after 5200, I sure as hell dont have the money for a 1800 Firestore, especially when ill be paying off the HVX while saving for a better mic and tripod for my new baby. If I do a wedding ive figured I can just do SD on the HVX. Ive seen some HVX SD and it looks great so why not?
Film look, the big catch for most Panasonic lovers. If a camera has that video look they'd rather kick it out the window than buy it. To me the film look is very debatable nowadays. You see films shot on HD video and they dont look like film they look like....well...HD. HD has its own signature being crystal clear and noise free while the HVX manages to (with the right settings) provide a relatively clean HD look, or a soft 16mm look in HD. I like that crystal clear look that doesn't really look like film. Like the look of National Geographic or other shows look great. Its detailed, crystal clear (using that alot lol), and just perfect. I dont think that look is so bad since alot of films I see shot in HD have that look. ROTS (SW revenge of the sith) had that exact look. Its not soft 16mm but is it really that bad to have crystal clear so called "video" looking HD? To me HVX HD, HD period, DV, and Film have their own signatures. DV looks noisy and often video unless you have the right stuff (DVX or XL2 tweaked), Film has that look we all love of soft slightly noisy, very dynamic color looking image, Normal HD like the National Geographic has that clean perfect look with the color but no noise and its sharp as hell, and the HVX HD has the HD resolution, with the dynamic range, and the soft 16mm look but isn't as great in the clean and noise free department as ive come to see.
The A1 from what ive seen is perfectly capable of doing what others use their HVX for. Maybe it has its shortcomings but in term of just getting a project done it can do it with the right user and the right approach. HVX will tackle it without much trouble at all, again with the right user and approach. Idk if either is more superior than the other.
I'm not sure which I should get, would I miss the HVX features even if I might not need them right this second? Should I take that extra dough and get a better mic, tripod, etc.? HVX is awesome but if the A1 can do what I would probably do with the HVX with just an extra step in the slowmo and film look department (tweaking the cam) it probably is the ticket no? I dont get paid 1000's to do projects but ide love to have the opportunity to do w/e I want and the HVX seems like it can do it all, but the A1 seems like it can do it all do, just with more effort.
People act like the format options on the HVX aren't creatable through the A1. 1080i interlaced video, deinterlaced and properly (key word here) downrezzed to 720p can look stunning IMO. Maybe not just as good but damn good and for people who more than likely go to DVD its a pointless argument.
Idk im sure ill confuse myself even more until my brain explodes tryign to decide what I should get. Its a tough argument and there are points and explainations to everything. I'm sure ill be happy with what I get.
Man thats a long post....phew.
Tape, ah well people have been using it for years and haven't seemed to have much issue. Now if your a pro and need that extra time instead of capturing I understand but im sure alot of folks love the tapeless feature but dont even gain much time using it. Copying 8GB to an HD for me takes slightly less than 20mins. Maybe a little less depending on the person and computer. I'm on a macpro so the copying is pretty fast but even in comparison, I would have probably plugged in my cam, captured my footage or been close to completing to do so, and be ready to go almost just as fast as copying off the card, importing into FCP, etc. Now you have to account for splitting the clips apart but from what ive heard the A1 splits your shots up almost exclusively as you capture which is nice. So where is the advantage besides being able to dump the card and use it again? I know having the codecs obviously ont he P2 is the advantage but seriously for those that aren't in broadcasting is it really that big of a deal? Color correction and the 4:2:2 is great but people before the HVX did some seriously great stuff with even their DV DVX so the ability to do things faster with the new colorspace doesn't mean someone with HDV and 4:1:1 would be much worse. There is a big difference sure but people got along well without 4:2:2 for ages and now they turn it into this thing like they wouldn't be able to make their film without it.
P2 is awesome but is it really that necessary? P2 is basically a firestore in card form that allows the recording of the specific formats and codecs. I dont own a laptop so its tough to unload efficiently but I have found out about the OTG drives. Audio issues with the A1 aren't that much of an issue even if I shoot serious work because I know many who do the same with the XL2 (which im sure is limited more than the A1) and have no problems with audio.
Variable frame rates....mmm..mmm...awesome to look at but if I can shoot 60i and make it looks almost as good why spend the extra 1500+ that ide be spending for HVX? Sure the HVX its instant and you can see it right away but if I dont mind rendering, is it worth the dough? (other than the super undercranked and overcranked footage that is, A1 can't really do that even in post)
The real thing that is the thing holding me back is the P2 and format choice. Sure P2 is great but being able to immedially see your shots and delete is very cool. I can see what I shot without rewinding, that to me alone might be worth the extra dough just for convienence since rewinding tape is a pain in the ass. Deleting a shot that wasn't right is also a plus. Having an 8GB card of just the good shots can stretch pretty far. People look at the 20mins in 720p 24n (pretty sure I got that right) and say "OMG THATS IT!!" but they aren't taking into account the advantage of being able to keep exactly what you want and toss out the rest. If I was just shooting a personal film and only had to dump the card when I filled it with good shots, my lord it would take a while im sure, even 20mins of perfect shots would take anyone a while. 15mins to offload onto an OTG drive (according to Barry's guess) isn't so bad for an 8GB Card.
Long term recording, o boy losing that is a burden...well not really. Firestore is always possible but after 5200, I sure as hell dont have the money for a 1800 Firestore, especially when ill be paying off the HVX while saving for a better mic and tripod for my new baby. If I do a wedding ive figured I can just do SD on the HVX. Ive seen some HVX SD and it looks great so why not?
Film look, the big catch for most Panasonic lovers. If a camera has that video look they'd rather kick it out the window than buy it. To me the film look is very debatable nowadays. You see films shot on HD video and they dont look like film they look like....well...HD. HD has its own signature being crystal clear and noise free while the HVX manages to (with the right settings) provide a relatively clean HD look, or a soft 16mm look in HD. I like that crystal clear look that doesn't really look like film. Like the look of National Geographic or other shows look great. Its detailed, crystal clear (using that alot lol), and just perfect. I dont think that look is so bad since alot of films I see shot in HD have that look. ROTS (SW revenge of the sith) had that exact look. Its not soft 16mm but is it really that bad to have crystal clear so called "video" looking HD? To me HVX HD, HD period, DV, and Film have their own signatures. DV looks noisy and often video unless you have the right stuff (DVX or XL2 tweaked), Film has that look we all love of soft slightly noisy, very dynamic color looking image, Normal HD like the National Geographic has that clean perfect look with the color but no noise and its sharp as hell, and the HVX HD has the HD resolution, with the dynamic range, and the soft 16mm look but isn't as great in the clean and noise free department as ive come to see.
The A1 from what ive seen is perfectly capable of doing what others use their HVX for. Maybe it has its shortcomings but in term of just getting a project done it can do it with the right user and the right approach. HVX will tackle it without much trouble at all, again with the right user and approach. Idk if either is more superior than the other.
I'm not sure which I should get, would I miss the HVX features even if I might not need them right this second? Should I take that extra dough and get a better mic, tripod, etc.? HVX is awesome but if the A1 can do what I would probably do with the HVX with just an extra step in the slowmo and film look department (tweaking the cam) it probably is the ticket no? I dont get paid 1000's to do projects but ide love to have the opportunity to do w/e I want and the HVX seems like it can do it all, but the A1 seems like it can do it all do, just with more effort.
People act like the format options on the HVX aren't creatable through the A1. 1080i interlaced video, deinterlaced and properly (key word here) downrezzed to 720p can look stunning IMO. Maybe not just as good but damn good and for people who more than likely go to DVD its a pointless argument.
Idk im sure ill confuse myself even more until my brain explodes tryign to decide what I should get. Its a tough argument and there are points and explainations to everything. I'm sure ill be happy with what I get.
Man thats a long post....phew.
Last edited:
giacomino
Active member
Xhg1 - Xha1 - Hvx200
Xhg1 - Xha1 - Hvx200
Great points from everyone. This article by Barry is fantastic. Now I wish the XHG1 users will post their thoughts between the G1 and HVX and the A1. Barry mentioned the Audio limitations with the A1. If I read it right, with the A1 you can not use the shotgun mic and a wireless handheld at the same time and/or you but can not adjust the sound individualy. Can someone please inform me on this. This is something you need when your working ENG. Does the XHG1 also have the same limitations? I do love the idea of having the Iris adjustment on the lens. I sure wish the hvx had this. I think this was poor planing on their part. I was sold on the HVX hearing great things about the camera. Now I would like to hear more about the G1.
And for those who say the hvx is not workable in the field, I cover alot of red carpets and I know 2 crews with the hvx. They love it and is find in the field. Also, a lot of people say that the A1 is great for the field over the hvx. I think the A1 is limited for field use. On the show I worked on, (everthing from entertainment, educational, sports, etc.. I did a lot of quick pushes and pulls, sometimes you need to push in fast to capture your subject or just to grab focus. The quick push and quick pull is a big thing not just for Boston Legal and other shows, but for all these reality; mags type shows, etc.. Why would canon not have a manuel zoom?
Tell me, will the hvx capture hdv with a tape? I am confused on this. One thing I know, I used to use a Sony Beta SP and then the station got the Sony XDCAM. One thing I did like was the fact I didn't have to keep changing tapes every 29mins. Also, the fact that my reporter loved to look at her intros and outros to make sure her presentation was perfect. You didn't have to rewind or recue the tape, just stop and it defaults to your last recorded clip. I believe this is something you can achive with the P-2 card.
Also, we are going to a tapeless society, One thing I like about the hvx is I feel I can grow into this camera. Also, when you are freelancing around L.A., you need to be able to have the equitment most people are looking for. I read Craigslist a lot and there are people looking for all styles of shooting. I think by reading Barry's article, it has help me realize more what the hvx can do.
Also, I wish panasonic would have resolved the on camera light issue by putting a plugin the camera for the frezzi light cord.
So if one has thoughts and the users are out shooting eng and movies and/or the A1 or G1 users are doing the same, please let me know your thoughts.
Thank you,
Jimmy
Xhg1 - Xha1 - Hvx200
Great points from everyone. This article by Barry is fantastic. Now I wish the XHG1 users will post their thoughts between the G1 and HVX and the A1. Barry mentioned the Audio limitations with the A1. If I read it right, with the A1 you can not use the shotgun mic and a wireless handheld at the same time and/or you but can not adjust the sound individualy. Can someone please inform me on this. This is something you need when your working ENG. Does the XHG1 also have the same limitations? I do love the idea of having the Iris adjustment on the lens. I sure wish the hvx had this. I think this was poor planing on their part. I was sold on the HVX hearing great things about the camera. Now I would like to hear more about the G1.
And for those who say the hvx is not workable in the field, I cover alot of red carpets and I know 2 crews with the hvx. They love it and is find in the field. Also, a lot of people say that the A1 is great for the field over the hvx. I think the A1 is limited for field use. On the show I worked on, (everthing from entertainment, educational, sports, etc.. I did a lot of quick pushes and pulls, sometimes you need to push in fast to capture your subject or just to grab focus. The quick push and quick pull is a big thing not just for Boston Legal and other shows, but for all these reality; mags type shows, etc.. Why would canon not have a manuel zoom?
Tell me, will the hvx capture hdv with a tape? I am confused on this. One thing I know, I used to use a Sony Beta SP and then the station got the Sony XDCAM. One thing I did like was the fact I didn't have to keep changing tapes every 29mins. Also, the fact that my reporter loved to look at her intros and outros to make sure her presentation was perfect. You didn't have to rewind or recue the tape, just stop and it defaults to your last recorded clip. I believe this is something you can achive with the P-2 card.
Also, we are going to a tapeless society, One thing I like about the hvx is I feel I can grow into this camera. Also, when you are freelancing around L.A., you need to be able to have the equitment most people are looking for. I read Craigslist a lot and there are people looking for all styles of shooting. I think by reading Barry's article, it has help me realize more what the hvx can do.
Also, I wish panasonic would have resolved the on camera light issue by putting a plugin the camera for the frezzi light cord.
So if one has thoughts and the users are out shooting eng and movies and/or the A1 or G1 users are doing the same, please let me know your thoughts.
Thank you,
Jimmy
KyleProhaska said:
Id gamble that a trained eye, but one who has never seen an image from these cams, watching in full HD on a large plasma could not tell the which is 4:2:0 (A1) or which is 4:2:2 (HVX)
Makes no difference even if you are broadcasting.
Yes, when it comes to thinks like keying the 4:2:2 colour space does much better. But I jump back again to a point, greenscreen isnt usually done on a whim and a good key requires a complete set up, lighting etc. Now you as a Mac Pro user would require some additional hardware between the cam and the mac, but by doing so you can achieve 4:2:2 direct from the composite of the A1.
Id say it really is a personal choice, but those FPS options are pretty sweet.
You also have to factor in daily archiving here. Once you dl a p2 to your hdd, thats where it is on a hdd that can die - it does happen.
Yes it is painfull to rewind and review.
Budget has to play a big part here. And I will tell you from experience crappy audio and poor pans arent going to get you more jobs.
Its the same for anyone using the XHa1 or XL H1. But I agree with your point you made after this statement. Its a different look, but certainly much more organic than 60i.
Id agree that extra spent on tripod is necessary. For Audio if your going to shoot weddings, make sure its up to speed. The filmlook point is debatable, they have different looks, but is one more like film? Going back to your previous point.
Not sure what you mean here, but the 1080 24 progressive mode on the A1 matches that of the HVX and does look stunning.
My advice is to make a choice and get out there shooting whatever you decide.
Jimmy, On the A1 you can record two channels of audio on seperate devices such as a shotgun and wireless. What you cant do is set one XLR to mic and one to line. Both are mic or both are line.
Whilst you cant do snap zooms, I think the push and pull youre referencing are acheivable.
Justin Kuhn
Veteran
Could someone explain the advantage of an iris ring to me? I'm satisfied with the iris dial on the HVX, it's a great improvement over the DVX. It seems like adding a ring would only crowd out your zoom and focus. In what situation would you need to rack your iris? I know there's one, but I can't think of it. And if it's that rare a situation, the dial seems sufficient.
HappyGobo said:
It's not at all an advantage in my opinion. The iris ring on the A1 feels way too "loose" and at times downright unresponsive for on the fly adjustment. In fact it's too easy to mistake it for the zoom (obviously experienced users will not have this problem) and accidentally change exposure while recording. It's also pretty easy to bump it and change the setting.
Barry_Green
Moderator
It depends on where you're coming from. If you're coming from the XL2, an iris ring is heaven-sent. If you're coming from an HVX, the iris ring is not so much of a big deal. It's not a night and day improvement over a good iris wheel, but it is a night and day (and summer and winter!) improvement over the steppy clicky iris switch on the XL2.
KyleProhaska said:
you kinda answered your own desicion here. you spent what looked like 30 minutes of typing, de constructing what HVX features you can "simulate" with an A1.
The reason is, the HVX is the more flexible tool. The a1 is a great camera as well, but think hard about howmuch time youre going to waste trying to simulate what you can get instantly, with an HVX. im not saying this to put down the A1, but imsaying, imagine shooting a sequec for slomo, in 60i 1080, taking into your NLE after the shoot and desiding its TOO slow. now youre stuck. where as on set/event space/location you can just review the shot in its intended speed, and resolution, and make your descion to reshoot. check the clips instantly to see if a boom pops into the shot, switch to a different format for a specific reason like a wideshot, (1080 for more detail to down res in to a 720p project).
Then theres the dubbing features, from 720/1080/DVCpro50 to DV tape. you can do it IN CAMERA!!!! I was shooting a short for a client on DV, and they wanted slomo. i shot it in 720/48P, and was dreading having to go to the car to get my laptop and transfer the footage to them through RAylight, then it dawned on me the internal Dub. Just dropped the whole slowmotion sequece at the proper speed Right onto the tape. it literally saved me 10 minutes on a tight schedule, and that let us get that one last shot at the end of the day.
You really should try the P2 workflow before you convince youorself you dont like it. I "didn't" like it at first, but now im converted. it saves you so much time, its crazy. not to mention that in 720pn, you can get tthough half a days shooting on one card, for narritive stuff. its not as bad as people "claim it is", 20 minutes is a long time.
giacomino
Active member
Anybody have thoughts on the JVC GY-HD110U? Please let me know what you all think. Need a camera for both ENG and Film making.
Also, on the XHG1. I am surprise no is really mentioning this camera. ????
NCIE - thanks for you reply. That really cleared the audio up for me. As far as the zoom, you are saying that I can push in ultra fast (not using the Zoom button, but the zoom on the lens)?
Thanks, Jimmy
Also, on the XHG1. I am surprise no is really mentioning this camera. ????
NCIE - thanks for you reply. That really cleared the audio up for me. As far as the zoom, you are saying that I can push in ultra fast (not using the Zoom button, but the zoom on the lens)?
Thanks, Jimmy
Barry_Green
Moderator
If you want to use a camera for HD news, the HD110 would be my last choice. It only shoots 30p, news is almost exclusively shot in 60i or HD 60p. For standard-def it's fine. For HD ENG, if you really want a JVC shoulder-mount camera, skip the 110 and go for the 200 or 250, those at least offer 60p. But they're much much more expensive.
Nobody talks about the G1 because it has little to no appeal to the mass market. It's a special-purpose tool, the $3,000 premium buys you some connectors that would be useful in a tethered studio situation and rarely elsewhere (although the TC IN/OUT would be nice for multi-camera EFP and ENG). On the DVInfo poll of "which would you buy", it ended up 90% A1, 10% G1. My conclusion in the article is that the A1 is appealing because of the price; it's at a very attractive price point that's within reach for a lot of users. The G1 is nearly twice as expensive, so nowhere near as appealing to that same group.
Regarding fast zooms, you will never get an ultrafast zoom on an A1. It simply can't do it. It's limited by its servo motor. You can get ultrafast zooms on the HVX or the HD110/200/250 because their lenses offers physical manual control; you can go from minimum to maximum zoom in 1/10 of a second if you want. I don't remember the fastest speed on the A1, it's probably somewhere around two or three seconds to go from min to max.
Nobody talks about the G1 because it has little to no appeal to the mass market. It's a special-purpose tool, the $3,000 premium buys you some connectors that would be useful in a tethered studio situation and rarely elsewhere (although the TC IN/OUT would be nice for multi-camera EFP and ENG). On the DVInfo poll of "which would you buy", it ended up 90% A1, 10% G1. My conclusion in the article is that the A1 is appealing because of the price; it's at a very attractive price point that's within reach for a lot of users. The G1 is nearly twice as expensive, so nowhere near as appealing to that same group.
Regarding fast zooms, you will never get an ultrafast zoom on an A1. It simply can't do it. It's limited by its servo motor. You can get ultrafast zooms on the HVX or the HD110/200/250 because their lenses offers physical manual control; you can go from minimum to maximum zoom in 1/10 of a second if you want. I don't remember the fastest speed on the A1, it's probably somewhere around two or three seconds to go from min to max.
The G1 is a weird little niche camera. cause if youre gonna buy that, mind as well go all out for the H1. but, nowadays the H1 really isnt as hot as it was, cause the A1 is 99% of its capability for 35% the price.
Elton
Veteran
TimurCivan said:
As much as I love the A1, I wouldn't go that far. Once you've had the pleasure of using the 16x manual lens (which doesn't ramp exposure through the zoom range and looks good in HD) or the 6x WA lens, you understand its potential.
Want a snap zoom? You got it. Want a truly nice wide with little to no barrel distortion or CA? The 6x delivers. Want a sharp lens with lots of telephoto and amazing OIS.? The 20x is a good choice. Want more overall manual control at your fingertips instead of digging though menus to change modes? The H1 is your camera.
When you factor in the affordability of interchangeable lenses (compared to JVC) and added audio control, the H1 isn't so irrelevant.
I'm sure the guys making The Signal appreciated the fact that they didn't have to add glass on top of the Zeiss/Mini35 setup. It makes a difference.
I think the G1 is also phenomenal value when you consider the potential of HD SDI acquisition--but most say "meh, HDV's good enough".
There's an affordable HD camera out there that's mostly right for just about anyone, but not necessarily perfect for every situation.
Wow, I'm surprised just how big the difference in sharpness/resolution is, between the two cameras. It really is a lot more than I expected. It takes all of two seconds to bump the contrast and up the saturation of the XH-A1 grabs to make them look very much like "hvx but higher res".
Not that the HVX is particularly pleasing to my eyes, or by any means a benchmark. The whole DVX/HVX colour thing is lost on me... All I see is a tendancy to over-saturate, often at the expense of clipping the R, G or B of the saturated areas...
Prime example:- http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/xha1/HVX Greenscreen Still.png
The blooming in the way-oversaturated flag is horrible .. that detail is gone and it's not coming back!
There has been some beautiful stuff shot on DVX/HVX cams, but there's been beautiful stuff shot on FX1s too.
To my eyes, the hvx looks blurry; an awful lot like upscaled footage .. like someone has taken the shots into photoshop and scaled them up by 25%. In contrast, the A1 looks neutral ... sharp, pristine, ready to grade.
I can see the attraction to the HVX for those easily wowed by saturated images, or (I must say) the genuine benefits of variable frame rates... but beyond that, the A1's sharp neutral footage is definitely what I'd prefer to see when it comes to grade.
Are people really taking these grabs into photoshop (or their nle) and feeling that they can get nicer results with the HVX? (Thats a serious question). Or are people just comparing the images direct from cam? Maybe people really do just want a nice pleasing image out of cam and either can't or don't want to take it through a serious grade ...
slightly puzzled,
Kris
Not that the HVX is particularly pleasing to my eyes, or by any means a benchmark. The whole DVX/HVX colour thing is lost on me... All I see is a tendancy to over-saturate, often at the expense of clipping the R, G or B of the saturated areas...
Prime example:- http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/xha1/HVX Greenscreen Still.png
The blooming in the way-oversaturated flag is horrible .. that detail is gone and it's not coming back!
There has been some beautiful stuff shot on DVX/HVX cams, but there's been beautiful stuff shot on FX1s too.
To my eyes, the hvx looks blurry; an awful lot like upscaled footage .. like someone has taken the shots into photoshop and scaled them up by 25%. In contrast, the A1 looks neutral ... sharp, pristine, ready to grade.
I can see the attraction to the HVX for those easily wowed by saturated images, or (I must say) the genuine benefits of variable frame rates... but beyond that, the A1's sharp neutral footage is definitely what I'd prefer to see when it comes to grade.
Are people really taking these grabs into photoshop (or their nle) and feeling that they can get nicer results with the HVX? (Thats a serious question). Or are people just comparing the images direct from cam? Maybe people really do just want a nice pleasing image out of cam and either can't or don't want to take it through a serious grade ...
slightly puzzled,
Kris
Elton said:
I love the canons. dont get me wrong man, you know me. i almost bought the H1.
- Status