HVX vs. the Canon XHA1

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm not sure why this is even being argued. The ability to resolve background detail is a major benefit for the Canon cams. It lends a "being there" quality that the HVX just doesn't. I think it was Scharky's "Water 720p" footage which best highlighted this for me. And disjectja's footage of course.

If the subject fills the frame, then the HVX is top dog for me. For landscapes it's definately the Canons. I own a HVX.
 
It's being argued because that assertion appears to exist primarily in internet lore. Looking at the actual pictures doesn't reveal any significant edge for the Canon. I'm not concerned with what something's "supposed to do", I'm just looking for what it "actually does". I see a very small advantage for the Canon in a couple of the real-world pics, maybe 5%. That's about it, and certainly not enough to even be arguing about.
 
One thing I would like to mention is that the United States Department of Defense after extensive research determined that the 720p format outresolves 1080i in apparent resolution.
 
Another consideration is how the 2 cameras handle motion. !080i HDV does a terrible job handling motion because of its long 15 frame GOP which is like taking a photocopy of a photocopy of a photocopy 15 times in a row. The Panasonic on the other hand uses a 1 frame GOP so each individual frame is individual compressed with no multigenerational picture quality loss. The end result is that the Panasonic will have much better temporal resolution that maintains its sharpness once motion is introduced. To declare the Canon the resolution winner without taking into acount its ability to handle motion but only its still picture resolution is a false judgement that deserves reconsideration since video unlike still photography is all about motion.
 
What I am trying to say is that the Panasonic may not start out having as much fine detail as the Canon but rather the Panasonic will maintain the fine detail once motion is introduced for a more highly resolved picture in the long run.

A good example would be to watch American Idol in high definition shot in 960x720p at 60 frames per second using 4:2:2 color using the Varicam. This may not seem like a lot of resolution but nothing outresolves the Panasonic Varicam once motion begins because the equivalent resolution of 720p is 1440i. This means the equivalent apparent resolution of the Varicam is 1440x960 which is almost equal to the HDV specification of 1440x1080. However the Varicam handles compression far better than 1080i and better compression means higher resolution. Again nothing outresolves the Varicam as far as broadcast television is concerned.
 
Its more like this. you can 100% count on what the frames of the HVX will look like. They may be softer, but they are stable. HDV can be sharper, but under certain circumstances you wont neccesarily get 100% of the performance you come to expect. Thus the Trade off. For Steven, the fine detial is neccesary. For me, i need the colorspace, framerates and IT workflow.
 
androbot2084 said:
What I am trying to say is that the Panasonic may not start out having as much fine detail as the Canon but rather the Panasonic will maintain the fine detail once motion is introduced for a more highly resolved picture in the long run.

A good example would be to watch American Idol in high definition shot in 960x720p at 60 frames per second using 4:2:2 color using the Varicam. This may not seem like a lot of resolution but nothing outresolves the Panasonic Varicam once motion begins because the equivalent resolution of 720p is 1440i. This means the equivalent apparent resolution of the Varicam is 1440x960 which is almost equal to the HDV specification of 1440x1080. However the Varicam handles compression far better than 1080i and better compression means higher resolution. Again nothing outresolves the Varicam as far as broadcast television is concerned.
Click to expand...

Theres alot of debate here. But i do think 60P looks REALLLLy Crispy.
 
So just for the hell of it I wanted to look at two side by side shots. One was taken with the DVX100B at f6 default settings and the other was taken with my XHA1 with a preset I developed called VIVIDRGB (neither have been retouched in any way, straight out of the cameras):

DVX100B:

dvxparkinglot.jpg



XHA1:
xha1parkinglot.jpg
 
I think we all can agree that a 16:9 high-def cam makes sharper 16:9 than a standard-def 4:3 cam does... The recent discussion was about HD vs. HD, and the contention that more pixels yields more detail.

Here's what you asked for -- treetops. One of these shots is from a "960x540" HVX, the other is from a 3-million-pixel, "true 1920x1080" HV20. Had to use the HV20 because I don't have an XHA1 to compare with (and besides I've already extensively shown how close the XHA1 and HVX are with all the pictures in the article.)

1176148661.jpg


Seriously -- can someone please point out the "extra 25%" resolution I'm supposed to be seeing from the camera that has six times as many pixels?
 
Last edited:
Barry, just so I am clear, I posted that for a color comparison, not resolution. Your test is interesting but I will do my own test at some stage. Thanks for posting those examples, though.
 
I just spent the last week developing this preset independent of my DVX and, for fun, I just compared the two today and I was surprised about how close they were in vividness. So that's the context of my post.
 
BTW, those "treetop" extractions are pixel-for-pixel extractions. Footage was captured on DV Rack 2.0 HD, and still frames were exported from DV Rack. I did it that way to try to keep the uncompressors as "comparable" as possible; MVB said earlier that Raylight was chroma-smoothing the HVX pics in the article. I figured using Serious Magic MPEG uncompression next to Serious Magic DVCPRO-HD uncompression should yield either both chroma-smoothed or neither chroma-smoothed, but either way it should be the most fair way to compare them.
 
disjecta said:
I just spent the last week developing this preset independent of my DVX and, for fun, I just compared the two today and I was surprised about how close they were in vividness. So that's the context of my post.
Click to expand...
Well, you did a superb job.

What are the DVX settings?
 
I believe they are the default f6 settings (this is my work DVX so I haven't changed it) but I will double check.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top