HVX vs. the Canon XHA1
- Thread starter Jarred Land
- Start date
- Status
DerrickTempleton
Well-known member
thanks Barry this is a very helpful article. Frankly I want both cameras after reading it. I think the HDV format is a lot more doc friendly, and currently that's my main thrust. But I've shot a short on the HVX before and it was a dream camera. Anyway, I feel like an informed buyer now.
the trees...
the trees...
The upper pic looks totally oversharpened relative to the lower. The lower pic looks great, very natural. The upper pic not so much. The difference is striking to me, especially considering that the lower pic comes from the HV20. Correct me if I am wrong.
The HV20 has a single sensor with a resolution of 1920 x 1080, or 2,073,600 pixels. The HVX has 3 sensors, each 960 x 540, with a combined pixel count of 1,555,200. The difference in pixel count between the HV20 and HVX is only 518,400.
The HV20 is an amazing camera!
the trees...
Barry_Green said: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.)
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?
The upper pic looks totally oversharpened relative to the lower. The lower pic looks great, very natural. The upper pic not so much. The difference is striking to me, especially considering that the lower pic comes from the HV20. Correct me if I am wrong.
The HV20 has a single sensor with a resolution of 1920 x 1080, or 2,073,600 pixels. The HVX has 3 sensors, each 960 x 540, with a combined pixel count of 1,555,200. The difference in pixel count between the HV20 and HVX is only 518,400.
The HV20 is an amazing camera!
Barry_Green
Moderator
I didn't set out to match edge enhancement, I probably should have.
The HV20 is amazing for the price point. But its sensor isn't 2,073,600, it's actually 3 million pixels (or 2.96 million). They use bayer interpolation to turn those 3 million b&w pixels into approximately 2 million color pixels. And the HVX doesn't use the three chips like that, it uses spatial offset to turn them into an effective 1920x1080 block. As the picture above demonstrates, teh difference in pixel count is *irrelevant*.
The HV20 is amazing for the price point. But its sensor isn't 2,073,600, it's actually 3 million pixels (or 2.96 million). They use bayer interpolation to turn those 3 million b&w pixels into approximately 2 million color pixels. And the HVX doesn't use the three chips like that, it uses spatial offset to turn them into an effective 1920x1080 block. As the picture above demonstrates, teh difference in pixel count is *irrelevant*.
You appear to be using a cam which is not the A1 to show that the A1 doesn't have a 25% advantage over the HVX in fine detail. Keeping in mind that the 25% figure was said in jest.
I've seen some HVX footage recently which shows promise is this regard. If someone had the opportunity to test both cams that would be helpful (and appreciated).
I've seen some HVX footage recently which shows promise is this regard. If someone had the opportunity to test both cams that would be helpful (and appreciated).
Barry_Green
Moderator
The entire article tests both cameras...
I added another shot because people were saying that more pixels = more detail, so I took the 3-million-pixel HV20 (the only other cam I had on hand) to test against the HVX, to put that specific claim to the test. But I've already done that same test with XHA1 vs. HVX, that's what this whole article is about. And I reiterate -- maybe 5% more. Not a chance of 25% more.
I added another shot because people were saying that more pixels = more detail, so I took the 3-million-pixel HV20 (the only other cam I had on hand) to test against the HVX, to put that specific claim to the test. But I've already done that same test with XHA1 vs. HVX, that's what this whole article is about. And I reiterate -- maybe 5% more. Not a chance of 25% more.
Gordon Prince
Well-known member
But the HV20 is the sharpest of the small cam-hood...
StMad said:
Maybe the number is not so relevant...ie, whether it's 5% or 10% (I hope you'll let the 25% figure go), but what the eyes perceive. So even if the difference is small, the overall effect when looking at fine detail is greater. Sharp vs what Adam Wilt describes as "a trifle unfocussed".
I understand comparing the cameras is what your article is about, but with all respect, there are people who don't believe the difference is a small one. If I get the opportunity I'll run some tests too, though that's unlikely at the moment. One concern I do have is when using a 35mm adapter. With all that glass I'd like to lose as little detail as possible.
I understand comparing the cameras is what your article is about, but with all respect, there are people who don't believe the difference is a small one. If I get the opportunity I'll run some tests too, though that's unlikely at the moment. One concern I do have is when using a 35mm adapter. With all that glass I'd like to lose as little detail as possible.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Travesty?
Jay Rodriguez
Coffee Member
lol, good one. threw barry for a loop for a second there.
disjecta
Lucky Duck
Hey, let's lock this thread and start putting some of these important comments and questions in relevant threads for each camera. I feel like the debate over which is better is over and done and anything else can be discussed independent of this thread...otherwise no one is going to find it.
Barry?
Barry?
- Status