HVX vs. the Canon XHA1

Status
Not open for further replies.
I did try. Read all the comments; I spent plenty of time with them trying to do that and to choose what the best way to present the information was.
 
snowleopard said:
But in the studio when do you need to go from super wide to full tele in .3 seconds?
Click to expand...

When you want to. Say it's a comedy and the character realizes something, you can snap into that reaction shot. Hence the expression "Oh snap!"

Or maybe it's a mockumentary kinda thing like The Office. Or maybe a war movie set in a time period where zooms in battlefield-type footage would be appropriate. Or maybe a music video.

But if I want a smooth, steady zoom there's always the rocker switch or the set-speed switch on the top handle.
 
Nice article Barry. But the thread that followed was crackin me up. I dont believe I have seen that many whiners in one thread. I dont own either camera, however from reading that article I can see the XHA1 is a fantastic HD camera in its price point. You definately gave it the benifit of the doubt by statements such as

I leave it up to you to decide if 24F lives up to its claim of delivering 24P-like results; from my perspective it does just fine, and certainly good enough that I think people should quit worrying about it.
Click to expand...

I can see that some posters here are biased against the HVX, and that is ok. Personally, if I had 5 grand, I'll buy the Canon. If I had 6 grand I'll buy the Panny.
 
XHA1's viewfinder

XHA1's viewfinder

Hey Barry

Thanks for a great article. Any words one the A1 viewfinder. I have been forgiving to my precious DVX but to my understanding the hvx200 has the same fault. As a potential upgrader it is even more disappointing to read about the problems people have focusing using the lcd.

To my it looks like Canon has done a great job with the XHA1 so given that it is possible to focus well on it, it stays on my radar as an possibel upgrade to the dvx100.

I would't be upgrading if Panasonic would have put 16:9 chips on the DVX in the first place... well
 
Last edited:
The LCD seems fine to me, its big enough for my liking, its sharp, and focusing isn't an issue IMO. I does have the focus help too where it zooms part of the image so you can see closer at what your trying to focus, that came in handy a few times.

- Kyle
 
The LCD is fine but it's small. I cried about it a couple weeks ago but then when I used the camera again this past weekend and watched the footage I shine again. The A1 is awesome IMO.
 
The A1 LCD is smaller than the DVX but it's sharp and easy to focus on. The HVX on the other hand has really bad LCD design. Barry said it's the same as the DVX but it can't be. With peaking on, I can get sharp accurate focus on the DVX but not on the HVX. Even with peaking on, it is hard to get sharp accurate focus. The VF is better for that.
 
The DVX100B LCD is the same part as the HVX LCD. DVX100A and DVX100 used a different LCD.

As for the XHA1, I found the LCD to be easier to get focus with than on the HVX. Judging exposure is not so easy, and the XHA1 LCD is optimistic, reporting images brighter than they actually are. It's like it's designed to look "pretty", and not necessarily "accurate", so you definitely want to have your zebras on at all times and judge exposure using the zebras, not going by what "looks good in the LCD".
 
No comments on the viewfinder in the A1. Guess no one is using it.

You need to help me out here guys. I have used my dvx100 (not A) for news stories and I love it. An upgrade is imminent because of my station switching to 16:9. HD probably follows in few years.

The station has used all Panasonic professional bigger cameras so I am betting that it will incorporate P2 in due time. The video journalists using dvx's have been much more successful then others in creating news items which go unnoticed as coming from smaller chip cameras. Much of our footage has been received as coming from the bigger cameras. And it is usually better than footage coming from comparable sonys. (I am not starting a row, and certainly the sonys have had their share of good footage in the hands of a good dp-as possible with any camera). The quality comes down to a good glass and usability despite what often stated. We have part time correspondents in the country side using the dvx whose main work is pluming and gardening and they deliver excellently shot stories. Nothing fancy, just basic pictures.

I always had my eyes set on the hvx. I see huge advantages in using P2 for news stories and the firestore 100 when doing longer shoots for programs. Where time is expensive I hate using tapes, digitizing footage and working on tape when writing my stories.
I also really liked the notion of a bit more zoom on the hvx since the dvx wasn't really stretching it.

Discouraging factors in buying the hvx for me are:
the focus problems I read about. An extra monitor is not an option in my line of work, and a guess the camera is heavy enough to begin with.

The two extra f-stops missing in comparison with the dvx. The dvx has served me well but I have envied users of other types for extra light sensitivity. I guess the same would apply to dvcpro50 as with the standard def.

I do fear that if I would give the A1 a shot, that Pana would announce the ideal 1/3 chip P2 news cam with more sensitivity and a viewfinder from heaven.

Bear with me, help me rationalize this.
This forum is the best.
 
Focus and sensitivity are the same on the HVX and A1, so going with an A1 isn't going to help you in those issues. If you like Panasonic footage, your station's using Panasonics, and your station's going P2 anyway, then why not go with the HVX?

I don't expect a new small P2 camera from Panasonic any time soon; their focus is on the bigger cameras right now (HPX2000, HPX500, etc). I keep looking for a quality AVC-HD camcorder from them, but no indication of anything coming any time soon.
 
Yeah I don't see another HVX like prosumer camera coming from panasonic anytime soon either. At least nothing between the $3000-$7000 price range. The hvx is pretty much as good as it gets it was the P2 cards that were the big problem/hurdle. Now that they are dropping the prices and making them larger I don't see a need for them to make a new camera.

They could however come out with something smaller than the HVX that doesn't do variable framerates but records to the dvcprohd format in maybe 720p24 720p30 1080p24 and 1080i. If they released that for less than the Canon A1 maybe around $2799 we would see some interesting stuff. If the 8 gig P2 cards are dropping in price this would be a great idea. They could include 1 8 gig card with purchase and now you could seriously double the amount of P2 users. Then it could be the DVX200! Okay who do I call at Panasonic to let them know. :)

I am pretty sure that by now there are more Canon A1 owners than XL H1 owners simply because it is cheaper but still delivers the quality we want. So if Panasonic wants to grow there user base of P2 owners they should release a lower priced P2 camera. From Panasonic's perspective they should think about the Pros who will buy the cam (DVX200) as a 2nd camera so they can sell more P2 cards. Everyone loves the P2 workflow just not the cost of it. PEACE
 
Nik Manning said:
Yeah I don't see another HVX like prosumer camera coming from panasonic anytime soon either. At least nothing between the $3000-$7000 price range. The hvx is pretty much as good as it gets it was the P2 cards that were the big problem/hurdle. Now that they are dropping the prices and making them larger I don't see a need for them to make a new camera.

They could however come out with something smaller than the HVX that doesn't do variable framerates but records to the dvcprohd format in maybe 720p24 720p30 1080p24 and 1080i. If they released that for less than the Canon A1 maybe around $2799 we would see some interesting stuff. If the 8 gig P2 cards are dropping in price this would be a great idea. They could include 1 8 gig card with purchase and now you could seriously double the amount of P2 users. Then it could be the DVX200! Okay who do I call at Panasonic to let them know. :)

I am pretty sure that by now there are more Canon A1 owners than XL H1 owners simply because it is cheaper but still delivers the quality we want. So if Panasonic wants to grow there user base of P2 owners they should release a lower priced P2 camera. From Panasonic's perspective they should think about the Pros who will buy the cam (DVX200) as a 2nd camera so they can sell more P2 cards. Everyone loves the P2 workflow just not the cost of it. PEACE
Click to expand...
It definitely is more puzzling to upgrade now compared to when I bought the DVX, which was then unchallenged IMO. I say that, disregarding 25P (pal) which I haven't used the once.

One worrying thing is the number of pixels on the ccd of the HVX being much fewer than on other competitors.

I totally agree with you Nik, that a more basic version of the hvx would be so great, skipping the multiple frame rates but with P2 and HD. Adding a iris control on the lens, extra x7 zoom and a very good viewfinder, it would great for documentaries and journalistic work.
 
Last edited:
ER, "why" ..? Because if you've reason to produce high-definition content than you might actually want to capture in something resembling high-definition detail?
 
Look at the pictures, not the "pixel count". The HVX is most obviously capturing "something resembling high-definition detail".
 
Barry you asked why?

Well because from what I have read the the more dense ccd's give a more detailed picture and the HVX supposedly looks softer, than the A1 for example, because of it's ccd and pixel shift technology. One has to think of clarity and details on all those 46" tv's being bought in every home.

I have to admit that I am not an engineer and no specialist in this field so please correct me and excuse my ignorance if I am misunderstanding something here. This is just what I have gathered from trying to read as much as I can on forums like this one.
 
You made it sound like comparing pixel-counts was a silly or irrelevant proposition... which is clearly unreasonable. There are many factors which combine to deliver a high quality image, and sensor resolution is one of them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top