Hvx200 Low light vs Sony Z1 and other questions

S

seti808

Member
I'm seriously considering getting the hvx200 next month when it comes out.

I have 3 questions i was hoping you guys could help me with.

Will the hvx200 shoot as good as the Sony z1 in low light?

Will there be some sort of lens adapter to put on other lens
such as wide angel or fish eye.

And final question what software will work out with the uncompreesed hd? Vegas?
How will I get the footage into the computer?
firewire or do i have to get expensive reader of some sort too?
 
seti808 said:
Will the hvx200 shoot as good as the Sony z1 in low light?
Click to expand...
Regarding the NBC shooter recent published doubts, I'd say that it's a good question, indeed!
 
seti808 said:
I'm seriously considering getting the hvx200 next month when it comes out.

I have 3 questions i was hoping you guys could help me with.

Will the hvx200 shoot as good as the Sony z1 in low light?

Will there be some sort of lens adapter to put on other lens
such as wide angel or fish eye.

And final question what software will work out with the uncompreesed hd? Vegas?
How will I get the footage into the computer?
firewire or do i have to get expensive reader of some sort too?
Click to expand...

lens adapter will be available with the cam soon from Century optics and others (e.g. 0.7, 1.6 etc)

software is still a problem in all areas. Vegas is not set, Liquid is not set, PRemiere is not set.

Canopus, Avid and Finalcut (Apple) are supported, but if and how native it all works is still not clear to me. Canopus charges extra for the HD pack, Avid only supports it in XPressProHD (and not in some higherend prdoucts??!!) and Apple needs a QT file. the workflows will start to develop now and maybe Barry can explain us how they got there stuff together that is seen here on the site now (in FCP for sure).
 
seti808:I'm seriously considering getting the hvx200 next month when it comes out.

> Will the hvx200 shoot as good as the Sony z1 in low light?

Seems so. Haven't done the test to quantify but right now it definitely looks that way.

>Will there be some sort of lens adapter to put on other lens
such as wide angel or fish eye.

See full line-up at Century Precision Optics.

>And final question what software will work out with the uncompreesed hd? Vegas?

DVCPRO is not uncompressed. I ti s a compressed format, it is just not as compressed as HDV. Right now Vegas, does not support the DVCPRO HD codec.

> How will I get the footage into the computer?
The same way we did here, we transferred in files, by opening the FCP and did Import Panasonic P2. Done.

>firewire or do i have to get expensive reader of some sort too?

We used the PCMCIA slot on the laptop.

Best,

Jan
 
alpi69 said:
Canopus, Avid and Finalcut (Apple) are supported, but if and how native it all works is still not clear to me. Canopus charges extra for the HD pack, Avid only supports it in XPressProHD (and not in some higherend prdoucts??!!) and Apple needs a QT file. the workflows will start to develop now and maybe Barry can explain us how they got there stuff together that is seen here on the site now (in FCP for sure).
Click to expand...

Barry for the first couple of days simply used windows explorer to move files off of the P2 card and onto a Hard Drive. Once he got to LA, we hooked up his HDD and opened FCP. Did Import Pansonic P2 and the files transferred in. Art Aldrich cut the footage. Same deal for the Michael Caporale Footage of the Geisha opening. After cutting it went to DVCPRO HD tape for continuous playback.

Hope that helps,

Jan
 
I must admit to being suprised that Panasonic don't know if the camera works in low light the same as the FX1 or ZU1.

Jan that's a bit of a hazy answer you have given us there. We know the FX1 ias not the greatest in low light conditions with a rating of about LUX3, which is not as good as the Sony PD170 or VX2100. The DVX100 was tested and proved to be better in low light than the FX1, so is this worse than the DVX100 for low light, or the same as the Sony?

Someone must know.
 
I put the FX1 and the current HVX side by side, and this HVX is at least a half-stop faster, maybe a full stop faster. It's difficult to tell because most of what we shot was outdoors, with the ND filters on, and the two cams have different-strength ND filters so the stops were never the same.

The DVX was about 2 stops faster than the FX1, but noisier. The HVX looks to be probably a stop faster than the FX1, with just a tiny bit more noise. But that's seat-of-the-pants impressions, not quantifiable repeatable testing.
 
Thanks for the answer Barry. I guess we will soon know for sure in the next few weeks when the camera is out and about and being used in low light conditions.
 
thanks for the replies guys.

Im getting excited!!!!!!!!!!

So i take it most of you guys think the panasonic
is a better camera than the sony z1.

More expensive but way more features.
 
I sincerely hope the final product will have a low noise level.

Low noise is much more important than high light sensitivity.
Lower sensitivity can be easily compensated, high noise cannot.

just my two cents.

I can't wait to try that camcorder !
By what i've seen here, i'm really impressed.
 
the HVX looks to be probably a stop faster than the FX1, with just a tiny bit more noise
Click to expand...
How is it that people decouple speed and noise like this? Isn't the SNR in low light the defining characteristic of its low-light performance?

-Spiff
 
Spiff 2,

not necessarily...
Some camcorders are really clean (no noise) with a completely closed iris, even if they do not have a great sensitivity.
 
Antoine_Fabi said:
I sincerely hope the final product will have a low noise level. Low noise is much more important than high light sensitivity.
Click to expand...
Well I just did some tests shooting blue sky with a 2/3" Sony BVW400A BetacamSP camera and looked at the tape on a good monitor. It appears that the HVX200, at 0dB, is about as quiet as the 400A or better.
 
I was not impressed by the noise characteristics at 6db.... at 12 the footage looked worse than turbo-gain at 60db on the SDX900. I have an original DVX100... so I can't turn up the gain on 24p mode.... but 12db looked worse than my DVX in interlace mode at 12. All subjective and I didn't have them side-by-side... but my gut reaction was "ugh!" Then again, I'm always shooting Beta/digibeta so I'm spoiled when it comes to s/n ratio.

After looking at the camera, I've decided to hold off purchasing one. I was an early adopter of the DVX and the DVX100a came out a month later. I bought the DVX before I needed it... won't do that with the HVX. However, if I have a client that wants to shoot with one, I won't hesitate getting one. I just wasn't wowed enough to throw down my credit card in anticipation/hope of needing it in the future. It didn't help that I got to play with the HDX-400 and Varicam at the show too.... reminded me why I love 2/3 in chips and try to avoid shooting dv whenever possible.


Just my random $.02 after digesting what I saw at the show for a day....
 
============================
"Well I just did some tests shooting blue sky with a 2/3" Sony BVW400A BetacamSP camera and looked at the tape on a good monitor. It appears that the HVX200, at 0dB, is about as quiet as the 400A or better." dixit NBCshooter
============================

Really ?
Wow, this is great !
You had HVX200 outdoor footage to compare ?

If the camera is quite at 0db, then i see no problem at all.
I always try to avoid gain anyway.
Just light the scene indoors is easy.
 
Just to better understand the concept, what is it that gain exactly does? Does it up contrast or graniness or what?

And, when somoene refers to "one stop faster" or anything regarding stops, what does that mean?

Thanks
 
I sat thru Jan's 2:00 p.m. presentation at DV EXPO on Wednesday. During the Q&A at the conclusion of the seminar - there was an exchange with an attendee as to whether an independent reviewer like Adam Wilt, had reviewed the HVX200, yet.

The point was that you may not get straight answers to very important questions - like the one asked here about low light, until a qualified, unbiased person - not connected with sales, marketing or engineering has a chance to review the product.

I too, have earned my living as a ENG news shooter and would like to know the real capabilities of the camera in low light conditions. And especially, where other than slow controlled pans may be required.
 
Antoine_Fabi said:
Really ? Wow, this is great! You had HVX200 outdoor footage to compare ? If the camera is quite at 0db, then i see no problem at all. I always try to avoid gain anyway . . .
Click to expand...
No. I was at work today with a bit of downtime between shoots, so I took out one of our Betacams out of the truck and shot some footage of the blue sky so I could make a comparison with the noise level I saw in the blue sky portions of the HVX200 playback and live output I saw at DV Expo on Wednesday. I have to say (although it was difficult to gauge noise levels on the LCDs at the show) that the HVX200 appeared, as far as my visual memory could serve from three days ago as good as or better than the BetacamSP playback.
 
geo said:
I was not impressed by the noise characteristics at 6db.... at 12 the footage looked worse than turbo-gain at 60db on the SDX900.
Click to expand...
I totally agree with your observations . . . +6dB looked funky, and +12dB was unacceptable. I feel your pain on your non-A DVX100 . . . I did virtually the same thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top