HVX200- The first hands on impression

Too Much to Hope For

Too Much to Hope For

I had held out hope that they could squeeze in the ability to record DVCPro-HD to tape but since they are going with MiniDV that is pretty much out of the question. I guess that the mechanism is too expensive to include in a $6000 camera and I'll just have to pony up another $3400 so that I can get that 1080 24p or 720 quasi-Varicam goodness.
 
Umm...

Umm...

Question.

I totally agree this looks like a really niiiiice camera, with lots of features and general goodness...but I do think it is a bit of an overstatement to tout a comparable 1080 recording mode when your CCD array is only 720 high. Or am I wrong that this is the case? Everything I read early on about this camera seemed to indicate only a 720 sensor, which might still scale nicely enough to 1280x1080, for a nice less-compressed output in a better-than-HDV codec. But this is still a 960x720 original image compared to Sony's 960x1080 array. Why does everyone seem to compare them as if they are the same? As if the HVX offers 1080 "just like the Sony" does?

Don't get me wrong; I imagine all the other comparators will likely win out in Panasonic's favor (24p, DVCPRO-HD, etc), but the 1080 claim/comparison still bugs me. It seems to me that the 1080 claim for output is not quite accurate, or if so deserves some kind of asterisk, meaning *interpolated* output. Or something. :undecided

Of course, maybe the array is actually 1280x720, meaning we'd gain in the horizontal and wouldn't lose anything in the upconvert to 1280x1080. That might actually be better; as we'd gain horizontal res, even if the vertical is scaled up 1.5x. But it still isn't exactly comparable, and isn't really a 1080 camera, exactly.

I guess ultimately it really does come down to simply comparing final images, which we can't yet do; I'm just trying to compare oranges and oranges with the numbers, and finding it a bit misleading all around.
 
First of all, no factual information has been released about the CCD at all. We have no idea what the CCD pixel dimensions will be.

Secondly, 960x720 refers to the pixel dimensions of the DVCPRO-HD format when it's recording 720p. Unlike HDCAM, DVCPRO-HD provides for both 1080 and 720 recording.

Nobody is going to compare this camera to a $160,000 CineAlta, other than to say that it is the only other camera on the market (or soon to be on the market) that can shoot 1080/24p. Obviously a $6,000 camera is not going to compare to a $160,000 camera (body + lens). But it's way premature to be making any guesses about "interpolation" or "scaling" or anything like that. We don't know yet, all we know is that Panasonic has promised us a camera that shoots native 1080i and 1080p, as well as native 720p.
 
Barry_Green said:
First of all, no factual information has been released about the CCD at all. We have no idea what the CCD pixel dimensions will be...

But it's way premature to be making any guesses about "interpolation" or "scaling" or anything like that. We don't know yet, all we know is that Panasonic has promised us a camera that shoots native 1080i and 1080p, as well as native 720p.
Click to expand...
Well, while it may be "way premature" to be making guesses about these things, it doesn't seem to stop anyone from making comparisons between existing cameras, without even knowing these specs for comparison's sake. All I'm saying is reading an article like this one compares the cameras in exactly this way, without even mentioning the little fact that "We have no idea what the CCD pixel dimensions will be." Speaking of prematurity.
 
... and the article clearly, and repeatedly, said that "the footage is all that matters, once we see the footage we'll be in a position to know." The article said that on paper the specs look great, but we still need to see footage. If the footage stinks, then obviously the comparison is moot, as nobody would buy the camera. How does that not adequately inform the reader?
 
Barry_Green said:
...How does that not adequately inform the reader?
Click to expand...
Well, I think my first question addressed exactly how it potentially misinforms the reader -- namely with regard to 1080 recording mode. We don't really know whether you can compare the HVX's 1080 to Sony's since we don't know the resolution of the CCD, yet the article doesn't mind throwing the 1080 mode around as if they are perfectly equivalent (or heck, as if the HVX is better), e.g. statements like: "...plus the ability to record 1080i and 1080p, and no MPEG artifacts, all for about the same price." I'm just saying I have a hard time considering this a true 1080 camera with only 720 lines in the CCD. (Assuming that proves to be the case.)

Why don't we drop it, Barry? I posed it as an open question that just kinda bugged me, but clearly some people will try to argue a point for the sake of arguing. It still bugs me, but we'll just have to wait to see. I just think "greater than sliced bread" articles like this sound more confident and comparable than they should, considering we haven't seen an image, or, for that matter, even know all the specifications of the camera. That's all. :shocked:
 
Has anyone actually HELD one of these? I thought the DVX was damn bulky to hold steady in one hand, this one seems impossible, then...
 
Lense as big as the sony hd?

Lense as big as the sony hd?

Is the lense about the same as the sony z1, besides the zoom because i know the pan. is longer. Also does anyone else agree that the z1 is just a meaner lookin camera? It sucks cause i really love sony, but looks like im goin w/this one.
 
I would imagine the lens would be better than the Z1's lens. Doesn't mean the resolution is going to be too much affected, it's still like 1080x1440 and not 1080x1920 or something like that isn't it (sorry if the numbers are wrong)?

Nobody has held an actual working model yet or seen a still or video of the footage. By the looks of things, it could have the big, yet hollow and light feel of the FX1 and Z1U or it could be a 5-10 pound weight! We don't know yet, but hopefully we'll see more during the fourth quarter of the year. I'm mostly wondering about the limitations of its DVCPROHD brought on by the 1/3" CCD. The JVC HD-100U looks great in comparison to the Sony's, though I am a bit partial to the HC-1 and A1-U since they're so small and HD at the same time. But if I'm going to be making movies, Panasonic's solution seems to be the most attractive.
 
so when exactly is the hvx200 coming out...I heard a rumor not until NAB 2006....I read hear 4th quarter 2005...but isn't it 4th quarter now?

Once they come out will they all be pre-sold or will their be some in stores?
 
They'll be out by Dec. 31st 2005, maybe a little sooner. And if you're not already on a pre-order list, there's very little chance you'd find one in stores as there's been very heavy pre-ordering.
 
i read December 20th, and I am so sad I can't afford one yet, I hope round 2 of cameras are out though by Feb 1st, when i plan on selling my youngest son to the circus to get one.
 
barry

once again thanks for the info....I am going to be shooting a feature in April...I'm looking around march to buy one...what would be the best game plan??? Is it going to be that hard to buy one in march?
 
barry

once again thanks for the info....I am going to be shooting a feature in April...I'm looking around march to buy one...what would be the best game plan??? Is it going to be that hard to buy one in march?
 
I would assume that the production line would be up to speed and able to deliver adequate quantities in March, but there's no way to know this far in advance. If it's a massive hit they might be in short supply for a while, if it doesn't go over that well then they may be plentifully available.
 
I'm hoping the HVX lives up to all the hype. But the $49 price difference mentioned in the review is not in true context. I'm sure that was the price difference when the article was written and YES HDV has serious limitations.

My point is there was not a $49 then or now over a $1000 price difference. For me and I'm sure many folks the price difference is at least double the purchase price. To get all that is wonderful with the HVX includes all the associated costs to actually capture and edit DVproHD. Including media (P2 orFW), a NLE that will work with DVproHD and a computer that will crunch four times as much data.

Sorry but like many I'm on a budget. I know my computer can crunch m2t files in Vegas (I've done it) and my old P4 2.4 GHz Dell will do it better with a new CPU and video card upgrade ($200-$400). Fot me it's $6,000 or less for a Z-1 and PC upgrades or $12,000 or more for HVX-200 with two P2 Cards, NLE or pay for a non native kludge workflow to vegas, plus a new PC. That's a long way from $49. For indies the DVX100 rocked because it was plug and play. I take now joy in this, I really want all that is better with the HVX it's just not in the budget.
 
Interval recording

Interval recording

Was just wondering if interval recording was re-included? Might have missed it when I skimmed the review.
 
Konrad,
While the cost of media may be a bit steep at this point, for only $49 more than a Sony, you can get a camcorder that captures and processes all its internal video in HD and then converts that video to SD to go to tape. You don't need a single P2 card to get started and you get a DVX100 on steroids. Plus, you have a direct path to HD when the time comes. I know a couple of rental houses that are planning on renting P2 cards for HVX users that can't afford the jump now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top