I went to the IBC in Amsterdam too! WOW!

[arkham]

As I went to the IBC yesterday with half a dozen students from my "movie directing school", I wanted to make a small report about the HVX200, which I (almost) directly compared with the Sony Z1. Let me tell you guys: the HVX200 is way better than the Sony. The picture quality is quite amazing, very close to the Varicam, IMHO. The prototype we were looking at is 85% of what the "1080i picture" from the end product will be, according to Jan Crittenden. And let me tell you it is hard for me to figure out what the remaining 15% will bring. Maybe a higher signal/noise ratio? That is one of the only things I can see for potential improvements, and this is one of the things that will be improved, according to Jan, whom I had the pleasure to speak with for quite some time.

First of all, compared to the Z1, the HVX200 has a better dynamic range. Much better in fact! I don't know how Panasonic did that, but my guess is they are using smaller resolution CCD chips (like 960x720) and therefore, bigger pixels. This is great news for all of us, in my opinion! On the other hands, resolution looked at least similar in both cams, but I didn't have a chart to compare both cams. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the HVX200 is slightly better than the Sony in that regard, because that's what it seemed to be. But it's difficult to say to the naked eye.

Second thing, the colors are accurate, very close to the "cine-gamma" look from our beloved DVX100. As I am used to the DVX100's film-like accuracy, I liked the HVX200's colors and flesh tones better than the Sony's.

Next thing: the DVCPRO-HD codec is much better than HDV at least for everything "in motion". From the different big-screen demos on the Panasonic and Sony booth (which were relatively close from each other), you could easily see how superior DVCPRO-HD is. If DVCPRO-HD is implemented half as well in the HVX200 than it is in the Varicam, let me tell you the HVX200 will destroy its competition. And I don't see why this codec would only be implemented half as well; quite the contrary: I am sure the HX200 will be fully comparable to the Varicam in that particular regard. And this is great news for all of us! Sure, the Sony Z1 is making nice still pictures, but you can get much better (still) pictures from a cheap 5 MP digital still camera.

Last but not least: Sony would be well advised to hire someone as customer dedicated as Jan is! I personally spoke with Jan for about 10 minutes and let me tell you how much I am impressed by her dedication and her expertise. Jan kindly and patiently answered my questions, like she always does with us on DVXUSER. So I went ahead and told her a big "thank you" for all the time she spends with us!

Now, the only thing I'd like is a time machine for me to go straight to the day I'll receive my HVX200.

 

[mmm]

arkham, just wondering, did you have a Z1 in hand to compare directly to the HVX by shooting the scene on which the HVX was locked and focused?

The scene was probably carefully lit to give a good impression of the camera, so it would be unfair to compare that to a Z1 in "normal" conditions.

 

[SPZ]

And, from what was reported here, the camera was connected trough component cables, so what you where seing was footage before dvcprohd compression- the same was happening with the Sony, I presume.

 

[arkham]

In fact, Panasonic and/or Sony had the good idea to make similar sets for us to shoot at. The lights were very similar and the objects also. Same kind of saturated colors. So, with my personal experience as a DP (I have DP'ed quite a few dozen shorts, commercials and music video clips so far), I could easily compare a few things like "color accuracy", "flesh tones" and "dynamic range". "Resolution" was a bit harder for me to compare directly, without any charts to shoot at...

But I have to agree with you upon the fact this isn't the best way to compare the two cameras as it leaves a lot of room for "subjective" interpretations. However, I am fairly confident that what I wrote, my own subjective impressions based on a less than ideal way to compare the two cameras, is pretty much what experts like Barry Green will tell you once they have the opportunity to make an extensive side-by-side test of those 2 cameras. I trust my eyes, as many other people around me seem to do

 

[arkham]

"the camera was connected trough component cables, so what you where seing was footage before dvcprohd compression- the same was happening with the Sony, I presume."

Yes: this is correct! Everything at Sony and Pana was connected trough the component outputs. And this is why I spent quite some time to compare DVCPRO-HD to HDV footage on the big screens, paying attention to the way those codecs were interpreting motion. And you now know there is absolutely no way to make any mistake about the superiority of DVCPRO-HD in that particular regard. HDV is quite nice for everything that is "still", but is pretty bad for "things" (frames, objects, etc...) in motion.

 

[mmm]

Thanks for the info arkham, I was just checking what it was based on.

Everything at Sony and Pana was connected trough the component outputs. And this is why I spent quite some time to compare DVCPRO-HD to HDV footage on the big screens, paying attention to the way those codecs were interpreting motion.

I think the point is that the output wouldn't have been compressed by the codecs at all. It is not "DVCPROHD" & "HDV" footage, simply uncompressed HVX and Z1 footage.

From what I heard, they weren't playing back any records at the Panasonic stand, only a live uncompressed analougue output, so it can't be used to judge the recording codec. If it was coming out of firewire, that could be a different story. It can still be used to compare the actual cameras though.

 

[arkham]

"I think the point is that the output wouldn't have been compressed by the codecs at all. It is not "DVCPROHD" & "HDV" footage, simply uncompressed HVX and Z1 footage."

I fully agree with you! But I probably wasn't clear enough when I said I have spend some time to compare DVCPROHD and HDV footage: the footage I was talking about had nothing to do with the exhibited cameras. So, I wasn't talking about the component-output footage at all for that particular point (motion rendering). The footage I was comparing were pre-recorded, edited, CCed, and so on. They were displayed on very large screens as demonstrations of those codecs capabilities. And that's where the superiority of the DVCPROHD codec was obvious, at least in terms of "motion rendering". In fact, it is easy for you to realise that HDV isn't very good when it comes to handling motion: Sony pretty much only exhibits (almost) still frames in each one of their HDV demos, whereas Panasonic shows fast moving action pictures, like that spectacular Formula one footage, where the camera is moving at something like 200 mph ... Of course, all the Panasonic footage was shot with a Varicam, not the HVX200...

However, all the other points I have discussed (dynamic range, color, flesh-tones accuracy, resolution, and so on) where related to the "component output of the exhibited cameras". The only thing I could compare from.

 

[Walter_Graff]

"arkham, just wondering, did you have a Z1 in hand to compare directly to the HVX by shooting the scene on which the HVX was locked and focused?"

Excellent! This is the ONLY way to make subjective comparisons. You can NEVER make an objective decision by watching a monitor and thinking one is better than another. Actually you can say it but then it isn't a fair statement because you can't compare side by side. I have seen plenty of HDV footage and all this talk I hear about motion problems just doesn't add up to what I have seen.

 

[SoerenM]

Well Walter.. seems like some people are just not as "sensitive" as others regarding the motion problems. (blockyness/pixelation etc. ... everything already well known MPEG2 "low" bitrate motion problems... just look at many HDTV satellite streams for example.. you'll see the same basically ;o)

 

[mmm]

"I think the point is that the output wouldn't have been compressed by the codecs at all. It is not "DVCPROHD" & "HDV" footage, simply uncompressed HVX and Z1 footage."

I fully agree with you! But I probably wasn't clear enough when I said I have spend some time to compare DVCPROHD and HDV footage: the footage I was talking about had nothing to do with the exhibited cameras. So, I wasn't talking about the component-output footage at all for that particular point (motion rendering). The footage I was comparing were pre-recorded, edited, CCed, and so on. They were displayed on very large screens as demonstrations of those codecs capabilities. And that's where the superiority of the DVCPROHD codec was obvious, at least in terms of "motion rendering". In fact, it is easy for you to realise that HDV isn't very good when it comes to handling motion: Sony pretty much only exhibits (almost) still frames in each one of their HDV demos, whereas Panasonic shows fast moving action pictures, like that spectacular Formula one footage, where the camera is moving at something like 200 mph ... Of course, all the Panasonic footage was shot with a Varicam, not the HVX200...

However, all the other points I have discussed (dynamic range, color, flesh-tones accuracy, resolution, and so on) where related to the "component output of the exhibited cameras". The only thing I could compare from.

I didn't mean to sound like I was having a dig at you BTW, I am very grateful of your writeup. There is a lot of mis-information floating around at present, that is all, so you have to be careful who to believe.

 

[mmm]

I have seen plenty of HDV footage and all this talk I hear about motion problems just doesn't add up to what I have seen.

I haven't seen many problems either. However, I am currently editing a coporate video that is full of motion graphics and gradients - lovely tacky crap for the client. The mpeg for DVD is struggling a bit, in my eyes at least. For any post production work I reckon HDV will have to be converted to a more robust codec. Not a major problem though really.

 

[arkham]

"I didn't mean to sound like I was having a dig at you BTW"

Don't worry: I never thought you were "having a dig at" me either I just wanted to be as clear as I could possibly be about what I did (subjectivly) compare. And I also wanted to be clear about the fact that, in my opinion, the HVX200 is going to rock! Big times! To my eyes, it is delivering all the goods we (the DVXusers) were dreaming of. And that's what really matters to me

I am truly delighted by what I have seen yesterday and I personaly have lost all my fears regarding this product. As a matter of fact, I am going to preorde an HVX200 as soon as possible!