Is my HVX obsolete?

D

daveswan

Well-known member
Well I suppose that technically it is, but what I'm trying to get a handle on is: should I be thinking of a Canon 5DII or even a panny GH1 when it comes out?
I'm not a pro film-maker, just a very serious enthusiast, so I'm not going to be able to make money, or even write kit off against Tax.
I may, repeat, may be in the market for a 2/3" Scarlet, depending on the economy and exchange rate, whilst admitting that it may be overkill for my needs.
I may be wanting to do Chromakey work as part of my film-making, so how well (Or badly) do the 4:2:0 formats key using Spectramatte in Avid MC (I told you I was serious :)).
I do have a hankering for the improved DoF control from the larger sensors that I may be going to, and would like to go bigger than 2/3", while recognising that even that wouild be better than my HVX.
Sorry to ramble a bit, I hope you can make sense of what I've written ('Cos I can't :)) and can give me some sensible advice,
Cheers,
Dave
 
The HVX is VERY far from being oboslete. Have you watched some of the films in the fest? or check out "a little mouth to feed" (the best HVX footage I have ever seen.)

The HVX can compete with almost anything out there in capable hands.

I will also be picking up a scarlet If (and that is a big If) it ever comes out. And the waiting list I am sure will fill up in minutes and you will probably have a year after that.

Hell, The DVX can still compete.
 
Yes, its still very competitive. You should invest in a 35mm adapter if you want more control on your image. The camera is a workhorse, and does excelent HD.
 
"Obsolete"

adjective

1. no longer in general use; fallen into disuse: an obsolete expression.
2. of a discarded or outmoded type; out of date: an obsolete battleship.

A large majority of low budget HD users still shoot with the HVX so it is definitely in general use. The HVX is still a capable and professional tool and is cabable of better quality than 90% of user's meager skills allow. I have rarely seen someone using an HVX who was so skilled that the HVX was holding them back from creating great work.

I have a DVX100A that I still use quite a bit on corporate. I had to sell my HVX to finance my HPX170 but now that the bottom seems to falling out on used HVXs, I may pick one up again, I have seen nice ones going for as low as $2,000.00 without cards from cash strapped owners. There has never been a better time to buy a used HVX although as the year progresses and the economy worsens, I can see the possibility of used, good condition HVXs for $1,500.00. It is a buyers market.

Unfortunately P2 cards don't seem to be following suite, they are still holding prices very steadily. I have seen new 16GB cards as cheap as $699.00, yet every used 16GB P2 card on Ebay has a buy it now price of $749.00. Ridiculous.

Dan
 
Thanks for the feedback folks.
I'm definatly holding on to my HVX, I guess what I was wanting to know was how the footage from the new cams stood up against it, my bad if I phased it poorly.
Given the cost of 35mm adaptors I may well look at the GH1 as a way to affordable shallow DoF without the slightly Heath-Robinson air of the adaptors (Not sure how that translates into US English).
Cheers to all,
Dave
 
Footage from the 170 is a little smoother and the 170 is a half stop faster so less need to use gain. But when well lit, the HVX footage still looks beautiful. I did an available light shoot in a well lit conference room with my 170 this week with modern fluorescents overhead, the kind that face up toward the ceiling the I looked at the footage today. While it is no means lit well, the images were still overall quite nice looking, surprised me a bit because I usually pout if I am forced to NOT light setups.

200 still rocks hard too. But you have to light your scenes to really get the best out of it.

Dan
 
Dan has it right there... I ended up selling my HVX as I wasn't using it after buying the 150 and I needed the money for other things. I didn't end up getting to much in terms of cash. I did okay with the accessories but I lost about 60 percent of the value off the camera.. but then again, it was highly used and I shot over 2000 hours of footage with it. It clearly made me money, but I didn't make much with it.


I do think that the new cameras are considerably better in terms of low-light and noise, but at the price you can pick up a used HVX.. might be a good steal to get a 2nd one.
 
I have rethought selling my HVX to get a 200A or 170. I ran across a set of scene files that when implemented, have made me MUCH happier with the footage I am getting.
That, combined with making sure things are well lit. To me, it just doesn't make sense right now to sell my camera for $2000 and spend $4000 more to replace the camera and the accessories that now won't fit (assuming I get the 170). All to get a noise improvement that will never be noticeable on the web, where 90% of my stuff goes.
I'm waiting till my HVX dies- which, with a solid state camera, could be a long time. My VX-1000 DV camera lasted over 10 years! Also, in a year or two 200a's and 170's may be selling for 3K or so, especially when the latest greatest new one comes out.
 
No offense daveswan but its a bit of a silly question isn't it?

I don't know about any of you guys but in my book a camera is never obsolete, and only insufficient for business useage based on one's own realistic discretion. I think its the last thing you need to worry about mon amie... Its a consumer mind set that is vital to grow out of in my book (that and scarlet day-dreaming hehe).

The HVX for me paid for itself in a few months. Anyone is business will know thats not the issue with the camera. Its really the guy who saves up to get his 'special' camera for home movies/shorts and thinks omg it will make a huge difference.

Meh. Lossfest, and every other fest proves it doesnt - not outwith exceptional circumstances... :)

Give me a Kelloggs Cornflakes box and a Jam Jar and ill give you a movie hehe ;)

// On a much more controversial note - perhaps we are starting to reach a peak in the 'genuine' demands for HD video. How much more is really necessary to please clients or home viewers on 50" max plasma screens? I mean I can't really notice huge differences between the resolution of some films shot on an hvx (shot well) and a RED. I mean I know i'd notice the difference full stop on a cinema screen (and usually i can make the techy distinction if i concentrate lol obviously) but is it otherwise as important as we think it is.

Of course we know broadcasters have their requirements (that are routinely stretched... lol) and that all has a part to play in camera choice but i think its exaggerated. In terms of HD aquisition, i think there will be a generalising that either exists already to an extent or will do so more and more. If that sounds a little abstract I apolagise, but when i see people 'chasing' pixels or other elements and panicking about cams less than a couple of years old - that no ordinary audience could distuingish then hmm... is the cause of concern for daveswan (in asking that question) a result of an almost pornographic marketing campaign of emergent HD technology or does it have actual credibility...
 
Last edited:
Another reason our HVX's will not be obsolete for a long time is because it can still do every "flavor" of video that is called for today.
Maybe a higher end camera will be called for on some of your gigs, but the HVX can take on any projects those SD, 720p and 1080i jobs call for.
I may sell our HVX's some day, but more than likely, we'll keep them for our Live multi-camera gigs we've been doing so much of lately.
Best of luck!
 
I have rethought selling my HVX to get a 200A or 170. I ran across a set of scene files that when implemented, have made me MUCH happier with the footage I am getting.
That, combined with making sure things are well lit. To me, it just doesn't make sense right now to sell my camera for $2000 and spend $4000 more to replace the camera and the accessories that now won't fit (assuming I get the 170). All to get a noise improvement that will never be noticeable on the web, where 90% of my stuff goes.
I'm waiting till my HVX dies- which, with a solid state camera, could be a long time. My VX-1000 DV camera lasted over 10 years!
 
I'm keeping my HVX200. It doesn't make sense for me to sell it when I can get great footage with the correct lighting - I'll use the money I'd spend upgrading on lighting and/or other equipment.

I think I'll order a couple Kino Divas. :D
 
In today's economy, it doesn't make sense to buy any camera unless you can pay for it very quickly and have signed contracts. I am very tempted to go for the HPX300 or possibly even a 2700, but I will not be doing that unless I sign a contract with a network and receive a deposit check that will pay for it.

I know we all like to have the latest toys but until the economy rebounds and money and credit begin to flow a little more, it jut seems nuts to spend thousands of dollars unless it saves you money by not having to do long term rentals.

Dan
 
If you are not a pro making money with the tools at hand then you are a hobbiest. In those terms if you want another type of camera to experiment some more, and you can afford it, then you go out and buy it. There is really no reason to ask this kinds of questions about a camera that professionals are still making money with. The original HVX 200 is still a high quality piece of equipment that produces great footage, there is no doubt about that.
 
Another tip- for better production value, I would suggest you invest on your post-production workflow. Nowadays, its in Post that you can make a huge visual difference...
 
And if you wanted to replace it this isn't the time. None of the current (video) cameras in that price range are significantly better. The HPX300 is an entirely different form factor. The EX3 is nearly as large and the EX1 isn't petite.

In 5-6 months there will be a host of new cameras from several vendors (GH-1, HVX200, HMC160?, XL-H2, XL-A2, D400, D800, Rebel something or other, Samsung, etc.) that dramatically increase your options.

If you wanted to try something, there are filters or a matte box and filters, a 35mm adapter (letus, SGBlade, etc.), some lights, a better mic, a field mixer, a new tripod, some gels, other grip equipment, stuff in post, etc.
 
The HVX/HPX is a camera that you buy and never sell. I'll most likely keep my 170 forever, it's to good of a camera to get rid of, and I'm sure many users feel the same way.
 
The year is 2025...Panasonic stopped selling P2 5 years earlier. 3D cameras shooting 8k images that are recorded uncompressed cost $3k.

16 years ago I shot SVHS-C with a camera larger than an EX1.

Forever?
 
DavidNJ said:
The year is 2025...Panasonic stopped selling P2 5 years earlier. 3D cameras shooting 8k images that are recorded uncompressed cost $3k.

16 years ago I shot SVHS-C with a camera larger than an EX1.

Forever?
Click to expand...

I didn't mean that it will be good enough to shoot on forever.

What I meant was, by the time it becomes outdated, it wont be worth selling. Better to keep it, so 20 years from now I can show my kids my vintage hpx170 and those crazy P2 cards :thumbup:
 
I am still shooting my DVX, I bought that, what about six or seven years ago? I will never sell it. I may have to sell the 170 off eventually, just because I would need the money to finance the new camera but we shall see. So far, the 170 is another classic and I would like to keep it forever.

Dan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top