MacVideo HVX200 Review

RE1000

RE1000

Well-known member
I just found this video review of the HVX200, I haven't really seen any video reviews of the camera, it's pretty nice.

MacVideo HVX200 Video Review

RickP2.JPG


Also on the site they show a music video shot with the HVX200.

http://www.macvideo.tv/EvanBethany-BIgMacVideoTV.mov
 
Last edited:
See, that's what I don't get. Both Z1 and HVX footage looked pretty much on pair here. Where's the HVX superiority? I don't see it here and I didn't see it when I used the HVX (compared to the HD100. My experience with the Z1 is limited). I see better colors, yes, but I’m talking sharpness. Actually both footages here looked pretty bad. Probably web compression. But compared to each other none looked better than the other and they had the same compression. Was the HVX in 720p mode? I will be shooting with the HVX again soon and I will make sure to try 1080p to see if it's really sharper. So far I have only shot in 720p and it's definitely too soft for my tastes. Looking forward to trying some 1080p.

By the way I don't own any HD cameras, not a HD100 nor a HVX200. I rent when I need HD.
 
Last edited:
Mediacre said:
See, that's what I don't get. Both Z1 and HVX footage looked pretty much on pair here. Where's the HVX superiority? I don't see it here and I didn't see it when I used the HVX (compared to the HD100. My experience with the Z1 is limited). I see better colors, yes, but I’m talking sharpness. Actually both footages here looked pretty bad. Probably web compression. But compared to each other none looked better than the other and they had the same compression. Was the HVX in 720p mode? I will be shooting with the HVX again soon and I will make sure to try 1080p to see if it's really sharper. So far I have only shot in 720p and it's definitely too soft for my tastes. Looking forward to trying some 1080p.

By the way I don't own any HD cameras, not a HD100 nor a HVX200. I rent when I need HD.
Click to expand...

Look, man, try them. You say you're going to have a go with the cameras, correct? TRY them. In diferent situations. Try in Sunlight. See the dinamic range of your shots. Try in low light, or in controled lighting. Im finishing a short shot with the HVX. Its jawdropping. I've seen one recently shot with the HD100 in a Big screen. Not impressed. It was sharp, I concede that, but the colors? The dinamic range? In any case, I'm a happy HVX shooter- have been for a year and a half. Two advices:

1st-The footage I'm getting today looks 10x better than the one I got when I first got the camera. Learn the tool, the way it reacts to light, and the different settings available.

2nd- Look at the picture of both cameras in TV screens set to Normal, and not "dinamic". It destroys the color rendition of the cameras.

If you feel better with the JVC, then by all means get it. Its also a nice cam. I have tried both and went for the HVX. I haven't regreted a bit.
 
Mediacre said:
See, that's what I don't get. Both Z1 and HVX footage looked pretty much on pair here. Where's the HVX superiority? I don't see it here and I didn't see it when I used the HVX (compared to the HD100. My experience with the Z1 is limited). I see better colors, yes, but I’m talking sharpness. Actually both footages here looked pretty bad. Probably web compression. But compared to each other none looked better than the other and they had the same compression. Was the HVX in 720p mode? I will be shooting with the HVX again soon and I will make sure to try 1080p to see if it's really sharper. So far I have only shot in 720p and it's definitely too soft for my tastes. Looking forward to trying some 1080p.

By the way I don't own any HD cameras, not a HD100 nor a HVX200. I rent when I need HD.
Click to expand...

When you've compared the HD100 to the HVX did you adjust detail to reflect the different default settings of the two? The HVX is slightly soft by default and the JVC is (reportedly - I've never used one) quite over-enhanced. So, according to Barry Green (if I may, and if my memory serves me correctly), the JVC's detai level should be turned down to about -6 or so, and the HVX should be turned up to at least +2 or 3.

I know with my own HVX that at detail +2, which is where I normally leave it, the image quality is simply breathtaking (more so as you get closer to the subject, as is the case with all these cams).
 
SPZ said:
2nd- Look at the picture of both cameras in TV screens set to Normal, and not "dinamic". It destroys the color rendition of the cameras.
Click to expand...

If you are already renting the cameras and are serious about making a clear choice, rent a properly calibrated broadcast monitor. Consumer TVs LIE. They are tweaked for image enhancement and will not show you what you are really getting.

Now that said... puts gun to head...

With the properly calibrated broadcast monitor on hand, you MAY... be able to get close enough with the adjustment controls on your consumer monitor to mimic the display of the broadcast monitor. It really depends on how fussy you have to be. If your images are for TV or Film work, stick with the broadcast monitor. If its for corporate or personal endeavors you may be able to tweak your consumer monitor to get "close enough" that you can trust it in most situations. But you must have your properly calibrated broadcast monitor on hand to set it up.
 
Take_1 said:
If you are already renting the cameras and are serious about making a clear choice, rent a properly calibrated broadcast monitor. Consumer TVs LIE. They are tweaked for image enhancement and will not show you what you are really getting.

Now that said... puts gun to head...

With the properly calibrated broadcast monitor on hand, you MAY... be able to get close enough with the adjustment controls on your consumer monitor to mimic the display of the broadcast monitor. It really depends on how fussy you have to be. If your images are for TV or Film work, stick with the broadcast monitor. If its for corporate or personal endeavors you may be able to tweak your consumer monitor to get "close enough" that you can trust it in most situations. But you must have your properly calibrated broadcast monitor on hand to set it up.
Click to expand...

Of course I know that. I've been working on the TV comercial and Broadcast industry for years now. What I'm saying is that many people evaluate picture quality by seeing the picture on consumer displays with oversharpening and dinamic coloring turned to the max. And this completely destroys the source picture. In my 17" JVC CRT Broadcast Monitor, the HVX looks fantastic. In a Sharp Aquos 46" with Dinamic and sharpenning turned to the max... It looks Horrible! Lots of chromatic noise, overblown colors, etc. Put the Sharp's setting to normal, and everything looks good again.

This also happens in other consumer tv's.

However, this is a goood topic for discussion, since most HDTV owners majorly put their tv's in this "dinamic" setting.
 
Comparing those two cameras based on that highly compressed web footage is not a good idea. Do it in person, and then decide for yourself. Plus, take into account that the guy used the hvx for all of a couple of hours, and apparently didn't even know about the added record time when using pn (or so that's the impression I got).

Jason
 
Well probably the most rudementary review I have ever seen. And the simple fact that most of the clip was a shot comparison on a highly compressed web codec? Is there even a point to that?

Only thing I was impressed with was the performance of the sachtler tripod. Gotta love em'
 
Last edited:
Oh boy...

hee hee... dont judge both cameras on this clip...

I mean, both footages have abnormal blown highlights.

I can garantee you both cameras can deliver MUCH better picture than what you see here.

I use a HVX every week, and i never have up with such crappy looking footage, honestly.

It may be the compression, the settings...dont know, but if you want to compare 2 cameras, shoot the same scene, same angle and field of view, at the same time, and try different settings for each camera. THEN make your own judgement.
 
Antoine_Fabi said:
Oh boy...

hee hee... dont judge both cameras on this clip...

I mean, both footages have abnormal blown highlights.

I can garantee you both cameras can deliver MUCH better picture than what you see here.

I use a HVX every week, and i never have up with such crappy looking footage, honestly.

It may be the compression, the settings...dont know, but if you want to compare 2 cameras, shoot the same scene, same angle and field of view, at the same time, and try different settings for each camera. THEN make your own judgement.
Click to expand...
They only used the camera a few hours, so I wasn't expecting even good footage. I just liked seeing the hvx200 out in the field.
 
Yeah,

You're right.

They were not pretending to make an in depth review in any way.

I see it more of quick appreciation on how it works in the field.
 
Hi all:

Seems funny to me that everyone seems to have a compulsive obsession with sharpness. As any DP will tell you, color reproduction, dynamic range/latitude is MUCH more important to how your images are perceived.

So many people end up using diffusion and softening filters, either in front of the lens or in post, that should tell you something. It's not smart to make buying decisions based upon sharpness.

I have extensive experience shooting with the Z1, XL-H1 and HVX. The HVX, hands down, in most situations, makes better looking pictures than the Z1 and usually better looking images than the XL-H1. Yes, lower resolution chips. Yes, more noise. BUT, the HVX has a more pleasing colorimetry and a better looking gamma curves and dynamic range than either of the other cameras.

I have tried to be totally objective as we didn't really want to use P2 for the long form programming we do, tape would have served us much better. But I cannot deny that the HVX-200 gives us better looking images than either of the other cameras. We own two Z1s, an XL-H1 and three HVX-200s so I feel that I have a better than average cross section of hands-on experience with each.

I have not ever tried the JVC, but I have a decided bias against JVC products based upon owning and using several of their broadcast/industrial products over the years. JVC gear, in general, is less reliable than gear from Sony or Panasonic. At least in my experience, its been that way.

All the best,

Dan
 
I dunno, I mean when I watched the review, which is not particularly indepth (this would be great for someone who has 6 grand to blow on a home video camera), one shot I noticed that was particularly telling was the large building with all the golf-ball looking textures on it. The HVX picked it up beautifully with very little artifacts (though some in the distance). I forget what you call these things, but basically it worked like a chroma chart. The Z1U on the other hand, strobed like crazy on that building.

Terrible web compression aside (you can tell he clearly went for frame size over detail), that comes through pretty clearly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top