Noisy hvx

[TommieGreen]

Okay, so I've been sitting here for well over an hour trying to get my noisy HVX image to look ANYTHING like my beautiful DVX image. I've messed around with EVERY setting until both cameras were identical, from the ND filter, shutter speed, Syncro Scan, everything in the Scene File and everything in the Display setup, but the HVX never fails to present an inferior, decontrasted, ashy, noisy grainy Image (In comparison). I've had the HVX for well over a year now saying 'I'll fix it later". The 'later' has come. Any ideas, guys? Thanx in advance.

 

[Cassius]

Care to post frame grabs?

 

[Ted Spencer]

The HVX200 is inherently noisier than the DVX, but the 200A is considerably less so. If you have a non-"A" HVX, you're looking at at about a 2 stop difference in light sensitivity, which, of course, is quite large. That's the reason for the noise difference at equivalent exposure, and there is nothing in-camera you can do to "fix the problem". It's caused by the larger number of much smaller sensor points (aka "pixels") on the CCD chips, which themselves are the same 1/3" size in both cameras. Since HD requires many more 'pixels', they're necessarily smaller, and the larger number doesn't fully offset the lower light efficiency of the smaller "footprint" per pixel, so the light sensitivity is a lot lower.

The 200A (along with the HPX170) introduced new sensor chips which are about a half-stop more sensitive and *much* less noisy at very low light levels. Enough so that about 9db of gain can be applied and still not exceed the noise level of the non-'A' 200 at zero gain. The result of that combination is a noise floor that approaches the DVX (but not quite, as I understand it - while admitting I've had almost no experience with the DVX).

So, first of all, forget about an HVX200 being as low-noise as a DVX. Ain't gonna happen. A 200A will be a lot closer, but the DVX will probably still be the winner in that category.