PLEASE EXPLAIN THE TECHI SIDE OF THIS Hvx vs. an HD cam

M

mroczkowski83

Member
Hi everyone. I'm not a DP so i dont know all the techi stuff but can someone explain to me what the difference is between this cam and a full size HD? is the resolution the same? cause if it is then why the major pprice break? secondly how do you plan to preserve the resolution. does this mean a new major online editing machine to hhold the uncompressed video?

Is this camera at all in great competition with an expansive HD cam? or at least is the footage quality going to be similar?

thanks. I love this site. you guys teach me everything.
 
mroczkowski83 said:
Hi everyone. I'm not a DP so i dont know all the techi stuff but can someone explain to me what the difference is between this cam and a full size HD? is the resolution the same? cause if it is then why the major pprice break? secondly how do you plan to preserve the resolution. does this mean a new major online editing machine to hhold the uncompressed video?

Is this camera at all in great competition with an expansive HD cam? or at least is the footage quality going to be similar?

thanks. I love this site. you guys teach me everything.
Click to expand...

Well, the HDX is an HD camera. It records 1080i, 1080p, 720p, 480i, and 480p. Its recorded resolution is the same as higher end HD cams. What separates it from the big boys are its imagers and its lens. This cam will seem to be a superior camera for the money but it cannot compare with other HD cams with 2/3" imagers and changeable lenses.

But for what it offers at its price point, its an absolute steal! Well actually, what it's specs are offerring ...

Correction ... I'll say that after I see the footage ...
 
Good question,
I don't really have any definitive answers on this one, as there are alot of unknown variables to cover in that 55 to 95 thousand dollar difference seperating the HVX from the the larger HD cams.
Based on early reports, and taking note of the obvious distinctions, i.e. larger sensors 2/3 vs. 1/3, better res and better low light performance as a result, 4:4:4 color vs. 4:2:2, high quality interchangeable glass, more overall control, etc. I think we'd be pretty surprised to find that in the right hands, the HVX will still produce footage that in certain situations could be intercut with footage from the larger HD cams.
There've been tests done like this using Sony's HDV Z1, and it recieved some good marks among seasoned HD veterans. So, if HDV can reportedly hang, I'm confident the HVX with DVCPROHD will do even better.
 
The HVX is a new high-definition camera, shooting DVCPRO-HD, the same format as used by the $70,000 VariCam. It will retail for $5,995.

It will also do many things the VariCam can't -- it can shoot 1080/24p, for example. It also does DVCPRO50 in standard-def, which the VariCam can't, and it records to P2, which the VariCam can't.

However, you won't have a $70,000 equivalent for $6,000. The VariCam will always produce a superior picture. 2/3" chips, and a $60,000 lens, will always deliver higher quality than you'll ever get from a small 1/3" camera. The VariCam will deliver better images in pretty much all ways. That's why it costs 10x as much. And the VariCam will do many things the HVX won't -- interchangeable lenses, for example, and remote CCU control, recording on tape, etc.

We won't know how competitive the HVX will be, picture-quality-wise, until we see footage (which won't happen for several months). My guess is that the HVX will probably deliver somewhere around 75% of the picture, for 10% of the price, which is an incredible breakthrough no matter how you slice it.
 
There is a lot more the HVX can do that the Varicam can't. The HVX can be used by a whole new class of artist that can not afford the Varicam. The HVX can be used to test the very limits of HD cinematography. In the hands of actual independant filmmakers, I can not wait to see what we are gonna see... Experiment, experiment, experiment... We will be able to try things, with the quality of DVC-PRO HD, that has never been thought of.

Imagine, shooting a feature only with compact flurescent lights or only with photofloods or with availble light and having it look great. Because of the cost of the HVX, filmmakers will have the ability to wait for the light and when the light is right , record to a high quality format.

F**k Hollywood, f**k the ASC, the golden age of Cinematography is about to commence!!!


Thank you Panasonic, thank you for thinking outside the the box.

Smitty.
 
I have an addendum to the original question. I'm not really looking at the difference between Varicam and the HVX in terms of picture quality, but more in terms of technological feasibility.

I guess the question centers around the P2 card, but I'm wondering why the HVX can't record HD to some kind of tape besides miniDV (it is my assumption that miniDV is too small a tape to handle the kind of information that HD puts out without having to first compress it like HDV does). I've never seen an HD tape like the Varicam tape, is it big? Is it too big for Panny to design the camera around (even if it makes the camera a shoulder mount style)? My thinking in all of this is that if the components are fast enough to write a signal to the P2 card, it must be able to write at the same speed to a tape, making the question of the expensive P2 not an issue.

Anyway, I'm kind of clueless when it comes to HD right now. So much to learn on it. I don't understand how there can be so much HD programming already. Do they edit it all in an analog style or is it just the fact that companies like NBC can afford million dollar HD edit bays with software we don't even know about for digital editing?

All I really know about HD editing is Final Cut Pro 5 and how you need to constantly render even with the latest G5 just to see some kind of effect you have applied. Not to mention the copius amounts of disk space needed to hold all of the information. How do the HD programmers do it?
 
This has been gone into at length in other postings, often by me.

Basically: the HDX records DV quality only to tape. For HD, you have to use P2 cards or hook up some kind of external system via Firewire or USB2.

The reason Panny doesn't put a Varicam style drive in is that the tape drives are much larger and MUCH more expensive.

http://www.cybercollege.com/tvp048.htm has a picture of a DVCPro tape. It's about the same size as an 8mm video tape.

As for FCP, you can edit using lower-resolution effects in real-time, and not have to render to see your work. In fact, the process is automatic, and will give you the highest-quality results it can manage, given the limitations of your CPU, drive, et cetera. Their demo shows them playing back 16 HD streams simultaneously, with only limited frame rate reduction. But who knows what kind of drive they were using.

But don't worry. You won't need to constantly render. Basic effects and color correction are real-time.
 
Thanks for the quick reply.

See, I'm a little confused why Panny didn't make a camera with all of the HDX features, but integrate it with DVCProHD. I mean, of course the size of the camera would have been bigger, but at least it would eliminate the P2 card quandry, which everyone seems not to like.

The HDX is the ultimate camera for me, with the exception of the P2 card integration. I think in the future, this will be a great media state to utilize. But right now the cost of multiple P2's, say, to an event videographer, is way out of reach. Now... if the same camera with DVCProHD tapes was available, it would be heaven! Seeing as a 92 minute DVCProHD tape is about $85:

http://www.edgewise-media.com/padvcprohd92.html

I know the direction Panny is taken. They want to show that the future will be "ultra-portable", with camera sizes in the realm of the DVX-100. Why can't they make an intermediate sized camera as well which will utilize the HD information in a tape format? I mean, the first camera I had was a huge camera that recorded onto VHS tapes and I didn't mind the size. They even promote the AG-DV60 (a shoulder mount cam that has less features than the DVX-100) for videographers who need a shoulder style mount. How about throwing the HDX components in that shell with a DVCProHD Deck in it?
 
Answers To Your Queries

Answers To Your Queries

tbanucci said:
See, I'm a little confused why Panny didn't make a camera with all of the HDX features, but integrate it with DVCProHD.
Click to expand...

Would you be willing to take my word for it? A DVCPRO-HD tape drive would add about $16,000 to the price of the camera. The least expensive DVCPRO-HD tape deck (The Panasonic HD-1200A) is $21,000 + $4,000 for the FireWire output card. Why would an entire camera be any less expensive than something that only has a tape transport?

tbanucci said:
Seeing as a 92 minute DVCProHD tape is about $85:
http://www.edgewise-media.com/padvcprohd92.html
Click to expand...
The Large-Size DVCPRO-HD tape will run 46 minutes in the 720p VariCam or 46 minutes in the 1080i AJ-HDX400. None of the cameras currently record "EX" tapes nor will they play back "EX" tapes.

tbanucci said:
Why can't they make an intermediate sized camera as well which will utilize the HD information in a tape format?
Click to expand...
A DVCPRO-HD drive has sixteen video heads spinning at an unbelievable velocity and extreme accuracy. It adds $16,000 to the price of the camera, at least. That tape drive is also fairly large which really makes it difficult to shrink down the size of a camera.

tbanucci said:
I mean, the first camera I had was a huge camera that recorded onto VHS tapes and I didn't mind the size. They even promote the AG-DV60 (a shoulder mount cam that has less features than the DVX-100) for videographers who need a shoulder style mount. How about throwing the HDX components in that shell with a DVCProHD Deck in it?
Click to expand...
Again, the DVCPRO-HD drive records four times the amount of data than a miniDV drive does. Not only does that make it big, expensive, and power hungry, it also means you need to have larger tapes. If they could record DVCPRO-HD on a miniDV tape (which they never will because the tapes were never designed for it, unlike DVCPRO tape which was designed from day one for higher bit rate formats, eg DV50, HD) you could only get about 15 minutes on a miniDV tape. So, you'd have a big, heavy expensive camera that recorded to 15 minute tapes.

The least expensive camera that records to DVCPRO-HD tape today is the HDX400,
a $43,000 1080i-only camcorder. BYOL=Bring Your Own Lens.

Hope this helps.
 
thisiswells said:
Would you be willing to take my word for it? A DVCPRO-HD tape drive would add about $16,000 to the price of the camera. The least expensive DVCPRO-HD tape deck (The Panasonic HD-1200A) is $21,000 + $4,000 for the FireWire output card. Why would an entire camera be any less expensive than something that only has a tape transport?
Click to expand...


A-ha! That's all I needed to know! Like I said, I'm unedjumacated about this stuff and learning more everyday. Thanks for the good info.

I'll shut up now.... :lipsrseal
 
@Rosestar

Dude if you think that you can light the whole set only with photofloods and fluo than you have a very silly idea of lightning. I shot a short film on DVX (interior) with 2x5k 2x2k plus some small 1k and Dedolight. I had around 18k of light and I must say it was not enough. Remember that digital has a tendency to interpret low light as digital hiss.

SORRY FOR OFFTOPIC
 
It's all good.

It's all good.

tbanucci--

It's nice to find reasonable answers, huh? Wish I knew about this site long ago.

I had to attend a $1500 workshop to learn most of this stuff.
I highly recommend the VariCamp: www.HDexpo.net

Best Wishes. :thumbsup:
 
Thanks thisiswells,

Yeah, I love this site. I get so much good info from the other users- not to mention the awesome battery deals and Barry Green book! HD is really hitting hard on me right now and I'm learning a lot about it. I'm currently offering HDV stuff, but I see HDV as an "interim solution" to real HD- which I know most of us are drooling to do.

Thanks for the info and the link. At least your $1500 investment is coming in handy for more than you!
 
I know this isn't really a fair comparision....but in regards to the P2 vs Price debate:

Remember when new technology like CD-R's came out? You could only record in REAL time 1x (150mbps) and the cost of a blank CD-R was like 10 bux. Now you can record at 52X and buy a spool of 50 CD-R's for 10 bux. I wish more of the P2 cynics would keep in mind that this is new technology and it will be around for awhile most likely. Hopefully in just a few years we can look back and laugh about the whole *P2 is too small / too expensive* debate.

It will take some time to fully catch on....but once it does, then we will see bigger and faster P2 cards for cheaper. And since P2 cards will be closely linked to the solid state memory market to begin with......there's no doubt it will get cheaper. That's a given. By the end of 06' we should be looking at 16GB P2 cards. Maybe even 32GB if we get REALLY lucky. I'm not worried.

For the last 20 years, people have been wanting Solid State Solutions, and now it's finally here. The progression from Moving parts and tape to non-moving parts and solid state was obvious. It was always just a matter of WHEN? I'm so glad it's here and I can't wait to look back in 10 years and laugh about why we used tape for so long. I guess the same arguments could be made in the Film vs. HD and NLE vs. Linear Editing debates.

Early adopters like us WILL help to drive down costs.....albeit slowly.

~reservoir~
 
reservoir said:
I know this isn't really a fair comparision....but in regards to the P2 vs Price debate:

Remember when new technology like CD-R's came out? You could only record in REAL time 1x (150mbps) and the cost of a blank CD-R was like 10 bux. Now you can record at 52X and buy a spool of 50 CD-R's for 10 bux. I wish more of the P2 cynics would keep in mind that this is new technology and it will be around for awhile most likely. Hopefully in just a few years we can look back and laugh about the whole *P2 is too small / too expensive* debate.

It will take some time to fully catch on....but once it does, then we will see bigger and faster P2 cards for cheaper. And since P2 cards will be closely linked to the solid state memory market to begin with......there's no doubt it will get cheaper. That's a given. By the end of 06' we should be looking at 16GB P2 cards. Maybe even 32GB if we get REALLY lucky. I'm not worried.

~reservoir~
Click to expand...

Everything you said makes perfect sense. The quandry for many is that they cannot afford the P2 cards at the outset. Surely as the prices drop more will be able to afford them and the HVX will become a more viable option. The problem is that some of us have to choose carefully. If we purchase an HVX when it is released and don't buy the P2 then we can use it as a good 16x9 DV camera until the prices drop on P2. However if we already have a really good DV solution it might be better for us to wait. By the time P2 becomes really affordable the technology may have shifted again (maybe even panny) and now there is an even better camera that has different imaging sensors or larger chips or what not in the same price range. Maybe even an hvx A model ala the DVX100A.

I guess all I am saying is that in comparison to the CDR comment: Surely you realize that 100s of thousands didn't bother to buy CD burners until they realized the media was very very affordable. They just sat it out. In the same sense when they finally bought they may have passed over the original manufactures of burners and bought from some other maker too. The same could happen with Panny. People might wait until it's affordable and by that time who knows what is going to be available from other vendors or panny.

I guess I think buying this camera and basing your decision on the fact that eventually the media will be affordable is a slippery slope to walk. Because as sure as the prices will fall on the P2 media the technology will rise forward. By the time the P2 is at the perfect point the camera may be a little dated as a new technology may arise. If you use the camera a lot and actually get work from it great.....but to buy it based on the assumption that you will one day use it's p2 HD feature may not serve you as well as you think.

FWIW
 
fud.

If this camera kicks ass, (and it does on paper) people will find a way to make it work. How about people give the doomsday prophecies a rest?
 
Just to clarify in case you thought I was dogging the camera I am not. I think it will be a technological marvel that a small percentage of the working videographers and filmakers can afford. I do believe that a large percentage will have no choice but to skip it because the media is not priced right or buy it and use only it's SD abilities. Either way there will be a much more defined line between the pros using this and the hobbyists and event videographers that there was with the DVX.

And obviously if you can afford the P2 media when this camera ships then it is a no brainer. I am referring to anyone that buys this camera sans P2 and waits for the media to become affordable. In the meantime the camera gets used in SD mode. We can only hope that by the end of 2006 the prices of P2 have dropped and are very affordable. But also...there could be a newer camera or technology that is just as cheap and you will want that then. Hence you never used the HD capabilites of the HVX. And if you have a good SD camera now you could have just used that.

With the rate of change in the industry I just wouldn't rely on the idea that P2 will eventually be affordable to justify buying it now. Chances are with this camera you can either afford it or you can't. The DVX was a much easier pill to swallow as it rode on current technology. So while it broke ground with new technologies, it still used current media and did not require a huge investment in new media.

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