ugafan
Looking for a woman
the hvx is a step up from the dvx in technology and price. it costs twice as much the dvx and you need to buy expensive p2 cards, which puts it in a different category.
Press Release: HMC150, "the new DVX"
- Thread starter Barry_Green
- Start date
the hvx is a step up from the dvx in technology and price. it costs twice as much the dvx and you need to buy expensive p2 cards, which puts it in a different category.
Nik Manning
Well-known member
I don't think barry is saying the 13Mbps AVCHD implementation is just as good as hdv. Numerous camera tests have showed AVCHD is lacking at 13Mbps. So lets get 1 thing clear so far all AVC-HD cameras tested at 13Mbps have been a step down from hdv compared to lets say a HV20.
ilauzirika
Boring Senior Member
but its not only the codec, I guess.
rawfa
Veteran
I absolutely adore my Canon Xh-A1, but I must say I'm sick and F**** tired to tapes. I physically hate the whole process. Now it all boils down to the if the new Pana will have at least equal image quality, tweak ability and price to the A1. Also it would be a super plus to have an EX1 type LCD with a flip image. Another thing that will also influence my decision is the fact that I work with cineform aspect Hd which makes editing a living dreams...and that for me counts more than going tapeless (at least now it does).
Last edited:
rawfa
Veteran
yes precicely, its H264. H264 with good implimentation looks spectacular. I dont understand why people are freaking out?
Yes but what camera?
This is a 3500$~ camera not a crappy 900$ consumer cam.
Look at what canon did with HDV. Why are people freaking about bit rates? are you all engineers? have some faith that they will build a proper DSP.
William_Robinette
Shallow Member
Exactly. Again it has been said that so far no camera head has done justice to AVC-HD.
And anyone who thought the HVX was purely a DVX upgrade needs to take a closer look at the two side by side.
Not to mention the fact that they are still selling the DVX right along side the HVX.
Zander
Well-known member
Yeah, I was under the impression that the HVX was the big brother to the DVX. I guess Panasonic adopted a kid to stick in-between.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Either you are joking, or woefully misinformed. AVC-HD blows HDV into the weeds at comparable file sizes, and can deliver HDV caliber at half the bitrate. It's a far advanced codec. It's the most advanced codec on the market, h.264.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Nowhere is AVC-HD called a "consumer" standard. HDV, on the other hand, was released as a "consumer" standard. Of course, so was DV. The marketplace will dictate whether professionals adopt it or not.
So far there have only been consumer cameras using AVC-HD, but that doesn't mean the format is limited to such.
This camera is not intended to be an enhancement to the HVX! It's a notch *below* the HVX, for the low-cost crowd.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Vegas supports AVC-HD. Initially, being a Sony company, they made it support *only* the Sony flavor of AVC-HD, leaving Canon and Panasonic users out in the cold. But they've updated it since, so it's probable that Vegas will work with this HMC150. We won't know for sure until it comes out.
Probably, but not certain until we see final specs. AVC-HD does support Standard Def recording.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Well, does the fact that they were sold side-by-side for the last two years give any clue?
One is a $5995 camera, the other is a $2995 camera. Not in any way in the same class or league. The HVX is a new model well above the DVX, well well above the DVX.
The HMC150 is an HD replacement for the DVX. It is not in competition with the HVX. It will be sold alongside the HVX, just like the DVX is sold alongside the HVX today.
Barry_Green
Moderator
A proper implementation of AVC-HD at 13mbps should be every bit as good as HDV.
Any credible tests?
I'd like to see a credible test that says that. I've seen AVC-HD at 9 megabits that looks to be a direct match to HDV.
It's also possible that someone may be using a great MPEG-2 implementation against a lousy AVC implementation; codec quality does vary. But a good AVC-HD implementation at 13mbps should be better than a good HDV implementation, and AVC-HD at 17 or 20 megabits should blow HDV into the weeds, and AVC-HD at 20 to 24 mbps should match XDCAM-HD or XDCAM-EX quality. (note: as a *format*, not as a camera head, because all the camera heads are or should be treated independently of the format!)
RokMartian
Active member
One thing to note about the gizmodo article is the last line:
"The HMC150 will be available this fall at a price to be announced."
So it looks like they are just regurgitating the same figure and seems to contradict the first line of the article.
Nik Manning
Well-known member
Well all I can say is show me the money. So far there is nothing I have seen that shows 13 megabits or higher has been able to compete with hdv. Maybe in the future AVCHD will get better but doesn't that also mean hdv could get better.
What would qualify as a proper implementation of AVC-HD at 13mbps?
Barry_Green
Moderator
So far I haven't seen an AVC-HD camera that I would bother to use at all. I mean, what's there to compare? An HG10, fer cryin' out loud?
Try a simple test: render out a video in MPEG-2, then render out that same video instead to h.264. You'll quickly see that h.264 is far superior at the same bitrate, and for equivalent quality you can cut the file size down to 1/2 or 1/3.
The day there's an HD100 or V1U or HVX or XHA1 that shoots to AVC-HD, that's the day we can evaluate how AVC-HD performs compared to HDV. Until then they're just little consumer pocket-cams and with those, quality is not exactly highest on their priority list.
Barry_Green
Moderator
i think the real question that should be asked is if we will see the book "panasonic hmc150" by barry green?
If it looks like it's going to be a big hit then yes. I'll need to see a lot more details first though.