Purchase HVX200 or Canon XL-H1

GoldenCam said:
Holyzoo, what do you think has better quality Canon or Panasonic. Since you have had use of both.
Click to expand...

I've only had hands on use with the Panasonic DVX100 and Canon XL2. Esentially I've owned both. Between the DVX100 and Canon XL2, I preferred the XL2 which has significantly more resolution and incredible black detail, and an actual widescreen image in the viewfinder when in 16:9 mode, instead of the DVX100 squeeze mode. I can't say that I preferred the size of the LCD on the XL2 though - it's tiny, but I could make it work for me.

Now about the HVX200 vs XL-H1, I'll tell ya I'm still on the fence. Let me see if I can make any more sense here. Disclaimer, these are my opinions based on everything I've seen from over 20GB of raw footage from both, and numerous screen grabs.

HVX200
Pros - DVCPRO HD codec, P2 tech tapeless - allowing quick transfer and separate clips for organization, good latitude, multiple frame rates, true progresive capture, uncompressed audio, compact size, relatively light weight, numbered readout of focus/zoom, nice focus feel.

Cons - I'm sick of waiting, P2 cards are incredibly expensive, P2 cards hold a painfully small amount of minutes (especially 4GB cards), no HD capture to tape, remarkably lower resolution than the XL-H1.


XL-H1
Pros - Available now, greater resolution, better black detail, tape based recording is affordable, tape based recording allows long record times, shoulder mountable, farther reach on lens, 72mm filter thread, detachable lens is a bonus but I don't plan on really using it.

Cons - HDV codec, extremely sensitive to highlight blowout, Magenta and blue *abberations* can be frequently seen on footage with contrasting shapes and especially bright lights, tape based - having to capture and I don't take the time to log/capture individual clips - takes way too much time, and god I'm tired of tape, did I mention I hate tape?, the focus control on the IS lens has an uncertain feel to it.

Quite the conundrum.
 
Awsome info Holyzoo, this really helped me out a lot. I am a director as well as DP so lens is important and looks like I think the XL-H1 will do the trick!

Or an XL2 with a 35mm adapter, any significant drop in quality from the XL-H1?
 
GoldenCam said:
Awsome info Holyzoo, this really helped me out a lot. I am a director as well as DP so lens is important and looks like I think the XL-H1 will do the trick!

Or an XL2 with a 35mm adapter, any significant drop in quality from the XL-H1?
Click to expand...

Cool, I'm glad all my brain unscrambling is helping other people out. I'm going to now be more biased towards the HVX200 since it's going to be shipping to me soon. So unless I *hate* the camera, it'll be my choice over the XL-H1.

So your question regarding XL2 vs XL-H1 has a simple answer. Do you want to shoot HD or does it not really matter. I definitely think of the XL-H1 as the XL2 on super steroids, so it's looking very much like the XL2 in a lot of ways. I realize the only key things the HVX200 isn't going to give me that the XL-H1 has is straight up kick ass resolution and the ability to record HD to tape. I'm not too concerned about the detachable lens. However, if you were going to buy the XL-H1, I would HIGHLY recoomend getting the 16X manual lens as it is worlds beyond the 20X IS for focus and zoom control. Although you won't have image stabilization and it's not officially an HD lens, but tests have not really shown a difference between the stock "HD" lens and other XL lenses from the SD cameras.

So where I stand on what I'll be enjoying with the HVX200 over the XL-H1 are the following:

DVCPRO HD codec acquisition with better motion handling, better handling of grain from a moving element 35mm imager, better color space 4:2:2, non-GOP, better highlight latitude within the codec, P2 tapeless capture, no more log and capture, P2 allowing file management and clip deletion for efficiency, P2 quick file transfer for editing, NATIVE 24P!, with no intermediate codec pull down removal tricks required, separate clips from P2 will make for better organization and project clean up with deleting unused files, P2 random access, quick clip playback for review for director, talent, reference, multiple frame rates, true progresive capture, uncompressed audio, compact size, relatively light weight, numbered readout of focus/zoom, nice focus feel, Focus assist, larger LCD, efficient and workable stop motion animation without killing your tape record heads, P2 pre-record and loop record, and everything that comes from being in the same family as the DVX100 and Varicam.

Woo!!!
 
Dang Steev,

You're making this wait for the HVX200 harder man :thumbsup:

Let us know when you get it.

By the way, I'm buing the Marshall V-R70P-HDA 7" LCD monitor.
It's on order from EVS.
How do you like yours?

Thanks, Steve
 
Stevet said:
By the way, I'm buing the Marshall V-R70P-HDA 7" LCD monitor.
It's on order from EVS.
How do you like yours?
Click to expand...

Stevet, I'm really NOT diggin the monitor with S-video from the DVX100a for sure. ;) It blows - I can't tell what's in focus. But the built in DVX100a LCD rocks for knowing focus. I'm anticipating the HVX200 to work great with the Marshall. Sooon soon soon. :D
 
You were able to test it with a high def source? I thought that's what your web page mentioned.

How did it look compared to SD?
 
It looked very nice. It prefers 1080. 720 was "okay" but showed some jaggies. Compared to SD... SD is depressing. This has been asked before why the S-video looks so awful. I'd have to see other LCDs via S-video that people are using to see if this is just the way SD looks on these things. And I say "these things" conservatively, because there aren't pro LDC 7" monitors at 800x480 on the market.
 
Holyzoo,

I'm in the same boat that you are in. I pre-ordered the HVX200 over a month ago. I was saddened by the resolution results, but I like many of the other HVX200 features -- like variable frame rates and DVCPro HD). I think that I will stay with the HVX200 and sell it if I hate it when I get it. I could always switch to the Canon or the JVC if I had to.

I've heard a lot of bad things about HDV, but I don't think that it's really that terrible. I just wanted to share my HDV experience with everyone...

I own the Sony HC1 (HDV camera). I paid a little less than $2000 for it (I heard that it now sells for about $1000). I bought it because I needed a HD camera to shoot my road trip (my brother and I travelled from New York City to California). That little camera has (reportedly) 656.1 lines of horizontal resolution and 480.9 lines of vertical resolution. That's not bad considering that the HVX is around the same (right?). Of course the HC1 is not in the same league as the HVX200 (I hope), but it's a great run and gun interlaced camera (I use it for my home movies).

On the road trip I shot a ton of footage at National Parks and everyone has been very impressed with the quality of images that came from this little Sony camera. I'm sure that shooting outdoors in bright light helped the image quite a bit. After shooting 8 hours of tape (something you can't easily do with the HVX200 unless you have a laptop and transfer time or a ton of p2 cards), I digitized everything in Final Cut Pro HD. Digitizing is a pain (I really look forward to a tapeless workflow), but dropped frames were not an issue. Final Cut Pro HD did not stop when it hit breaks in the tape, it kept going. The cool thing was that FCP broke all of the shots into separate clips (I guess it can tell when you turn the camera on and off?).

Editing in Final Cut Pro was pretty easy in HDV, but as soon as you add color correction and want to output back to tape, you have to go through a very long render process. I hope future editing machines will handle HDV better. NOTE: I was able to help the HDV shots big time with color correcting. Brining the blacks down so they just touched zero on the scopes and increasing the chroma made the the images really pop (HDV handles color correcting better than you would think).

Just for the fun of it, I sent all of my clips (color corrected) to stock footage companies and they were very impressed. Three stock footage companies are selling my HDV footage. It's not posted on their websites yet, but I will let you know when it is (in case you want to see what my HDV footage looked like). Bryce Canyon, Zion Canyon and the Grand Canyon are must see places!!!

The great thing about the Sony HC1 is that the camera can be used as a deck. I can edit, then make a HDV master. I can take my camera to other peoples homes and show them the footage in all its glory (which looks very nice on a HDTV). Blu Ray and/or HD DVD should solve this problem for HVX200 owners.

Q: So why did I buy the HVX200? A: Mainly because I want to use the HVX to shoot narrative films. The interlaced image just doesn't do it for me.

To see if I could be happy with interlaced HDV for dramatic shooting, I did test the Sony HC1 in a indoor lighting situation. I did a three point lighting (high contrast) shot. The image looked pretty good, but I new that 24p would serve me better (interlaced feels wrong for movies -- fine for news and shooting real life, but not great for movies -- In my opinion!). I am very happy to hear that the Canon ann JVC have a nice 24 frames mode.

With variable frame rates, XLR inputs, 24p and DVCPro HD, I think that the HVX200 will satisfy me.

I did rent the pro version of the Sony HDV camera (Z1U, right?) and it was also a nice camera (XLR inputs, pro body, etc...), but I did not like its fake 24p mode and I did have some problems doing quick moves with the camera (I would get a glitch in the middle of very fast pans -- perhaps HDV can't handle extreme movement). I hope the HVX200 does not have this problem.

I just wanted to throw out my HDV experience. I'm hoping the HVX200 will blow me away.

It's a shame Panasonic didn't make the camera higher in the resolution department. I'm sure that if it was closer to the XLH1, it would blow away the competition (it's the main reason why so many are on the fence about this camera). In my opinion, Panasonic should have made the camera higher rez. They have more to lose being that they are DVCPROHD P2 vs all of the other companies using HDV. I'm sure that XDCAM will make purchase decisions even harder for us all, but IT'S GREAT THAT WE HAVE SO MANY AFFORDABLE HD OPTIONS! This is an exciting time.
 
thefilmaddict said:
I'm hoping the HVX200 will blow me away.

It's a shame Panasonic didn't make the camera higher in the resolution department. I'm sure that if it was closer to the XLH1, it would blow away the competition (it's the main reason why so many are on the fence about this camera).
Click to expand...


I think your in for a surprise!

The HVX might not be as sharp as the H1, but I bet it's a lot sharper than some believe.
 
I have to agree with Steve, the HVX200 is one hell of camera. I have filmed with them all, and I'm more closer to a HVX200 than the H1.

I just got a new print from the lab that jammed up the other day. The color richness is amazing coming from the HVX.....



Michael Pappas
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
PappasArts & Arrfilms Main site

CONTACT VIA AOL INSTANT MESSENGER
AT { PAPPASARTS2 }


XLH1 and HVX200 frame grabs and news here:
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms

http://www.PappasArts.com
http://www.Myspace.com/PappasArts
 
PappasArts said:
I'm more closer to a HVX200 than the H1.
Click to expand...
Well...well...maybe, I must be to denounce my own words and to say that I was wrong?

Each Michael's post after...and I'm more closer to your (filmmaker) POV. Is your brand, too? I'm referring my favourite brand: the motion picture.
 
thefilmaddict said:
to shoot narrative films. The interlaced image just doesn't do it for me.

To see if I could be happy with interlaced HDV for dramatic shooting, I did test the Sony HC1 in a indoor lighting situation. I did a three point lighting (high contrast) shot. The image looked pretty good, but I new that 24p would serve me better (interlaced feels wrong for movies -- fine for news and shooting real life, but not great for movies -- In my opinion!). I am very happy to hear that the Canon ann JVC have a nice 24 frames mode.

(...)

I did rent the pro version of the Sony HDV camera (Z1U, right?) and it was also a nice camera (XLR inputs, pro body, etc...), but I did not like its fake 24p mode and I did have some problems doing quick moves with the camera (I would get a glitch in the middle of very fast pans -- perhaps HDV can't handle extreme movement).
Click to expand...
Thanks for your useful report, so much brand agnostic appreciated, as your other posts.

But why 24CF?...if you have@post 50i -> 50p -> 25p -> 24p

Do you know this one sample?
http://www.lumieremedia.com/tomorrowistoday/tomorrow_trailer/
 
Stevet said:
I think your in for a surprise!

The HVX might not be as sharp as the H1, but I bet it's a lot sharper than some believe.
Click to expand...

I finally got to play with a shipping HVX at the local dealer today. (their only one)

I must say, first and foremost, I am very happy to be an XL-H1 owner. It has far surpassed my needs and expectations by any measure. However, I bought it for actual television production, with the potential for filmmaking projects. I know it delivers an amazing image.

But I must say, the HVX is a remarkable camera. It certainly delivers a nice film look straight out of the box, and it feels very sturdy. I found the noise to be acceptable, but the color in it's cinegamma is just beautiful. Very rich.

I probably would've been seduced by this camera if it were actually easy to obtain when I really needed to dive in and get into low-cost HD. But it wouldn't have been the right choice for me. I am passionate about digital filmmaking, but make a living as a shooter/editor, and now I have a camera that isn't a self-contained little wonder, but ready to go with other cameras in multi-shoots. For me, that has tremendous value.
The Jackpack, interchangeable lenses, and simple tape recording are quite important to me. I will probably get a HDV Firestore in the future, but I like the safety of tape...not to mention the recording times that are hard to part with.

The HVX is more of a personal film camera, with amazing features and a lovely image.
But it's aimed towards DIY filmmaking, and the H1 is aimed at the entry level HD broadcast market, with a lot of cross appeal to indies.

We did a few quick rez charts and there was no doubt, the H1 was sharper, but that sure isn't everything! Aesthetically, I love the HVX200's image. LOVE IT!!

It's an amazing tool and I don't think fence sitters need to be worried about it's capabilities. It's not the ultimate 1/3" pixel pusher, but it's gorgeous. Certainly enough to feel like it's big-screen worthy and will translate well to any format.

Kudos to Panasonic.
 
Thanks Elton,

I was the same way regarding the H1 and HVX.
They are both great cameras and I had a hard time choosing
which one to go with.
I have the HVX on preorder. I like them both too.
The H1 produces some jaw dropping stuff.
 
Does the Canon have a different HDV codec than Sony since nobody is talking about motion artifact when shooting with the Canon while Sony's fx1/z1 is notorious for it's motion artifacts ?????? If the Canon has the same (low) degree of motion artifacts as the HVX I am tempted to switch to the Canon camp !!!
 
The main advantage the HDV 24F mode on the Canon has in respect to the Sony's modes is, that one can compress a progressive image better than an interlaced one. Also, the XLH1 shoots in 48i to deliver the 24F which means that the motion is rendered perfectly (and not chunky as 60i -> 24 as on the Sony).

And, they use the full 25Mbit in respect to the JVC HDV codec where only 19Mbit are used.

So the Canon has the best motion capture of all the HDV cams. And it is good enougth for fast pans and fast moving objects. At least for me, but you should go and look at it yourself.

Still, when you shoot something like water with lot of waves, the HDV codec breaks. Even on the XL H1. Only the HVX will shoot that without major artifacts.
 
The codec has held up better than I thought it would with water scenes. Still, there is the possiibility for some slight macroblocking artifacts, but then again, there are SDI portable solutions coming and then it won't be an issue at all. At least with the H1 you can throw a little more money at the problem and it will go away.

BTW, I think the JVC has the best 24p motion rendition. 24F is great, but JVC has the film look nailed, and their 24p is 19mbits alloted to fewer pixels and strictly to 24 flagged frames, plus their mpeg2 is probably a little less prone to breakdown due to the higher 6 I frames per second of footage.

All these cameras have signifigant advantages and disadvantages.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top