red vs. hvx
- Thread starter slimchrisp
- Start date
pmpworks
Well-known member
HVX and the FS-100 with the new version 3.0 firmware is the way to go 200+ min of 720p footage, just look at some of the videos done with the HVX. For all we know, when the Red starts shipping, someone like Sony with say HA! LOOK WHAT WE HAVE! and you'll say CRAP, I knew it! Also editing the RED footage will be expensive $$$. So unless your a movie studio, I would get an HVX... you will love it.
Freudenberg makes a great point. Look at the resale value on DVX cameras - over 50% of their original MSRP.
If you can gig an HVX200 for even a day or two a month for eighteen months, you can handily sell it to cover the difference of your original investment (and then some).
By then, RED and SI2K should be (and will have been, respectively) in full production, established an acceptance in the industry, a reputation of reliability and have a proven workflow.
An HVX is a lot of camera for $5k - has a lens and everything. Take heart, many HD outlets aren't quite ready for 1080p originated materials yet. You can deal with 4k when the rest of the world is ready for it.
There will be plenty of REDs to go around at $35k - you can get your's later.
Tell us what you decide.
e
If you can gig an HVX200 for even a day or two a month for eighteen months, you can handily sell it to cover the difference of your original investment (and then some).
By then, RED and SI2K should be (and will have been, respectively) in full production, established an acceptance in the industry, a reputation of reliability and have a proven workflow.
An HVX is a lot of camera for $5k - has a lens and everything. Take heart, many HD outlets aren't quite ready for 1080p originated materials yet. You can deal with 4k when the rest of the world is ready for it.
There will be plenty of REDs to go around at $35k - you can get your's later.
Tell us what you decide.
e
Luis Caffesse
Admin
overlandfilms said:
Best review ever.
:thumbsup:
LMAO... Lens and Everythign.....
( but hes actually speaking truh, the Varicam/DSR450/SPX900/HDX900 Etc... All are MSRP no lens.)
( but hes actually speaking truh, the Varicam/DSR450/SPX900/HDX900 Etc... All are MSRP no lens.)
I figure I was a tool at the top, now the least I can do is be helpful with grossly obvious supportive statements!
e
e
DavidBeier
Veteran
Justyn said:
Call your local Best Buy and they'll likely tell you they have PS3's sitting on shelves (every one in a two hour radius of me has). Some things are just too expensive.
For that matter, most HD-TVs that people own are in the 1024x768 range, not even convering full 720p resolution. 1080p sets are just coming out bit it seems that the broadcasting industry has no plans to support 1080p due to the bandwith requirments (just what I've read) so it seems doubtful that those will become popular. Bottom line is that probably much less than 1% of the poplulation would be able to notice the RED's sharper 1080p performance. It really only seems an option if you're primarily thinking of projecting which, if that was the case, you probably wouldn't be going with a 1/3 HD camera like the HVX200.
I'm very impressed by the results I'm getting with my HVX for the short film I'm shooting. If it wasn't for some DOF issues of the stock lens, I can't see how this baby would fail in a big screen projection. With great audio production, good lighting, and great acting, I believe that resolution is not going to make your audience distracted (like they were with DV).
HVX is more than enough. If you really do something good or interesting in filmmaking, than people will give you money to use film or the 4:4:4 10 bit cameras. But for independent short film and features, for people like me, not known or aspiring to be a decent filmmaker, I believe that the HVX is a camera that can take my story to professional looking levels. The money for the Red we can waste on a 35mm adaptor, an External monitor, a COmputer editing system, a couple of P2's, some external HDD's, Quality lights, and hiring decent actors and crews. All this system must be close to the stock Red (or maybe cheaper). Add to that the small form factor of the HVX, and you get the bonus that all the tripods, Steadicams and supporting gear is cheaper than the Bigger cameras (size+weight) need.
I'm a very happy HVX owner, indeed
HVX is more than enough. If you really do something good or interesting in filmmaking, than people will give you money to use film or the 4:4:4 10 bit cameras. But for independent short film and features, for people like me, not known or aspiring to be a decent filmmaker, I believe that the HVX is a camera that can take my story to professional looking levels. The money for the Red we can waste on a 35mm adaptor, an External monitor, a COmputer editing system, a couple of P2's, some external HDD's, Quality lights, and hiring decent actors and crews. All this system must be close to the stock Red (or maybe cheaper). Add to that the small form factor of the HVX, and you get the bonus that all the tripods, Steadicams and supporting gear is cheaper than the Bigger cameras (size+weight) need.
I'm a very happy HVX owner, indeed
Gordon Prince
Well-known member
If the others don't, we are always good supporters of our own investments, at least. This has a name: self-esteem. :grin:
In the UK the percentage of 1080p sets (normally marketed as "TrueHD" or "1080HD") has markedly risen in the last few months, and the forecasts are that they will be well in the majority by the year end. And AFAIK pretty well all HD disc sales are 1080p/24, which is exactly why the "TrueHD" label is seen as desirable by the manufacturers. (Not only are the screens higher resolution, but no scaling is required.)DavidBeier said:
As far as broadcast goes, I think you're drawing the wrong conclusions. You really need to specify framerates, and in that case, then whilst 1080p/50 is indeed not in the running at the moment, then over here 1080p/25 PRODUCTION is the norm for things such as drama. That can then be transmitted as 1080psf/25 (to maintain transmission compatability with 1080i/25) and a modern "TrueHD" receiver should be able to recognise it and display it as true 1080p/25. So effectively the broadcast industry is heavily supporting 1080p transmission - as long as it is 25p, not 50p, and via psf.
My friend that borrows a DVX100-B from his job... never shot in 24p until he met me and does not know how to do a pulldown... now wants a RED. He does not know what a RAID array is and what 4k or 2k resolution is. He often makes the statement that he can't see the difference between HD and SD. Get out of the way everybody... here comes the unruly mob.
John Godden
Well-known member
andrae said:
".... unruly mob" ................. :-Laugh(DBG):
I think you're right-on about this issue.
The flip side of this issue is that there will likely be a few Reds for sale once the wannabes figure out they can't deal the camera or workflow.
JohnG
Last edited:
slimchrisp
Well-known member
overlandfilms said:
thanks a lot guys. what i really wanted to hear was "spend the money you have set aside for a down payment on a house and buy a red".
but noooooo. you had to say a bunch of logical things that make sense!
he he. yeah, i'm way over my head even thinking about a red right now. the gigs i've done so far are all pretty small, and i expect them to stay that way for at least the very near future. so, paying for an hvx with gig money is way more realistic than a red.
in addition to paying gigs, i'm making some short films now too, and just wanted to be able to get the closest to film look with the best quality. like someone above said, i can PIMP out an hvx big time (cineporter, few p2 cards, 35mm adapter, follow focus, matte box, ...) for way less than just a red body alone.
and hey, i've seen a lot of hvx footage, and it's really amazing. just out of curiosity, does anyone know where i could see some clips of hvx footage transferred to 35mm?
thanks again for bringing me back to reality everyone.
DavidBeier
Veteran
JitCam said:
Well, I wouldn't go that far. On a 35mm blow up, RED is going to slaughter the HVX200. I love the camera but it's good to know its limitations. I've seen comparisons of 1080p HVX200 and RED downrezed to 1080p and RED is clearly superior. I've seen HVX200 blown up to 2k and RED downrezed to 2K (roughly the resolution you'd want for a 35mm transfer) and RED is even more impressive. A big screen is where you'll see a big difference. I'm just arguing that, unless that's what you think your primary viewing method will be, it's not worth it.
HVX200 looks like Super 16mm when projected. I saw The Queen which parts were shot in 16mm before which a trailer for an HVX200 shot film was shown. It compared to the Super 16mm (a bit cleaner in fact) but not to the 35mm scenes.
Nearly infinite, S16 like image, for the cost of 5 minutes of 35mm flm stock, shoot to final print. Beautiful.
Or Nearly infinite 35mm Film like images, for the cost of 35minutes of 35mm filmstock shoot to final print.
Or Nearly infinite 35mm Film like images, for the cost of 35minutes of 35mm filmstock shoot to final print.
ripupthehwy
Well-known member
Looks cool? I think its pretty damn ugly. Looks like a prop from Deep Space Nine.
It might grow with your needs, but will it grow with what the public demands? With electronic technology its impossible to stay ahead of it, to know what the demands/needs will even be in 2 or 3 years.
But all joking aside, I think the Red is overkill unless your shooting for a million dollar film. Most of us on DVX user are not shooting a million dollar film. If that were the case, then they should probably go out and rent a Cine-Alta, a Varicam, or an Arriflex 35mm camera.
In either way, why are there even issues about whether or not to pass on the HVX or wait for the Red? Buy the HVX and then if the Red pans out, buy it 1 or 2 years later when you know what your'e getting into with it. When there is proper editing support for it and a demand for what it can do.
I think SERIOUS future RED customers are probably people who are doing high end productions,, I mean stuff that you know is going to be printed to 35mm film for theatrical release or Network TV. These people are not going to squawk at the price tag on the RED and truthfully they wouldn't even consider the $5000 HVX. Probably just skip right over to the Varicam or HDX900. Thats what I would do. Buy what you want TODAY and if you don't need it don't buy it. If you're gonna just throw money away because all this is just a hobby for you then whats the issue? Buy the HVX and then buy the RED too.
Last edited:
DavidBeier
Veteran
harddrive said:
Majority of what? HD sets? Maybe. I don't know the UK market well but even the majority of HD sets in the UK would still probably mean something like 3% of the whole UK market. And I really get nausiated with the term "true HD" since it's pretty much become code for "anything but our product isn't real HD!"
Once again, I'll defer to you on the UK. I work in the US however. Here, we have people battling between 1080i and 720p. I support 720p since personally I don't mind losing a bit or resolution for a pure, progressive signal (why would anyone ever want to deal with interlace again?). In this case, neither side seems to want to change any time soon. Fox, which has come down on the side of 720p, is outfitting all their stations with Panasonic HD cameras which tend to be more geared toward 720p signals. ESPN certainly isn't going to drop it any time soon and lose their smooth, 60p sports footage. True 1080p seems mostly reserved for Blu-Ray and HD-DVD owners for a good while. Unltimatly, I just don't think it's going to gain enough of a market dominance to justify going with RED unless you plan to project.
This is not a knock against RED at all as it looks to blow the HVX200 away in just about every category. It's just a matter of how many of us really NEED it beyond the bragging rights.
but david isnt 720 60p much sharper than 1080i?