ResChart Flippin' Fun: HVX200 vs. XL H1

J

JackFoley

Active member
I thought it would be fun to do a little A/B comparison between the rescharts that have been posted so far by Kaku and Pete. I converted the images to grayscale and saved them as 256 color gifs, so the complete 8 bit should be there.

This shows the difference between the HVX details set to 0 and -5. Some people like the edge enhancement present in details 0, from me only -5 works.

ResChartsFlipFun1.gif


This shows the difference between the XL H1 60i and 24f. If anyone seriously states that 24f does not lose any resolution when compared to 60i, I would suggest new eyeglasses :kiss:

ResChartsFlipFun2.gif


The inter-cam flips are good for nothing since the condition and settings have been totally different and the XL H1 charts are too small. But I could not resist doing them anyway :evil:

* The settings I would shoot in, details -5 vs. 24f.

* The ones that look sharpest on both cams, details 0 vs. 60i.

* Details -5 vs. 60i

Again, these cannot be used to draw any concusions but - at least for me - are fun to look at.
 
Hmmm... I know which rez chart looks the best to me... However I'm going to reserve judgement until the results of the 4 cam blind test next week.
 
Actually I'm 90% certain I'm going to get the HVX because I have loads of Panasonic batteries already...

Heh! Heh! Heh! ;-)
 
I know we can't pass judgement but doesn't the -5 setting seem really soft??
I know it might create a more pleasing picture when in "Real world" use but this really surprised me.
 
I know, as already pointed by Barry, that there are many factors to consider. However, regarding this specific aspect of single-frame resolution, I am extremelly surprised by how much better the Canon looks. :(
 
In the XLH1 the vertical resolution loss in 24F is evident, but the horizontal resolution remains constant.

Meanwhile the HVX doesn't even appear close to the Canon... I can barely resolve discrete lines at all! One has to wonder whether the resolution chart is even in focus, and also how strongly the 1.5 PAR comes into play.

-Spiff
 
JackFoley said:
I thought it would be fun to do a little A/B comparison between the rescharts that have been posted so far by Kaku and Pete.
Click to expand...

JackFoley said:
Again, these cannot be used to draw any concusions but - at least for me - are fun to look at.
Click to expand...

Dude, why would you post info that one shouldn't draw conclusions from? This seems like cold war politics to me. You must have assumed that by posting those gifs people might be prejudiced. Things are pretty emotional here. In my opinion those gifs are not fun.

Anyway here's to 2006 and thanks to Jarred for letting us, strangers, into his backyard, thanks to Barry for his help with understanding of the technology. And thanks to Jan and Panasonic for bringing us a fantastic piece of equipment for under 10K that we can go out and make brilliant statements with.

Kindest Regards
 
5ive, I was calling these images fun (or hoax) because none of the res-charts have been shot in a professional studio environment. So if someone would actually try to determine the exact cam resultions and draw conclusions from that - that would be stupid.

But what they show is the difference of the detail setting on the HVX and between the 60i and 24f modes of the XL H1.

The only professional stuff that I have seen so far is the footage Barry provided for the HVX. And that looked breathtaking. I have not seen a single professional shot from Canon yet. Only blown out garbage with high resolution.

For my part, I start drawing conclusions when I see the results of Barry's shootout next week.
 
JackFoley said:
For my part, I start drawing conclusions when I see the results of Barry's shootout next week.
Click to expand...

Sorry bro, just a bit on edge since the craziness from yesterday. I'm with you on waiting for Barry's results. However, when it comes down to it, I'll judge when I have an HVX in my hands and I'm shooting with it. LOL:thumbsup:
 
It is clear that it is not a reliable comparison, but I find it hard to accept that those charts were shot in such different ways that even the extreme difference in resolution is meaningless. However, if this is the case, I will be waiting to see a similar comparison done correctly. I hope Barry will post such comparison next week.
 
No, SJUSER, I can not do that because I do not have any of those cams so I could shoot the res-charts in a professional environment. Barry will do this next week, hopefully.

Btw. it's "Lieber JackFoley" and "kindischer Wiener" joke :laugh:
 
I think it's pretty obvious that the Canon XLH1 will resolve more pixels than the HVX or the other HDV cams, given what we know about the glass and chips, and the footage I've seen.

I'm looking forward to comparisons which cover other areas such as color, dynamic range, motion, compression artifacts, etc. Resolution charts, while very important, are kinda boring and don't always represent a real-world shooting environment.
 
The problem is that different tests will yeald different results. Even with a single image, you will see different readings. Please see the link below:


http://www.cinemahill.com/hidef/xlh1&f900/


If you look closely at IMG-0115.jpg you'll see that the maximum horizontal resolution is different in different areas of the image. WHY? Because the alignment of the lines in the chart and the CCD pixels is different.

As long as everyone understands that the information (comparison) is using TWO DIFFERENT tests, thus results and conclusion is questionable at best, OK.


Bob Diaz
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top