Cuantos the Wrestler
Active member
I must say that reading these threads here truly helped me to select the HVX as my new camera. I am on the waiting list at Abel and I can not wait for it to arrive.
I was first interested in the Sony (as my previous camera was the VX-2000), and I considered it to be my front runner. However, the 24p was missing, and I heard whispers of disillusionment with the CineFrame. My next favorite was the JVC and the camera looked awesome. Further reading revealed an MPEG2 compression which worried me. Wasn’t this what we used to compress SD down to fit on a DVD? Why would someone want a compressed image as a base “negative” of information?
I then found out that Sony also used the MPEG2 format. The ease of a mini-dv tape was starting to lose its appeal to me. But need for compression did make sense. Here we have HD cameras trying to squash visual info onto an old school tape. Digital 8 didn’t try to shoot to VHS so what was up with this?
The Canon seemed like the next one to consider, but I considered the increase in price equivalent to not adding a new Intel computer to my domain.
I had heard of Panasonic (a review proclaimed an old DVX to be even better than the CineFrame) but I was not truly familiar with the line. I also thought the cost was going to be pretty high considering the expense of the chips (P2), but a friend recommended this site and I became a regular reader.
I am by no means a veteran of a thousand physic wars like many of you here on the board, but I did benefit by sitting back and “listening” to proclamations, concerns, trolls alerts, new owners, etc
For me, the Panasonic really sounded like the way to go. I like the compatibility with Final Cut Pro, and was pleased with the demonstration of the camera at Abel. No camera is going to be perfect, and we should be thankful for how far the medium has come. My thought has always been if someone is noticing a resolution concern in a minor shadow down in the corner then my story and actors are not doing their job.
I am a 21st century pixelmaker and I am looking forward to a wonderful world of creation this year.
Thanks for the insight!

I was first interested in the Sony (as my previous camera was the VX-2000), and I considered it to be my front runner. However, the 24p was missing, and I heard whispers of disillusionment with the CineFrame. My next favorite was the JVC and the camera looked awesome. Further reading revealed an MPEG2 compression which worried me. Wasn’t this what we used to compress SD down to fit on a DVD? Why would someone want a compressed image as a base “negative” of information?
I then found out that Sony also used the MPEG2 format. The ease of a mini-dv tape was starting to lose its appeal to me. But need for compression did make sense. Here we have HD cameras trying to squash visual info onto an old school tape. Digital 8 didn’t try to shoot to VHS so what was up with this?
The Canon seemed like the next one to consider, but I considered the increase in price equivalent to not adding a new Intel computer to my domain.
I had heard of Panasonic (a review proclaimed an old DVX to be even better than the CineFrame) but I was not truly familiar with the line. I also thought the cost was going to be pretty high considering the expense of the chips (P2), but a friend recommended this site and I became a regular reader.
I am by no means a veteran of a thousand physic wars like many of you here on the board, but I did benefit by sitting back and “listening” to proclamations, concerns, trolls alerts, new owners, etc
For me, the Panasonic really sounded like the way to go. I like the compatibility with Final Cut Pro, and was pleased with the demonstration of the camera at Abel. No camera is going to be perfect, and we should be thankful for how far the medium has come. My thought has always been if someone is noticing a resolution concern in a minor shadow down in the corner then my story and actors are not doing their job.
I am a 21st century pixelmaker and I am looking forward to a wonderful world of creation this year.
Thanks for the insight!