What camera performs better in low light?

Eatsnax

Eatsnax

Well-known member
I have an HVX 200. I love it, it's a great camera. But as we all know low light with it is not all that great. I am in the market to get another camera. I'm eyeballing the HPX170, which looks tempting. But I'm wondering if I should go to another brand of HD camera?

I know all the positive with the HPX, and HVX. Can anyone suggest a good CCD camera, close to the HVX, that has better low light performance?

Any input would be great.

Thanks!
 
Thanks for the reply. I'm wondering if there is a cam out there faster than the HPX?

Does anyone know if the DVX-100a, which I have, is a good barometer for checking the light sensitivity of the HPX?
 
Meaning, if I wanted to get an idea, of how the HPX170 handles in low light situations, if I should use the DVX as an example. I was reading somewhere here a few months back that the HPX170, performs close to the DVX100, in terms of low light.

I have the HVX200. I'd like a camera that will handle low light better. I was wondering if I test with my DVX, if it will give me a good idea of just how much better light sensitivity the HPX170 will have over the HVX.
 
The HPX170 has about a half stop more sensitivity than the HVX200. It's not that much more sensitive. But, what it has is WAY less noise and WAY cleaner gain. So you can easily go to at least 6dB of gain, and probably 9dB, before you're matching the grain pattern of the HVX200. So that means that as a practical matter, when comparing noise levels, the HPX170/HMC150 are about 1.5 to 2 stops "faster" than the HVX200, but you have to use the gain to get it.
 
I've seen some debate on this in the past and I'm wondering if it's still strictly a personal call or if there's a general technical consensus about it:

If the light just isn't there (and you can't, say, get the DJ to raise the lights a bit at the reception), is it better to raise the gain to 6db or boost it in post?

Thanks,

Clint
 
Barry_Green said:
The HPX170 has about a half stop more sensitivity than the HVX200. It's not that much more sensitive. But, what it has is WAY less noise and WAY cleaner gain. So you can easily go to at least 6dB of gain, and probably 9dB, before you're matching the grain pattern of the HVX200. So that means that as a practical matter, when comparing noise levels, the HPX170/HMC150 are about 1.5 to 2 stops "faster" than the HVX200, but you have to use the gain to get it.
Click to expand...

It should also be mentioned that this is equally true of the HVX200A vs HVX200.
 
I am a very happy HVX owner.... But unfortunately I have to move on to Sony or something else. I live in a run and gun low light world and my Panasonic just dosent cut it.

Im not a rolling shutter-long gop- fan but it seems I have to do it. Going to VMI in L.A. in the morning to test the EX1, EX3, New JVC models against my HVX with a low light set-up. Im in a spot where I really dont have the money to get 3 300's or 500's.

In my perfect world I would get the low light performance in a DVCproHD codec without spending 13,000 a pop X 3 to get it.

I hate the thought of working with HDV. Whats a guy to do?
 
ron, why dont you just rent for now and wait until later in the year (or next) for the scarlet to come out... and then see how things flush out.
 
wgzn said:
ron, why dont you just rent for now and wait until later in the year (or next) for the scarlet to come out... and then see how things flush out.
Click to expand...

Let me preface this by saying that as I do more and more field work I am after the ENG form factor as I make my decision.

I tested 4 cameras today... And was able to make my decision in just a few hours. The EX1, EX3, and believe it or not even the new JVC is nothing to sneeze at. Bummer is they all have one thing in common HDV... Now the EX3 really turned my head, Outstanding camera WOW really nice images.

The new JVC had the form factor, decent entry level glass and most of the stuff Im looking for... But Im sorry to say it makes me nervous... I do like the new native QT codec... but its new.

The EX3, JVC are all just short of the cost of the new HPX300. So there you have it, The 300 specs just make what I need for low light. Barely...

Yes its Cmos... I know, But I get everything I wanted from both worlds. So providing the lease goes through In 3 months we will have three 300's

_______________________________________________________________



What HDV does to GFX is not so much fun. Alot more work, Its compressed nearly twice as much DVCPRO, Color space is different, and when I try to mix footage between EX1 and other sonys the interlacing is a killer.

To be fair Im not a total pro..... And a real editor knows how to get around this stuff.
 
Hi Ron:

I am working on a big article on my experience with the HPX300 a few weeks ago. We are editing a piece we produced for LA Metro that we shot with it. I think you will really like the 300, it is an amazing value for the money. Is it perfect? No, but neither the Sony or the JVC are perfect either. I do feel that it is the biggest bang for the buck in its price range easily. I miss it, I sent it back last week.

Good luck and let us know how you like them when you get them.

Dan
 
FilmBoy77 said:
why do people hate hdv? i have an hvx and i've never worked with hdv so i'm curious.
Click to expand...
Don't worry...it's more like a Mac vs PC discussion. I work with HDV...and the way I see it "every" format has its issues. It's just a matter of picking your poison. I don't have any issues with HDV myself... If there are artifacts (Like the inherent noise in the HVX200)...then it's nothing a little Neat Video can't fix. It's All Good.
 
The Crank 2 footage proves that there is still life left in HDV. Like every other format out there these days, HDV has its pluses and minuses.

If you are talented, HDV, AVCHD, DVCProHD, XDCAM EX, they are all just letters. Can you light? Tell a story? Write? Direct actors? Thats what it takes to be a filmmaker, format is coming close to being irrelevant these days.

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