One thing I read about the HVX is that the CCD processes everything at full 1080 HD and down converts to whatever format. The Panasonic documentation says that it can do a much cleaner picture if you copy from P2 card to miniDV tape, but I'm unclear about if I record straight to miniDV tape is it the same great quality?

Or it is the same as just using a DVX100 and recording to tape?

Recording straight to tape is DV video only. On the P2, you can DVCPro25/50 and DVCProHD. In DV, the biggest difference on tape is the HVX color space (4:2:2).

Based on what I have read, but not personal experience, having the HVX internally down-convert to the HVX tape unit will probably give a much better picture than most other methods. If you have recorded in 720p 60, the down-conversion will deliver one full frame from the 720p to one field of the DV. I am planning some tests of this soon, but this is the method I owuld recommend.

Yes, thanks for the replies. I guess I should phrase my question better.

Two options:

1) record to P2 in 720p or higher. then transfer from P2 card to miniDV. Panasonic's documentation says that this is higher quality than convential straight to miniDV recordings on other camera.

2) record straight to miniDV ON the HVX. Panasonic's documentation says that everything is captured at full 1080 HD through the CCD and down converted to whatever. Does that include miniDV picture will be as good as option 1, or will it be the same as any other camera shooting to tape, i.e. the DVX100?

Just trying to figure out which way to shoot for best/stable picture in SD (will edit in SD from miniDV tape). In fact the difference could be negligible even.

Ronald:

If I recall correctly, Barry Green, who is probably one of the best authorities on the HVX-200 since he wrote the HVX-200 guide that Panasonic included with the camera, stated long ago that if you want the best NTSC quality on the HVX-200, you should shoot to DVCPro50. He said that looked better than shooting HD and down converting it to NTSC.

Not sure why you would ever want to end up on DV tape or in the DV codec, it is pretty lousy looking in comparison to DVCPro50. Why not just shoot and edit DVCPro50?

I own both cameras and no, shooting to tape with the HVX does not look the same as the DVX, it looks considerably better other than if you need to shoot interlaced. If you need to shoot interlaced, the DVX will show fewer jaggies (aliasing) than the HVX. But if you are shooting progressive, the HVX looks better, I know, I have done several shoots using both shooting the same subject. Better colors, resolution and latitude on the HVX than the DVX but the DVX is more light sensitive.

Dan

Not sure why you would ever want to end up on DV tape or in the DV codec, it is pretty lousy looking in comparison to DVCPro50. Why not just shoot and edit DVCPro50?
If you want to avoid the P2 workflow? If you actually want to use tape?

Otherwise, I'd fully agree, DVCPro50 makes most sense if you can get away with not using tape and want SD. It's especially true for NTSC countries, less so for PAL ones, as all forms of DV25 in NTSC are 4:1:1, whereas for PAL DV and DVCAM are both 4:2:0 (only DVCPro is 4:1:1 in PAL).

The significance really comes when the material is burnt to DVD and 4:2:0 colour space, and half the chroma of NTSC DV25 gets discarded. This doesn't happen with PAL DV(CAM).

I agree - shoot in DVCPRO 50, which transfers to DVD much better than DV. Edit your project in DVCPRO 50, then output to DVD. You'll end up much better than DV on tape.