<<<<<All in all the amount of noise seemed pretty close to what you get at DV resolution on a DVX. So it's really nothing to worry about - people have been shooting great stuff with the DVX for years.>>>>>

IMAGE--IMAGE---IMAGE.............. That's important.... I like the HVX200, but let's get real and dump the Kool Aid bowl over and sit around the table and have an honest discussion over beers.



I have a big issue with this statement. Those ccd's should be cleaner and better than what is in a DVX. There is a "H" in the HVX for HD not a "D" in DVX for DV.

So to say that there is nothing to worry about is excepting what shouldn't be happening in the first place..


We shouldn't have DV noise levels on and HD camera......


Just how focus is imperative to be dead on; because the HD level of image quality will spotlight that mistake; the same goes for the HD signal from the CCD block etc as well........



There is no SD/NTSC softness to mask artifacts or noise in the HD chain. So the CCD's etc need to be cleaner than just a DV camera.



If you film making style is like ,Blade Runner ,Xfiles, ET, Alien, Godfather, Apocalypse Now*and The Shawshank Redemption type of lighting, your going to have noise issues with the HVX200.

Oh........ Wait a second....... The above lighting styles are the way most films are lit. Damn....... I guess we could light like game shows then everything would be peachy....




How is it that the CCD noise is apparently cleaner with the HD version of a standard def design DVX100a from http://www.reel-stream.com/ ??????

How is it?????


The HVX should be cleaner than a DVX100a shouldn't it?????


Michael Pappas
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
PappasArts & Arrfilms Main site
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms
http://www.PappasArts.com
http://www.Myspace.com/

Isn't it way too early to be drawing these conclusions? It just now started shipping.

Isn't it way too early to be drawing these conclusions? It just now started shipping.

Hmmmmm, I don't think so. If you tested one, then you've tested 'em all. Wouldn't you agree?

How many bowls of Gumbo do you need to eat before you know it's good? Just one.
(unless ofcourse the ingredients change over time)

- ShannonRawls.com

I agree with most of what you have stated. I love Panasonic (DVX100 rocked) but there is a real trend (not on these boards exclusively) for people to just brush off comments that are potentially negative about the Panasonic as unimportant... yet if some of these "first impressions" mentioned potential noise on the XLH1 or JVC it would be getting ripped up one side and down the other. There is a weird sort of "magic" over the HVX that seems to make us all want to not see anything bad in it. Like when you are in love you don't see the bad in you girl (or boy).

I am also wondering where the thread that Shannon started begging for some "impressions" that actually address the image quality and not just talking about the aesthetics and menus options and P2 went. Did that thread get deleted? I was really interested in hearing what people had to say and "wam!"....it's gone.

can someone at least comment on what happened to make it go bye bye?

Marty, it was too harsh. it violated the TOS of this website, and it had to go. Rightfully so.

I guess I shoulda just said:

As a potential buyer of the HVX-200 camera, I sure wish there was some more compelling footage for me to review to encourage me to place a pre-order for one. I like the features and all that this revolutionary camera can do, but the image and picture quality it produces is the most important purchasing factor for me as a moviemaker. For the past 10 months I have been really anxious to acquire the hvx-200 based on the overwhelming amount of praise I have heard about this forthcoming camera, and now that it is here, it doesn't seem to be living up to what has been preached to me. If things continue as they have been, i.e.. very little footage from panasonic themselves and professional users I can trust, professional reviews that seem to excude talking about the picture quality, excuses for image shortcomings and unacceptable solutions on how to fix its problems. Then I may be forced to buy an alternative camera that I know produces an excellent picture for its class.
Is it possible that I can get an honest review of the picture quality from an unbiased reviewer as compared to the picture quality that its nearest competitor can produce so I can make a final determination on if I should spend my money on purchasing this Panasonic Camera?

That's what I should'a said. So I'm saying it now. I know we are planning to do a shoot-out and that will be good enough for me too (better then anybody elses review could ever give me). However, I have no idea when that's going to take place. Problem is, I need info now, because I have jobs coming up. And "I" am the one who picks the camera we use. Period.

You can best beleive after we test all 4 of these cameras, I am going to be the first one to come here and announce the WINNER when it comes to how well the picture is. I have no loyalty to ANY of these manufacturers. I only have loyalty to my movies and how they look. *smile*

- ShannonRawls.com

can someone at least comment on what happened to make it go bye bye?Here's your comment:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=57400

No it was not Shannon, don't you back down for god sakes.

You were 1 million % right in what you wrote.... I'm glad your here.

It's amazing that people can post FUD about HDV and get away with it.

When the truth is spoken with passion it's railed against...... Not good!


What you did, is what started this board in the first place ( The XL1 WatchDog ). This is a no BS sugar coating site and should never change. Your anger is fueled by your passion. The same Passion I wrote back in April about lens and HVX200.

If this was 1997 in 2006; the XL1 vertical line issue would have stayed and the Banding/posteraztion issue would still be there or atleast it would have taken a lot longer to fix.....

Pappas

Marty, it was too harsh. it violated the TOS of this website, and it had to go. Rightfully so.

- ShannonRawls.com

Thanks Chris. While that original thread may have been harsh I like the "idea" behind it. I'd like to see some early reports that talk more about image quality and a little less about the mechanics or aesthetics.

No it was not Shannon, don't you back down for god sakes.

You were 1 million % right in what you wrote.... I'm glad your here.

It's amazing that people can post FUD about HDV and get away with it.

When the truth is spoken with passion it's railed against...... Not good!


What you did, is what started this board in the first place ( The XL1 WatchDog ). This is a no BS sugar coating site and should never change. Your anger is fueled by your passion. The same Passion I wrote back in April about lens and HVX200.

If this was 1997 in 2006; the XL1 vertical line issue would have stayed and the Banding/posteraztion issue would still be there or atleast it would have taken a lot longer to fix.....

Pappas

Michael,
While I am not agreeing with your above statement completely I'd like to thank you for the entire "vertical lines" issue. I had it on my XL1 and because of your posts and articles I was able to get it fixed. However that was on a "released" camera. As far as I know the HVX200 is not officially in the wild yet so we need to try to look at this stuff at least a little objectively.

It IS too early for all this. There's a shipload of judgment being heaped upon the HVX from a rowboat-load of information. A handful of VERY much appreciated, but entirely non-scientific, test shots do NOT warrant page after page of recent pronouncements by people who have never even seen one of these cameras. Heck, we haven't even seen a rez chart yet, for those of us who do care about that kind of performance measurement. (And BTW, I own two XL H1's and have no current aspirations of buying an HVX, so I'm not saying this as a protagonist of Panasonic or the HVX!)

Let the INFORMATION flow, and then we can discuss it like adults. (However, as a general comment, of course this isn't an "ADULT" board...please, please, just skip any crudeness or profanity when you are tempted to post in that way).

So c'mon guys, PLEASE tone it down if for no other reason than as a courtesy to the guy who owns the site, and maybe even to the other guys -- the unpaid Wranglers -- who WILL take their personal time to edit or remove your posts if you cross the line!

Now back to FACTUAL posts about the HVX200...

I really don't think I'm being unreasonable when I ask folks to keep it technical, don't get personal, keep your emotions in check and lay off the crudeness and profanity. Keep it clean. Geez, is that too much to expect. It's not about the negativity, it's about the noise. Let's please conduct ourselves like professionals. If you want your typical Wild West "internet experience," this really ain't it.

(Thanks Pete)

Back in 2005/2006 there was the great and terrible HVX200 crucifixion. A true lynching. It was a travesty and injustice, motivated by prejudice, impatience, and camera racism. Fortunately, the HVX200 transcended the ballyhoo and banal bull****, and landed into the formidable hands of the revolutionary warriors of tapeless HD production. They had been blessed, and the blessed rejoiced. A-****IN-MEN.

p.s. I'm done and outta here until I receive mine. I'll be back then. Laterrz.

(Edited to remove profanity. Pete)

I have to agree with Pete. It's too early to pass a lot of these judgements... I'm sure we'll all find plenty of things about the HVX200 to complain about and I'm sure we'll find things to rejoice over. From what we can all surmise at this point, based on the extremely limited amount of clips available, is that, uh, I don't really know. Overall, in my opinion, the footage looks great. Playing with color correction, it definitely has more latitude than HDV. It definitely shows some real promise vs. HDV for high motion scenes.

OTOH, I have seen some clips with too much edge enhancement, some with high noise levels, etc.. Is this an indication of the camera? Or are people still learning its ins and outs?

But even the worst I have seen from the HVX200 at this point is still a step up from DV25. That, the higher resolution, the promise of a true tapeless workflow and those variable frame rates more than justifies the cost to buy for me... I just need to figure out an edit solution sometime between now and when my HVX200 arrives. When the camera does arrive and if I think it blows chunks, I'll sell it and take my losses like a man (or with whatever dignity I can muster) and buy an XLH1.

For me, it's not to early. I have been at this long enough to gage pretty quickly a camera and format. I have filmed with the HVX200 for quite awhile, been to a filmout that only a handful in the world got to see..

What I don't like is the massive Kool Aid talk.

I'm on a HVX200 order list, so I must like things about it to consider it. But I must remain in the middle and not become bias towards my judgment on any of these camera. I owe it to those that put trust in me to be honest, fair and unbiased. I won't betray that trust to anyone or to me.....


Michael Pappas
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
PappasArts & Arrfilms Main site
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms
http://www.PappasArts.com
http://www.Myspace.com/

Chris, though I don't contribute much to this forum, I appreciate the level of professionalism and expertise maintained here, especially given the discussions of formats and equipment that many people still consider to be somehow less than "professional".

In response to the original issue posted here, I have looked forward to an affordable HD camera like the hvx200, but let's be realistic: expecting even more image info from 1/3" ccds is reaching a bit. I'll be happy just to get the resolution with an useable image, even more happy if there is some extra exposure latitude. For me, everything else is gravy.

For me, it's not to early. I have been at this long enough to gage pretty quickly a camera and format. I have filmed with the HVX200 for quite awhile, been to a filmout that only a handful in the world got see..

Well, yes... If you actually have had access to the HVX200, then you should be able to guage this! :)

What I don't like is the massive Kool Aid talk.

Yes, but there's a lot of this with any of these new products and even current products. For a lot of people, this is their dream camera, initial footage looks impressive and the specs (on paper) seem amazing. They don't want to listen to or read something negative. It's just like people who have already purchased a new camera or computer and have a significant investment in that equipment... They can get terribly defensive when negative comments or even accurate critical observations are made in regards to their investment.

I'm on a HVX200 order list, so I must like things about it to consider it. But I must remain in the middle and not become bias towards my judgment on any of these camera. I owe it to those that put trust in me to be honest, fair and unbiased. I won't betray that trust to anyone or to me.....

I think it's great having your opinions here and the opinions of others like Shannon. While he's happy with his XLH1 and rubbing our noses in it, he's made a lot of valid points here. But I think the "Kool Aid talk" won't really go away until a significant number of HVX200s are actually being used. And especially not until people form their own opinions after using the camera instead of looking at video shot by others in situations that may not replicate their environment or workflow.

Lot's of folks getting worked up about low light performance of HVX200 and noise.

Unless someone here has seen such tests with this camera, many of us, those of us that can see/play Kaku's source clips, only have that to go on.

Please realize Kaku is learning the particulars of this camera. Many shots look excelent. There seems to be noise issues in some shots but it may (or may not) be something solved as one develops a better understand of how to work with the camera. Many folks are tossing many things to Kaku to try. Doesn't leave much time to trouble shoot each issue.

One test might be to shoot under similar situation one might find at a dark night wedding reception or shooting a band in a darkly lit bar/club.

Gain up to Max (+12, +18?) at F1.6, maybe hot exposed spots only hit Zebra 70 at peak (short of pointing it at the light bulbs). Back off gain to see if there's a tolerable "sweet" spot.

Maybe compare this with 1/3" chip HDV cameras. One might use Sony PD-170 as an "optimal" 1/3" SD camera at same settings. Remember the HVX is a 1/3" HD variant camera, not 2/3" and not SD.

Kaku, tomorrow you must shoot a wedding reception and a band in the darkest club in Tokyo with 5 cameras slung over your shoulder or they'll be riots at DVInfo <said in jest of course>.

Kaku is already "dancing as fast as he can."

Yes there's cause for concern but one can't know for sure until one has thorough knowledge of the camera and does a methodical test.

Yes it's "too soon." Translation - the test hasn't been done yet to move me from "concern" to a definitive "issue" and then develop a means to deal with it if it is an issue or whether such results eliminates the camera for use in dark shoots.

This is directed at the forum users in general and not any individual/s in particular. It's a bit verbose, so bear with me:

As mentioned earlier, there's a ton of hype being heaped on the HVX prior to and during it's intial release. So be it. "Measurebators" abound on forums like this and that's fine, there's a place for those who enjoy cracking heads over finite tech specs. Bully for you guys. The endless debate over which thing is better is just that, endless, and you're welcome to keep the flame burning as far as I'm concerned.

However, there's one very important point that most seem to be missing here that needs to be addressed: For every piece of hardware created there is a perfect match-to-purpose aspect. Camera hardware is just like any other tool - you wouldn't use a Phillips head driver on a flat-head screw, would you? Just like in my primary business of commercial print still photography there is a "tool" that is selected based on what the job requirements are. If I have to create an image that's going to be a double-page spread at 300 dpi I'm not going to use my D2X, I'll grab my 4x5 body and shoot chrome.

If you really know how to use your hardware you can create amazing imagery by utilizing knowledge of lighting, exposure, composition etc. etc. regardless what you're shooting or editing with. Sure, some cameras have features that others don't, that doesn't mean they're better but more that they are optimized for certain types of work.

As an example: I've never been a fan of the Canon XL series of cameras, in fact I can't stand them. However when I was producing my first demo reel that's all I had available to me and I learned to make the best of what it could do. I used my knowledge of lighting, color and composition and that demo has had lavish praise ever since. Those in the industry who have seen the demo are surprised when I tell them what it was shot with, and to be honest, so am I now that I've been able to use other cameras myself.

But, times and technology have changed siginificantly and I've chosen the HVX for my new project. I didn't choose it because I'm loyal to Panansonic or because I bought into the hype, I chose it because it had very specific features that I absolutely need for my work, period. The Sony Z1U (which I just sold) could'nt do the job, and neither could the JVC HD100U nor could the Canon H1. Those are all great cameras in their own right and can and will make great images - in the hands of those who know how to maximize their individual capabilities!

Obviously the more knowledge you have on any product will help you make an intelligent purchase choice - IF you have enough information to make certain assumptions. We're all anxious to see what the HVX will do and some of us like myself have already made our choice based on features alone and less on actual camera output.

My point is this: If you're considering the HVX but aren't sure then wait for those of us who've ordered it to get it, test it and share our info. Otherwise any assumptions made now could be grossly over or under-rated.

Consider your camera choice as picking the right tool for the job. If the camera does what YOU need it to do, who cares if Tom, Dick or Harry doesn't like it? Get it?

I'd like to echo Craig and Robert - similar theme.

Horses for courses here - use what's right for the budget, the workflow and the delivery format.

Hell, this is a fixed lens 1/3" ccd cam ( you don't know this, heh) - all manufacturers in this end of the market HAVE to make compromises. There is no holy grail.

fwiw - From what I've seen - it looks good. Not "omfg great" but solid good.

I have been lucky enough to see some test footage from a Varicam and the HVX side by side on a well lit set with pro lighting. (Web only - compressed to H.264).
The varicam was set up by a tech for 20 mins and yup, you guessed it, the guys pretty well pulled the HVX out and shot. So it's an unfair comparison - but the little HVX was freak'n close - damn close. <subjective - HELL YES>

No noise here, folks. A tweak or two on the gamma knee/s and I reckon they would have colour matched the two really well. Yes - you'll notice the difference in a wide shot between the two. Tight in for b cam cuts, I doubt it. edit: well, you guys would but no one else could, IMNSHO.
Sooooo - there you go. More food for thought.

And no - I'm really sorry, I'd love to put the clip up - but I'm not able to do so. Sorry.

I've been very happy with what i've seen from the HVX, very warm filmic and richly colored footage. As for the XL H1, it still looks like video, they just haven't figured it out over there in canon land. Even with the low noise factor of the H1, the HVX offers variable frame rates, a solid/tapeless recording format and a push toward the future of affordable indie film making. I'll take my noisey HVX over a flat and overly sharp H1 anyday.

For me, it's not to early. I have been at this long enough to gage pretty quickly a camera and format. I have filmed with the HVX200 for quite awhile, been to a filmout that only a handful in the world got to see..

What I don't like is the massive Kool Aid talk.



I couldn't agree more -- especially the claims that DVCPRO HD is "better" than HDV. There are many who have found weakness in this now old DVC codec before the HVX200 was even announced.

Part of the Kool Aid is the passive acceptance of Panasonic's refusal to provide information on the CCDs. I've been covering Panasonic camera's for almost 15 years and CCD specs have always been provided. Moreover, whenever the numbers are better than their past cameras or any competitor's camera, they have marketed this point. AS THEY SHOULD!

Suddenly they don't provide specs. There is only one logical conclusion -- these specs are not good. Either they too clearly indicate that they limit the possible quality of HD video -- most likely they undersample the image in comparision to the DVCPRO HD recording format (which itself is an undersampling codec at both 1080i and 720p) OR they feel they are worse than their 1080i (Canon) and 720p (JVC) competition.

CCD specs are not a propritary "process" like Canons 24F. They are they basic numbers by which cameras have -- fairly or unfairly -- been judged.

Of course, I expect someone at Panasonic is already typing the word SPECULATION. Don't bother! By not releasing the numbers you force any comment on your CCDs -- by definition -- to be "speculation." Which in turn, very cleverly, let's you dismiss any negative comments as "unsupported speculation."

Not to leave Canon free of guilt -- their claim that they will not disclose the nature of 24F beause it would reveal a "propritarty process" seems to have been handled here in a Cool Aid manner too. To tell a customer, if the SUV they buy either has 2-wheel or 4-wheel drive in not revealing anything about a PROCESS. It is only a critical FACT about what they are buying. A fact they have the right to know.

I for one would love to know the CCD specs. It is important. If Panasonic are using low res CCD's and upscaling for 1080 then any noise from the CCD's is going to be upscaled too. Could this be why all the mosquito noise that seems to be apparent in the dark areas of the HVX images seems to stick out so much?? Any image scaling may not be apparent on first generation footage, but what will it look like after a couple of generations or after dubbing to another format that may be sampled or scaled in a different manner??

I know there will be a fair review showing the (in)possibilities of the HVX200, but the (3) reactions I saw from delivered cams are showing grain in the blacks, no intuitive interface and showing image softness. You can say that now, it is 2006. Sure I keep my eyes open .

Generally I find people being very biased in favor of Panasonic, holding the bad things away, praising the goods, if it is another brand they do it the other way.

As a unbiased person I think this is strange marketing behavior. But hey, I don´t like the Apple or 'Steve Jobs is God' way of thinking either. Be realistic.

The expectations are high, Panasonic made them that way, carefully giving information that will hype the product and they had some right to do so, the DVX100 is a good product. But not showing the ccd specs (we will spread the info out as soon as we know it, the hole world around on every site and video magazine) is strange behavior. Sites that are directed to users in a way you do not really know what is marketing and what is not, hurts the free internet community. If you criticize the Pana brand you are in trouble.

For me, this looks like a good next camera to shoot on, but I will take a good look at what it is. How it works in daily work, on street, in editing and backup. I´ll read all what is going on before the cam will come to Europe.

Why would any professional preorder any camera without throughly testing it in real world shooting situations. It boggles the mind that someone is loose enough with their cash that they can slap down either a big deposit or pay in full (a la B&H) for something they haven't tried. I have to assume that the people who do it are either loaded with money, or have a specific shoot in mind. The specific shoot in mind excuse doesn't make sense because how does one know what a camera will do when they haven't shot with it? For that matter, they don't even know when they are going to get delivery.

Why would any professional preorder any camera without throughly testing it in real world shooting situations. It boggles the mind that someone is loose enough with their cash that they can slap down either a big deposit or pay in full (a la B&H) for something they haven't tried. I have to assume that the people who do it are either loaded with money, or have a specific shoot in mind. The specific shoot in mind excuse doesn't make sense because how does one know what a camera will do when they haven't shot with it? For that matter, they don't even know when they are going to get delivery.

I'm sure some of you are in big cities and have the luxury of going and trying a "professional" camera in a working and environment and thus determining if it is "everything" you need. I leave in Ohio and I'm near Cleveland and Akron and only 1.5 hours from Pittsburgh, and I have never been able to find pro gear to try. In light of that I have purchased all 5 of my cameras in the last 12 years via mail order. Canon A1, Canon XL1, DVX100, Canon XL2 and now the HVX200. At least in this day and age I have sites like this to read reviews and honest opinions on the equipment that I buy.

Now obviously I am not in the "high end" pro realm. I do shoot professionally and get paid for it but I don't spend $50K on my cameras. BUt just the same I feel a lot of people have to rely on reading reviews on-line or magazines and buying what they think will work best for them. We can't always get access to this equpiment for in-person evaluation.

Having said all this you should "buy" from a reliable dealer who will give you your money back or at least allow you to get a different camera if the one you buy turns out to not be suited to you.

when everyone was lynching HDV cameras, that it produces horrible artifacts, that its just a consumer format..etc back in May/June... where was the civility? did they all own a HDV camera?

I wonder why when it comes to Panasonic everyone is hush hush?

So whoever has the camera, please focus on the images it produces & not the menus,formats, codecs, p2 etc.... and I donno what Chris means by usabilty forum... (I am a usabilty anaylst) - but I don't want to know how user friendly HVX is...

i just want to know how good of an HD image it produces... does it have noise in natural lighted scenes...

Part of the Kool Aid is the passive acceptance of Panasonic's refusal to provide information on the CCDs. I've been covering Panasonic camera's for almost 15 years and CCD specs have always been provided. Moreover, whenever the numbers are better than their past cameras or any competitor's camera, they have marketed this point. AS THEY SHOULD!


Have u noticed -
whenever it suits them they talk about numbers (DVCPRO v/s HDV, bitrates, 4:2:2 color space), and whenever it doesnt suit them...its all about the image (CCD Specs, Lens..etc)

I'm sure some of you are in big cities and have the luxury of going and trying a "professional" camera in a working and environment and thus determining if it is "everything" you need. I leave in Ohio and I'm near Cleveland and Akron and only 1.5 hours from Pittsburgh, and I have never been able to find pro gear to try. In light of that I have purchased all 5 of my cameras in the last 12 years via mail order. Canon A1, Canon XL1, DVX100, Canon XL2 and now the HVX200. At least in this day and age I have sites like this to read reviews and honest opinions on the equipment that I buy.

Now obviously I am not in the "high end" pro realm. I do shoot professionally and get paid for it but I don't spend $50K on my cameras. BUt just the same I feel a lot of people have to rely on reading reviews on-line or magazines and buying what they think will work best for them. We can't always get access to this equpiment for in-person evaluation.

Having said all this you should "buy" from a reliable dealer who will give you your money back or at least allow you to get a different camera if the one you buy turns out to not be suited to you.

I understand your issue but it still doesn't make sense to me. Even if they don't have access to a camera, why don't they wait until it has been released and get feedback from professionals who actually have the gear? Anyhow, I'm amazed at the whole concept and I am beginning to think that maybe it has more to do with marketing cash and less to do with reality.

By the way, if you are going to spend 10,000 for a camera and accessories, a cheap flight to a city that has a store that has the camera might be in order. It is probably worth the investment.

Well, I'm going to adopt the old fashioned approach and rent one for a day or so ...
This whole "order and pay" thingy over the 'net sight unseen sends my wallet into spasms. Maybe it's hungry ... ?

dear all,

is there a way to have a test drive from a one subjective pro DOP to take the 4Cams and test them:

01) same resolution chart.
02) same low light.
03) same day light
04) same .......

then post.....

something like :
www.tomshardware.com for new hardware and benchmarkes.....

thanks,
Amr

By the way, if you are going to spend 10,000 for a camera and accessories, a cheap flight to a city that has a store that has the camera might be in order. It is probably worth the investment.

That's a good idea and I have thought of it many times. However I am usually on a very tight budget and even with the HVX I am only spending $5400.00. Not near $10K. Also I need every penny so even a cheap flight can detract from the funds for the purchase. Oh....I wish I could be have money burning a hole in my pocket to just spend it! As it is I don't know how I am going to afford a case for the HVX!!!

Peace!

So you're already squared away on the editing side, with a Mac and Final Cut Pro, right?

I agree with most of what you have stated. I love Panasonic (DVX100 rocked) but there is a real trend (not on these boards exclusively) for people to just brush off comments that are potentially negative about the Panasonic as unimportant... yet if some of these "first impressions" mentioned potential noise on the XLH1 or JVC it would be getting ripped up one side and down the other. There is a weird sort of "magic" over the HVX that seems to make us all want to not see anything bad in it. Like when you are in love you don't see the bad in you girl (or boy).



You just nailed it. That's exactly what goes on in any Panasonic board. I have seen people get humiliated just because they dared to point a real flaw in the DVX or HVX.
Truth is, it's out, and I'm not impressed by what I've seen so far. Not for 10k anyways.

So you're already squared away on the editing side, with a Mac and Final Cut Pro, right?

Chris,
If you are directing that to me I have 2 different answers.

1)I am still going to be editing most of my immediate projects in SD/DV so I will still be on my XP workstation for that. I am not in a huge hurry to go full blown HD. I can afford to dabble as the clients get up to speed and the software matures a little.

2)I do have a Mac-mini and access to 4 different G5's at the office though they are dedicated to graphics so I'd have to use those after hours. I also do have a copy of Final Cut Pro at the office but never needed to use it. However with several reports that you can actually do a little work on the mini (with DVCPRO-HD) I am going to test it out and see how I like it. I currently use Livetype 2 for most of my titles anyway then bring them over to the PC for compositing in Premiere or AE.

Tonight I am going to try some of Kaku's clips in FCP and see how the performance is. I am not expecting much but anything right now is better than nothing.

Also.....I sold my RTX100 Matrox card and breakout and was able to add 1 4GB P2 card onto my order so I can at least get access to the variable frame rates that the HVX offers. Even if I downsample to a DV tape that is still a feature that no other SD camera can boast.

I for one would love to know the CCD specs. It is important. If Panasonic are using low res CCD's and upscaling for 1080

That's pretty obvious I would say. If the camera had 1920x1080 CCDs, why would they hide it? The fact the CCD specs is being held from consumers even after release can't mean anything but inferior numbers, regardless of if it impacts image quality or not.

Yes Marty that was directed at you and I really like your answer. It makes perfect sense to use the camera for SD recording for now, and then move up to HD later. That's the way I'd probably play it myself.

Either that, or I'll go Mac for the first time ever. Thereby shocking all of my Mac friends.

That's pretty obvious I would say. If the camera had 1920x1080 CCDs, why would they hide it? The fact the CCD specs is being held from consumers even after release can't mean anything but inferior numbers, regardless of if it impacts image quality or not.

Not necessarily true. Sure, I'd love to know the CCD details, but there are a few reasons that Panasonic could be keeping them under wraps other than the pixel count being inferior. But no matter how hard Panasonic tries, sooner or later someone is going to figure it out anyway...

My guess is that the CCDs have a native res of 1024x768 or something very close to that. Just a personal theory of mine and based on what I've seen of the clips so far. I really do think the chips have a higher resolution than 720 lines vertical, which would be the minimum (with pixel shift) to scan a 1080p equivalent. IMO, I'm seeing more vertical detail than what we're seeing from the JVC HD100 that has 1280x720 native CCDs (also with pixel shift). Horizontally the image seems to be softened a bit and this could be that DVCPROHD already undersamples 1080i as 1280x1080 rather than the 1440x1080 of HDV and other formats. But it could also mean that the horizontal pixel count is lower than we would expect. Could it be possible that we're looking at a 16:9 CCD that has an odd pixel photosite (pixel) aspect that would be something like 860Hx820V ? Hmmm....

Are you seeing actual detail, or are you seeing aperture correction and coring?

What it boils down to is whether it produces a decent picture or not. Lets imagine for arguments sake that the FX1 has a 2mp ccd and the HVX had a 1mp ccd. Now imagine that the HVX had more picture contorl, handled a wider contrast range, and reproduced colours better. Resolution numbers don't mean much now do they?

I don't support one or the other, but if you like the picture a camera produces, then go with that camera. The main limitation of these cameras is not the ccd block, but the lens.

Want to know something strange? Some people often go for the Varicam over HDCAM because of the softer 'film' look. Some claim that HDCAM is too sharp (despite many setups in use actually turning all the detail circuits, and hence artificial edge enhancement off).

There are limitations with DVCproHD. There are limitations with HDV and HDCAM too. Which leads me to something else.

Many are claiming that certain codecs fall apart under heavy post adjustment and codec a is better than codec b for bluescreen/greenscreen etc. Some questions.

1. What ITH are you doing with your footage in order to have to push it so far?!

2. Taking into acount all the questions about bluscreen and greenscreen, where are all these composited videos being shown? Is everyone just talking about these effects or are they actually making them?

3. What do you expect for 6k?

I'm seeing more vertical detail than what we're seeing from the JVC HD100 that has 1280x720 native CCDs (also with pixel shift)

The HD100 employs no pixel shift, the resolution is native.
I'm not sure the clips I have seen are any sharper than what the HD100 produces. It's sure more colorful, but not sharper. Most seem to agree the 1080 is uprezed 720.

About the reason they are hiding the CCD specs, reading your post I got the impression you agree it may be inferior pixel count, even though you started saying it may not be so. So I got a little confused over your opinion here.

Want to know something strange? Some people often go for the Varicam over HDCAM because of the softer 'film' look. Some claim that HDCAM is too sharp (despite many setups in use actually turning all the detail circuits, and hence artificial edge enhancement off).

This may be true for TV movies, but for theatrical released movies HDCAM is preferred exactly for being sharper. I personally never heard of a major movie shot on the Varicam.



3. What do you expect for 6k?

For 6k the HVX is just a DV25 camera right?

This may be true for TV movies, but for theatrical released movies HDCAM is preferred exactly for being sharper. I personally never heard of a major movie shot on the Varicam.

And since TV movies and documentary is where most HD is being used, that is what I was referring to. There aren't all that many movies being shot with HDCAM either.

For 6k the HVX is just a DV25 camera right?

Pretty much, yes.

I donwloaded the DVCPro50 raw MXF files offered and all I can say is NOISE. I'm looking at them raw with no transcode or anything (my editor supports the raw MXF).

I wish I could report better news but it is "rub my eyes" noisy.

it looked like webcam! :(

when everyone was lynching HDV cameras, that it produces horrible artifacts, that its just a consumer format..etc back in May/June... where was the civility? did they all own a HDV camera?

I wonder why when it comes to Panasonic everyone is hush hush?


It's simple, the DVX100 delivered in a way no one had dreamed and now it created a loyal fan-base, though some may not want to admit it. I love Panasonic and am pretty loyal to them because they deliver. I think Sony sucks for a number of reason (mostly their corporate culture and they don't seem to care about their "fans" = buyers) but I'll probably buy a Sony FX1 this year. I'll probably sale the Sony and get an HVX next year. (Or maybe keep them both if money's good). The fact is Panasonic is known to deliver based on not only the needs but the "wants" of the prosumer market and this will get you far everytime. Canon seems to do this also. Sony, not so much.

-Nate

No it's not good. I can't understand why. The HVX can be such an awesome camera. I fear it may be inferior ccd's that are causing this.

By the way I just got back from Promax after and exhausting capture from an XLh1 of material I filmed at Birns and Sawyer. I will be posting jpegs for now taken straight from the tape via sd card. look for them later. Early thoughts on what I have seen are they look good. I hate log and capture, I wish the H1 had P2 slots.......


Michael Pappas
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
PappasArts & Arrfilms Main site

XLH1 and HVX200 frame grabs and news here:
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms

http://www.PappasArts.com
http://www.Myspace.com/

Michael,

you've worked with both the HVX and the XLH1.

Wich one do you prefer ?
How would you compare the image quality ?

I know it is subjective, but...

The HD100 employs no pixel shift, the resolution is native.
I'm not sure the clips I have seen are any sharper than what the HD100 produces. It's sure more colorful, but not sharper. Most seem to agree the 1080 is uprezed 720.

Hmmm.... Are you sure there's no pixel shift (at least horizontal) on the HD100? I could swear there is....

About the reason they are hiding the CCD specs, reading your post I got the impression you agree it may be inferior pixel count, even though you started saying it may not be so. So I got a little confused over your opinion here.

Sorry if I confused, I kinda started rambling. Yes, I think the pixel count is inferior to the H1. I do believe that the vertical pixel count is greater than 720 - looking at individual frames, there is definitely more vertical detail in the 1080 footage than the 720, so I doubt it's simply up-scaled 720. Look at raw frames in Photoshop or other app and look at the edge "enhancements" and halos. They like to stretch horizontally. Is this a sign of lower horizontal res (rectangular CCD pixels that are elongated horizontally) or is it a factor of the DVCPROHD codec using 960x720 & 1280x1080 resolutions which must be stretched horizontally for proper playback or is it a combination of both?

Hmmm.... Are you sure there's no pixel shift (at least horizontal) on the HD100? I could swear there is....

The HD-100 uses full resolution 1280x720 chips. They use no shifting. JVC gambled on native rez chips and I think it pays off in great quality and predictable results.

I have seen some very impressive results from the HD100. It's actually kind of shocking...I think it has the best 24p "look" of them all. It's a subjective thing for sure, but it seemed to have the most filmic motion of them all.

Things I've seen look like really good Super16. It's too bad JVC has a bit of a stigma to overcome. I look forward to their next version. Hopefully with higher bit rates, frame rates, and SDI.

deliver. I think Sony sucks for a number of reason (mostly their corporate culture and they don't seem to care about their "fans" = buyers) but I'll probably buy a

On the contrary. Sony listens quite intently. But it isn't going to make something that conflicts with its own overall strategy.

I take it that you are referring to progressive scan when you say that they don't care about their fans or buyers? There's more to life than a 'p'. Do you actually think that a company is going to sacrifice customers just to be awkward?

If you want to see corporate attitude at work look no further than Panasonic. Or ask any product reviewer unlucky enough to say anything negative about their stuff. Panasonic do not welcome criticism of any form. Sony on the other hand don't mind at all. In fact the very reason why Showreel mags Sony XDCAM supplement was created by an independent magazine was precisely because Sony wanted an independent viewpoint, warts and all. Panasonic would never ever even contemplate such an idea.