AG-HVX200 vs GY-HD100U for Adventure Sports

[Jeremy Clark]

Hello.. I'm trying to make a purchase decision between the Panasonic and JVC based on shooting adventure sports - extreme mountain biking, kayaking, skiing, rock climbing, sailing, racing events, and aerial water & mountain footage. My understanding is that 60p works better for fast motion (vs 30p), but how much better? I really like the JVC, but if it's that much of a difference, then I'll spend the money on the Panasonic, P2 cards and Firestore. While the JVC HD200 does come out later this year (in 60p), it's also got a price tag of around $8k. I'm also interested in exporting stills, so perhaps the Panasonic in 60p would provide the best still frame vs a JVC in 30? A lot of my hesitation going with the Panasonic has to do with ergonomics and complete reliability (and cost) on solid state. Perhaps I've already answered my own question (Panasonic is probably better form me), but suggestions are welcome.

Thanks!
Jeremy

[Douglas Spotted Eagle]

Based on experience with both, I'd suggest this:
The JVC will give you the better image color depth due to it's imager, and non-bitstarved stream, assuming the camera is attached to one of the vehicles involved in the extreme sport. But you need to take the GOP somewhat into consideration. The HD100 is the only full raster, low cost HD solution right now. That has some significant benefits. *If *the HD200 has full raster sampling at 60p, it's safe to assume it will be a visibly, if not significantly, more accurate image than the Panny.
The Panny won't have GOP considerations, but it has less information to start with, as it's resampling the pix both vertically and horizontally. We tried it on a motorcycle, and it was less usable than the Sony A1U or the Z1.
Then you have to consider over/undercrank, which is very useful for sports and high action, and none of the HDV camcorders offer over/under crank while the Panny does.
There is no "complete reliability" in solid state. Period. That's far, far more hype and theory than reality. You're taking the card in/out at least 10 times an hour if not more, (27 times in 1080 mode) and that can easily compromise the workflow and reliability. Additionally, where does the P2 data end up? On a hard drive. Always. That also incurs some compromise to "complete reliability." On the other hand, if you use 720 native, you'll cut about half the capture time from your workflow.

In other words...each has its advantages and disadvantages, and you need to determine which compromises you're ready to make.

[Ken Hodson]

One thing to consider is the 480p60 mode of the JVC. Yes it is SD but it is true 16:9 and does not use the lower quality DV codec. We have found that it upsamples to 720p very well. Use the 720p30 for locked down or long shots, and the 480p60 for all of the high motion shots. I would hate to think of how fast a P2 card would disapear at 60fps! The JVC will give you a full hour on the HDV tape.
Maybe rent a cam and see how well the 480p60 mode works for you.

[Jeremy Clark]

Hey Dougles (or do you prefer Doug?).. I attended several of your classes this year at NAB and met you briefly at Adobe's booth. Great job - I learned a lot from you, especially with regards to audio. I'm excited to see your name on the reply & thanks for the feedback :)

Ken.. being that you're in Vancouver, are you shooting bikers in Northshore or going to Crankworx? I can't wait to go again this year. I'm in Seattle, and frequent Whistler - thank you for the info as well, much appreciated. I'm leaning toward the JVC now.

[Ken Hodson]

I actuall live north of Van in a small town called Powell River. But people actually know where Van is ;>)
No mountain bikes, but some hand-held running shots and some close up traffic with a pan. Looked awsome. I don't normally shoot 60p unless I will be using it for a slow-mo. Unless you are disrtibuting in 720p60 HDTV, there is no point in shooting at that frame rate. All my work is for DVD, so no point.

[Douglas Spotted Eagle]

Originally Posted by Ken Hodson

One thing to consider is the 480p60 mode of the JVC. Yes it is SD but it is true 16:9 and does not use the lower quality DV codec. We have found that it upsamples to 720p very well. Use the 720p30 for locked down or long shots, and the 480p60 for all of the high motion shots. I would hate to think of how fast a P2 card would disapear at 60fps! The JVC will give you a full hour on the HDV tape.
Maybe rent a cam and see how well the 480p60 mode works for you.

I'll second that the 480p60 upsamples well. I have images of upsampled footage in my newest book on HDV, showing how the BR 50 upsamples. It's a pleasant surprise when you go to work with it. Of course, it's entirely dependent on the hardware or software you use to upsample as to the results you'll achieve.

Jeremy, most friends call me "Spot." Thanks for the kind words.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Douglas Spotted Eagle

In other words...each has its advantages and disadvantages, and you need to determine which compromises you're ready to make.

I'd second that wholeheartedly. And add that one of the biggest disadvantages (IMO) of the HD100 v the HVX200 is due to go away shortly with the arrival of the HD200 and true 720p/60. P2 may be good in some circumstances, but I'm not sure action sports is one of them, and if you intend doing a lot of handheld work, the HD100 is a far nicer camera to handhold. The addition of a Firestore gives it back many of the tapeless advantages of P2 working.

[Wayne Morellini]

What about the DVCPRO50 mode on the Pana?

Douglas, can you explain further what you mean by the problems with the Pana?

Thanks.

[Douglas Spotted Eagle]

Originally Posted by Wayne Morellini

What about the DVCPRO50 mode on the Pana?

Douglas, can you explain further what you mean by the problems with the Pana?

Thanks.

I didn't realize I'd cited "problems" with the Panny? I said the cam isn't useable as a 1080 camera on a fast moving dirtbike, and even if it had been, I don't know that I'd consider it for such work. With tape or Firestore, we can put a cam in a safetybag for an hour. It takes quite a bit of time to put the cam in a bag and seal it, then mount it. If I have to do it every 8, 12, or 16 minutes, it becomes a huge problem. Add to that taking the card in/out/in/out/in/out etc in a very dusty environment, it's not going to survive. Either the card, computer, or camera are going to suffer some sort of failure, almost guaranteed. With a Firestore, we can do several hours in a bag, starting and stopping with a remote, never opening the safety bag.
In its native mode, the Panny is a good camera, not outstanding, IMO. It's just not what I'd been led to believe it was gonna be.

[Wayne Morellini]

?

Originally Posted by Douglas Spotted Eagle

..-bitstarved stream..but it has less information to start with, as it's resampling the pix both vertically and horizontally. We tried it on a motorcycle, and it was less usable than the Sony A1U or the Z1.

What context do you mean?

I think I have heard of a hard drive interface to the PS slots, but how does tape hold up under these conditions?

[Douglas Spotted Eagle]

I don't consider that a "problem", I consider that how the cam was designed.
You've got a cam with an imager that is 720 x 540. PAL SD is 720 x 576. Using pixel shifting, the cam upsamples that image to 1280 x 720. That works fine for 720p. I personally prefer the JVC, but it's not enough of a diff, IMO, to call one "significantly" better than the other. That said, now take that same 720 x 540 image and upsample it to 1920 x 1080. Then it becomes bitstarved, and by no stretch of the wildest imagination is it "4:2:2" media. The Sony and Canon both are better by a long shot when it comes to color richness and quality of overall image.
As far as tape on a motorcycle, we've been mounting cams to Xbikes for years, no issues at all. Nicest thing of all, is that removing the mic mount from the Z1 allows it to fit a safety bag made for a PD 150. Shooting dirt events kills all cams regardless, after about 6 months of shooting if you're careful. I'd wager that an HVX might last for a month tops, because it's always gonna be out of the bag, in the dirt, and taking in dirt/dust/etc every few minutes. You can't run off the track every few minutes to dump.
There are indeed HDD recorders for the HVX, but that sorta kills the value of P2, doesn't it? The whole marketing concept of P2 is "No moving parts." Eventually, it's gonna end up on an HDD anyway tho, if you're going to be editing.
Again, I don't see these as problems, I see them as part of the format/design/element of the camera. Just like you're not going to see great low light capability in an A1U, just like you're not likely going to be happy with the CF24 in a Z1, and just like you're not going to be happy with the servo in the XLH1, or the potential for split screen in the HD100. In other words, every cam has its faults. You just have to decide what you're going to do with it.
Kinda like the story of the 10.00 hooker....We know what it is, now we just gotta establish the price we're going to pay.

[Barry Green]

Originally Posted by Douglas Spotted Eagle

You've got a cam with an imager that is 720 x 540. PAL SD is 720 x 576. Using pixel shifting, the cam upsamples that image to 1280 x 720.

This is not correct, the sensors are 960 x 540, and are scanned at 1920x1080, and all internal processing is done at 1920 x 1080. Panasonic claims a de-bayered, de-mosaic'd resolution of 1440 x 810 pixels, and resolution charts show that it's every bit a match for the JVC and Sony.
http://www.fiftv.com/HVX200/3-Cams-Charts.JPG

That said, now take that same 720 x 540 image and upsample it to 1920 x 1080. Then it becomes bitstarved

Not correct. It's always 1920 x 1080 internally, and at no point is it "bit starved" (which is a term used to describe what happens when HDV runs out of bits in its GOP). The image doesn't have enough discrete definition to fully round out a 1920 x 1080 display, but then again neither do the Canon or Sony in their 1080 modes either.

and by no stretch of the wildest imagination is it "4:2:2" media.

Again, quite disagreed. One doesn't need to stretch their imagination, they only need to look at the footage and the HVX is notably higher in color resolution than the 4:2:0 competition.

Here's an example, a blown-up extraction of a JVC HD100 shot vs. an HVX200 shot. You'll notice much more clarity vertically in color definition, which is exactly what one would expect when comparing 4:2:2 to 4:2:0, as both sampling systems provide the same horizontal chroma res, but 4:2:2 is twice the vertical color resolution. Again, exactly what the comparison footage shows:
http://www.members.shaw.ca/petermhsu/barrypic.jpg

The Sony and Canon both are better by a long shot when it comes to color richness and quality of overall image.

Again, I respectfully disagree, and I submit that what has been stated here is one man's subjective opinion, and there are many, many who would disagree with that, most especially on the subject of color richness.

Visit the various camera forums here on DVInfo, all of them feature clips that can be downloaded, clips that have been posted by shooters who are generous enough to share them. For the HVX, I'd recommend looking up the clips by Steev Dinkins, Cassidy Bisher, and the Wolves footage from Kevin Railsback. For the HD100, look for clips posted by Stephen Noe. For the XLH1, Barlow Elton and Steve Dempsey have posted excellent footage. For the Sony, vasst.com has several clips available.

Just like you're not going to see great low light capability in an A1U, just like you're not likely going to be happy with the CF24 in a Z1, and just like you're not going to be happy with the servo in the XLH1, or the potential for split screen in the HD100. In other words, every cam has its faults. You just have to decide what you're going to do with it.

On that element we are in complete agreement. Every product in this price range has unique capabilities that make them more suitable for some jobs than for others. People would probably serve themselves best by choosing between these tools based on the differences in functionality/ergonomics/lens/battery life/tape/P2 etc., rather than worrying about pixels here or there.

[Douglas Spotted Eagle]

Originally Posted by Barry Green

Again, I respectfully disagree, and I submit that what has been stated here is one man's subjective opinion, and there are many, many who would disagree with that, most especially on the subject of color richness.

re.

Of course, it's subjective...based on our particular RW uses of the cams and not shots of flowers, charts, or cars moving down a street. YMMV.

[Wayne Morellini]

Originally Posted by Douglas Spotted Eagle

same 720 x 540 image and upsample it to 1920 x 1080. Then it becomes bitstarved, and by no stretch of the wildest imagination is it "4:2:2" media.

That is the confusing bit, it has upto 100Mb/s, and you seam to be implying that the interpolation effects the amount of bits it has, which i now understand that you are implying something else.

I would have thought that the high bit rates for HVX would out do the bit starved 19Mb/s GOP structure.

There are indeed HDD recorders for the HVX, but that sorta kills the value of P2, doesn't it? The whole marketing concept of P2 is "No moving parts." Eventually, it's gonna end up on an HDD anyway tho, if you're going to be editing.

But a hard drive is a lot cheaper than flash, who cares about marketing fantasies.

[Jarred Land]

back to the topic.. not that resolution isn't important but its kinda not.

The HVX does have some incredible features for adventure sports.

First of all P2.. its a tapeless non moving recording format. I used to race mountain bikes and I have strapped a dvx to road bikes and mountain bikes.. and when things got rough the tape heads would slide and garble the footage up... you dont get that with a solid state cards. Heck even when I was in NY doing a 3 way shootout with the cameras the Sony got bumped for less than a second and it resulted in a gop half a second drop.

About the time thing.. two 8gb cards gives you 40 minutes in 720pn mode.. sure thats a bit far from 60 minutes on tape, but later this summer when the 16gb cards come out (probally at the same price the 8gb are now) it gives you 80 minutes of non stop record.. so it will beat Tape. period. And dont start on the whole cost thing because Ive already saved enough money not buying tape stock to pay for my P2 cards.

Another thing is the slow motion and fast motion cranking of the camera that is very unique.. for sports its invaluable.

Another thing is the prerecord feature of the HVX.. you can sit and point at something and press the button 5 seconds after it happens and the camera automatically records it.. so if your standing at a jump waiting for the guys to come out of the trees you dont need to sit there and burn through tape waiting.. you just press the record button when you see them, it takes the pre-record and lays down all your shot. Of course this saves disk space and "capture" time as well all the way down the line.

The last thing is durability.. I would like to bet, but am not about to test it myself, is that the HVX would survive alot more beating than the JVC. I could be wrong though there.. thats just a wild guess.