Canon XL H1, AG-HVX200, or What?

[Ken Hodson]

Originally Posted by Tim Kolb

I guess I shouldn't have used the word "native"...or at least specify whether I meant the image format or the codec.

Not sure what "WORD" you should have used? Point is DVCproHD records a lot less pixels (960X720). Fair?
I would love a further explanation, as I'm not getting the logic you are going with. Please help.
Kenobi

[Tim Kolb]

Originally Posted by Ken Hodson

Not sure what "WORD" you should have used? Point is DVCproHD records a lot less pixels (960X720). Fair?
I would love a further explanation, as I'm not getting the logic you are going with. Please help.
Kenobi

Oh, I absolutely agree... My original point was just to balance the pros and cons of the panasonic HVX200 vs the Canon HDV cams.

When I was talking about the sensors in the cameras, the point I was attempting to make was that the Canon is shooting a format that produces a 1440x1080 image...not a 1920x1080 image that is recorded at 1440 like HDcam, but an anamorphic 1440x1080 image...and it's sensors are 1440x1080. (Yes, it does upres to 1920 for HDSDI out as SDI requires square pixels, but that's a different concept). And in the case of the JVC flavor of HDV, we actually have a camera with a 1280x720 sensor making a 1280x720 image.

The DVC proHD format is similar to the HDcam format in that it has a recorded frame size in-file that is smaller than it's playback frame size (1920x1080 for HDcam and 1280x720 for DVC proHD).

Mac accesses DVC ProHD directly, and now many other programs can grab P2 media directly as data, and that's where we see it with a framesize of 960x720 non-square, but that is not the SMPTE 296M spec, it's a storage format. We never see HDcam footage as 1440x1080 because we don't work with HDcam footage as data. We run it in through HDSDI, which is what DVC ProHD was originally designed to do. In comparison, HDV has no storage framesize vs playback framesize (for its standard, FireWire workflow), but it is temporally compressed.

So...one way or another the HVX200 has a lot of work to do. Since the Varicam has 1280x720 sensors, one would assume that the image is 1280x720 at some point in the camera...subsampled as 960x720 to be recorded, and it's played out at 1280x720. You note that DVC ProHD's native framesize is 960x720...which might then lead someone to believe that the HVX200 only pixel-shifts vertically from 540 to 720, leaving the 960 as "native". AFAIK, the image from the 960x540 sensor is pixel-shifted to 1280x720, recorded at 960x720...and if you ingest via HDSDI (which is what most of us had to do for a handful of years as it was the only option), the image is played out at 1280x720.

Anyway, I'll stop wasting bandwidth at this point. The whole idea was to point out that all of these cameras have their drawbacks and while I have worked with an HVX200 and really like the images, it's not the all-encompassing answer to every question.

...sorry for not being clear enough. It's a struggle to stay brief but be specific.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Anthony Marotti

I only have seen a glimps of the new Sony EX, and no pricing. Do you have a link to that type of info?

There is a whole section on this forum : http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/forumdisplay.php?f=150 and specifically this thread: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=91594

[Thomas Smet]

The decision is really up to you. Nobody here or anywhere or even myself can give you the perfect magical answer as to which camera is better. In fact they are all pretty equal give or take a few points here and there. I tend to think of the cameras as more like film stocks where they are all film but they all have a different look to them. While the HVX200 may be slightly softer it does have a nice overall rich clean look to it. You could have 1000 people tell you one camera is perfect while another 1000 will tell you their camera is perfect. In this price range nothing is perfect. Heck even HDCAM and the F900 has it's limitations.

Your best option is to look at footage shot with each camera and check the cameras out for yourself to make your own judgement on which one works for you. What works for me may not work for you and I would never begin to even think everybody else in the world would have the same tastes as me. Maybe you can find somebody that lives near you that has some of the cameras in question so you can check them out to see how they look and feel.

The other thing to do would be to search these forums on this subject and on the subject of each of the cameras in question. There have been hundreds of topics on what each camera brings to the table and you will get more information there then you will in your own topic here.

[Tim Kolb]

Originally Posted by Thomas Smet

The decision is really up to you. In this price range nothing is perfect. Heck even HDCAM and the F900 has it's limitations.

Your best option is to look at footage shot with each camera and check the cameras out for yourself to make your own judgement on which one works for you.

...hmmm. So I suppose I just could have said this and saved myself a lot of typing...

In my own defense, when I do say it this way on most any forum I post on, I'm always challenged.

Well said.

[Thomas Smet]

Originally Posted by Anthony Marotti

I recently directed a commercial and the DP that we used had a AG-HVX200. He raved about the camera (he owned it so I would expect him to) and mentioned the fact that it could output uncompressed video (might have needed a 3rd party product?) and how the end result was so much better than the Canon.

Thanks in advance :-)

This is another example of people feeding useless and wrong facts just because they own a camera. Like what was said by other people at one point any HD camera including a single chip HDV consumer camera will have live uncompressed output via component cables. The reason why this statement by the DP was really stupid is because the Panasonic only has component outputs which are analog. The Canon XLH1 has HD-SDI which is digital and higher quality. The SONY V1 uses HDMI which is just as good as HD-SDI and it is also digital.

So the Panasonic would be one of the last cameras I would consider to use if I was going to capture live as uncompressed or lightly compressed. The Panasonic is a nice camera but the point the DP gave you is just plain ignorant.

[Mathieu Ghekiere]

I think the workflow of an HVX200 is more complicated then the Canon's.
Besides of the 24f (which is now almost supported by most big NLE's, no? or am I wrong), it's smaller data, and on regular cheap mini dv cassettes.

Panasonic has variable frame rates though.
Canon higher resolution and the A1 is one of the best 'bang for the buck' around now.

There is also the XD CAM EX, announced by Sony ,which looks VERY interesting.

ps: the reason why I think some people advice you to skip the XL H1 is, although it's a fantastic camera, besides of the interchangible lens system, audio controls and ergonomics (which could all be very important to you, you decide!), the A1 and G1 give you an equal picture on a smaller pricetag with some extra's even (more custom presets and manual iris ring).
And the G1 has also audio over it's HDSDI, which the H1 doesn't have.

If you don't need the HD-SDI: go for the Canon A1, would be my advice.


Or you could buy a RED camera with Nikon lenses ;-) Héhé

[Kyle Prohaska]

I haven't seen anyone mention actual camera performance compared. Not image, but actual latitude, etc. For instance, the HVX eats light. If your looking to do commercials (and I know this sounds shallow) but what camera will "look" the best? HVX and A1 is small whereas the XLH1 or HPX will have a definite PRO look to them. I had an XL2 and got nothing but stares from people. Clients wont know any other way to judge the equipment you have except what it looks like...and if they had to blindly pick between someone with an HPX or w/e, and an HVX....I think they'd opt for the "bigger" camera. Just something to keep in mind. Clients are dumb, even if you show them footage (if you get that far), they wont have any idea of how good your equipment is except what they see with their eye and what it looks like.

Something to chew.

BTW, if you have that kind of budget, look at the bigger cams for sure.

- Kyle

[Anthony Marotti]

Originally Posted by Thomas Smet

This is another example of people feeding useless and wrong facts just because they own a camera. Like what was said by other people at one point any HD camera including a single chip HDV consumer camera will have live uncompressed output via component cables. The reason why this statement by the DP was really stupid is because the Panasonic only has component outputs which are analog. The Canon XLH1 has HD-SDI which is digital and higher quality. The SONY V1 uses HDMI which is just as good as HD-SDI and it is also digital.

So the Panasonic would be one of the last cameras I would consider to use if I was going to capture live as uncompressed or lightly compressed. The Panasonic is a nice camera but the point the DP gave you is just plain ignorant.

That is what I thought, but he said that with this 3rd party magic device he could get 4:4:4 output ???

Maybe it could dust my studio as well :-)

[Ken Hodson]

Real Stream has a product called Hydra. It is a hardware add-on. It comes with a stiff price.
http://forum.reel-stream.com/viewtopic.php?t=663

[Anthony Marotti]

Originally Posted by Ken Hodson

Real Stream has a product called Hydra. It is a hardware add-on. It comes with a stiff price.
http://forum.reel-stream.com/viewtopic.php?t=663

Well, I guess he was right and my suspicions were unfounded !

[Sergio Perez]

I ask you this because with 25k you can buy into cameras a LOT better than those posted: The HPX 500 (20k with lens), or the "revolutionary" RED Camera (23K with Lens).

What where you getting, in this 2 cameras?

Panasonic HPX500- Variable frame rates in 720p, 2/3 ccd's, 1080p 25/24 recording, lovely Panasonic cinegamma (subjective). Camera package comes with 4 16gb P2 cards.

Positive- Already available; Proven Workflow; Broadcast ready, with both 1080 and 720p recording; 2/3 CCD's for added sensitivity and dinamic range

Cons- Pixel Shifted CCD's from lower resolution chips (don't know the exact figure), P2- positive or negative is subjective, but its a different workflow.

RED Camera- 4k recording (resolution 2.5x more than 1080!), variable frame rates up to 120fps (not definitive) in 2k, records to CF cards most of the 25/24fps modes. 35mm size sensor- Capable of using still 35mm lenses.

Pros- Camera already being used by famed filmmakers like Sodebergh, Peter Jackson, and others. This says a lot.

Cons- New boy in town; NLE support; First cameras out might have minor bugs; Not yet available (should ship this month); Waiting time- with 2 000 preorders or more, if ordered now one should see a camera...by the end of 2008.

I own and operate an HVX200, but have seen impressive stuff with the XL-H1. Don't forget, your production is not only the camera. When you buy an HVX or an XL-H1, you're also allowing yourself to have less expensive support equipment that does the same job as the heavy duty equipment for bigger cameras- dollies, cranes, steadicam's, etc. This is also important to take into consideration!

Cheers

Sérgio

[Anthony Marotti]

Hello,

Thanks for the valued info.!

I would love a lot of the new gear out, or coming out, but you hit it on the head, these cameras mentioned are already out and can be edited using less sophisticated equipment.

I'm still leaning toward the Canon, but for some unknown reason I wish that I had a better alternative :?:

[Sergio Perez]

Originally Posted by Anthony Marotti

Hello,

Thanks for the valued info.!

I would love a lot of the new gear out, or coming out, but you hit it on the head, these cameras mentioned are already out and can be edited using less sophisticated equipment.

I'm still leaning toward the Canon, but for some unknown reason I wish that I had a better alternative :?:

I suggest you take a look at the Panasonic HPX500- its already available, its Pal/Ntsc compatible, and its editable with an Imac or Macbook pro. DVCPRO HD is very edit friendly. What I said is that this so called " bigger and heavier cameras" need support gear that is a lot more expensive than DV grade support gear... If I had a 25K budget, needed a camera immediately, I wouldn't hesitate on going HPX500... Mainly because I already own a G5 that's P2 ready and a tripod that can handle that camera...The only thing that would be useless for me would be my Glidecam 4000 with smooth shooter...

Also, take a look at the Silicon Imaging Mini. I forgot to mention this camera. I believe there's a forum here about that camera, take a look. Sounds promissing on paper, and its already released- I have no experience whatsoever with it, tough.

[Anthony Marotti]

Thanks Again !

BTW I am a Premiere Pro 2 and soon PPro CS3 user. I heard that your camera is mac friendly, would the Canon be more suited to my editing workflow?

Thanks!!

AM