HD100 compared to HVX200
 

For those that like to compare cameras, here is a fairly thorough analysis conducted by Walter Graff of Bluesky Media:

http://www.bluesky-web.com/HDVHVX.htm

Thanks Andrew.

It was quite a thorough comparison and I agree with his conclusions, I only wish he had compared the motion signature with the motion smoothing turned off.
Each of these cameras are superb at progressive capture, and each is ideal for different purposes.
As I told Barry Green the other day at the Panasonic booth, I'm considering having a HVX200 on the truck the next time I shoot something with alot of stunts. The small size and 60P recording would make it an ideal crash cam substitute for an eyemo or a great overcranked B-Cam for fight action. I also like that you can set a shutter angle that locks to the frame rate. I hope JVC adds a similar function to the new models.

Hey Tim,

Don't you ever sleep? The forum is lucky to have you...
Agreed. Not sure why he did that. Motion smoothing is not for me. I also agree with your likes on the HVX. There is a lot to like about that camera. The HD100 just suits me better for most appps.

Not to hijack this thread... but... I'll do it anyway. Andrew, it was *great* to meet you in Vegas, thanks for coming by my party Monday night, and I have to say in all honesty that your HD100 presentation at the JVC booth was simply amazing. That was some incredible work. I'm still shivering from all the rain, the jungle rot and the creepy-crawlies. Not to mention the slow-roasted HD100. Too bad you didn't have any fajita seasoning for that, it would have tasted better. Well done my friend,

Hey Chris,

Thanks for your comments. Great to meet you to and hats off for doing such a great service for the indie community.

While we're on the subject of veering the topic off-subject, let me do a Chris-Hurd style hijack and say: Tim Dashwood is indeed the bomb. I've said that before, but I only knew him online; I'm pleased to say that in person he's every bit as helpful, knowledgeable, and just as classy as he comes across online. What you see is what you get with him, and what you get is a patient, knowledgeable, helpful, nice guy.

I'm producing and shooting my film right now, but will try to dedicate at least 30 minutes to dvinfo each night before I go to bed. This means that over the next 3 weeks I will probably only have enough time to read the new posts and maybe respond to one or two per day.

Thanks for the kind words Barry.. and right back at ya! I wish we had had more time to hang out at NAB, but you always had your hands full answering numerous questions everytime I swung by the Panasonic booth. I thought that wolf footage was awesome by the way! Did you shoot that?


While we're patting each others backs, cudos to you Andrew for the awesome presentation of your trip to Madagascar. Nate, Chris and I stood there watching with jaws dropped during the 'leach' and 'foot rot' section. The fact that you went back later for pickups shows your ultimate dedication as a filmmaker.
It was also great to meet you in person and discuss your filmout experiences.

more filmic HVX??
 

From the images shown in that review, does anyone agree that the images shown from the HVX look more organic, softer and film-like compared to the HD100? (more so the automobile traffic, street/cyclist and the coast/benches shot)

I dident want to see this as I had my mind set that I was going to purchase HD100 over the Panasonic. Now i have to think further...

Oh, I wish -- no, that was shot by Kevin Railsback of www.silverphoenixllc.com. He's running his own stock footage distribution business, and he has an uncanny ability to get shots that are just jaw-dropping. I first met him when he wrote to me and said "I'm shooting dark wolves in the snow, what settings do you recommend?" I gave him some suggestions and said "hey, wolves -- sounds cool, show me some pics when you get back." And, well, the rest is history. He's incredibly talented.

If by "softer and more filmlike" you mean "less detail." The HVX doesn't have as many pixels, which makes it look softer. If you like that look, you can always turn the detail setting on the HD100 down. I'd rather begin with more detail and turn it down than not have enough when I want it.

I had the exact same feeling - his words said one thing, but the image spoke otherwise..

the jvc images were a bit bright and sharp - the hvx ones looked pleasing to the eye - almost as if shot thro a filter

i am confused again - i was leaning towards JVC - now i am downloading some files to see it myself...

Please don't make a choice based on anyone else's opinions (mine included.) Test the cameras for yourself before you buy and judge the results based on your personal needs.

Remember both cameras can be configured in numerous different ways to achieved the desired results. That is the fundamental flaw in trying to compare cameras when subjectivity is a factor. Comparing resolution and sharpness is easy, but both cameras were essentially set to only one or two of numerous possible configurations.
I believe, based on my extensive experience with the DVX100 and HD100, that the HVX200 could be made to match the response characteristics of HD100 and vise-versa.

The essential differences to concern yourself with in these two cameras is ergonomics, lens and recording codec/medium. Other than that, I would bet you could easily achieve equal results in colour response and latitude.

That's for sure...

Amazing. I guess the saying it's "in the eye of the beholder" is true. Without exception my eye went to the HD100 pics as more pleasing every time--before I looked to see which camera was which. Not because of sharpness but because of what I saw as apparent greater latitude. I liked the details in the mids and shadows.

edit: with the exception of the higher gain night shots. I like the lower smear on the HVX.

I'd say the HVX200 will be right for you. It does make a nice filmic look.