Is DVX100 cleaner? at DVinfo.net

Yik Kuen · March 27th, 2003, 10:11 PM

Does DVX100 captures as clean as PD-150/VX2000 in bright condition with 0dB gain?

I came across somebody mentioned that it's images are grainier than others. Is there any work around ?

Jeff Donald · March 30th, 2003, 04:27 PM

Define clean or cleaner. Their specs are very close and clean is, I think, a subjective term. I would say the DVX100 image is very near the PD150.

Yik Kuen · March 30th, 2003, 06:22 PM

Hi Jeff,

I am referring to a thread posted by Migual Lopez, titled :
"And finally... the dvx100 arrives and... what the hell is this?"

He mentioned :

"But then i plug into the TV and "buarfff". Image is not as good as expected. There is a little noise (gain at 0 dB), the red color is not too good, the whites are dirty... It is not the image i was expecting after watching it in the computer."

Jeff Donald · March 30th, 2003, 07:51 PM

I would suspect the image quality of the TV before the DVX100. I like the image of the DVX100, however the image is similar to the PD150 and XL1. Many users talk in too many superlatives in relation to the DVX100. I have not found the image quality substandard in any way.

Matt Milan · March 30th, 2003, 09:50 PM

The TV and the way you connect it to the TV does make a difference.

I have noticed this especially when switching between my 42" Toshiba TV w/ the RCA cables, and my 36" Panasonic TV w/ an s-video cable.

It could just be the s-video connection... but the image clearly looks better on the Panasonic. I was extremely satisfied with the picture I got using the Panasonic and s-video.

Steven-Marc Couchouron · March 30th, 2003, 11:23 PM

Just for added info, here's what Adam Wilt (who can be trusted for not writing anything he couldn't back up with facts) wrote on the subject (in his dv.com review) :

"The 410-kilopixel CCDs on the AG-DVX100 make sharp images requiring minimal edge enhancement. The high pixel density minimizes the horizontal aliasing artifacts that afflict the 380-kilopixel PD150, and lets you tweak the detail level without concern for aliasing. "

Yik Kuen · March 31st, 2003, 12:13 AM

Hi all,

Resolution wise, I believe it's far more superior. But, I'm still skeptical, esp. its ability to suppress video noise.

See as mentioned by Miguel, "the whites are dirty" and I've heard quite a number of users stating that Panny is still behind Sony on handling video noise. But, how true it is, I would have to see it myself.

Here, in Spore, it's quite difficult to have hands-on test. You'd prob. know which model to buy and head straight for that.

Thanks for your input.

Miguel Lopez · March 31st, 2003, 06:27 PM

Hello. After shooting docens of test with the dvx i can say this:
- about the noise: definately, in the computer, images look with more grain that XL1. But also much more define.

- About color. As far as i have seen, in cine-gamma colors are much less saturated than in XL1 even when the settings are at +5. This is a thing i have to test even more, because colors tend to desaturate, or unless, to be less saturated than in XL1. i liked how the XL1 managed colors. Beter than Sony.

- The problem is the settings. Shotting in Norm mode gives us too much contrast. Images are easily overexposed in the whites. If we use cine gamma we avoid this, but then colos is not as powerfull as in XL1.

Big problem, big problem...

March 27th, 2003, 10:11 PM	#1
Yik Kuen Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Johor Bahru, Malaysia Posts: 135	Is DVX100 cleaner? Does DVX100 captures as clean as PD-150/VX2000 in bright condition with 0dB gain? I came across somebody mentioned that it's images are grainier than others. Is there any work around ?

March 30th, 2003, 04:27 PM	#2
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	Define clean or cleaner. Their specs are very close and clean is, I think, a subjective term. I would say the DVX100 image is very near the PD150. __________________ Jeff Donald Carpe Diem Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Where to Buy? From the best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors

March 30th, 2003, 07:51 PM	#4
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	I would suspect the image quality of the TV before the DVX100. I like the image of the DVX100, however the image is similar to the PD150 and XL1. Many users talk in too many superlatives in relation to the DVX100. I have not found the image quality substandard in any way. __________________ Jeff Donald Carpe Diem Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Where to Buy? From the best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors

March 30th, 2003, 09:50 PM	#5
Matt Milan New Boot Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Castro Valley, CA Posts: 11	The TV and the way you connect it to the TV does make a difference. I have noticed this especially when switching between my 42" Toshiba TV w/ the RCA cables, and my 36" Panasonic TV w/ an s-video cable. It could just be the s-video connection... but the image clearly looks better on the Panasonic. I was extremely satisfied with the picture I got using the Panasonic and s-video. __________________ -Matt Milan-

March 30th, 2003, 11:23 PM	#6
Steven-Marc Couchouron Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Paris, France Posts: 110 Images: 5	Just for added info, here's what Adam Wilt (who can be trusted for not writing anything he couldn't back up with facts) wrote on the subject (in his dv.com review) : "The 410-kilopixel CCDs on the AG-DVX100 make sharp images requiring minimal edge enhancement. The high pixel density minimizes the horizontal aliasing artifacts that afflict the 380-kilopixel PD150, and lets you tweak the detail level without concern for aliasing. " __________________ SMCproductions.com

March 30th, 2003, 06:22 PM	#3
Yik Kuen Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Johor Bahru, Malaysia Posts: 135	Hi Jeff, I am referring to a thread posted by Migual Lopez, titled : "And finally... the dvx100 arrives and... what the hell is this?" He mentioned : "But then i plug into the TV and "buarfff". Image is not as good as expected. There is a little noise (gain at 0 dB), the red color is not too good, the whites are dirty... It is not the image i was expecting after watching it in the computer."

March 31st, 2003, 12:13 AM	#7
Yik Kuen Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Johor Bahru, Malaysia Posts: 135	Hi all, Resolution wise, I believe it's far more superior. But, I'm still skeptical, esp. its ability to suppress video noise. See as mentioned by Miguel, "the whites are dirty" and I've heard quite a number of users stating that Panny is still behind Sony on handling video noise. But, how true it is, I would have to see it myself. Here, in Spore, it's quite difficult to have hands-on test. You'd prob. know which model to buy and head straight for that. Thanks for your input.

March 31st, 2003, 06:27 PM	#8
Miguel Lopez Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Madrid, Spain Posts: 187	Hello. After shooting docens of test with the dvx i can say this: - about the noise: definately, in the computer, images look with more grain that XL1. But also much more define. - About color. As far as i have seen, in cine-gamma colors are much less saturated than in XL1 even when the settings are at +5. This is a thing i have to test even more, because colors tend to desaturate, or unless, to be less saturated than in XL1. i liked how the XL1 managed colors. Beter than Sony. - The problem is the settings. Shotting in Norm mode gives us too much contrast. Images are easily overexposed in the whites. If we use cine gamma we avoid this, but then colos is not as powerfull as in XL1. Big problem, big problem...