|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
January 6th, 2006, 12:45 PM
|
#46 | |
|
New Boot
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 7
|
Quote:
And I'm happy that Panasonic decided to implement this codec in HVX. If it is not enough for some kind of work ("codec is FAR from perfect") then I think that H1 is not enough too. |
|
|
|
|
January 6th, 2006, 03:05 PM
|
#47 |
|
Wrangler
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Eagle River, AK
Posts: 4,100
|
Laco,
DVCProHD, HDV, and uncompressed all have very different strengths and different weakness, so it probably isn't quite right to say that if one is not right for a purpose, then another isn't either. Very exciting times when many of us are now able to choose amongst High Definition solutions!
__________________
Pete Bauer The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science. Albert Einstein Trying to solve a DV mystery? You may find the answer behind the SEARCH function ... or be able to join a discussion already in progress! |
|
|
|
|
January 6th, 2006, 03:32 PM
|
#48 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Southern Cal-ee-for-Ni-ya
Posts: 608
|
2 year old camera close in resolution!
Just for fun, I hand held shot the chart with my JVC HD10 .
It's resolution looks maybe just a little lower than the HVX ! Again, this was hand held, the chart was on an 8.5x11 printout. HD10 at 720p http://home.earthlink.net/~lesd/hd/jvc-HD10-chart.jpg JVC HD10 at 1920 size: http://home.earthlink.net/~lesd/hd/j...-1920chart.jpg and the HVX: http://home.arcor.de/martin.doppelba...rts/0088YP.png Enjoy! ;) -Les |
|
|
|
|
January 6th, 2006, 03:32 PM
|
#49 |
|
New Boot
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 7
|
I wanted to say that if somebody is not satisfied with DVCProHD compression then he has to look at better camera than HVX or H1 too.
|
|
|
|
|
January 6th, 2006, 03:46 PM
|
#50 | |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 155
|
Quote:
Could you mount the camera on a tripod? |
|
|
|
|
|
January 6th, 2006, 03:54 PM
|
#51 | |
|
Trustee
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 1,689
|
Quote:
No need to defend Panny, if you read my post I will be using the XLH1 into a Panny DVCproHD deck. I am currently working on a project shot on a Varicam. Interviews on a black background and once you tweak ANYTHING the blacks get VERY noisy. I am doing an offline in DVCproHD and recapturing uncompressed for the final product. I was just surprised to see so much noise... ash =o) |
|
|
|
|
|
January 6th, 2006, 03:57 PM
|
#52 | |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Southern Cal-ee-for-Ni-ya
Posts: 608
|
Well, it was at 1/250 sec exposure, but I guess the hand held could have screwed with the focus a bit. I'll try to shoot it again this weekend.
So what did you think of the much poo poo'ed HD10 ? It can still hold it's own on res, but it still has all the non-manual controls issues, and non optimal mpeg2. But you can get one on Ebay for < $1600, I'm sure. Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
January 7th, 2006, 07:18 AM
|
#53 | |
|
HDV Cinema
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 4,007
|
Quote:
But worse, the HVX is grossly over sharpened -- look at the wheel outline. ----------------- However, I've been shooting with my JVC HD1 in India. Once again I'm blown away be its "filmic" color which IMHO is the reason I and others liked the DVX100 so much. The HVX has the same great color. Which leads me to conclude that for many -- the HVX's great color and 720p60 and 720p24 operation will make it a winner if/when there is a cost effective way to record. Sorry, P2 still makes no sense for general use. --------------------- The CCDs will be an issue only when operating at 1080i. It's not clear why Panasonic even bothered with 1080i since it involves under sampled CCDs recorded to an under sampled recording format. In fact, it's not clear why anyone would shoot such 1080i when they have the ability to record 720p60. ------------------ Lastly, these long passionate "conflicts" seem to occur with the introduction of every camera. I remember the brutal criticism of the JVC HDV cameras' "lack of exposure control." Shooting in India under all sorts of light conditions, I realize how EZ it is to control exposure. So EZ, I'm revising my JVC Guide -- making it much simpler. The first version was long because I wasted space responding to all the criticism. It was a "defensive" document. I suspect that in a few weeks folks will have sorted out the CCD rez issues. And, HVX lovers can all become less definsive. Of course, all this would all be much simpler if Panasonic had provided the necessary specifications to understand the camera. Speaking of specs -- what are the sensitivity specs?
__________________
Switcher's Quick Guide to the Avid Media Composer >>> http://home.mindspring.com/~d-v-c |
|
|
|
|
|
January 7th, 2006, 07:28 AM
|
#54 | |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 155
|
Quote:
3 lux on HVX |
|
|
|
|
|
January 7th, 2006, 09:15 AM
|
#55 | |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Posts: 158
|
Quote:
I'm mostly amazed by the poor horizontal resolution. You get that out of every 16:9 sd camera. I just wonder if there's any difference with real resolution between 720 and 1080 recording modes? And if 1080 mode is always reducing vertical resolution to remove flickering from 1080i displays? 20% increase in resolution and the camera gets called hd instead of sd. This industry is sad... Well, I think I still have to buy it, because it's the only progressive 16:9 1/3" sd camera after all. (XL2 has smaller area for video in the imagers.) |
|
|
|
|
|
January 7th, 2006, 09:34 AM
|
#56 | |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 853
|
Quote:
So I wouldn't necessarilly call it sad. And why are we even using the hand-held shaking shots from a HD10 as any type comparison? Joke or not? That shouldn't have even been posted, because it's now going to confuse people to think that they should get an HD10 on eBay over an HVX-200 to make their short film....I know it's hard to comprehend, but TRUST ME, it can/will happen. C'mon guys, think. Just think of how many idiots work at your job that you can't beleive got the position they have.....yea, it's like that. *smile* Do you realize how many people come to this website to help make purchasing decisions? Everybody is not as smart as you are. I know it's hard to understand that, but there are allot of sheep out there who will believe anything..AND NO, they will not go any further in research then this one thread of discussion. - ShannonRawls.com
__________________
Shannon W. Rawls ~ Motion Picture Producer & huge advocate of Digital Acquisition. |
|
|
|
|
|
January 7th, 2006, 03:55 PM
|
#57 | |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Southern Cal-ee-for-Ni-ya
Posts: 608
|
Rant
I posted the quick , handheld JVC HD10 chart because I wanted to make a point. "The Emperor's New Clothes"
These camcorder companies are so lame that in 2 years they have hardly made any progress in terms of real HD resolution. Many of them are protecting expensive 'pro' cameras with 5 figure price tags. Look at the still camera market. That market grows at a much more expected rate in image quality. Don't let Sony and Matsushita lull you into thinking that the image sensors are like diamonds in price. That's BS. These companies do not have the best interest for the filmmaker as their primary goal. They want to tie you into their product line, their P2 cards, their expensive tape decks, etc. The Japanese have a saying: "Business is war". In the next 2 years, they will be whalloped by non-video derived bayer cameras from some smaller companies. Think 'mini-origin' . Nothing to do with Sony or Canon or Matsushita. More to do with Seagate, Intel, and some industrial sensor companies that are not into the cartel. And some very smart Codec people ;) -Les Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
January 7th, 2006, 04:24 PM
|
#58 | |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 155
|
Quote:
Sony and Matsushita have cornered the market and other companies are filling the vacuum that they created. If Sony could develop 25 Mbps DV codec/tramsport 10 years ago, it does not make any sense not to progress beyond 25 if the resolution is now nearly 5x higher (HDV). It took Sony about 3-1/2 years to increase CineAlta's 175 Mbps rate to 880 Mbps in their CineAlta SR portable deck, but in 10 years they could not go beyond 25 Mbps with DV/HDV. Does it make sense? |
|
|
|
|
|
January 7th, 2006, 04:42 PM
|
#59 | |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Snellville, Georgia
Posts: 614
|
Quote:
And if they really are very talented, hey, they'll produce a great piece with that HD10! |
|
|
|
|
|
January 7th, 2006, 04:50 PM
|
#60 | |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Snellville, Georgia
Posts: 614
|
Quote:
Both the development of the CineAlta and HDV camcorders has been in response to market forces. I'm sure if Sony thought they'd sell as many CineAltas with 175mbps rates they would not have bumped it to 880 in such a short period. We don't have to like 25mbps HD camcorders, but they certainly make sense. |
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
||||||
|
|
