HVX in SD vs. Current AGX100B? at DVinfo.net

Shawn Alyasiri · February 23rd, 2006, 12:18 AM

Hi there. Just curious if there was any difference in using the HVX in SD mode vs. the results you can achieve with the AGX-100B?

I would guess the AGX has better light sensitivity - maybe not...

I ran into a friend's AGX recently and liked it. I would far rather invest in the HVX though, unless it was at a significant disadvantage in similar environments.

I would want excellent low-light capability, 24p/24pa modes, shooting to miniDV tape, etc.

So essentially - is the SD section/capabilities of the HVX the same as the current 100B?

Thanks,
Shawn

Shawn Alyasiri · February 23rd, 2006, 12:40 AM

BTW - I meant DVX - not AGX. Sorry..

Robert M Wright · February 23rd, 2006, 01:14 AM

Both cameras have 3 lux listed for minimum illumination on B&H's site. I have my doubts though, that the HVX200 would do quite as well in dim lighting as the DVX100B, but I have never touched either camera.

Barry Green · February 23rd, 2006, 01:18 AM

There are a lot of similarities, and some differences, some of which are substantial.

If you're shooting in standard-def DV mode, they're quite comparable. The HVX has a more telephoto lens and a wider-wide angle, and it has a sharper high-def lens and native 16:9 chips so if you're shooting 16:9, the HVX will definitely deliver more resolution than the DVX.

However, the DVX has an advantage in sensitivity; in progressive mode it's about 1 stop faster than the HVX is. In interlaced mode it's another stop faster still.

The HVX has the ability to shoot in DVCPRO50 mode for standard-def though, and that's notably superior to anything the DVX could do. It requires P2 cards to shoot DV50, but then you get 4:2:2 color sampling and much milder compression.

Other than the sensitivity difference, you can pretty much think of an HVX as a superset of the DVX; it has everything the DVX has and a whole lot more. And it's $2,000 more as well, so it should offer more!

Ash Greyson · February 23rd, 2006, 01:26 AM

Easy call... as noted... in 16:9 the HVX wins hands down

ash =o)

Jarred Land · February 23rd, 2006, 01:32 AM

Its also worth noting that you can match the HVX to the DVX in terms of gamma and overall image similarities in plain vanilla DV mode. Dont know what situation would arise for it...but if you had to do pickups for a DVX shoot or if you have a DVX and HVX and need to shoot DV you can match them.

Like Barry said though.. DVCpro 50 kills DV in every aspect.. and once you use it you will never want to go back to DV.

Dylan Couper · February 23rd, 2006, 01:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry Green

If you're shooting in standard-def DV mode, they're quite comparable. The HVX has a more telephoto lens and a wider-wide angle,

Hey Barry, would you (or anyone else) happen to know the 35mm equiv. for the DVX and HVX offhand?

Jeff Kilgroe · February 23rd, 2006, 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dylan Couper

Hey Barry, would you (or anyone else) happen to know the 35mm equiv. for the DVX and HVX offhand?

I think that would be 32 to 423 if I recall... Panasonic has it posted on the HVX200 page and it's probably in the users' guide.

Robert Lane · February 23rd, 2006, 09:00 PM

From our studio testing, both the HVX and DVX100B have superb color. We shot both under controlled studio lighting conditions side-by-side and had both cameras pointed at a GreytagMacbeth Color Checker.

With the HVX in DV mode we were often hard-pressed to tell the difference between the two and in fact often got confused as to which clip we were looking at.

However, as Barry pointed out, once we shifted the HVX into DV50 mode the advantages of the 4:2:2 color space were clearly evident: Reds popped and overall gamma and chroma saturation were much better.

Panasonic has always been known for amazing color, even in the *lowly* DV realm. We put the DVX100B up against several other DV/HDV cams - XL2-s, Z1, H1, HD100 - and the DVX was the clear winner in color output. The most amazing thing about our results, were that even if we put the Z1, H1 & HD100 in full HDV mode all we got was better resolution, but not better color. That shocked us all.

I've said this many times, but if I were shooting anything that had an SD 4:3 final output, I'd take the DVX100B over ANY of the other cameras - with exception to the HVX, of course.

Jarred Land · February 23rd, 2006, 11:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Lane

However, as Barry pointed out, once we shifted the HVX into DV50 mode the advantages of the 4:2:2 color space were clearly evident: Reds popped and overall gamma and chroma saturation were much better.

I did a very similar test Robert; and i could even see a huge difference in the banding on the edges of the macbeth chart in 4:2:2.. i was actually shocked the difference was so extreme.

Ash Greyson · February 23rd, 2006, 11:57 PM

You will get better chroma resolution by not going to DV25.... reds and blues will maintain more detail, a real achilles heal of the DVX

ash =o)

Robert Lane · February 24th, 2006, 07:03 AM

Jarred,

You bring up a point that answers a question that's taunted many an indi producer: If a project has a final output to DVD would it look better shot in DV50 or HD and then downconverted to SD widescreen for DVD authoring? The answer is, "absolutely".

As you mentioned, there is significant banding due to harsher compression from the DV25 spec. If that's what you start out with as raw footage things will only get worse as you recompress for DVD output.

It also points to being "future proof" for future iterations of the same project. The HD-DVD players are literally just around the corner with Toshiba launching it's player next month. In less than 2 years the HD-DVD player market will of course explode as consumer demand draws pricing down and availability up. If you shoot in the best codec you can afford now (and with the HVX full 1080p is a reality) then you'll always have that HD footage available to re-cut a "new" version of your original project and could re-release the true HD version.

February 23rd, 2006, 12:18 AM	#1
Shawn Alyasiri Major Player Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Bloomington, IL Posts: 256	HVX in SD vs. Current AGX100B? Hi there. Just curious if there was any difference in using the HVX in SD mode vs. the results you can achieve with the AGX-100B? I would guess the AGX has better light sensitivity - maybe not... I ran into a friend's AGX recently and liked it. I would far rather invest in the HVX though, unless it was at a significant disadvantage in similar environments. I would want excellent low-light capability, 24p/24pa modes, shooting to miniDV tape, etc. So essentially - is the SD section/capabilities of the HVX the same as the current 100B? Thanks, Shawn

February 23rd, 2006, 09:00 PM	#9
Robert Lane Go Go Godzilla Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Scottsdale, AZ USA Posts: 2,825 Images: 15	My 2 cents worth From our studio testing, both the HVX and DVX100B have superb color. We shot both under controlled studio lighting conditions side-by-side and had both cameras pointed at a GreytagMacbeth Color Checker. With the HVX in DV mode we were often hard-pressed to tell the difference between the two and in fact often got confused as to which clip we were looking at. However, as Barry pointed out, once we shifted the HVX into DV50 mode the advantages of the 4:2:2 color space were clearly evident: Reds popped and overall gamma and chroma saturation were much better. Panasonic has always been known for amazing color, even in the lowly DV realm. We put the DVX100B up against several other DV/HDV cams - XL2-s, Z1, H1, HD100 - and the DVX was the clear winner in color output. The most amazing thing about our results, were that even if we put the Z1, H1 & HD100 in full HDV mode all we got was better resolution, but not better color. That shocked us all. I've said this many times, but if I were shooting anything that had an SD 4:3 final output, I'd take the DVX100B over ANY of the other cameras - with exception to the HVX, of course.

February 23rd, 2006, 12:40 AM	#2
Shawn Alyasiri Major Player Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Bloomington, IL Posts: 256	BTW - I meant DVX - not AGX. Sorry..

February 23rd, 2006, 01:14 AM	#3
Robert M Wright Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Minnesota (USA) Posts: 2,171	Both cameras have 3 lux listed for minimum illumination on B&H's site. I have my doubts though, that the HVX200 would do quite as well in dim lighting as the DVX100B, but I have never touched either camera.

February 23rd, 2006, 01:18 AM	#4
Barry Green Barry Wan Kenobi Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Carolina Posts: 3,863	There are a lot of similarities, and some differences, some of which are substantial. If you're shooting in standard-def DV mode, they're quite comparable. The HVX has a more telephoto lens and a wider-wide angle, and it has a sharper high-def lens and native 16:9 chips so if you're shooting 16:9, the HVX will definitely deliver more resolution than the DVX. However, the DVX has an advantage in sensitivity; in progressive mode it's about 1 stop faster than the HVX is. In interlaced mode it's another stop faster still. The HVX has the ability to shoot in DVCPRO50 mode for standard-def though, and that's notably superior to anything the DVX could do. It requires P2 cards to shoot DV50, but then you get 4:2:2 color sampling and much milder compression. Other than the sensitivity difference, you can pretty much think of an HVX as a superset of the DVX; it has everything the DVX has and a whole lot more. And it's $2,000 more as well, so it should offer more!

February 23rd, 2006, 01:26 AM	#5
Ash Greyson Trustee Join Date: May 2003 Location: Tulsa, OK Posts: 1,689	Easy call... as noted... in 16:9 the HVX wins hands down ash =o)

February 23rd, 2006, 01:32 AM	#6
Jarred Land DVX User Join Date: May 2003 Location: Vancouver Posts: 281	Its also worth noting that you can match the HVX to the DVX in terms of gamma and overall image similarities in plain vanilla DV mode. Dont know what situation would arise for it...but if you had to do pickups for a DVX shoot or if you have a DVX and HVX and need to shoot DV you can match them. Like Barry said though.. DVCpro 50 kills DV in every aspect.. and once you use it you will never want to go back to DV.

February 23rd, 2006, 11:57 PM	#11
Ash Greyson Trustee Join Date: May 2003 Location: Tulsa, OK Posts: 1,689	You will get better chroma resolution by not going to DV25.... reds and blues will maintain more detail, a real achilles heal of the DVX ash =o)

February 24th, 2006, 07:03 AM	#12
Robert Lane Go Go Godzilla Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Scottsdale, AZ USA Posts: 2,825 Images: 15	Jarred, You bring up a point that answers a question that's taunted many an indi producer: If a project has a final output to DVD would it look better shot in DV50 or HD and then downconverted to SD widescreen for DVD authoring? The answer is, "absolutely". As you mentioned, there is significant banding due to harsher compression from the DV25 spec. If that's what you start out with as raw footage things will only get worse as you recompress for DVD output. It also points to being "future proof" for future iterations of the same project. The HD-DVD players are literally just around the corner with Toshiba launching it's player next month. In less than 2 years the HD-DVD player market will of course explode as consumer demand draws pricing down and availability up. If you shoot in the best codec you can afford now (and with the HVX full 1080p is a reality) then you'll always have that HD footage available to re-cut a "new" version of your original project and could re-release the true HD version.