Mix HVX200 and Varicam at DVinfo.net

Rodolphe Pellerin · March 18th, 2006, 05:16 AM

Is it possible to mix footage from HVX200 and Varicam ?

I work often with the Varicam and a HVX200 as a B camera is an interresting idea for me...

But HVX200 seems to be really soft compared to varicam and other HDV... (I saw this on the native DVCPRO HD WOLVES.MOV). Except the definition, the picture quality is really good... For a final work on DVD it's OK but is it still good for a HD work ?

Justyn Rowe · March 18th, 2006, 12:00 PM

That's pretty much one of the biggest benefits of this camera. It is a great B camera for a varicam.. I have shot both and now I own an HVX and calling it soft footage... especially on that wolves stuff.. seems kind of spacey. I think it's really right on... and sometimes looks better than the Varicam, IMHO. Comparing it to other HDV footage is also kind of nutty. I haven't been impressed by ANY HDV footage. I've shot with the JVC and messed around with the Canon.. My buddy owns the sony and they all pale in comparison. I shot side by side at the road races on Thursday with a Sony HDV and he had to shoot his stuff locked down! So instead of getting the beautiful telephoto tight shots whipping around the corner like I was getting... at variable speeds.. with immediate viewing and offloading to the P2.. He got Jack....

I also had probably 40 people come up to check out my camera.. ask questions and hand out cards. Nothing for the Sony! The two and honestly all of the others aren't in this league...

At first it was people taking about teh noise.. and that was BS.. Then it was the resolution.. and the softness and that's all BS too. I guess if I had an inferior design I'd be poo pooing the panny too. Just look at the sales. the interest.. and the fact that 2 out of 3 people I know who bought the JVC have sold it to get the HVX... And frankly I don't know anyone who bought the Canon... Including all my old XL1 compadres....

Keep up the comments.. really makes me more solidly firm that I made the best decision possible. Nothing compares to this camera>>> Nothing.

I shot some pro skaters yesterday... They all have cameras.. some Sony HDV camersa.. and SD stuff.. After they saw my footage from the HVX they asked if I'd come out again.. and they'd buy me the century fisheye for doing that... Now I can guarantee that crap wouldn't happen with anything else....

I'd also be very concerned if I owned a varicam or cinealta.. I booked a national commercial in late April that was slated for varicam... There won't even be one there. For the cost, they'll have 3 HVXs....

Shane Ross · March 18th, 2006, 06:13 PM

I'll second that. I am working on a History Channel show shot primarily with the varicam, but with a majority of the recreations shot with the HVX-200. So that we could split up our crews and get the most footage we could. One Varicam, two HVX-200s.

They cut together nicely.

The Varicam is still the A-CAM though...don't forget.

Rodolphe Pellerin · March 19th, 2006, 07:07 AM

You're in love with your cam, and I understand you ;-)

Firstly, I have to test this "little Varicam" (I've just "touched" it during a demo in Paris France). I see it's really difficult to get an objective opinion on a forum ! There's a lot of speculation about the performances and specifications !

PS: Do you know where I can download more native footage or extracted stills ?

Thanks.

Flax Johnson · March 19th, 2006, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rodolphe Pellerin

You're in love with your cam, and I understand you ;-)

Firstly, I have to test this "little Varicam" (I've just "touched" it during a demo in Paris France). I see it's really difficult to get an objective opinion on a forum ! There's a lot of speculation about the performances and specifications !

PS: Do you know where I can download more native footage or extracted stills ?

Thanks.

Tu peux déjà regarder cela : snow day

http://motivitypictures.com/hvx200/m..._snow_day.html

Tu trouveras pas mal de footage sur dvxuser et sur dvinfo.

Tu dois aussi absolumment lire la comparaison de Barry Green entre la HD100 et HVX200 à las vegas : http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=50288

Rodolphe Pellerin · March 19th, 2006, 07:20 PM

Merci beaucoup ! Infos très intéressantes...

Est-ce que tu es utilisateur de la HVX200 ?

Ash Greyson · March 19th, 2006, 10:32 PM

You can use just about anything for a "B" camera as long as the shots are different lengths and construction. I am cutting HVX and XL2 into a Varicam project, no problem.

That being said, calling the HVX a mini-Varicam is downright silly. I dont see people calling the Z1u a mini-CineAlta. The HVX is a great 1/3" CCD cam but cannot begin to approach the capabilities or image of a Vari. If you think it can I would argue that you are not taking advantage of the Vari, its much better lenses, color, range, DOF, etc. etc. etc. The Vari is much much harder to use, even most seasoned shooters carry a guide around.

ash =o)

Rodolphe Pellerin · March 20th, 2006, 02:37 AM

I agree ! This is why I put "Little" before "Varicam" ;-)

Sean Buck · March 20th, 2006, 07:51 PM

I have shot with the Varicam and the HVX200 as a B and C cam. Sometimes you can tell the difference and sometimes it is very hard. I wanted to post the raw images from our shoots but our contract with talent wouldn't allow it. But you can take a look at www.hhgl.com. If you look in the video section at the "Press Conference" and the "Draft" you will see all 3 of the cameras intercut. See if you can tell which is which. I know that the compression is not the best but that was out of my hands.

Ash Greyson · March 20th, 2006, 11:05 PM

Anything for internet delivery is hard to comment on. My argument is not that you cant set up a Vari in a very simple set-up, with a large DOF and flat settings and have it look similar to an HVX. My argument is that a skilled Varicam operator can get an image that the HVX cannot come close to. I shot some NACSAR stuff on a Vari that looked AWESOME, the "b" camera was an HVX and we could not cut in anything that was of similar length...

ash =o)

Flax Johnson · March 21st, 2006, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rodolphe Pellerin

Merci beaucoup ! Infos très intéressantes...

Est-ce que tu es utilisateur de la HVX200 ?

Pas encore. Mais j'espère devenir rapidement le propriétaire d'une de ces merveilles. :o)

(Je repasse en anglais pour la suite)

But before, I prefer to wait and see how the PAL model performs. The lack of 60p is really a big loss and I'm almost sure to buy an NTSC model.

But Danilo del Turo said on dvxuser the HVX200 Pal model is less noisy than the NTSC model. If it's true, it could make me change my mind and buy the PAL model

Danilo del Turo : (http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=50400&page=2)
"When I've worked on Ntsc version I've set all Cinegammas, and saturated the colors at max (very very very red) and the realtime footage was on little crt (i dunno if hd, but I believe it was) , it should mask noise (crt mask noise), but it showed a lot. All was well illuminated.
Tested Pal camera with a Panasonic display Hd (30") the same settings, altering till burnin' the image, oversaturating in evr'y way...NO NOISE."

Jason Cunningham · March 21st, 2006, 06:31 PM

I did a test comparing the HVX with the Varicam on an HD monitor. The cameras were side by side and we toggled between the images. We tried to match the image as closely as possible. We opened the HVX up all the way and dialed in the Varicam to around a 5.6 or so. The HVX image was a tad bit darker at it's widest setting. We recalibrated the monitor to make sure this was correct and got the HVX a little closer but not by much. Both cameras were at 720 24P.

The color rendering was very similar. The sharpness was very comparible as well. The biggest (and only) difference I saw was the Varicam image being brighter at lower stops. The HVX lens was suprisingly wide (first time I'd played with the camera) and the image was razor sharp on the HD monitor. I was very disappointed with the flip out LCD though. The colors didn't match our monitor at all. And the image on the LCD looked blown out (we used zebra stripes) but it looked fine on the monitor. We know it wasn't the monitor because the Varicam footage looked fine.

This was a pretty informal test but our conclusion was that there is a 2-stop difference between the cameras and everything else looked pretty similar. Now if we were watching the footage projected or on a larger monitor then the differences might start to crop up. But I was very, very impressed by the image coming from the HVX. There isn't a $60,000 difference between these two in terms of image quality.

Rodolphe Pellerin · March 22nd, 2006, 12:48 PM

If your conclusion is only on a 2-stops difference, I think it's a good news !

Sensitivity is not the same at 24P and 60P. At 60P (needed for overcrancking)you need more light... SlowMo in Medium/Low light environment will be probably better on a Varicam...

Jason Cunningham · March 22nd, 2006, 02:27 PM

If I could choose one camera for a project, the Varicam wins hands down. However, I could buy five fully loaded HVX cameras for the cost of just the Varicam lens. Also, I didn't see a detail increase in 1080 mode but it seemed to give us an extra stop of sensitivity. The thing that caught my attention the most about the HVX was the sharpness of the image and the color rendering. It seemed identical to the Varicam. But to put it simply, the Varicam's image is just plain brighter. In low light situations, there's no contest between these two but in a well lit studio (like we were in) I only saw a 2-stop difference and both images looked super clean. I'm not a D.P. though so take this for what it's worth.

Ash Greyson · March 23rd, 2006, 02:03 PM

The differences between the cameras are conditional, like I said, in some cases there will be very little difference but in general the Vari can do many things the HVX simply cannot touch. The Vari with its 2/3" CCDs will have better latitude, be much better in lower light, have much less noise in general, much less chroma noise and a MUCH smaller DOF.

If you are staying wide and shooting in good light, the HVX will work in a similar fashion to a Vari. If you are in varied lighting, using a long lens to control the DOF and need the best resolution, the Vari will outperform the HVX by leaps and bounds.

ash =o)

March 18th, 2006, 05:16 AM	#1
Rodolphe Pellerin New Boot Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 22	Mix HVX200 and Varicam Is it possible to mix footage from HVX200 and Varicam ? I work often with the Varicam and a HVX200 as a B camera is an interresting idea for me... But HVX200 seems to be really soft compared to varicam and other HDV... (I saw this on the native DVCPRO HD WOLVES.MOV). Except the definition, the picture quality is really good... For a final work on DVD it's OK but is it still good for a HD work ?

March 18th, 2006, 12:00 PM	#2
Justyn Rowe Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 54	HVX blows 'em all away! That's pretty much one of the biggest benefits of this camera. It is a great B camera for a varicam.. I have shot both and now I own an HVX and calling it soft footage... especially on that wolves stuff.. seems kind of spacey. I think it's really right on... and sometimes looks better than the Varicam, IMHO. Comparing it to other HDV footage is also kind of nutty. I haven't been impressed by ANY HDV footage. I've shot with the JVC and messed around with the Canon.. My buddy owns the sony and they all pale in comparison. I shot side by side at the road races on Thursday with a Sony HDV and he had to shoot his stuff locked down! So instead of getting the beautiful telephoto tight shots whipping around the corner like I was getting... at variable speeds.. with immediate viewing and offloading to the P2.. He got Jack.... I also had probably 40 people come up to check out my camera.. ask questions and hand out cards. Nothing for the Sony! The two and honestly all of the others aren't in this league... At first it was people taking about teh noise.. and that was BS.. Then it was the resolution.. and the softness and that's all BS too. I guess if I had an inferior design I'd be poo pooing the panny too. Just look at the sales. the interest.. and the fact that 2 out of 3 people I know who bought the JVC have sold it to get the HVX... And frankly I don't know anyone who bought the Canon... Including all my old XL1 compadres.... Keep up the comments.. really makes me more solidly firm that I made the best decision possible. Nothing compares to this camera>>> Nothing. I shot some pro skaters yesterday... They all have cameras.. some Sony HDV camersa.. and SD stuff.. After they saw my footage from the HVX they asked if I'd come out again.. and they'd buy me the century fisheye for doing that... Now I can guarantee that crap wouldn't happen with anything else.... I'd also be very concerned if I owned a varicam or cinealta.. I booked a national commercial in late April that was slated for varicam... There won't even be one there. For the cost, they'll have 3 HVXs....

March 18th, 2006, 06:13 PM	#3
Shane Ross Major Player Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Los Angeles, USA Posts: 539	I'll second that. I am working on a History Channel show shot primarily with the varicam, but with a majority of the recreations shot with the HVX-200. So that we could split up our crews and get the most footage we could. One Varicam, two HVX-200s. They cut together nicely. The Varicam is still the A-CAM though...don't forget.

March 19th, 2006, 07:07 AM	#4
Rodolphe Pellerin New Boot Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 22	You're in love with your cam, and I understand you ;-) Firstly, I have to test this "little Varicam" (I've just "touched" it during a demo in Paris France). I see it's really difficult to get an objective opinion on a forum ! There's a lot of speculation about the performances and specifications ! PS: Do you know where I can download more native footage or extracted stills ? Thanks.

March 19th, 2006, 07:20 PM	#6
Rodolphe Pellerin New Boot Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 22	Merci beaucoup ! Infos très intéressantes... Est-ce que tu es utilisateur de la HVX200 ?

March 19th, 2006, 10:32 PM	#7
Ash Greyson Trustee Join Date: May 2003 Location: Tulsa, OK Posts: 1,689	You can use just about anything for a "B" camera as long as the shots are different lengths and construction. I am cutting HVX and XL2 into a Varicam project, no problem. That being said, calling the HVX a mini-Varicam is downright silly. I dont see people calling the Z1u a mini-CineAlta. The HVX is a great 1/3" CCD cam but cannot begin to approach the capabilities or image of a Vari. If you think it can I would argue that you are not taking advantage of the Vari, its much better lenses, color, range, DOF, etc. etc. etc. The Vari is much much harder to use, even most seasoned shooters carry a guide around. ash =o)

March 20th, 2006, 02:37 AM	#8
Rodolphe Pellerin New Boot Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 22	I agree ! This is why I put "Little" before "Varicam" ;-)

March 20th, 2006, 07:51 PM	#9
Sean Buck Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 44	I have shot with the Varicam and the HVX200 as a B and C cam. Sometimes you can tell the difference and sometimes it is very hard. I wanted to post the raw images from our shoots but our contract with talent wouldn't allow it. But you can take a look at www.hhgl.com. If you look in the video section at the "Press Conference" and the "Draft" you will see all 3 of the cameras intercut. See if you can tell which is which. I know that the compression is not the best but that was out of my hands.

March 20th, 2006, 11:05 PM	#10
Ash Greyson Trustee Join Date: May 2003 Location: Tulsa, OK Posts: 1,689	Anything for internet delivery is hard to comment on. My argument is not that you cant set up a Vari in a very simple set-up, with a large DOF and flat settings and have it look similar to an HVX. My argument is that a skilled Varicam operator can get an image that the HVX cannot come close to. I shot some NACSAR stuff on a Vari that looked AWESOME, the "b" camera was an HVX and we could not cut in anything that was of similar length... ash =o)

March 21st, 2006, 06:31 PM	#12
Jason Cunningham New Boot Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 13	I did a test comparing the HVX with the Varicam on an HD monitor. The cameras were side by side and we toggled between the images. We tried to match the image as closely as possible. We opened the HVX up all the way and dialed in the Varicam to around a 5.6 or so. The HVX image was a tad bit darker at it's widest setting. We recalibrated the monitor to make sure this was correct and got the HVX a little closer but not by much. Both cameras were at 720 24P. The color rendering was very similar. The sharpness was very comparible as well. The biggest (and only) difference I saw was the Varicam image being brighter at lower stops. The HVX lens was suprisingly wide (first time I'd played with the camera) and the image was razor sharp on the HD monitor. I was very disappointed with the flip out LCD though. The colors didn't match our monitor at all. And the image on the LCD looked blown out (we used zebra stripes) but it looked fine on the monitor. We know it wasn't the monitor because the Varicam footage looked fine. This was a pretty informal test but our conclusion was that there is a 2-stop difference between the cameras and everything else looked pretty similar. Now if we were watching the footage projected or on a larger monitor then the differences might start to crop up. But I was very, very impressed by the image coming from the HVX. There isn't a $60,000 difference between these two in terms of image quality.

March 22nd, 2006, 12:48 PM	#13
Rodolphe Pellerin New Boot Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 22	If your conclusion is only on a 2-stops difference, I think it's a good news ! Sensitivity is not the same at 24P and 60P. At 60P (needed for overcrancking)you need more light... SlowMo in Medium/Low light environment will be probably better on a Varicam...

March 22nd, 2006, 02:27 PM	#14
Jason Cunningham New Boot Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 13	If I could choose one camera for a project, the Varicam wins hands down. However, I could buy five fully loaded HVX cameras for the cost of just the Varicam lens. Also, I didn't see a detail increase in 1080 mode but it seemed to give us an extra stop of sensitivity. The thing that caught my attention the most about the HVX was the sharpness of the image and the color rendering. It seemed identical to the Varicam. But to put it simply, the Varicam's image is just plain brighter. In low light situations, there's no contest between these two but in a well lit studio (like we were in) I only saw a 2-stop difference and both images looked super clean. I'm not a D.P. though so take this for what it's worth.

March 23rd, 2006, 02:03 PM	#15
Ash Greyson Trustee Join Date: May 2003 Location: Tulsa, OK Posts: 1,689	The differences between the cameras are conditional, like I said, in some cases there will be very little difference but in general the Vari can do many things the HVX simply cannot touch. The Vari with its 2/3" CCDs will have better latitude, be much better in lower light, have much less noise in general, much less chroma noise and a MUCH smaller DOF. If you are staying wide and shooting in good light, the HVX will work in a similar fashion to a Vari. If you are in varied lighting, using a long lens to control the DOF and need the best resolution, the Vari will outperform the HVX by leaps and bounds. ash =o)