V1 and EX1 comparison, sort of.

Sherif Choudhry · July 26th, 2008, 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Rhodes

I Shot a DOC. using the V1 and EX .The EX has more res. than the V1 EX 1/2 native chips 1980x1080 Yea better in low light. The first thing a noticed was the view finder res. I loved the v1 for weddings when I owned them. Now I am using EX1's and Z7's

The Homeless in Austin Trailer on my site was shot with EX1 and V1u
The weddings Trailers were shot with V1us and FX1's

www.dvdaction.net

Brian, I liked the trailers, strong videography - is it possible to purchase the Homeless one on DVD as I'd like to see it on a plasma screen?

Brian Rhodes · July 26th, 2008, 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sherif Choudhry

Brian, I liked the trailers, strong videography - is it possible to purchase the Homeless one on DVD as I'd like to see it on a plasma screen?

Sherif I am still in production on this project. Send me your address . I will render out some scenes on Blu-Ray or send you couple of Raw clips.

John Bosco Jr. · August 1st, 2008, 04:48 AM

Lets not get into a codec war. DVCProHD is a very acceptable codec that is used in its higher end cameras, like varicam. Let's face it. Whether native or H/H+V shift, it still all ends up 1920 x 1080 when using 1080i. The EX3 is not sub $8k, so we'll leave it out. In my comment last month, I acknowledged that the EX1 is a better camera because of the 1/2" imagers and manual lens. I was just pointing out that the HVX200a with its changes is a lot closer to the EX1, and for about the same price (when you consider the extra cards you will need), it's a viable alternative to the EX1, mainly because of the global shutter and 4:2:2 color space. Yes I wish it had 1/2" imagers, and yes I wish it had at least HDMI out. But it is still a very good camera and preferred by a lot of clients over EX1. So the bottom line is it depends on what you are shooting, and who you are shooting for? For my money, I'll rent for now.

Oh, regarding the HPX 170, it has the same chipset as the HVX 200a. It has more professional features but the same chipset. In fact, their upcoming AVCHD camera, HMC 150, will have the same chipset. What's up with that? I do agree with previous comments that 1/2" imagers should have been used in the 200a or at least in the HPX 170.

Sherif Choudhry · August 1st, 2008, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Rhodes

Sherif I am still in production on this project. Send me your address . I will render out some scenes on Blu-Ray or send you couple of Raw clips.

Brian thanks I'll drop you an email through your website - good luck with completing it - it looks good. Sherif

Sherif Choudhry · August 1st, 2008, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Bosco Jr.

But it is still a very good camera and preferred by a lot of clients over EX1. So the bottom line is it depends on what you are shooting, and who you are shooting for? For my money, I'll rent for now.

John, Thats what I've been trying to understand (and has confused me) - what sort of client would prefer the image from a HVX200a or HPX150? Is it better in lowlight, do blacks show less noise ? The color from the EX1 just looks so beautiful - OK so perhaps if i did tons of green-screen (which I dont at all) or compositing then the 4:2:2 helps (but I dont composite) - so exactly in what situation would you choose an HVX200a over an EX1?

Sounds like you've used both cameras?

Perrone Ford · August 1st, 2008, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sherif Choudhry

John, Thats what I've been trying to understand (and has confused me) - what sort of client would prefer the image from a HVX200a or HPX150? Is it better in lowlight, do blacks show less noise ? The color from the EX1 just looks so beautiful - OK so perhaps if i did tons of green-screen (which I dont at all) or compositing then the 4:2:2 helps (but I dont composite) - so exactly in what situation would you choose an HVX200a over an EX1?

Sounds like you've used both cameras?

I'm very curious about this as well. Because if doing a lot of green screen was important to me, I'd be using the HD-SDI and not fooling around with either the Long-GOP of XDCam or the not-full-resolution DVCProHD.

John Bosco Jr. · August 2nd, 2008, 02:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sherif Choudhry

John, Thats what I've been trying to understand (and has confused me) - what sort of client would prefer the image from a HVX200a or HPX150? Is it better in lowlight, do blacks show less noise ? The color from the EX1 just looks so beautiful - OK so perhaps if i did tons of green-screen (which I dont at all) or compositing then the 4:2:2 helps (but I dont composite) - so exactly in what situation would you choose an HVX200a over an EX1?

Sounds like you've used both cameras?

It's the HPX 170 by the way. What sort of clients? Well, there's a mixture. Some like the 4:2:2 for compositing or when doing green screen. Yes, you can take SDI out and bypass the codec, but sometimes that is not an option on remote shoots requiring green screen. Some require fast motion shots and don't want to deal with the perceived motion artifacts of the rolling shutter or MPEG 2 codec of the EX1. Others are just biased or uninformed about the EX1 and demand the HVX 200. Still others have had scenes shot with a varicam or the 900 (HD version) and want "B" shots from the 200. Some want SD and they like the fact of DVCPro50/25; downconverting is not an option for them. Others feel that DVCProHD is easier to deal with in post.

I have not used the HPX 170, but it has the same chipset as the HVX 200a. So I'm basing the look on the 200a. The EX1 is excellent in low light. The 200a with the new chipset now does fairly well in low light, so I would say it's a wash as far as low light with the edge going to the EX1. To be honest, I don't do a lot of shoots where the scene is not lit.

So when it comes down to it if you absolutely want or need to buy a camera, either the EX1 or the HVX 200a/HPX 170 will find you lots of work.

It seems in my area Panasonic reins higher than Sony. Panasonic cameras are requested twice as much as Sony. This is odd because Sony always use to be the leader. I guess Panasonic is doing some really good marketing in this area.

Perrone Ford · August 2nd, 2008, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Bosco Jr.

I guess Panasonic is doing some really good marketing in this area.

You said a mouthful right tnere...

Greg Laves · August 29th, 2008, 10:20 PM

Got to do a shoot today with 2 - V1's and the EX-1 from the original comparison. This time with no operator errors. This was a 2 subject coffee table set-up and we had great lighting. Me and my V1 were the A camera. The wedding videographer was B camera on the other V1 (with me setting it up this time). Camera C was the EX1 on a door way dolly/jib arm set up. The EX1 was the "safety" always wide camera. Once we got the basic lighting set up, we set up the cameras and started to refine our lighting. Right out of the box, the DP kept commenting on how beautiful the image was coming out of the 2 V1's. BTW, he owns the EX1. He and the C camerman probably spent 45 minutes extra trying to get the EX1 to please his eye as much as the 2 V-1's. He almost wore out the A/B button on his Sony 9" field monitor that he was using to compare the images. When the shoot was over, we went back to the edit suite to look at the footage and the V1 stuff looked awesome, as did the EX1. I sure wish the V1 had the same LCD viewfinder as the EX1. It would be much easier to get quick, accurate focus. But, all in all, the V1 has to be one of the best bargins around.

Sherif Choudhry · August 30th, 2008, 05:52 AM

Greg, I saw film from 1955 the otherday and i swear that on DVD viewing the V1 image quality far surpassed it. I think the only hindrance on these types of cameras is the focusing - ie, its hard to on the small ldc screen, so you need a 7" lcd add on.

But the image quality means you need to start really to get the camera technique right. 1 minute after everyone comments how good the V1 or EX1 image quality is, they are then back to criticising the camera movements or editing or actors!

Greg Laves · August 30th, 2008, 07:46 AM

As a camaraman, I think not being completely confident that you have nailed the focus is a mental distraction. I find I am constantly refering back to the field monitor. Unfortunately, you can't always do that when shooting. In this case, we only had one field monitor and the DP got to use that one so he could direct the 3 cameramen. One other disappointment with the LCD was its inability to reproduce the full richness and beauty of the shot I was getting. We were in a dark toned room and we had highlight lighting on distant objects in the background and they looked absolutely beautiful on a good monitor but I really couldn't tell it on the LCD. The V1 captured it perfectly on tape.

Is it too much too ask for the manufacturers to give us perfect HD cameras for under $5000.00. Ummm, well yes that probably is asking too much. But we can hope can't we?

August 29th, 2008, 10:20 PM	#24
Greg Laves Major Player Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Corpus Christi, TX Posts: 640	The V1 is awesome Got to do a shoot today with 2 - V1's and the EX-1 from the original comparison. This time with no operator errors. This was a 2 subject coffee table set-up and we had great lighting. Me and my V1 were the A camera. The wedding videographer was B camera on the other V1 (with me setting it up this time). Camera C was the EX1 on a door way dolly/jib arm set up. The EX1 was the "safety" always wide camera. Once we got the basic lighting set up, we set up the cameras and started to refine our lighting. Right out of the box, the DP kept commenting on how beautiful the image was coming out of the 2 V1's. BTW, he owns the EX1. He and the C camerman probably spent 45 minutes extra trying to get the EX1 to please his eye as much as the 2 V-1's. He almost wore out the A/B button on his Sony 9" field monitor that he was using to compare the images. When the shoot was over, we went back to the edit suite to look at the footage and the V1 stuff looked awesome, as did the EX1. I sure wish the V1 had the same LCD viewfinder as the EX1. It would be much easier to get quick, accurate focus. But, all in all, the V1 has to be one of the best bargins around.

August 1st, 2008, 04:48 AM	#18
John Bosco Jr. Major Player Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Pinellas Park Posts: 232	Lets not get into a codec war. DVCProHD is a very acceptable codec that is used in its higher end cameras, like varicam. Let's face it. Whether native or H/H+V shift, it still all ends up 1920 x 1080 when using 1080i. The EX3 is not sub $8k, so we'll leave it out. In my comment last month, I acknowledged that the EX1 is a better camera because of the 1/2" imagers and manual lens. I was just pointing out that the HVX200a with its changes is a lot closer to the EX1, and for about the same price (when you consider the extra cards you will need), it's a viable alternative to the EX1, mainly because of the global shutter and 4:2:2 color space. Yes I wish it had 1/2" imagers, and yes I wish it had at least HDMI out. But it is still a very good camera and preferred by a lot of clients over EX1. So the bottom line is it depends on what you are shooting, and who you are shooting for? For my money, I'll rent for now. Oh, regarding the HPX 170, it has the same chipset as the HVX 200a. It has more professional features but the same chipset. In fact, their upcoming AVCHD camera, HMC 150, will have the same chipset. What's up with that? I do agree with previous comments that 1/2" imagers should have been used in the 200a or at least in the HPX 170.

August 30th, 2008, 05:52 AM	#25
Sherif Choudhry Major Player Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: London Posts: 222	Greg, I saw film from 1955 the otherday and i swear that on DVD viewing the V1 image quality far surpassed it. I think the only hindrance on these types of cameras is the focusing - ie, its hard to on the small ldc screen, so you need a 7" lcd add on. But the image quality means you need to start really to get the camera technique right. 1 minute after everyone comments how good the V1 or EX1 image quality is, they are then back to criticising the camera movements or editing or actors!

August 30th, 2008, 07:46 AM	#26
Greg Laves Major Player Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Corpus Christi, TX Posts: 640	As a camaraman, I think not being completely confident that you have nailed the focus is a mental distraction. I find I am constantly refering back to the field monitor. Unfortunately, you can't always do that when shooting. In this case, we only had one field monitor and the DP got to use that one so he could direct the 3 cameramen. One other disappointment with the LCD was its inability to reproduce the full richness and beauty of the shot I was getting. We were in a dark toned room and we had highlight lighting on distant objects in the background and they looked absolutely beautiful on a good monitor but I really couldn't tell it on the LCD. The V1 captured it perfectly on tape. Is it too much too ask for the manufacturers to give us perfect HD cameras for under $5000.00. Ummm, well yes that probably is asking too much. But we can hope can't we?