OT: various camera comparison test

Patryk Rebisz wrote on 1/1/2008, 10:15 PM
Comparing Canon XL H1, JVC GY-HD100, Panasonic AG-HVX200, and Sony HVR-Z1

http://www.adamwilt.com/HD/4cams-part2.html

This is the image that shows that HDV looks great for the most part but falls apart when the "shit hits the fan" (or rock hits the water...):
http://www.adamwilt.com/HD/4cams-part2-framegrabs/TX-67-XLH1.jpg

Having worked with all those cams (and CCing significan amount of stuff from JVC and Panasonic) i would have to say that they are all a joke on big screen, but if i was given a free camera today i would go with Panasonic, but because i like to work with the 35mm adapters and Panasonic is fixed lens i would go with JVC or Canon to attach it to a 35mm rig (especially since the 35mm lenses help to take away the over all sharpness of the frame thus "reducing" the amount of details in the frame thus "helping" the codec to be more efficient).

(i shoot lots of music videos/low budget commercials and low end narratives)

Comments

DJPadre wrote on 1/1/2008, 10:49 PM
Directory has no index file.
DJPadre wrote on 1/1/2008, 10:58 PM
http://www.adamwilt.com/HD/4cams-part2-framegrabs/

Resolution has nothing to do with codec management.
If this were the case, the Z1 and every other HDV cam which scales up to HDV res wouldnt puke the way they do.
HVX is salvaged by a powerful, yet very outdated codec, yet i do not know why this particular image shows so many interlace combing, considering its a progressive camera.

As for the H1, its obvious the camera itself wasnt tweaked. Just look at the colour rendition across several samples and it looks like rubbish.

As for comparing the HVX to these camera, the only time where this would be of any worth or value would be if its lined up against another camera using the same codec. In this case, i twould be an H1 outputtin to SDI and capturing live DVCProHD

We all know many compromises were made to bring HDV to the fore.
Fact remains, for most uses, its perfectly sufficient, and this is why it was released and mass marketted and used the wya it has been.

Im hoping for AVCintra sooner rather than later, as this codec in itself pukes on everything. Even consumer camcorders using this codec (AVCHD) offer a cleaner image than a HDV semi pro camera.

In any case, weve seen the last HDV camera from Sony. I have it on good authority that the shoulder mount and handheld HDV units (the ones that can take CF cards) are the last of teh bunch from Sony.


deusx wrote on 1/2/2008, 2:14 AM
For new buyers EX1 makes all these cameras obsolete.

There is HV20 at the low end, then there is EX1 at whatever end it is, but in between those two there is nothing worth considering any more.
Grazie wrote on 1/2/2008, 2:34 AM
"but in between those two there is nothing worth considering any more. "

OOOoo . . sounds like a chasm in the market waiting to be populated? Waddyah reckon'?

Grazie
Patryk Rebisz wrote on 1/2/2008, 3:03 AM
DJ, that outdated codec makes in many ways inferior camera superior to all those other cams using HDV.

deusx, i'm not sure what you make your preditions about EX based on, but the camera doesn't bring anything new to my line of work. For that reason you won't be seeing too many people in my busines (muisc videos and narrative) working with that camera beacuse it has fixed lens. If anything it's a bit better then HVX200 in that comparison, so yeah i would take it over HVX but i would take JVC or Canon with an adapter and 35mm lenses anyday over you 1/2" sensor.
DJPadre wrote on 1/2/2008, 4:42 AM
"DJ, that outdated codec makes in many ways inferior camera superior to all those other cams using HDV."

Sadly, the codec and the lens are the only things keeping this camera alive. Dont not misinterpret me, Ive always been a strong believer in Panasonic, but IMO, tehy went a little too far too soon, and IMO, the HVX was well ahead of its time. Sadly though the camera and the recording format is nowhere near as efficient when u cosnider the movement within the IT field. Consider the fact that NLEs require pretty beefy systems on their own accord, and as technology evovles, you can see how the HVX is badly stunted with P2 transfer speeds and capacity, in addition to the resolution and image sharpenss.
To this day there is not one camera out there that can pull off what a HVX/DVX can pull off with colour straight out of the box.

The point however is that the HVX was released amid a HD war which was never trully established. Noone knew what was happening with it and P2 wokflow was not only new, but also very expensive.. and still is...

P2 was established long before HD options were, however the issue now faced by many, is whether or not a fully loaded HVX is worth the money when compared to an EX.
Frankly I despise Long Gop, but its the price we pay when it comes to compromises required when considering HD at this cost

I went with HDV (Canon A1's) because not only do they offer features no other HDV cam offers but technically they come VERY close to the way a DVX operates

In regard to teh EX, i personally believe that its what event videographers have needed.
Its an F350 in a shoebox and noone can deny that its one of the best cameras on the market today, be they ENG or handheld.
In regard to the lense, i know MANY MANY producers who opted for canon and JVC, only to discover that they have no intention of buyng any new lenses or adapters. I would have to say that there is only one person i know who uses EF lenses on their XL2 and even that is on a rare occasion.


winrockpost wrote on 1/2/2008, 5:02 AM
but in between those two there is nothing worth considering any more. "

That may be true if cash is not an issue,,, but there are a few cams out there in the $3500 range I'd much rather use than a hv20, double that to get the ex,,, and yep the price looks very good ,but may be out of some budgets
Andrew B wrote on 1/2/2008, 5:38 PM
Anyone have any thoughts on the Sony Z7?
I dig the 4 channels of audio (among other things)...
Less than the EX1 (smaller chips too), but it gives you the option of recording to tape along with a compact flash card...
Patryk Rebisz wrote on 1/2/2008, 6:32 PM
DJ, that's like saying "The Simpsons" is a terrible show but the only thing keeping it alive is that it's funny... Yeah, it's the codec that with all the weaknesses of the camera still make it a tad above the cometition in the image quality wars.
deusx wrote on 1/3/2008, 1:03 AM
>>>>deusx, i'm not sure what you make your preditions about EX based on, but the camera doesn't bring anything new to my line of work.<<<

I did say, for new buyers.

My logic is if you are going to spend $4000 or possibly more on one of these HDV cams, it's worth adding a couple of thousand more and just go for EX1.

If you already own one of those cams and they do what you want them to do, then obviously, no need to spend more money on a new cam like EX1.
DJPadre wrote on 1/3/2008, 6:03 AM
define image quality...

is it clarity of image? Immediate contrast out of teh camera, colour accuracy, dynamic range, luminance response, sharpness, motion....

if going specifically for colour rendition and motion, then I would say that the HVX is king, however bare in mind that the HVX and A1 are BOTH rated at 8.38 DR so in essence their actually the same when it comes to colour response, and this is more than likely caused by the fact that the A1 is running full raster 1440x1080 vs the HVX 960x540. The biggest issue however is motion, and this is where HDV falls down. Hell, XDcam also has issues with certain environments in which HDV exceeds performance, such as fireworks and strobascopic lighting. XDCam will puke due to the variable bitrate, however HDV wont due to the constant bitrate, and obviously DV wouldnt either

As for teh simpsons comparison I have to disagree. If teh HVX was running HDV, it would pretty much be an A1, hence the reason why bought A1's.
Dont get me wrong, I think the HVX is a good unit, but it seems that the DVX longform event shooters have had no choice but to retain tape based recording, and this forces them to jump ship, like i did, to another camp simply becuase P2 jsut doesnt cut it for me. I love DVCXproHD, but its too much for what an event videographer needs. When you consider most of teh broadcast world is perfectly happy with DV50 and DigiBeta, DVCProhd100 is just a tad too much for most peoples uses. Toi be frank, the clients know no different. They either like it or they dont, and im yet to have a complaint from a client
be they broadcast or private. in fact, ive got some footage i shot with my A1 which is being used for a national promotion soon and i was simply sitting on a hill taking afew shots.
Its been a good money spinner for me and the potential for more work in teh future is defiantely tehre as im in the process of working out a contract with them.
This isnt because i was in the right place at the right time. its because the A1 can do things not many other cameras can. Knowing the camera DOES help of course, but if i could get teh kind of shots that camera can pull off (which a HVX or DVX wouldnt simply because it doesnt have the reach) then i wouldnt be looking at over 100k right now...
The codec means nothing if the camera makes u money..
And to be honest, using an EX or a HVX, or an F350 wont make me any more money... i'd be making the same regardless, so why invest so much into a system and increase ones workload when these elements wont increase the financial benefits?

I am yet to see a HVX owner earning more than i am for a wedding shoot.. lol I am yet to see a cient say "hey ok, you use "that" camra, im happy to pay you more...
But look here.. if we can pull off what we pull off with "this" camera, then why pay extra when u dont have to?

Camera alone does not make the image