-
Anyone else confused or dissapointed with new HVX200?
-
I’m confused. Why should a 1/3″ CCD prosumer camera produce a better picture than a full size 2/3″ CCD pro camera?
I’d be curious to how close the HVX is in picture quality though. I plan on using the HVX for the same thing, shooting in DV50 and outputting to Beta sp.
-
[brianluce] “I’m confused. Why should a 1/3″ CCD prosumer camera produce a better picture than a full size 2/3″ CCD pro camera?
I’d be curious to how close the HVX is in picture quality though. I plan on using the HVX for the same thing, shooting in DV50 and outputting to Beta sp.”
The chip technology has improved since the old BETACAM 2/3 inch chip camera was introduced. Of course a 2/3″ chip with todays technology is going to look a whole lot better than than a 1/3 ” chip will, especially in low light.
-
how old is the d30 technology? we have a d50 betacam that’s a few years old and it makes our dvx100 look absolutely sick by comparison. if i were to find out that the hxv in dvcpro50 mode can match up well with our d50 betacam i’d be totally stoked.
-
Try backing the detail down , perhaps you are sending the Beta SP too much info and the extra is just turning into aliasing and garbage.
What don’t you like about the Beta SP copy? That might help us give more suggestions.
Best,
Jan
-
The DVCPRO50 recordings look fine except for lots of alias on clothing, bricks, diagonal lines, etc. Lowering detail to -5 helps. But of course you begin to loose sharpness.
Others have suggested that I do not have the proper hardware to downconvert the DVCPROHD recordings. Yhey are noisy, soft and loaded with alias artifacts. BTW, I get the same result with DVCPROHD recordings from the Varicam. As I said the DVCPROHD recordings look great on the FCP Cinema screen so I know the camers makes a great picture.
Thank you for your response. I will continue to research my hardware needs.
-
The 1/3 inch HVX camera is going to look better than a 2/3inch d30 or d50 because even though the chip is smaller, the camera is putting more information per frame to the P2 card than either of those camera which are limited to 720×486 sd-601 frame sizes.
The HVX is capable of capturing a much larger frame size in two flavors 1920×1080 and 720×1280, you are getting that extra resolution when you record. So when you downconvert the footage to SD it is going to look great, like making 5×7 prints from an 8×10 negative. The HVX also records progressive frames in 720P mode and interlaced frames in 1080i mode.
Comparing the picture quality of any DV camera to a d50 is a no brainer because DV records in a 4;1;1 color space and it is the codec (not the chipset) that creates the fuzziness. if you have chance try recording the composite OP of a dvx camera to a beta deck and you will be surprised how amazingly it stacks up. The d30/50 and the HVX (to the p2 card only) records a 4;2;2; color sampled picture. This is what will make these two cameras more comprable in both picture and quality. If I was mixing the two I would capture all of my beta tape to a DVCpro50 codec and I am certain they would match up quite nicely despite the chipsize difference. You can paint either of the cameras to match each other but the they ahve distinct SONY and Panasonic looks respectively.
David
Peace and Love 🙂
-
The 1/3 inch HVX camera is going to look better than a 2/3inch d30 or d50 because even though the chip is smaller, the camera is putting more information per frame to the P2 card than either of those camera which are limited to 720×486 sd-601 frame sizes.
The HVX is capable of capturing a much larger frame size in two flavors 1920×1080 and 720×1280, you are getting that extra resolution when you record. So when you downconvert the footage to SD it is going to look great, like making 5×7 prints from an 8×10 negative. The HVX also records progressive frames in 720P mode and interlaced frames in 1080i mode.
Comparing the picture quality of any DV camera to a d50 is a no brainer because DV records in a 4;1;1 color space and it is the codec (not the chipset) that creates the fuzziness. if you have chance try recording the composite OP of a dvx camera to a beta deck and you will be surprised how amazingly it stacks up. The d30/50 and the HVX (to the p2 card only) records a 4;2;2; color sampled picture. This is what will make these two cameras more comprable in both picture and quality. If I was mixing the two I would capture all of my beta tape to a DVCpro50 codec and I am certain they would match up quite nicely despite the chipsize difference. You can paint either of the cameras to match each other but the they ahve distinct SONY and Panasonic looks respectively.
David
Peace and Love 🙂
-
[Scenecutter] “The DVCPRO50 recordings look fine except for lots of alias on clothing, bricks, diagonal lines, etc. Lowering detail to -5 helps. But of course you begin to loose sharpness.”
Ah, now we are getting somewhere. Go to the menu that is V. Detail Freq. Set this to Mid or Thick. That should alleviate some of the problems that you are experiencing with the DVCPRO50 transfer to the Beta SP. BetaSP cannot handle the full verticle res that is possible with it set at thin, Mid might be okay, but thick would probably be best.
Good luck,
Jan
Jan Crittenden Livingston
Product Manager, DVCPRO, DVCPRO50, AG-DVX100
Panasonic Broadcast & TV Systems -
Thanks, I’ll give it a try.
-
[Scenecutter] ”
Others have suggested that I do not have the proper hardware to downconvert the DVCPROHD recordings. Yhey are noisy, soft and loaded with alias artifacts. BTW, I get the same result with DVCPROHD recordings from the Varicam. “Then Stop trying to go from compressed codec to another compressed codec down-convert in software. FCP does not do that well. and you need to judge SD footage on a proper NTSC display.
You are doing yourself a great disservice — no computer monitor cannot properly judge an NTSC image.Gary Adcock
Studio37
HD and Film Consultation
Chicago, IL USA
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up