hd100u vs. hvx200

[Noah Kadner]

Of course HD has more definition- that’s just a matter of fact. But that said, there are movies in theaters already that came from the DVX100. HD is only going to make good footage look better but for people like me- SD is already looking pretty good on its own. And there’s a lot of infrastructure available to enlarge SD to HD should the need arise. I’ve yet to go to a single festival with my movie that required anything above a DigiBeta SD tape for projection. That’s easily dubbed from a DVX100-originated project.

Noah

[Steve Freebairn]

To answer your question, the HVX200 would produce the best looking images. The HDV that the JVC is going to give you will only contain a 25 mbps data stream. The HVX200 will give you a 100mbps data stream. If you need any overcranking or undercranking the HVX200 will also be a lot better. The only problem that you’ll have with the hvx200 is storage for all of your footage, but since you aren’t filming until next spring, just buy Focus Enhancements portable HDD. You’ll need a huge storage drive on your computer, I’d go with at least 1tb of Raid 5 storage space. That’d be enough for a 10:1 ratio of footage for a 90 minute feature.

[Donatello]

just to be clear .. panasonic hasn’t released any info if the camera shoots 1920×1080 = we only know it does have a 1080i mode but that could be 960×1080, 1440×1080 ..from hearing panasonic talk about the camera i doubt if it has native 1920×1080 …

the JVC HDV i believe is 720p which the other poster says has a 25mbs data rate … i believe the HVX200 when shot in 720p(24p) has a 40mbs data rate .. and it does have 4:2:2 color space vs. HDV 4:2:0 … so theoretically it should have a better image thenHDV BUT the bottom line is what is on the screen and from judging past tape to film transfers somnetimes it comes down to one house being better then the other = the lessor camera with a excellent DP could look better then the better camera with a so-so DP …

[Harry]

1. Don’t kill yourself photographing this thing. I agree with Kalunga Lima (above) There are loads of DPs out there with their own gear who will shoot for you for food and water and the feature credit.

2. Forget the “out to film” until that distribution deal comes knocking.

3. These adaptors for using prime lenses are all very well, but you lose about 2 stops of light, and that’s going to affect your setup time (more light needed) and focus pulling too. Having a shallow depth of field may look nice, and “35mm-ish” but you pay the price in the possibility that your assistant cameraperson may not be the greatest focus puller in the world AND the fact that stills lenses have difficulty maintaining sharpness during a focus-pull. You are asking for problems.

4. I’ve done this before.

Best

Harry.

[Cris Cunningham]

Thanks Harry.

I appreciate all the feedback. I welcome it. I’m aware of a lot of this, and continue to research, but your frankness is helpful.

I won’t go this alone.

cris

[Dave Dessel]

If you were writing and producing a rock opera, wouldn’t you want a virtuoso guitarist thrashing out the score? Why do that yourself when it will never be as good as the virtuoso? Now, imagine playing the guitar yourself in the opera, as well as every other insturment, how good would it be? It’s taking on too much, isn’t it?

Sure you can buy that guitar, or a camera in this case, but is it worth it? It takes years to become a great DP, it’s as hard as becoming a classical musician. Why not get someone really talented to DP the film? You will find someone if you look.

I would suggest you focus on building a great team around you that includes an experienced DP, Line Producer, Soundperson, and Editor. Really good actors aren’t a bad idea either and they can be harder to find then you think.

Writing the story, which is the most important thing, great acting, and casting are what will make a film a success more than anything else.

If you want to write and direct films, don’t get caught up in pondering about technology or equipment. You are much better off taking Robert Mckee’s Story class, and a directling workshop.

We’re at a point where anybody can afford a non-linear editor and a camrera. So what? That does not make you a filmmaker. You don’t need any gear to be a great filmmaker. What you need to do is develop your talent and you invest in your abilities. Gear can always be rented or a crew person will own it and include the item with their services.

Unless you want to be DP specifically, focusing on buying a camera is a distraction from the really hard stuff that you must face which is writing, taking creative risks, and putting yourself out there. Don’t waste your time.

Best of Luck,

David Dessel
Editor, The Untold Story of Emmett Louis Till
In Theaters October 2005
Distributed by ThinkFilm

[Toke]

Major part in PQ comes from the lens and so far every detachable lens has been better than any non-detachable. We’ll see if hvx200 changes this rule…

[Graeme Nattress]

That’s a rather blanket statement about lenses that I don’t think holds up, especially with the issues with the stock lens on the JVC. Not that the fixed lens on the Sony looks that much better.

Graeme

– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects and Standards Conversion for FCP

[Toke]

Propably everybody knows this:

https://www.eidomedia.com/hdve/ziess_fuji.htm

and that was just an old and cheap fujinon sd lens.
After seeing that I was so convinced about the quality of these super hyper non-detachable hd lenses, that you really have to give proof that any of them is better than even the stock lens of 100u (which is of course the cheapest detachable lens in the market today…).

[Graeme Nattress]

Well, so far el cheapo JVC lens doesn’t look good, and neither does the built in Sony lens. What can be said other than they both look bad, especially in terms of chromatic aberations. Next we’ve got the new Canon and Panasonic to compare…. Should be interesting….

Graeme

– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects and Standards Conversion for FCP