-
HVX-200 and Varicam Performance
In looking that at footage from Varicam and the HVX-200 there are some large differences.
1. The HVX 200 footage is very noisy. The Varicam footage does not have hardly any noise. (1/3 inch CCD the cause?) It looks a bit like the HDV from Sony FX-1.
2. Chromatic Abberation seems to be a problem for the HVX200 at the far ends of the lens. Also see
purple fringes at high-low ends of lens.3. The color seems pale by comparison. Notice the Varicam colors “pop” and are very vivid. The noise from the HVX-200 seems to detract from what would otherwise be a good 4:2:2 sample space.
Overall. The HVX-200 does not compare favorably with the Varicam. It is not a replacement for the Varicam. Also it really is not much better than transcoded HDV 1080i, thats been brought into DVC PRO HD 1080i or 720p. I have some transcoded HDV at 720p that actually looks better than the HVX footage. Colors and low noise.
-
13 Replies
-
Hello George,
Where did you do this “test”.
And yes I would say that a camera
that costs 10x more should put out
a better picture.
Have you looked at any of the HVX footage
over at DVXuser.com??
I have been comparing that to Sony’s HDV
demos from there website. I would say that
the HVX blows away HDV in all categories.
Sure if you need to tape 2 hour meetings and
they think they need HD than HDV is the format for you.
I do spot work and .doc features, the HVX will allow
me to do more interesting work than I could renting
a Varicam. -
I was looking at footage in DVCPRO 720p/24 and 60.
The issue I think is that the small 1/3 inch CCDs are too noisy. Sure the DVCPRO codec is great. But
the noise issues with the 1/3 inch chip are a real problem for this camera esp at HD resolution.Has anyone done analysis on the DVCPRO 50 16:9 progressive capability of the HVX200? That is likely better quality and may merit a purchase of the camera alone. (ie not hoping for varicam quality and not being disappointed).
Also don’t think that the camera blows away the Sony FX1 either, esp when one downconverts to 720p from a native 1080 x 1440 resolution using DVCPRO 100 at 720 x 960. My tests show otherwise and I can share the footage if you like, seeing is believing.
Overall I am not overly impressed with what I have seen with the HVX 200. I am impressed with the innovation however to P2 cards over using tape. that is a very big step forward. And also no more expensive decks to buy.
-
[George] “But the noise issues with the 1/3 inch chip are a real problem for this camera esp at HD resolution.”
Of course there are differences with 2/3 and 1/3 chips however in a properly lit scene i am not seeing the “vast”{ difference that you are eluding to.
[George] “Also don’t think that the camera blows away the Sony FX1 either, esp when one downconverts to 720p from a native 1080 x 1440 resolution using DVCPRO 100 at 720 x 960. My tests show otherwise and I can share the footage if you like, seeing is believing.”
I love these posts – not a single shred of evidence, and not an idea of where you got your hands on one of the very few of these that are out there. While I do agree that at 1080i60 there is not a great difference to what the zu1 can do.
Now lets talk about the addition of 1080 24pA, and all of the variable speed function at 720p that can be done with the camera in addition to all of the standard def formats available.The camera captures the native DVCPROHD codec in both 720p and 1080- but your frame size is not correct. The 4:2:2 1080 DVCPROHD codec is actually 1280x 1080. not the HDV size of 1440×1080 @ 4:2:0 that you quoted
Gary Adcock
Studio37
HD and Film Consultation
Chicago, IL USA -
Your honesty is extremely helpful, thanks for that. On a forum like this there is an overwhelming desire to sing the party line, I prefer the truth.
I saw some footage from Japan that was unlit, night. The blacks were crazy black, I think the ire in Japan is 0 so, black is really black. I wonder if the footage was treated.
Do you think there might be a simple solution to the noise issue within FCP? Perhaps a filter or treatment of some kind?
Might the noise effect you see be resolved with more fill light? In other words does the camera seem to be fine when the black is given a little more light? Some cameras and film stocks respond fantastically to just 1/2 stop more light in the shadows.
Your chromatic aberrations issue is troubling, the fact that it is found mostly at either end of the zoom range is better than at all points of the zoom. I wonder if the footage you are shooting is shot to highlight this issue, i.e., lots of contrast, back lighting etc?
I would like to see the footage.
Chris
-
[Blub] “Do you think there might be a simple solution to the noise issue within FCP? Perhaps a filter or treatment of some kind? “
Chris
the same tricks used for digital still images works for de-noising video, you blur the blue color layer.[Blub] “Might the noise effect you see be resolved with more fill light? In other words does the camera seem to be fine when the black is given a little more light?”
This too is very true, in my tests, as I said in a properly lit shot their is not nearly as much difference in the images, however in low light the 2/3 “cameras always win the battle.
Gary Adcock
Studio37
HD and Film Consultation
Chicago, IL USA -
[Blub] “The blacks were crazy black, I think the ire in Japan is 0 so, black is really black. I wonder if the footage was treated. “
IRE is irrelevent. We’re talking digital video here which has no setup, no IRE.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects and Standards Conversion for FCP
-
The same thing went on when the DVX-100 came out. Early reports of grainy images.
Most did not have the camera set-up properly. It would be real hard to judge a camera in an initial test. The first time I see cameras is in a dimly lit demo room
and the salespeople have no idea how to set these cameras up. I keep asking if they can light a proper scene or take the camera outdoors. I am comparing the WMV-HD clips I have of the HVX footage and Sony’s own demo of the High-End HDV camera. Looking at the image quality, sharpness and motion artifacts I could not even think about buying an HDV camera. While the HVX videos I have seen get a thumbs up. Time will tell, I have other clients I edit for that are going HDV, they do training videos and long form talking head meeting room stuff, not the kinda stuff that P2 is all about.
I have the HVX or order and whenever I receive it?? I plan to shoot some spots and
higher end corporate presentations. I have many clients who have expressed an interest in presenting WMV-HD at tradeshows and the like. -
I have read this several times, why do some of the digital cameras I have used (Sony) have IRE in their menus and offer 0 or 7.5. When I test them the 0 IRE does show blacker blacks. I have no problem with the idea that digital has or can obviate IRE, but why is it still in the cameras?
Chris
-
Blub,
[Blub] “I have read this several times, why do some of the digital cameras I have used (Sony) have IRE in their menus and offer 0 or 7.5. When I test them the 0 IRE does show blacker blacks. I have no problem with the idea that digital has or can obviate IRE, but why is it still in the cameras?”
They need a 7.5 IRE setting solely for when they might be used in an analog switched multi-cam situation where they are mixed with analog camera heads. Otherwise the 7.5 IRE setting is useless and should never be used.
Ron Shook
-
For analogue playout only.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects and Standards Conversion for FCP
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up