[Luis Caffesse]

As an addition to Eleventy’s great comparison Barry Green took the time to render out some examples of the DVCProHD codec as well as the HDV codec using the same sample picture Eleventy used in his original test.

As Barry was careful to point out, this is comparison of codecs, not of cameras.

720P comparison:
https://www.icexpo.com/dvx100/720vs720.png

1080i comparison:
https://www.icexpo.com/dvx100/1080vs1080.PNG

For details on the method used to get these samples, check out Barry’s explanation here:

https://www.dvxuser.com/V3/showthread.php?t=26165

Enjoy.

Luis Caffesse
Studio 3 Productions, Inc.
Austin, Texas

[Luis Caffesse]

[Carlos] “My experience with -3DB is with the SDX900, the Varicam and the F900.

Boy is my face red!
I’ve used the F900 and the Varicam on numerous shoots, and had no idea they had a -3db setting. For the record though, on those shoots I was just the director, never the camera op or cinematographer, so I didn’t get into the detailed settings nearly as much as I do when shooting SD. I guess that’s the great thing about surrounding yourself with talented people, if they know what they’re doing then you don’t have to.
🙂

Of course I don

[Luis Caffesse]

[Carlos] Friction on the F-Stop knob: I can

[Luis Caffesse]

[eLeventy] “Kinda difficult. My system( Avid Xpress Pro) only does SD. So uprezzing this way is a nono. Would have to get my hand on the codec, and do it another way. “

Perhaps someone else out there who has the capabilities would be willing to render out a quick test for us?

Any takers?

You’re right in your math, as far as I can tell, in terms of what we should expect to see. But, as your tests show, it’s really nice to be able to see the side by side, so I think it would be a great addition to see DVCProHD as well as DVCPro50, given that you’ll have HD resolution but twice the compression. Sometimes it’s hard for people to understand what effect each of these factors will have on the final image. There’s nothing quite like seeing a side by side to clear things up.

Thanks again.

Luis Caffesse
Studio 3 Productions, Inc.
Austin, Texas

[Luis Caffesse]

Nice comparison Eleventy, thanks for taking the time to do that.
The results aren’t all that suprising, given the lower compression rate of DVCPro50, but it’s nice to be able to see the side by side.

I wonder if you could render out some DVCProHD results so we can see how the higher compression & resolution will compare with the DVCPro50 results.

In fact, the thing I’d be most curious to see is an uprezzed DVCPro50 side by side with a DVCProHD test.

Luis Caffesse
Studio 3 Productions, Inc.
Austin, Texas

[Luis Caffesse]

[Barry Green] “There’s no need to rely on “going by feel”, because you get discrete, distinct feedback, with far more precise feedback related to lens position than you’d ever get with any “hard-stop” lens.”

Barry… we agree 150%
Just wanted to make sure I had made my point clear…
I’m also tired of the ‘we want a removable HD lens for $6000’ posts.

In the following thread on DVinfo Jan mentioned that the HVX won’t actually read out the inches on the LCD (which is pretty disapointing).

Any idea if this means we will only have the same MF0-99 scale we have now?
Or will there be feet and no inches?

https://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=43697

Luis Caffesse
Studio 3 Productions, Inc.
Austin, Texas

[Luis Caffesse]

[Barry Green] “Forgive me for sounding facetious, but — isn’t that EXACTLY what they’re delivering? Except better?

Well, no not exactly, but it’s really really close.
Let me be clear by the way, I have no complaints with what I’ve heard about the HVX lens so far, I was only commenting on the fact that I think most people who are saying they want a removable lens are saying so due to the manual controls they would like to have. I think most people would be happy to get the control and feel of a “removable lens” in a fixed lens design.

Here’s what I mean: the zoom is a fully manual, cam-driven zoom. Certainly should be every bit the match of any other manual lens zoom. Much better feel than the DVX lens’ zoom, it’s an improved design. So it should be at least as good as what you’d expect on a “manual” lens, because it *is* manual.

I’m with you 100%
And as it was, I was happy with zoom on the DVX.
Getting away from the servo ‘infinite spin’ zoom ring was a huge step forward.

Okay, on to iris: a “real” lens has a ring. The HVX will have a wheel. Exactly what more control do you get from the ring, than from the wheel? Granted you can take your eye away from the viewfinder, tilt the camera up, and dial in a specific f-stop on the ring. But using the viewfinder display you can dial in exactly the specific f-stop you want using the wheel, while not having to take your eye away. I know the ring is familiar, and “feels right”, but does it actually give you more control? Yes the ring can be set between f-stops, but so can the wheel. The wheel on the DVX gives you 1/6 stop control. You have more control with the wheel than the display even shows — the display shows half-stops, but the wheel is calibrated in 1/6 stops. Again, not being facetious, I’m asking a serious question — what is it that you can do with the iris ring on the lens, that you can’t accomplish with the wheel on the DVX?

You are right in practice, I suppose that you can accomplish the same end with a wheel as you can with a ring. However, I think the incorporation of an on-lens iris ring would be a great improvement. First, it does “feel right” (as you mentioned) and there is much to be said about the ergonomics of a camera and how comfortable it is to shoot with it. From a practical standpoint, if the iris were on the lens it would mean less hand movement while shooting, as you could focus/zoom/expose by only having to move your fingers, and not change your hand position. This would make it easier to do hand held shooting without bumping the camera accidently to change exposure. Third, I see no reason why an iris ring on the lens could not have the same readout on the display screen – I just assumed that it would (we’re still talking about a fixed lens here). So you still get all the benefits you mentioned of exposing without taking your eyes off the screen (except now you don’t have to move your hand much either). Fourth, personally I’ve always felt that the 1/6stop settings on the DVX wheel design was a detriment rather than a benefit. While it’s great to not see the exposure ‘steps’ that you get in say a PD150, it’s also more difficult to know where you are between stops. An iris ring would be easily viewable and could include markings. The wheel is simply too small and out of the way to include any accurate marking that can be easily seen.

So, while I agree with you Barry that you can do everything with a wheel design that you can do with an on-lens ring, I still believe an on-lens ring would make for better ergonomics, and would have a few ‘ease of use’ benefits. I suppose my question would be, why not have an on-lens iris ring? What do you lose? What can you do with the wheel that you can’t do with a ring? It would simply make for a better camera in my opinion.

Granted, it’s not a dealbreaker. I still plan on owning an HVX when it becomes available. I’m just saying it would be preferrable and would make my shooting more comfortable.

I’m not arguing that the wheel is “better”, I’m just saying — I can do everything with the wheel that I can do with the ring. What additional feature are you looking for?

Like I said, it’s not really additional features I’m looking for, just better handling and ergonomics. I agree that the wheel is not “better,” and I just don’t see what real cost or complications an on-lens ring would add. Then again, I don’t design cameras for a living…so there is probably a reason. Perhaps size? I mean, these cameras are pretty small as it is.

The DVX focus ring has no hard stops, that’s true, but it provides precise, measurable, repeatable focus moves. It doesn’t move the focus elements based on the speed you move the ring, like the PD150 does. It is directly, precisely, completely measurable. It moves the elements based on how you move the ring. That’s why Century could make their markable focus ring with hard stops — because the DVX ring was precise and repeatable.

I agree 100% again.
And, like the zoom on the DVX, I thought the manual focus on the DVX was a huge step forward for prosumer cameras. Now, why not take another step forward and give it hard stops. Again, it would simply make it that much more comfortable to shoot with (I’m thinking mainly about handheld shooting here).

As far as the display markings, that is again another step forward.
I was thrilled to hear we would hve real measurements as opposed to the Z measurements (which granted, were a big improvement over NO measurements in the past).

Like I said, all in all I’m happy with the lens details I’ve heard so far.
My point was only that I think most people are looking for the feel of a professional lens, and are confusing that with removable. I still think a fixed lens camera can feel and work every bit like a professional removable lens camera. As of right now it’s only missing a couple of small details.

So — as a practical, functional matter, the HVX is going to offer you all the manual control that you would otherwise be getting on a “fully manual” lens, because it is a fully manual lens (except that it also supports optical image stabilization, and the possibility for autofocus if you choose to use it, something you’re not going to have available on a fully manual lens).

Absolutlely.

So what’s the problem? Is it the lack of hard stops? Do having hard stops somehow help you focus better? Really?

It feels more comfortable to me when shooting handheld, especially in a documentary situation. It’s nice to know when you’ve reached the end the lens.

Which is a several-thousand-word way of saying “relax — they’re already giving you a fully manual lens.””

I’m fully relaxed Barry.
🙂
And again, I realize it’s a fully manual lens, I guess I should have specified the ‘feel’ and ergonomics of a fully manual lens.

I still think it would be a more comfortable camera to work with if it had an on-lens iris ring and hard stops on the focus.

I can definitely live without that, but I can’t say I wouldn’t prefer it.

Luis Caffesse
Studio 3 Productions, Inc.
Austin, Texas

[Luis Caffesse]

[Graeme Nattress] “I hope my existing matte box fits though! “

I wouldn’t hold out hope on that Graeme, given that the HVX’s lens diameter is 82mm, most of the lens accessories probably won’t make the switch.

Luis Caffesse
Studio 3 Productions, Inc.
Austin, Texas

[Luis Caffesse]

[Blub] “I sense that most people who want a removable lens mount don

[Luis Caffesse]

[Jan Crittenden Livingston] “Take a look a the SDX900 website and spend a few minutes looking at the downloadable scene file area. All of the scene files there were created in camera, and are recreatable with a download, save to SD card and load into your SDX900”

Jan, if I’m not mistaken, the HVX will also have a memory card slot which will allow for loading up scene files, is that right? If that’s the case, can we expect to see a downloadable scene file area on Panasonic’s website for the HVX200 once it’s available?

Obviously I wouldn’t expect the same level of control that we get on the SDX, but just curious.

Thanks.

Luis Caffesse
Studio 3 Productions, Inc.
Austin, Texas