AG-HVX200 vs GY-HD100U for Adventure Sports - Page 3 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > High Definition Video Acquisition > General HD (720 / 1080) Acquisition

General HD (720 / 1080) Acquisition
Topics about HD production.


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 9th, 2006, 04:31 AM   #31
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Singapore
Posts: 97
Regardless of the image quality (where I think it's been proven that these 1/3" cameras are pretty comparable), I think for the HVX to be viable in any sort of "real-life" video (i.e. sporting events, documentary, concerts, etc.) you will absolutely need to have a firestore or other long-format hard drive recording device. P2 just doesn't cut it (yet).

On a film set you can easily stop the action to dump off a full p2 card. Something you can't do when recording a race, or action sports.

People say that the p2 workflow saves you time by not needing to digitize into your NLE. But it saves you time in the wrong place. I'd much rather spend an hour digitizing footage once I'm back in the edit suite, than spend 15 minutes swapping and dumping cards while I'm on location missing the action.

So if the HVX is appealing for you, skip the p2 card and go for the Firestore.
__________________
John Burkhart
http://mynahmedia.com
John M Burkhart is offline  
Old May 9th, 2006, 08:16 AM   #32
Major Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Tokyo/Sydney
Posts: 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash Greyson
last time I checked 8gb P2 cards were $600. You also must factor the extra back-up, archiving, etc. that must be done with destructive media.

ash =o)
Tell me where your getting 8GB P2 cards for $600, do you know too Thomas?
__________________
"eyes through a digital world"
Jemore Santos is offline  
Old May 9th, 2006, 08:59 AM   #33
Trustee
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 1,719
sorry I got them mixed up with the 4 GB cards. The 8 GB cards from one place I just checked are $1,400.00 each bringing the total to $2,800.00. This however does not change the cost of backing up all of your footage. Even if you use a firestore device you still have the huge cost of raw footage backup.
Thomas Smet is offline  
Old May 9th, 2006, 01:35 PM   #34
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,699
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas Smet
Actually at 60p the p2 cards use the same full 100mb/s rate as 1080i HD so 2x8 GB cards only gives you 16 minutes of record time compared to 60 minutes.
Whoops! You're quite right, I just adjusted Jarreds figures to compensate for 60p being 100Mbs and was assuming it was for 4 and 8 GB cards - I now realise his figures are for 8GB and 16GB. Which means that the total continous record time at 60p without reloading is indeed currently only 16 minutes.

For action sports, I'd expect to shoot everything at 60p (or interlace) to avoid the jerky motion. So then no slo-mo from the HVX, and it will use the card capacity up at the maximim rate. But at least it will actually do 60p, unlike the HD100, and that's why I think the HD200 is something to really look forward to.

As for all the pricing figures, then yes indeed, the tapes ARE the backups, and comparisons of tape v P2 costs are meaningless without factoring in the P2 backup costs, both in time as well as cost of backup media. That's what is potentially so good about the HD100 plus Firestore currently - the Firestore gives all the ease of ingest into an NLE that P2 does, whilst creating a tape archive/backup at the same time.
David Heath is offline  
Old May 9th, 2006, 01:52 PM   #35
Trustee
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Vancouver BC Canada
Posts: 1,315
Unless one is distributing on 720p60 HDTV, shooting 60p is quite pointless except for slo-mo shots. If one is shooting for SD broadcast shoot using the HD100's 480p60 mode for high action shots and interlace.
__________________
Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech.
Ken Hodson is offline  
Old May 9th, 2006, 01:55 PM   #36
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 2,053
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Heath
As for all the pricing figures, then yes indeed, the tapes ARE the backups, and comparisons of tape v P2 costs are meaningless without factoring in the P2 backup costs, both in time as well as cost of backup media.
Yep, that's right. And actually it's the tape vs hard drive cost that I found interesting. The per-minute cost of the media for Varicam tapes (to store DVCPro 100 material) comes to about 50 cents per minute. The cost for SATA hard drive storage is about the same. Perhaps a few cents less. Duplication is in real time for tape, in less than real time for a hard drive.

Then, as you mentioned, you have to figure in the cost of backups: Should one back up all the original source material as well as the finished edited product? Maybe just save the edited project as it can be set up to "point" at the original source material, rather than save seperate project and media for each project? Or backup just the finished project, along with extra-long handles on each clip, and delete the source media?

If nothing else, the source media really needs to be backed up immediately after shooting and kept that way until it's edited. I'd like to do that with a mirrored RAID but imagine bringing that on a road trip. They're not huge but I don't think I'd be comfortable running a mirrored RAID w/o some sort of UPS, even a small one. And even a small UPS is heavy enough to anchor a small boat.

Then for archiving: perhaps go through the original media later and cull all the obviously unusable shots (how tedious would THAT be!?). Lots of questions to ponder.

Of course the cost of media always gets passed along to the client. Unless it's your own production. In which case you're stuck with it...
__________________
Dean Sensui
Exec Producer, Hawaii Goes Fishing
Dean Sensui is offline  
Old May 9th, 2006, 06:41 PM   #37
Trustee
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 1,689
I havent bought any P2 cards myself but I do use an HVX some... I was TOLD the cards were purchased for $600 each from B&H.... could be wrong though...



ash =o)
Ash Greyson is offline  
Old May 10th, 2006, 03:28 PM   #38
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Centreville Va
Posts: 1,828
Just to inject a little reality based humor here...

All of you are making an excellent case for the XDCAM HD and it's affordable, nondestructive (if you want it to be that way) disk system.

Sounds like he could use a F330 and rent a lens to get by. I heard it's 60i is great and it does 30p really well. And you can connect to it like an external HD and copy things over.......

Since we're all speculating about cost here, you're getting pretty close in price.
__________________
Boycott Guinness, bring back the pint!!!
Joe Carney is offline  
Old May 10th, 2006, 03:36 PM   #39
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Centreville Va
Posts: 1,828
double post sorry
__________________
Boycott Guinness, bring back the pint!!!
Joe Carney is offline  
Old May 10th, 2006, 04:15 PM   #40
Wrangler
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 3,012
so, jeremy, is this discussion helping you with your decision-making process? i'm curious to see where this lands for you. i shoot a lot of outdoors, wildlife, and some adventure sports, climbing, paragliding, kayaking and the like, and i can't seem to pull the trigger on any one of these new-breed cameras yet. HVX tempts me for the over/undercrank for adventure sports. H1 has no peer for wildlife shooting and i own a lot of long lenses. and JVC, which i would never have considered in the past, seems to have knocked the ball out of the park this time around...the best overall footage of all the dvinfo-posted footage seems to come from this camera, in my highly subjective opinion. the one thing i have not done is taken the time to play with all three, and i think personal operator comfort will be the ultimate determining factor.

i'm curious bout where all this information is leading you, so far. interesting thread...
Meryem Ersoz is offline  
Old May 10th, 2006, 08:01 PM   #41
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Redmond, WA
Posts: 34
Hi Meryem (and to everyone who has contributed),

Wow - I have learned a lot from this board and appreciate the interest my question has generated. Thank you all for your feedback and discussion. Great stuff :).

Meryem, I agree that the over/undercrank ability of the HVX is appealing. After taking a look at another post showing the JVC trying to procees footage from a motorcross race (which looked choppy), that basically answered my question regarding 30p for fast motion. Otherwise, the JVC is awesome. Honestly - I'm back to square one, but it seems that my decision now boils down to an HVX, or waiting for JVC's HD200U in Oct/Nov. The HVX certainly brings a lot to the table, but holding the camera during extended periods concerns me. Anton Bauer's EgripZ would help, but for 3rd party shoulder mounts, they all seem kind of clunky. And as for P2 cards in the field - sure, I may be required to bring along a laptop or hard drive to dump files, but I think that's realitively short term. P2 capacity will increase, and prices will drop. Purchase two high capacity cards and a Firestore a year or two from now, and you should have hours of shooting. The HVX should prove to be a great long term investment. And what a great discussion to have.. two 24p HD cameras under $10k? Are you kidding? Deciding between the JVC and Panasonic is a win-win situtation. I'm just giddy thinking about this stuff.

Where I think you nailed it was on personal comfort. Great footage comes from getting a great shot, so if I've developed a method that works best for me, I probably should stick to that. Tape vs P2 (and either cam with a Firestore) is fine with me. I'm using an XL1 now, and JVC's shoulder mount seems a natural fit. I'll be making a trip to my local dealer to see what feels best. Great for me, not great for them - I love talking about this stuff, and after a while, I probably get a bit annoying. Then there's the Canon XLH1.. :). Actually, I can't wait to make my purchase.

Meryem, Boulder is awesome.. I actually just bought an investment house in Louisville. We have similar interests, so keep me posted on what you decide as well, and best of luck.

Thanks!
Jeremy Clark is offline  
Old May 11th, 2006, 03:10 AM   #42
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,699
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy Clark
Meryem, I agree that the over/undercrank ability of the HVX is appealing. After taking a look at another post showing the JVC trying ........that basically answered my question regarding 30p for fast motion. Otherwise, the JVC is awesome.
Ah yes.... but you can't have your cake and eat it. I agree that 30p is not suitable for what you want to shoot, and that is indeed an argument for the HVX and 60p (or waiting for the HD200), but if you use the HVX as a 60p camera, you lose the slo-mo ability. You can only overcrank it if the final product is to be 24p - which is not likely to be suitable for action sports.
David Heath is offline  
Old May 11th, 2006, 03:27 AM   #43
Trustee
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Vancouver BC Canada
Posts: 1,315
To say 30p is unsuitable for "motocross" in this instance is to say no one ever shot good FILM of motocross, or racing. Crap. Film is only at 24p frames. Yes it can look bad, but it can also look fine if shot correctly. To give a blanket statement that 30p is just not suitable, when it is 25% more frames than film isn't correct to me. One would have to know how to shoot with a progressive camera for starters. Shooting for film 101 should cover the basics. Is it as desirable as 60p, no. But again unless you are soley distributing at 720p60, what advantage is 60p getting you other then over crank?
__________________
Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech.
Ken Hodson is offline  
Old May 11th, 2006, 07:17 AM   #44
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,699
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Hodson
Film is only at 24p frames. Yes it can look bad, but it can also look fine if shot correctly.
Well, OK, I'm happy to change my above remark to "......30p is less suitable for what you want to shoot, and that is indeed an argument for the HVX and 60p" if you like, but does it really change the argument? A feature film with every shot pre-plannable may well be easier to shoot "correctly", but with fast sport, and maybe unpredictable action, that can be easier said than done, as you seem to acknowledge with "it can look bad". My understanding is that is why in the broadcast world the choice is between 720p/60 and 1080i/30 for sport etc, both having 60Hz motion, whilst 24 and 30Hz motion may be preferred in some cases for drama.

As for distribution, then whilst 24p may be most suitable if that is for film, then my feeling is that 720p/60 would be better not only for HD showing, but would be better temporally for a downconversion to DVD etc, keeping 60Hz motion in SD through interlace.
David Heath is offline  
Old May 11th, 2006, 09:50 AM   #45
Wrangler
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 3,012
thanks for the sharing your thoughts, jeremy. it's easy to get caught up in the technical details. i guess i'll know it when i see it.

i'm looking pretty hard at buying a studio space in Old Town Louisville (much cheaper than Boulder!). we're practically neighbors....
Meryem Ersoz is offline  
Closed Thread

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > High Definition Video Acquisition > General HD (720 / 1080) Acquisition

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:36 AM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network