XL-H1 vs HVX-200 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.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old June 5th, 2006, 08:52 AM   #1
Tourist
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 3
XL-H1 vs HVX-200

Hi,

Could someone please highlight the main differences between the Panasonic HVX-200 and Canon's XL-H1?

In your opinion which is the best in terms of picture quality and use on FCP for editing?

Kind regards,
Ollie
Oliver Waters is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5th, 2006, 09:19 AM   #2
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Stockton, UT
Posts: 5,648
Canon does not offer overcrank/undercrank, Panny does. Canon is 24, 30, and 60 fps
Canon does not have built in storage, Panny does. Canon stores to tape.
Canon does not shoot 720 at all. It shoots 1080. Panny shoots 1080, but it looks like 720 upscaled to 1080.
Some folks like the form factor of Canon, others prefer the Panny.
Canon has better glass, and interchangeable glass, Panny has fixed glass.
Canon has SDI out, Panny does not. Canon's SDI does not carry audio tho.
Canon is more aimed at shoulder mount; you'll need a kit to make the Panny mount on your shoulder.
Canon has 1440 x 1080 sensors, Panny allegedly has 960 x 540.
Canon has mpg audio, Panny has PCM.

Both are good cameras, at 720p the Panny is grea, not the cream of the 720p crop, but very nice, IMO. But...it's a 1080 world.
__________________
Douglas Spotted Eagle/Spot
Author, producer, composer
Certified Sony Vegas Trainer
http://www.vasst.com
Douglas Spotted Eagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5th, 2006, 10:03 AM   #3
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Snellville, Georgia
Posts: 614
Oliver, I'd recommend you spend some more time using the Search feature here. The differences between these two cams (AND the HD100 AND the Z1) have been examined down to the last pixel numerous times.

You can also search on DV.com for a 4 cam comparison article by Adam Wilt. Additionally, he's reviewed the XLH1 AND the HVX200 in seperate articles. Good reading (and I think he awarded both cams 4.5 out of 5 starts - impressive!).

Good luck!

www.philipwilliams.com
Philip Williams is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5th, 2006, 10:28 AM   #4
Tourist
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by Douglas Spotted Eagle
Canon does not offer overcrank/undercrank, Panny does. Canon is 24, 30, and 60 fps
Canon does not have built in storage, Panny does. Canon stores to tape.
Canon does not shoot 720 at all. It shoots 1080. Panny shoots 1080, but it looks like 720 upscaled to 1080.
Some folks like the form factor of Canon, others prefer the Panny.
Canon has better glass, and interchangeable glass, Panny has fixed glass.
Canon has SDI out, Panny does not. Canon's SDI does not carry audio tho.
Canon is more aimed at shoulder mount; you'll need a kit to make the Panny mount on your shoulder.
Canon has 1440 x 1080 sensors, Panny allegedly has 960 x 540.
Canon has mpg audio, Panny has PCM.

Both are good cameras, at 720p the Panny is grea, not the cream of the 720p crop, but very nice, IMO. But...it's a 1080 world.
Great stuff, cheers ;o)
Oliver Waters is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 6th, 2006, 09:48 PM   #5
Major Player
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 355
Quote:
Originally Posted by Douglas Spotted Eagle
Both are good cameras, at 720p the Panny is grea, not the cream of the 720p crop, but very nice, IMO. But...it's a 1080 world.
It may be a 1080 world but after you have seen the thousands of clips I have seen from every HD camera from the FX-1 upto the HVX, and they are not shooting test charts, The HVX-200 wins hands down. It holds it's own with $65,000 VariCams. The color and motion capture of the HVX exceeds anything I have seen from HDV. Want to use interchanagable lenses? M2 from redrock. The HVX is one of the first generation of P2 cameras that will only get better and be able to keep growing into the DVCPRO HD workflow. 25 & 19 Mbit tape systems are a dead end.
The real interesting development is RED which will make everything we are debating about a moot point.
__________________
Mike Schrengohst
dvd.pro@verizon.net
Mike Schrengohst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 6th, 2006, 10:08 PM   #6
Trustee
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 1,689
I own a DVX and XL2 and frequently use an HVX, XLH, SDX900 and a Varicam. The Vari is my personal favorite and when using it strengths the 2/3" CCD BLOWS away the 1/3" stuff, not even close in most scenarios. Obviously, if you are shooting interviews against a black backdrop, it doesnt matter as much. The XLH is actually SHARPER than the Vari but HDV is a terrible format for editing. I either shoot straight to a 1200HD deck via HD-SDI or transfer to tape and capture from them. DVCproHD is much better to work in but if you do more than one or two CC stages you really need to work uncompressed for the polish.

Bottom line the HVX is NOT the best 1/3" HD camera, it is simple one of the ones to choose from. Currently the cost of P2 and reliability of direct to HDD make the choice harder. P2 is destructive and I do no feel it is the format of the future... or course, neither is HDV...


ash =o)
Ash Greyson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 6th, 2006, 10:13 PM   #7
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Stockton, UT
Posts: 5,648
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Schrengohst
It may be a 1080 world but after you have seen the thousands of clips I have seen from every HD camera from the FX-1 upto the HVX, and they are not shooting test charts, The HVX-200 wins hands down. .

You're certainly welcome to your opinion. Not many others share it. The HVX has its exceptionally strong points, and its weak points. Just like any camera.
Given that we own all four budget HD cameras, I'd suppose I've got a fairly informed, if not balanced opinion.
And we don't shoot test charts. Most of our work is at least at 60mph or faster.

[edit] Ash sums it up pretty well, IMO.
__________________
Douglas Spotted Eagle/Spot
Author, producer, composer
Certified Sony Vegas Trainer
http://www.vasst.com
Douglas Spotted Eagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 6th, 2006, 10:34 PM   #8
Trustee
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 1,689
Just to support the position of DSE, I LOOOOOOVE the Varicam but it only shoots 720P and most the people in NYC and LA are 1080i only. I have friends who do ten F900 shoots for every one Vari shoot. I am not a fan of the F900, it produces super clean, super clear images but lacks the depth of the Vari...but the resolution is a BIG deal to many people, especially on the high end...



ash =o)
Ash Greyson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14th, 2006, 09:43 PM   #9
Major Player
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash Greyson
Just to support the position of DSE, I LOOOOOOVE the Varicam but it only shoots 720P and most the people in NYC and LA are 1080i only. I have friends who do ten F900 shoots for every one Vari shoot. I am not a fan of the F900, it produces super clean, super clear images but lacks the depth of the Vari...but the resolution is a BIG deal to many people, especially on the high end...



ash =o)
Just adding that 4:4:4 color doesn't hurt either. ^_^

But yeah, go with what looks best to you. I personally don't like the XLH1 because the viewfinder is pretty poor and unreliable, but I do like the form factor. However, the HVX200 seems to be winning most people's hearts and I'm one of those people who could really use the variable frame rates in their projects and I don't mind P2 either.

Still, I'd stick by my first statement, just go with what looks best to you.
__________________
"Babs Do or Babs Do not, there is no try." - Zack Birlew
www.BabsDoProductions.com
Zack Birlew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14th, 2006, 09:59 PM   #10
Trustee
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 1,689
The F900 is a 3:1:1 color space camera... still most in broadcast prefer it to the 720p 4:2:2 of the Vari. The XLH has a terrible viewfinder but the HVX"S screen is not very good either, the Sony is the only one that is adequate.

Variable framerates is really THE main thing that the HVX has going for it and THE thing the other cams just cant offer in this price range...



ash =o)
Ash Greyson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14th, 2006, 10:47 PM   #11
Major Player
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 355
DSE said it was a 1080 world but it's gonna be a 1080p
world not 1080i. I have to usually de-interlace 1080i footage so it works with all the other progressive footage we have in edits. At least with HD footage the resolution loss when de-interlacing is not that bad. I guess if you are doing your own show front to back then you could use all 1080i footage. We are usually providing footage as snippets for other shows and the over whelming majority of folks want progressive footage.
Especially when downconverting, no interlace nastiness to deal with.

Take a look at this spot shot with an HVX
(Footage courtesy of Jim Arthurs)

http://ftp.datausa.com/imageshoppe/o...K_sorenson.mov
(Right click save as)
__________________
Mike Schrengohst
dvd.pro@verizon.net
Mike Schrengohst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14th, 2006, 11:49 PM   #12
Trustee
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 1,570
American Cinematographer June 2006 pages 108 to 116 should give some good insight into this vexed question. In all fairness the XL-H1 was being used with the Wafian.
Bob Grant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 15th, 2006, 12:04 AM   #13
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Stockton, UT
Posts: 5,648
It *is* a 1080i world now. It *will* be someday, a 1080p world. We'll all be much balder, fatter, and wiser when that day comes to the broadcast world.
__________________
Douglas Spotted Eagle/Spot
Author, producer, composer
Certified Sony Vegas Trainer
http://www.vasst.com
Douglas Spotted Eagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 15th, 2006, 10:23 AM   #14
Major Player
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 612
Gah! Sorry, Ash, I was thinking of the F950 for the 4:4:4! =D My bad.
__________________
"Babs Do or Babs Do not, there is no try." - Zack Birlew
www.BabsDoProductions.com
Zack Birlew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 15th, 2006, 12:38 PM   #15
Trustee
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 1,689
No problem, I figured as such. The point being that the broadcasters/Hollywood DPs are more concerned with resolution than color space.

Also, while 1080P may indeed be the future, only a TINY percentage of current HDTVs already in homes support it. By the time 1080P is viable, the HVX200 will most likely have been replaced by a much better and much cheaper alternative.



ash =o)
Ash Greyson is offline   Reply
Reply

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

Omega Broadcast
(512) 251-7778
Austin, TX

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

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

EVS
(800) 238-8480
Glendale, 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 10:01 PM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2015 The Digital Video Information Network