HVX vs HD100 at DVinfo.net

Charles Jones · February 24th, 2006, 09:09 PM

I'm a newby, and I've been reading for a few months about what you all think about many cameras but I want to know what you think about the HD100 vs HVX200. It sounds like a silly question becasue panasonic with 4.2.2 and frame rates and shooting at 720 & 1080 but JVC's interchangable lenses makes a good battle. A camera like Panasoni doing all that is fine but the glass in front of the camera plays a big factor.

What do the guru's think or are there threads already about this battle? Help

Chris Hurd · February 24th, 2006, 09:38 PM

Charles, the single most important difference between the two is the workflow. The question is, do you want to work with tape (less expensive in the HDV format) or tapeless (P2). You're the only one who can make that determination. There is no clear cut right or wrong answer -- it all depends entirely on your particular needs and desires. You really owe it to yourself to try before you buy. Don't make a purchase without first getting your hands on the gear, even if you have to drive a long way to do it.

Tim Holtermann · February 24th, 2006, 09:45 PM

They are both good cameras and there is much more to compare than just tape/tapless, after all you can record tapless with the HD100 using the Firestore option.

What are your primary concerns/needs?

Stephen L. Noe · February 24th, 2006, 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charles Jones

What do the guru's think or are there threads already about this battle? Help

Chris is right and there is not much of a battle. If the HD-100 fit's your workflow and it suit's you economically and ergonomically then it's a no brainer. If you're prepaired to take on the P2 workflow then the most economical camera is an HVX200. You'll find alot of thread's that split hairs over all sorts of stuff.

So, what camera are you currently using and what NLE?

Jiri Bakala · February 25th, 2006, 07:45 PM

So, yes, the HD100 is 'only' 720p but it is a pixel for a pixel. The HVX uses H/V pixel shift, hence the reason why some people felt the images were somewhat 'soft'. Well, now that we know the specs, in my opinion, the HD100 is ahead of the game.

More info here:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=47570

Robert M Wright · February 25th, 2006, 08:25 PM

Both cameras can be purchased for less than the cost of a new Ferrari, and shoot 720p HD video. That's about where the similarity ends really. They have very different (onboard) recording formats (HDV on tape vs DVCPro-HD on solid state memory cards), different lens mounting (interchangeable vs permanently fixed), different form factors (shoulder mount vs handheld), and at least a two-fold difference in initial purchase price (if you include the cost of the P2 cards).

Charles Jones · February 26th, 2006, 04:31 AM

thanks guys I think the Hd100 is the one for me. I need lenses for the mini35 and as long as the Hd100 has Presets like the XL2 and Dvx and HVX to raise and lower gama and blacks E.T.C thats all I need in life. 720 or 1080 means nothing to me because you can shoot crap on 1080 and shoot something beautiful on SD and at the end of the day the story and the image is what matters the 720 or 1080 wont help if you cant light it right.

So thanks guru's thanks.

Steven Thomas · February 26th, 2006, 08:48 AM

Very true....
But,

If all else is the same and the only difference is HD vs SD....
Well, I believe we all know who wins.

Robert M Wright · February 26th, 2006, 06:19 PM

It's not HD vs SD at all. It's two fundamentally different approaches to acquiring HD. About all they do have in common, is that both cameras can acquire a 720p image. How they go about acquiring a 720p image is entirely different, in most significant regards. The HD100 to HVX comparison is a lot more like comparing apples to beef, than comparing an apple to a pear.

February 24th, 2006, 09:09 PM	#1
Charles Jones Tourist Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 3	HVX vs HD100 I'm a newby, and I've been reading for a few months about what you all think about many cameras but I want to know what you think about the HD100 vs HVX200. It sounds like a silly question becasue panasonic with 4.2.2 and frame rates and shooting at 720 & 1080 but JVC's interchangable lenses makes a good battle. A camera like Panasoni doing all that is fine but the glass in front of the camera plays a big factor. What do the guru's think or are there threads already about this battle? Help

February 24th, 2006, 09:38 PM	#2
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,366 Images: 513	Charles, the single most important difference between the two is the workflow. The question is, do you want to work with tape (less expensive in the HDV format) or tapeless (P2). You're the only one who can make that determination. There is no clear cut right or wrong answer -- it all depends entirely on your particular needs and desires. You really owe it to yourself to try before you buy. Don't make a purchase without first getting your hands on the gear, even if you have to drive a long way to do it. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

February 25th, 2006, 07:45 PM	#5
Jiri Bakala Major Player Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Kelowna BC Canada Posts: 706	HVX chips are 960x540, the HD100 1280x720 So, yes, the HD100 is 'only' 720p but it is a pixel for a pixel. The HVX uses H/V pixel shift, hence the reason why some people felt the images were somewhat 'soft'. Well, now that we know the specs, in my opinion, the HD100 is ahead of the game. More info here: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=47570 __________________ www.ascentfilms.com

February 24th, 2006, 09:45 PM	#3
Tim Holtermann Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 184	They are both good cameras and there is much more to compare than just tape/tapless, after all you can record tapless with the HD100 using the Firestore option. What are your primary concerns/needs?

February 25th, 2006, 08:25 PM	#6
Robert M Wright Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Minnesota (USA) Posts: 2,171	Both cameras can be purchased for less than the cost of a new Ferrari, and shoot 720p HD video. That's about where the similarity ends really. They have very different (onboard) recording formats (HDV on tape vs DVCPro-HD on solid state memory cards), different lens mounting (interchangeable vs permanently fixed), different form factors (shoulder mount vs handheld), and at least a two-fold difference in initial purchase price (if you include the cost of the P2 cards).

February 26th, 2006, 04:31 AM	#7
Charles Jones Tourist Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 3	thanks guys I think the Hd100 is the one for me. I need lenses for the mini35 and as long as the Hd100 has Presets like the XL2 and Dvx and HVX to raise and lower gama and blacks E.T.C thats all I need in life. 720 or 1080 means nothing to me because you can shoot crap on 1080 and shoot something beautiful on SD and at the end of the day the story and the image is what matters the 720 or 1080 wont help if you cant light it right. So thanks guru's thanks.

February 26th, 2006, 08:48 AM	#8
Steven Thomas Trustee Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Gilbert, AZ Posts: 1,896	Very true.... But, If all else is the same and the only difference is HD vs SD.... Well, I believe we all know who wins.

February 26th, 2006, 06:19 PM	#9
Robert M Wright Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Minnesota (USA) Posts: 2,171	It's not HD vs SD at all. It's two fundamentally different approaches to acquiring HD. About all they do have in common, is that both cameras can acquire a 720p image. How they go about acquiring a 720p image is entirely different, in most significant regards. The HD100 to HVX comparison is a lot more like comparing apples to beef, than comparing an apple to a pear.