Since the last three years I've been an avid proponent of the DVX, and that one of my beliefs is that the HD100 fills all the jobs of the DVX and more, I decided the next logical step would be to compare the two.

On Sunday, myself and my friend Brian Hodge (DVX owner) decided we'd set up a shot or two and compare the two side-by-side. The tests would be:

1-DVX100A vs. HD100, both shooting DV 24PA

2-DVX vs. HD100, HD100 shooting HDV 24P then downconverted to SD res.

3-DVX resolution chart vs. HD100 res chart in DV 24PA

4-DVX res chart vs HD100 res chart (downconverted to SD from HDV)

I compiled the results into a DVD image that can be downloaded, burned, and then viewed on NTSC or your computer. While you can definitely see differences on a computer monitor, I feel these sorts of things are best judged on NTSC.

The link:

Mac: http://www.hdvinfo.net/media/nweaver/DVX-HD100.img
PC: http://www.hdvinfo.net/media/nweaver/HD100-DVX.iso

I'll wait until I get some responses to post what I feel the results were...you know, to keep up the suspense and all :-)

Hi Nate

How did you do the down conversion from HDV 24p to SD?
Through NLE means or component out of the camera into a DVCAM/DV VTR?

Sorry, no Mac to appreciate your efforts.

Nate, thanks for the effort. Unfortunately an img file will not work with Windows. We'll need an iso file to be able to burn it.

Yeah, I would like to watch it too, but I'm also wintel based.
May I ask you an off topic question on the HD100?
Is the tripod plate really a standard sony and does the camera come with the tripod shoe or the shoe comes with the plate when you buy it? I have a sony plate laying around, but I don't have a shoe.

Thanks Nate.

Link to ISO added above.

Yeah, I would like to watch it too, but I'm also wintel based.
May I ask you an off topic question on the HD100?
Is the tripod plate really a standard sony and does the camera come with the tripod shoe or the shoe comes with the plate when you buy it? I have a sony plate laying around, but I don't have a shoe.

Thanks Nate.

The JVC plate is the same as a Sony. Just mounted a 709 on it no problem.
But the camera does not come standard with the tripod shoe. The tripod shoe comes with the tripod plate.

You'll need to see if JVC offer the tripod shoe as a part.

You can't use a Sony tripod shoe either, the holes don't line up (but not by much). Which I guess means Chrosziel will have to release a new light weight support(rail mount).

Link to ISO added above.

Nate: since you apparently have access to both cameras, how about comparing a resolution chart shot on the HD100 at full HDV quality to the same chart shot on the DVX100? We've seen plenty of comparisons between HDV and DV cameras where the HDV footage is downsampled to SD resolution; time to take the gloves off and let HDV show its full value!

Hi,

@Kevin, you know the rez for HDV is better and will mop the floor with the DVX100a. The problem is, there is no delivery method for HDV unless you're going straight to HDTV broadcast or to the web (DivX, WMV or QT-H264). You can't burn an HD DVD on any device so the HDV must be downsampled to SD in order to deliver a DVD. If Toshiba ever get's their act together then maybe we'll be able to deliver HD-DVD, until then it's downsample and archive or transfer to film hombre...

@Nate, The ISO burned and played. Thanks for doing that. They looked comparable to me. I didn't check the waveform or do a histomatch but to my eye they looked pretty close. Do you know of any clips on line that were shot in 30P?

Thanks for posting that comparison Nate. What I'm seeing is a lot more resolution from the HD100 than on the DVX, even in SD mode, which suprised me. The place to see this is on the stones between the railroad tracks, and the resolution charts attest to this, hard to argue with that. However on the color front, I find the DVX picture much more pleasing all round I have to say.
I'd want to do a lot of color correction on the JVC pics for my taste, but just a bit of saturation on the DVX. I wonder how well the HDV from the HD100 holds up to any color correction? I'd probably want to transcode to DVCPRO HD or better uncompressed to attempt that.

Thanks again

Paul

Thanks for posting that comparison Nate. What I'm seeing is a lot more resolution from the HD100 than on the DVX, even in SD mode, which suprised me. The place to see this is on the stones between the railroad tracks, and the resolution charts attest to this, hard to argue with that. However on the color front, I find the DVX picture much more pleasing all round I have to say.
I'd want to do a lot of color correction on the JVC pics for my taste, but just a bit of saturation on the DVX. I wonder how well the HDV from the HD100 holds up to any color correction? I'd probably want to transcode to DVCPRO HD or better uncompressed to attempt that.

Thanks again

Paul

I agree with the assertion that the HD100 footage looks sharper, but the res charts I think I messed up. The downconverted HD100 chart is sharper on the vertical resolution, but worse on the horizontal. I pulled the full frame stills using Quicktime Player, and then made the enlargements using Photoshop...using the scale tool inside a 720x480 document. I think maybe the scale tool was not the way to do this.

Also, somebody asked how I did the footage downconversion...all footage was pulled into a DVCPRO 50 timeline and then the MPEG-2s were encoded directly off of that. The idea was to preserve to chroma resolution gain you get when downconverting HDV.

FCP 4.5 did a lousy job of scaling down footage, but 5 seems to do a great job.

Hi Nate,

thanks for the great comparison. I am following the discussion about the HD 100 for some months now but finally I got a few visual arguments to decide. The downconverted material looks pretty good and I think I will sell my GY 5000 soon. Maybe the experts still have good arguments against it but my pics just have to look good on TV and with a little adjustments the cam permits the results must be (nearly) perfect.

Markus

If I could sell my DV500 for a half reasonable price I would. I love it, but would like to move to a HD100 for the obvious HD option but also native 16:9 DV. I would still have my DV301 for low light 4:3 SD (about the same as the DV500).

What I would like to see is a comparison between footage from the DVX that has been upconverted to 720p and native 720p footage from the HD100.

What I would like to see is a comparison between footage from the DVX that has been upconverted to 720p and native 720p footage from the HD100.

Why? You want to see just how much softer the DVX footage would be? I'm sure the DVX uprezes pretty nicely for a DV camera, but trust me, there's a lot more real resolution the HD100 puts out.

The FOV and focal length are not the same, so the more telephoto image will look sharper.

The FOV and focal length are not the same, so the more telephoto image will look sharper.

It's true I screwed up on getting identical frames, but the size of the rocks in the lower left is the same on both shots. There's other things in the frame that are the same size, like the cracks between the bricks.

If you look at it on the right monitor/device the difference is pretty clear regardless.

It's true I screwed up on getting identical frames, but the size of the rocks in the lower left is the same on both shots. There's other things in the frame that are the same size, like the cracks between the bricks.

If you look at it on the right monitor/device the difference is pretty clear regardless.

The difference is clear but I'm not sure it's meaningful giving the differences in the frames .

Nate, do you remember how were the settings in both cameras? Did you try to match the colors? I will be shooting a doc with 2 cameras next week and I haven't decided yet which to use, the DVX100A or the HD101. The colors on the DVX100 look better, but the HD100 has more resolution. Maybe with some adjustments you could have improved the colors on the HD100, did you try to do it?

Thanks for this, it's helpful
...can't wait to do this test again in about a month with the HVX200

Nate, do you remember how were the settings in both cameras? Did you try to match the colors? I will be shooting a doc with 2 cameras next week and I haven't decided yet which to use, the DVX100A or the HD101. The colors on the DVX100 look better, but the HD100 has more resolution. Maybe with some adjustments you could have improved the colors on the HD100, did you try to do it?

Nooooo...the point of the test was resolution only. I've been using Tim's DVX color matrix settings on my HD100 and it's been matching DVX stuff closely enough.

The answer is, yes, the color settings could have been much better on that test for the HD100.

I can't think of a single reason to use the DVX over the HD100 for most purposes.

Nate I would also love to see the DVX100 blown up compared to the HD100. I think we all know the HD100 will have more detail but just how much so. I know a lot of people who debate with me on the issue of if HD is even worth it. A lot of these people think good SD looks good enough even on a large plasma TV so they do not really see the advantage to HD at this point. I have taken HDV clips found on this forum from every current HDV camera and made a down converted DVD to show a bunch of people and while the stuff looked amazing they still swear there SD cameras look just as good. I tried pointing out the level of detail but they just didn't see it. Since we are all eventually moving to large HD displays at some point in the near future it would be nice to finally see what everything will look like displayed that way. As SD both look good with the HD100 having a slight advantage but how much of an advantage will the HD100 have when viewed as HD.

Nate I would also love to see the DVX100 blown up compared to the HD100.

It looks soft. But honestly, see for yourself.

I think we all know the HD100 will have more detail but just how much so.

The difference in apparent sharpness is greater than just examining the numbers would suggest.

I know a lot of people who debate with me on the issue of if HD is even worth it.

Considering the HD100 was only $2k more than a DVX, I probably would have paid that much more for the camera just for it's form factor, manual lens, and higher res in DV mode, HDV aside.

A lot of these people think good SD looks good enough even on a large plasma TV so they do not really see the advantage to HD at this point.

Agreed. It's hard for the industry to sell HD sets when they keep advertising ED sets as HD.

I have taken HDV clips found on this forum from every current HDV camera and made a down converted DVD to show a bunch of people and while the stuff looked amazing they still swear there SD cameras look just as good. I tried pointing out the level of detail but they just didn't see it.

The people I shoot/direct for see and know the difference. They view the camera as a budget Varicam.

Hi,

@Kevin, you know the rez for HDV is better and will mop the floor with the DVX100a. The problem is, there is no delivery method for HDV unless you're going straight to HDTV broadcast or to the web (DivX, WMV or QT-H264). You can't burn an HD DVD on any device so the HDV must be downsampled to SD in order to deliver a DVD. If Toshiba ever get's their act together then maybe we'll be able to deliver HD-DVD, until then it's downsample and archive or transfer to film hombre...


Actually I have a couple of HVD's and an HVD player (Chinese format) - all I need to work out is how to author the things (that seems to be a black Chinese art). Seems to be straight forward 720P MPEG 2 @ roughly 14Mb/s in a modified DVD format.

It's not really a delivery format, just an interesting niche

Actually I have a couple of HVD's and an HVD player (Chinese format) - all I need to work out is how to author the things (that seems to be a black Chinese art). Seems to be straight forward 720P MPEG 2 @ roughly 14Mb/s in a modified DVD format.

It's not really a delivery format, just an interesting niche

What about DVD Studio Pro 4?
http://www.apple.com/ca/finalcutstudio/dvdstudiopro/

, and higher res in DV mode, HDV aside.


Aside from offering 16x9 the resolution is the same. Or are you saying when you downsample to DV it looks better?

Aside from offering 16x9 the resolution is the same. Or are you saying when you downsample to DV it looks better?

It's not though. Since those tests I had a multicamera concert shoot with DVXs and my HD100 setup to DVX color settings. The HD100 isn't too hard to spot in the final edit.

Look for "Avenged Sevenfold, Live in Concert" on MTV2.

[edit: the effect is greater when shooting HDV and downsampling. Also, the difference between the DVX and HD100 in DV mode isn't "Oh my god, look at that!", but to my eye there's definitely a difference]

Nate,

Is this what you shot?

http://www.mtv2.com/#series/19223

S.Noe

OK I see what your saying Nate. I thought you were actually talking spec rez as compared to the say the SD modes which are actually derived from more pixels.

Nate,

Is this what you shot?

http://www.mtv2.com/#series/19223

S.Noe


Yeah, that's it. Myself and my producer Joe Grzeskowiak produced, I shot the front and center (FOH) camera on the HD100. I also edited, color-corrected, and onlined.

It's still not done either! Still compiling different versions with different songs for different outlets!

What about DVD Studio Pro 4?
http://www.apple.com/ca/finalcutstudio/dvdstudiopro/

Looks nice Tim, but I don't think it can author the same format as HVD.

I tried to post a jpg of the directory structure, but don't have permission to upload images.

Anyway it includes an HVD-TS folder that contains the raw .mpg files, 4 x .idx files, with matching .ctr files, a .dat file, a file just labelled Menu with no extension and .ifo files which you can't open in IFOEDIT. folder. It works like a standard DVD but only in an HVD player. Video is encoded at 960x720 @ roughly 12.5Mb/s including MPEG audio.

MAde by a company called Amlogic - website here:
http://www.amlogic.com/products.html
And the HVD website - unfortunately only in Chinese is here:
http://www.hvd.cn/

I'm not sure what the codec is (but probably mPEG4) but I can't play the files successfully in WMP, PDVD, QT or VLC.... yet