|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
April 12th, 2005, 10:49 PM | #1 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: California
Posts: 667
|
HVX-200 info, might be new
This link mentions two interesting things.
One is a shipping weight ( Shipping Weight: 8lbs US/ 36.2kg ) . And this "" The HVX200 camcorder is an affordable tape-less (P2) High definition and standard definition camcorder. """" Tapeless they mention. This could mean nothing or it could mean what it says. My opinion is the HVX200 will not have tape which is better since this is the future. With 1394, there will be firestore options for longer recording needs. Here is the link: http://www.ear.net/cgi-bin/estatusp?p=1&mode=stp&q=PAN-AGHVX200 This link appears to have a place ready for manuals etc and a fourm that even Jan is at too! http://ag-hvx200.com |
April 13th, 2005, 09:34 AM | #2 |
New Boot
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 14
|
from hdforindies
The 1080 res will be 1280x1080 pixels to tape. The 720 formats will be 960x720 to tape. These are the resolutions recorded to tape, subsampled from their higher end source. This camera is expected to have a 1280x720 image sensor and all of a sudden this camera looks a bit crappier.. |
April 13th, 2005, 11:37 AM | #3 |
Major Player
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 587
|
How so?!
|
April 13th, 2005, 12:05 PM | #4 |
Barry Wan Kenobi
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 3,863
|
Those are the same specifications used by the $70,000 VariCam.
Sorry, not looking any "crappier"! |
April 13th, 2005, 12:09 PM | #5 |
Obstreperous Rex
|
Thanks, Barry, for beating me to the punch on this!
Most F.U.D. is simply an opportunity to set the record straight. ;-) |
April 13th, 2005, 04:23 PM | #6 |
Trustee
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Wilmington NC
Posts: 1,414
|
um...yawn..yes that IS looking much "crappier" as I was under the impression that this camera would have TRUE 1080x1920 resolution...too bad...as that is a HUGE change in image quality from 720p to 1080p...
but then again I will never be happy till we have 12bit raw images like my Canon 10D still camera shoots.. |
April 13th, 2005, 05:25 PM | #7 |
Major Player
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 704
|
um...yawn..yes that IS looking much "crappier"
Really? So the Varicam isn't good enough for your applications? Wow. What are you shooting on now Obin? Just curious.
__________________
Luis Caffesse Pitch Productions Austin, Texas |
April 13th, 2005, 07:41 PM | #8 |
Trustee
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Wilmington NC
Posts: 1,414
|
well as soon as I get my raw 4:4:4 1080p camera done I will be shooting on it..no i don't care for the varicam at all way to much compression for post and color grading...but then again I treat every project as if it's a feature or a national commercial...I can't help it ..image quality is my thing... ;)
I do tend to go way beyond the norm with the things I/we do in post untill you have seen full on un-compressed I can understand what your saying to me..wait till you see 4:4:4 12bit raw files..:) |
April 13th, 2005, 08:28 PM | #9 |
Obstreperous Rex
|
<< I treat every project as if it's a feature or a national commercial >>
Thing is though, there are actually quite a few features and national market commercials which are shot with the Varicam. |
April 13th, 2005, 09:32 PM | #10 |
Trustee
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Wilmington NC
Posts: 1,414
|
true- it's not a bad camera I just have a personal issue with heavy compression on such a "high" level camera system..
you can get a really really good image from the varicam just like you can from a dvx100 - IF you light well - you just can't change it as much in post |
April 13th, 2005, 09:36 PM | #11 |
Major Player
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 587
|
I don't think the compression is all that bad. Could it be better? Certainly! I'd love to get my hands on a 4:4:4 camera but it's just not practical in terms of workflow for me.
What sort of color grading are you doing that causes so many problems with the DVCproHD codec? I don't think I've ever had a situation where I couldn't make the adjustments I needed to SD DV footage using Color Finess. Now, you can't go fixing exposure as easily but if you shoot the footage well I really don't think this is a problem. |
April 14th, 2005, 05:57 AM | #12 |
Obstreperous Rex
|
Agreed. Frankly I have *never* witnessed any compression issues with Varicam material that was shot well to begin with.
|
April 14th, 2005, 07:53 AM | #13 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 65
|
<<<-- Originally posted by Chris Hurd : Agreed. Frankly I have *never* witnessed any compression issues with Varicam material that was shot well to begin with. -->>>
Pulling clean keys from DVCPRO HD material is anything but fun. |
April 14th, 2005, 08:14 AM | #14 |
Trustee
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Luis Obispo CA
Posts: 1,195
|
I have no personal experience with the Varicam, but a buddy of mine tested it at his studio and came to the conclusion that the compression was too great for what they do (which is a lot of keying, and virtual sets).
Barry |
April 14th, 2005, 10:18 AM | #15 |
Major Player
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Illinois
Posts: 888
|
and this ad at ear.com says official release April 18, 2005!! That would be a fast release...
|
| ||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|