P2 vs tape test
 

As the HVX200 can capture miniDV to tape or to the P2 card, it should be feasible to set up a back to back, or side by side, and directly comparable tests of the workflows, productivity, output, archiving and other implications of these alternative capture methods.

Are there any plans for such back to back tests? If not, would it not be a good idea to set them up, rather as some are planning to set up comparisons of the HVX200 vs JVC ProHD vs Sony HDV format cameras?

Jan Crittendon said at the recent DVExpo in NY that the HVX200 will *NOT* record DV to the P2 cards, only to MiniDV tape.

I hoped it would have that capability in order to speed up work flow on DV projects. So for DV format projects the HVX200 is overkill at 3 times the price of a DVX100a.

I'd prefer that the DV tape mechanism be dropped from the HVX200.

First it would further improve the ruggedness of the camera.

Second, the camera would be lighter. Probably not a large reduction in weight, but I notice the difference even when I shoot with different size batteries and have to do hand held stuff.

Third, if you need the project delivered in a DV format, one could easily use an optional external portable HD (Firestore, etc). Or convert later.

The MiniDV tape feature on the HVX200 seems to be a marketing compromise that diminishes, in my opinion, the mission of this camera.

i say, instead of droping the tape, speed it up so you can capture hd to tape.
just a thought.

"HD to tape" was not a viable option on the HVX200. One primary concept behind this camcorder is giving it a very low price point, well under $10,000. Adding a DVCPRO HD tape transport would have put several thousand dollars on top of that. Can't remember but I believe the DVCPRO HD tape transport is something like $6600 all by itself. This would have more than doubled the price of the HVX. At that point, if you want to shoot DVCPRO HD to tape, why not just choose a DVCPRO HD tape-equipped camcorder?

For David, we don't have to wait for the HVX200 to ship before conducting the type of test you're describing. P2 cameras have been around for well over a year. For example there are several hundred SPX800 camcorders in North America; it's just a matter of finding one whose owner is willing to devote the time and energy to such an experiment (although I would imagine that SPX800 owners are too busy shooting to bother with internet message boards, but maybe we can find an exception).

I agree wholeheartedly with Robert -- in my opinion the DV tape transport on the HVX is extraneous; I really wish they hadn't gone that route.

Thanks for the replies. I was unaware of that. As I read it, the brochure implied that P2 cards will record DV as well as all the other DVCPro formats.

The intended point of my question was to ask if anyone was planning to compare working with 60 minutes of DV on tape with 60 minutes of DV on a PS2 card. If they were to do so they would presumably have to record to DVCPro 25 to do it.

The use of P2 cards is a radical change from tape that surely must have important implications for workflow and archiving.

Honestly, I'd rather use the camera's DVCPRO 50 for SD work anyway... I mean Digibeta quality in a $6K cam? Nice, very nice. So my question is, how will it mix with DV footage on projects with various sources for footage... I'm sure it'll play just fine...

Just a reminder that yes, the codec is close to digibeta quality, but there's a reason you can't get a digibeta camera for $6,000. MUCH better cameras, larger ccd's and much better lenses...

Just a reminder for people who compare cameras like this. The gap between them is narrowing, but there still are differences.

FWIW, I just finished editing a Discovery show that had mixed SONY Beta camera footage along with a SONY Beta camera w/ DV Cam back on it. I could not tell the difference at all when only the tape format changed...beta vs DV cam. However, they also shot some with the DVX100a and while it looked very good, the depth of field made it obvious it was a smaller chip set/different lens than the Beta camera. You also could tell on handheld footage...a 10 lb camera moves much differently than a 30 lb shoulder mounted camera when hand held.

So, just remember when comparing...there are more things to think about than just resolution if trying to get a "pro" look...

KW

Hi Robert,
I'm wondering if you may have misheard or perhaps misremembered this. I attended the same seminar (the last one of four identical presentations, at 3pm on Wednesday the 20th) and in the notes I took, Jan said that there would be a dubbing feature to allow you to take standard DV from the P2 cards straight to the tape transport. In fact the new HVX200 brochure that Panasonic handed out at this show (DV Expo East) says plainly that "the AG-HVX200 can record HD, DVCPRO 50, DVCPRO or DV format data on P2 cards." And this certainly jives with everything else I've heard about the HVX200. Other P2 cameras can record DV25 to P2, and the HVX should be no exception. Hope this helps,

Perhaps the confusion is over MiniDV transport is DV(25) only, not DV-50, DVCPRO-HD, etc. I don't see why Panasonic would prevent you from being able to record DV-25 on the P2 cards. Although if you had DV-50 & HD at your fingertips, why shoot in DV-25?

I too don't understand them deciding to have a DV only transport on an HD/DV-50 camera. I guess Panasonic didn't want to piss off the wedding shooter crowd.

-CJ

Just to clarify a point that has been worrying me, does this camera record DVCPro 50 to tape? Or does it only record this format to P2, like the DVPro HD?

It records DVCPRO 50 to P2 only.

As Chris had mentioned above, and I remember Jan saying this at NAB, to record DVCPRO-HD to tape, you need 16 record heads. (I suspect half or so for DVCPRO-50) Also, if memory serves, she has said those heads ran for $800(?) a piece.

P2 has made the camera far cheaper, given its capabilities.

-CJ

Agreed. In the seminar at DV Expo East, Jan covered the differences between a DV25 tape transport chassis and a DVCPRO HD tape transport chassis. The HD mechanism is larger, deeper, has more recording heads and is exponentially more expensive than the DV25 mechanism. Putting an HD tape transport on the HVX200 would have been pointless. Frankly in my opinion the DV25 transport on the HVX is also pointless, but it's a done deal.

Thanks Chris! Sorry for the misinformation!

Either Jan misheard/misunderstood my question, or I did the same with her answer. When I asked her if the HVX would record DV to P2 cards she said no. That's what I thought I heard! Jan said that would involve 2 different codecs and a conversion. Maybe she thought I meant HD and DV at the same time? Who knows?

All that matters is the correct information.

I just re-read the brochure I picked up at DVExpo and it states the the HVX200 will indeed record DV to the P2 card(s).

While this is welcome news for those of us who need to output projects to DV, in my mind it makes the tape transport on the HVX redundant and unnecessary.

Robert, were you at the same presentation as me, at 3pm Wednesday? Because I thought I heard this question too. I believe there was a slight misunderstanding to this. I'm pretty sure Jan thought you were asking about dubbing pre-recorded material from the tape to the cards, and the answer to that is No. At this point of the seminar I think she had mentioned the dubbing function which will go from P2 cards to DV tape for standard DV25 (plain vanilla DV). The dubbing function will let you go from cards to tape, but not the other way around. That's what she meant by answering "no" to that question, as she thought you were asking if you can dub the DV tape contents to the P2 cards.

I was there on Tuesday at 1PM. Similiar question, different person, different day!

I was all the way in the back so perhaps she couldn't clearly hear what I was asking. And, I bet she has been asked all of these question over and over by now!