HVX200 Reviews are not focusing on what's important at DVinfo.net

Michael Pappas · January 3rd, 2006, 09:34 PM

<<<<<All in all the amount of noise seemed pretty close to what you get at DV resolution on a DVX. So it's really nothing to worry about - people have been shooting great stuff with the DVX for years.>>>>>

IMAGE--IMAGE---IMAGE.............. That's important.... I like the HVX200, but let's get real and dump the Kool Aid bowl over and sit around the table and have an honest discussion over beers.

I have a big issue with this statement. Those ccd's should be cleaner and better than what is in a DVX. There is a "H" in the HVX for HD not a "D" in DVX for DV.

So to say that there is nothing to worry about is excepting what shouldn't be happening in the first place..

We shouldn't have DV noise levels on and HD camera......

Just how focus is imperative to be dead on; because the HD level of image quality will spotlight that mistake; the same goes for the HD signal from the CCD block etc as well........

There is no SD/NTSC softness to mask artifacts or noise in the HD chain. So the CCD's etc need to be cleaner than just a DV camera.

If you film making style is like ,Blade Runner ,Xfiles, ET, Alien, Godfather, Apocalypse Now*and The Shawshank Redemption type of lighting, your going to have noise issues with the HVX200.

Oh........ Wait a second....... The above lighting styles are the way most films are lit. Damn....... I guess we could light like game shows then everything would be peachy....

How is it that the CCD noise is apparently cleaner with the HD version of a standard def design DVX100a from http://www.reel-stream.com/ ??????

How is it?????

The HVX should be cleaner than a DVX100a shouldn't it?????

Michael Pappas
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
PappasArts & Arrfilms Main site
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms
http://www.PappasArts.com
http://www.Myspace.com/

Chris Hurd · January 3rd, 2006, 09:44 PM

Isn't it way too early to be drawing these conclusions? It just now started shipping.

Shannon Rawls · January 3rd, 2006, 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

Isn't it way too early to be drawing these conclusions? It just now started shipping.

Hmmmmm, I don't think so. If you tested one, then you've tested 'em all. Wouldn't you agree?

How many bowls of Gumbo do you need to eat before you know it's good? Just one.
(unless ofcourse the ingredients change over time)

- ShannonRawls.com

Marty Hudzik · January 3rd, 2006, 09:52 PM

I agree with most of what you have stated. I love Panasonic (DVX100 rocked) but there is a real trend (not on these boards exclusively) for people to just brush off comments that are potentially negative about the Panasonic as unimportant... yet if some of these "first impressions" mentioned potential noise on the XLH1 or JVC it would be getting ripped up one side and down the other. There is a weird sort of "magic" over the HVX that seems to make us all want to not see anything bad in it. Like when you are in love you don't see the bad in you girl (or boy).

I am also wondering where the thread that Shannon started begging for some "impressions" that actually address the image quality and not just talking about the aesthetics and menus options and P2 went. Did that thread get deleted? I was really interested in hearing what people had to say and "wam!"....it's gone.

can someone at least comment on what happened to make it go bye bye?

Shannon Rawls · January 3rd, 2006, 09:56 PM

Marty, it was too harsh. it violated the TOS of this website, and it had to go. Rightfully so.

I guess I shoulda just said:

As a potential buyer of the HVX-200 camera, I sure wish there was some more compelling footage for me to review to encourage me to place a pre-order for one. I like the features and all that this revolutionary camera can do, but the image and picture quality it produces is the most important purchasing factor for me as a moviemaker. For the past 10 months I have been really anxious to acquire the hvx-200 based on the overwhelming amount of praise I have heard about this forthcoming camera, and now that it is here, it doesn't seem to be living up to what has been preached to me. If things continue as they have been, i.e.. very little footage from panasonic themselves and professional users I can trust, professional reviews that seem to excude talking about the picture quality, excuses for image shortcomings and unacceptable solutions on how to fix its problems. Then I may be forced to buy an alternative camera that I know produces an excellent picture for its class.
Is it possible that I can get an honest review of the picture quality from an unbiased reviewer as compared to the picture quality that its nearest competitor can produce so I can make a final determination on if I should spend my money on purchasing this Panasonic Camera?

That's what I should'a said. So I'm saying it now. I know we are planning to do a shoot-out and that will be good enough for me too (better then anybody elses review could ever give me). However, I have no idea when that's going to take place. Problem is, I need info now, because I have jobs coming up. And "I" am the one who picks the camera we use. Period.

You can best beleive after we test all 4 of these cameras, I am going to be the first one to come here and announce the WINNER when it comes to how well the picture is. I have no loyalty to ANY of these manufacturers. I only have loyalty to my movies and how they look. *smile*

- ShannonRawls.com

Chris Hurd · January 3rd, 2006, 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marty Hudzik

can someone at least comment on what happened to make it go bye bye?

Here's your comment:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=57400

Michael Pappas · January 3rd, 2006, 10:07 PM

No it was not Shannon, don't you back down for god sakes.

You were 1 million % right in what you wrote.... I'm glad your here.

It's amazing that people can post FUD about HDV and get away with it.

When the truth is spoken with passion it's railed against...... Not good!

What you did, is what started this board in the first place ( The XL1 WatchDog ). This is a no BS sugar coating site and should never change. Your anger is fueled by your passion. The same Passion I wrote back in April about lens and HVX200.

If this was 1997 in 2006; the XL1 vertical line issue would have stayed and the Banding/posteraztion issue would still be there or atleast it would have taken a lot longer to fix.....

Pappas

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shannon Rawls

Marty, it was too harsh. it violated the TOS of this website, and it had to go. Rightfully so.

- ShannonRawls.com

Marty Hudzik · January 3rd, 2006, 10:09 PM

Thanks Chris. While that original thread may have been harsh I like the "idea" behind it. I'd like to see some early reports that talk more about image quality and a little less about the mechanics or aesthetics.

Marty Hudzik · January 3rd, 2006, 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Pappas

No it was not Shannon, don't you back down for god sakes.

You were 1 million % right in what you wrote.... I'm glad your here.

It's amazing that people can post FUD about HDV and get away with it.

When the truth is spoken with passion it's railed against...... Not good!

What you did, is what started this board in the first place ( The XL1 WatchDog ). This is a no BS sugar coating site and should never change. Your anger is fueled by your passion. The same Passion I wrote back in April about lens and HVX200.

If this was 1997 in 2006; the XL1 vertical line issue would have stayed and the Banding/posteraztion issue would still be there or atleast it would have taken a lot longer to fix.....

Pappas

Michael,
While I am not agreeing with your above statement completely I'd like to thank you for the entire "vertical lines" issue. I had it on my XL1 and because of your posts and articles I was able to get it fixed. However that was on a "released" camera. As far as I know the HVX200 is not officially in the wild yet so we need to try to look at this stuff at least a little objectively.

Pete Bauer · January 3rd, 2006, 10:13 PM

It IS too early for all this. There's a shipload of judgment being heaped upon the HVX from a rowboat-load of information. A handful of VERY much appreciated, but entirely non-scientific, test shots do NOT warrant page after page of recent pronouncements by people who have never even seen one of these cameras. Heck, we haven't even seen a rez chart yet, for those of us who do care about that kind of performance measurement. (And BTW, I own two XL H1's and have no current aspirations of buying an HVX, so I'm not saying this as a protagonist of Panasonic or the HVX!)

Let the INFORMATION flow, and then we can discuss it like adults. (However, as a general comment, of course this isn't an "ADULT" board...please, please, just skip any crudeness or profanity when you are tempted to post in that way).

So c'mon guys, PLEASE tone it down if for no other reason than as a courtesy to the guy who owns the site, and maybe even to the other guys -- the unpaid Wranglers -- who WILL take their personal time to edit or remove your posts if you cross the line!

Now back to FACTUAL posts about the HVX200...

Chris Hurd · January 3rd, 2006, 10:21 PM

I really don't think I'm being unreasonable when I ask folks to keep it technical, don't get personal, keep your emotions in check and lay off the crudeness and profanity. Keep it clean. Geez, is that too much to expect. It's not about the negativity, it's about the noise. Let's please conduct ourselves like professionals. If you want your typical Wild West "internet experience," this really ain't it.

(Thanks Pete)

Steev Dinkins · January 3rd, 2006, 10:27 PM

Back in 2005/2006 there was the great and terrible HVX200 crucifixion. A true lynching. It was a travesty and injustice, motivated by prejudice, impatience, and camera racism. Fortunately, the HVX200 transcended the ballyhoo and banal bull****, and landed into the formidable hands of the revolutionary warriors of tapeless HD production. They had been blessed, and the blessed rejoiced. A-****IN-MEN.

p.s. I'm done and outta here until I receive mine. I'll be back then. Laterrz.

(Edited to remove profanity. Pete)

Jeff Kilgroe · January 3rd, 2006, 11:07 PM

I have to agree with Pete. It's too early to pass a lot of these judgements... I'm sure we'll all find plenty of things about the HVX200 to complain about and I'm sure we'll find things to rejoice over. From what we can all surmise at this point, based on the extremely limited amount of clips available, is that, uh, I don't really know. Overall, in my opinion, the footage looks great. Playing with color correction, it definitely has more latitude than HDV. It definitely shows some real promise vs. HDV for high motion scenes.

OTOH, I have seen some clips with too much edge enhancement, some with high noise levels, etc.. Is this an indication of the camera? Or are people still learning its ins and outs?

But even the worst I have seen from the HVX200 at this point is still a step up from DV25. That, the higher resolution, the promise of a true tapeless workflow and those variable frame rates more than justifies the cost to buy for me... I just need to figure out an edit solution sometime between now and when my HVX200 arrives. When the camera does arrive and if I think it blows chunks, I'll sell it and take my losses like a man (or with whatever dignity I can muster) and buy an XLH1.

Michael Pappas · January 3rd, 2006, 11:27 PM

For me, it's not to early. I have been at this long enough to gage pretty quickly a camera and format. I have filmed with the HVX200 for quite awhile, been to a filmout that only a handful in the world got to see..

What I don't like is the massive Kool Aid talk.

I'm on a HVX200 order list, so I must like things about it to consider it. But I must remain in the middle and not become bias towards my judgment on any of these camera. I owe it to those that put trust in me to be honest, fair and unbiased. I won't betray that trust to anyone or to me.....

Michael Pappas
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
PappasArts & Arrfilms Main site
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms
http://www.PappasArts.com
http://www.Myspace.com/

Tom Vandas · January 4th, 2006, 12:31 AM

Chris, though I don't contribute much to this forum, I appreciate the level of professionalism and expertise maintained here, especially given the discussions of formats and equipment that many people still consider to be somehow less than "professional".

In response to the original issue posted here, I have looked forward to an affordable HD camera like the hvx200, but let's be realistic: expecting even more image info from 1/3" ccds is reaching a bit. I'll be happy just to get the resolution with an useable image, even more happy if there is some extra exposure latitude. For me, everything else is gravy.

January 3rd, 2006, 09:34 PM	#1
Michael Pappas Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: California Posts: 667	HVX200 Reviews are not focusing on what's important <<<<<All in all the amount of noise seemed pretty close to what you get at DV resolution on a DVX. So it's really nothing to worry about - people have been shooting great stuff with the DVX for years.>>>>> IMAGE--IMAGE---IMAGE.............. That's important.... I like the HVX200, but let's get real and dump the Kool Aid bowl over and sit around the table and have an honest discussion over beers. I have a big issue with this statement. Those ccd's should be cleaner and better than what is in a DVX. There is a "H" in the HVX for HD not a "D" in DVX for DV. So to say that there is nothing to worry about is excepting what shouldn't be happening in the first place.. We shouldn't have DV noise levels on and HD camera...... Just how focus is imperative to be dead on; because the HD level of image quality will spotlight that mistake; the same goes for the HD signal from the CCD block etc as well........ There is no SD/NTSC softness to mask artifacts or noise in the HD chain. So the CCD's etc need to be cleaner than just a DV camera. If you film making style is like ,Blade Runner ,Xfiles, ET, Alien, Godfather, Apocalypse Now*and The Shawshank Redemption type of lighting, your going to have noise issues with the HVX200. Oh........ Wait a second....... The above lighting styles are the way most films are lit. Damn....... I guess we could light like game shows then everything would be peachy.... How is it that the CCD noise is apparently cleaner with the HD version of a standard def design DVX100a from http://www.reel-stream.com/ ?????? How is it????? The HVX should be cleaner than a DVX100a shouldn't it????? Michael Pappas Arrfilms@hotmail.com PappasArts & Arrfilms Main site http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms http://www.PappasArts.com http://www.Myspace.com/

January 3rd, 2006, 09:44 PM	#2
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,366 Images: 513	Isn't it way too early to be drawing these conclusions? It just now started shipping. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

January 3rd, 2006, 09:56 PM	#5
Shannon Rawls Major Player Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Los Angeles, California Posts: 853	Marty, it was too harsh. it violated the TOS of this website, and it had to go. Rightfully so. I guess I shoulda just said: As a potential buyer of the HVX-200 camera, I sure wish there was some more compelling footage for me to review to encourage me to place a pre-order for one. I like the features and all that this revolutionary camera can do, but the image and picture quality it produces is the most important purchasing factor for me as a moviemaker. For the past 10 months I have been really anxious to acquire the hvx-200 based on the overwhelming amount of praise I have heard about this forthcoming camera, and now that it is here, it doesn't seem to be living up to what has been preached to me. If things continue as they have been, i.e.. very little footage from panasonic themselves and professional users I can trust, professional reviews that seem to excude talking about the picture quality, excuses for image shortcomings and unacceptable solutions on how to fix its problems. Then I may be forced to buy an alternative camera that I know produces an excellent picture for its class. Is it possible that I can get an honest review of the picture quality from an unbiased reviewer as compared to the picture quality that its nearest competitor can produce so I can make a final determination on if I should spend my money on purchasing this Panasonic Camera? That's what I should'a said. So I'm saying it now. I know we are planning to do a shoot-out and that will be good enough for me too (better then anybody elses review could ever give me). However, I have no idea when that's going to take place. Problem is, I need info now, because I have jobs coming up. And "I" am the one who picks the camera we use. Period. You can best beleive after we test all 4 of these cameras, I am going to be the first one to come here and announce the WINNER when it comes to how well the picture is. I have no loyalty to ANY of these manufacturers. I only have loyalty to my movies and how they look. smile - ShannonRawls.com __________________ Shannon W. Rawls ~ Motion Picture Producer & huge advocate of Digital Acquisition. Last edited by Shannon Rawls; January 4th, 2006 at 01:16 PM.

January 3rd, 2006, 10:13 PM	#10
Pete Bauer Wrangler Join Date: May 2003 Location: Eagle River, AK Posts: 4,100	It IS too early for all this. There's a shipload of judgment being heaped upon the HVX from a rowboat-load of information. A handful of VERY much appreciated, but entirely non-scientific, test shots do NOT warrant page after page of recent pronouncements by people who have never even seen one of these cameras. Heck, we haven't even seen a rez chart yet, for those of us who do care about that kind of performance measurement. (And BTW, I own two XL H1's and have no current aspirations of buying an HVX, so I'm not saying this as a protagonist of Panasonic or the HVX!) Let the INFORMATION flow, and then we can discuss it like adults. (However, as a general comment, of course this isn't an "ADULT" board...please, please, just skip any crudeness or profanity when you are tempted to post in that way). So c'mon guys, PLEASE tone it down if for no other reason than as a courtesy to the guy who owns the site, and maybe even to the other guys -- the unpaid Wranglers -- who WILL take their personal time to edit or remove your posts if you cross the line! Now back to FACTUAL posts about the HVX200... __________________ Pete Bauer The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science. Albert Einstein Trying to solve a DV mystery? You may find the answer behind the SEARCH function ... or be able to join a discussion already in progress!

January 3rd, 2006, 10:21 PM	#11
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,366 Images: 513	I really don't think I'm being unreasonable when I ask folks to keep it technical, don't get personal, keep your emotions in check and lay off the crudeness and profanity. Keep it clean. Geez, is that too much to expect. It's not about the negativity, it's about the noise. Let's please conduct ourselves like professionals. If you want your typical Wild West "internet experience," this really ain't it. (Thanks Pete) __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

January 3rd, 2006, 09:52 PM	#4
Marty Hudzik Trustee Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Canton, Ohio Posts: 1,771	I agree with most of what you have stated. I love Panasonic (DVX100 rocked) but there is a real trend (not on these boards exclusively) for people to just brush off comments that are potentially negative about the Panasonic as unimportant... yet if some of these "first impressions" mentioned potential noise on the XLH1 or JVC it would be getting ripped up one side and down the other. There is a weird sort of "magic" over the HVX that seems to make us all want to not see anything bad in it. Like when you are in love you don't see the bad in you girl (or boy). I am also wondering where the thread that Shannon started begging for some "impressions" that actually address the image quality and not just talking about the aesthetics and menus options and P2 went. Did that thread get deleted? I was really interested in hearing what people had to say and "wam!"....it's gone. can someone at least comment on what happened to make it go bye bye?

January 3rd, 2006, 10:09 PM	#8
Marty Hudzik Trustee Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Canton, Ohio Posts: 1,771	Thanks Chris. While that original thread may have been harsh I like the "idea" behind it. I'd like to see some early reports that talk more about image quality and a little less about the mechanics or aesthetics.

January 3rd, 2006, 10:27 PM	#12
Steev Dinkins Major Player Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 613	Back in 2005/2006 there was the great and terrible HVX200 crucifixion. A true lynching. It was a travesty and injustice, motivated by prejudice, impatience, and camera racism. Fortunately, the HVX200 transcended the ballyhoo and banal bull**, and landed into the formidable hands of the revolutionary warriors of tapeless HD production. They had been blessed, and the blessed rejoiced. A-*IN-MEN. p.s. I'm done and outta here until I receive mine. I'll be back then. Laterrz. (Edited to remove profanity. Pete)* __________________ www.holyzoo.com

January 3rd, 2006, 11:07 PM	#13
Jeff Kilgroe Major Player Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Golden, CO Posts: 681	I have to agree with Pete. It's too early to pass a lot of these judgements... I'm sure we'll all find plenty of things about the HVX200 to complain about and I'm sure we'll find things to rejoice over. From what we can all surmise at this point, based on the extremely limited amount of clips available, is that, uh, I don't really know. Overall, in my opinion, the footage looks great. Playing with color correction, it definitely has more latitude than HDV. It definitely shows some real promise vs. HDV for high motion scenes. OTOH, I have seen some clips with too much edge enhancement, some with high noise levels, etc.. Is this an indication of the camera? Or are people still learning its ins and outs? But even the worst I have seen from the HVX200 at this point is still a step up from DV25. That, the higher resolution, the promise of a true tapeless workflow and those variable frame rates more than justifies the cost to buy for me... I just need to figure out an edit solution sometime between now and when my HVX200 arrives. When the camera does arrive and if I think it blows chunks, I'll sell it and take my losses like a man (or with whatever dignity I can muster) and buy an XLH1. __________________ - Jeff Kilgroe - Applied Visual Technologies \| DarkScience - www.darkscience.com

January 3rd, 2006, 11:27 PM	#14
Michael Pappas Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: California Posts: 667	For me, it's not to early. I have been at this long enough to gage pretty quickly a camera and format. I have filmed with the HVX200 for quite awhile, been to a filmout that only a handful in the world got to see.. What I don't like is the massive Kool Aid talk. I'm on a HVX200 order list, so I must like things about it to consider it. But I must remain in the middle and not become bias towards my judgment on any of these camera. I owe it to those that put trust in me to be honest, fair and unbiased. I won't betray that trust to anyone or to me..... Michael Pappas Arrfilms@hotmail.com PappasArts & Arrfilms Main site http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms http://www.PappasArts.com http://www.Myspace.com/ Last edited by Michael Pappas; January 4th, 2006 at 01:13 AM.

January 4th, 2006, 12:31 AM	#15
Tom Vandas Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: currently in Kigali, Rwanda Posts: 144	Chris, though I don't contribute much to this forum, I appreciate the level of professionalism and expertise maintained here, especially given the discussions of formats and equipment that many people still consider to be somehow less than "professional". In response to the original issue posted here, I have looked forward to an affordable HD camera like the hvx200, but let's be realistic: expecting even more image info from 1/3" ccds is reaching a bit. I'll be happy just to get the resolution with an useable image, even more happy if there is some extra exposure latitude. For me, everything else is gravy.