-
Resources
-
P2 Killer? Panasonic HVX200 vs Sony HVR-V1U cost analysis
Published by admin September 20th, 2006 in NewsJosh Oakhurst has some thoughts on the new Sony HVR-V1U, calling it “Sony’s New HVX-200/ P2 Killer.” All in all he seems to like the new camcorder and has posted a cost breakdown of the V1U vs the HVX200. For me, I’m stoked to see another 24p option on the market, particularly in the sub-$5K price-range. Competition is good.
-
About FreshDV
-
Sponsors
-
Recent Comments
- DrDimento on P2 Killer? Panasonic HVX200 vs Sony HVR-V1U cost analysis
- Ray Paunovich on Overview Video of the Sony EX3 Camera
- Leo on Handy Resolution Chart
- Johnny McMillion on Overview Video of the Sony EX3 Camera
- jesse on Overview Video of the Sony EX3 Camera
-
Fresh Links
Well, I am very biased against HDV from the get go so there is no comparison IMHO.
DVCPRO HD is a far superior format…and cheap is as cheap does. But, if you are on a budget….you have to settle for what you get.
Hmmm P2 Killer, I hardly think so…HDV and DVCPRO-HD are in two vastly different categories. Until a format is released that competes with the rich 4:2:2 color and at a half decent data rate…DVCPRO-HD and P2 is the hands down winner in my opinion
There is always a tradeoff. Whereareas the codec is the stronghold of the P2 formant, its recording media is its weakling. A potential buyer has to decide between picture quality (which in most cases is not visible)against workflow issues and of course price.
IMO for most users the latter is more importand, because we must not forget that both cameras are targeting budget conscious professionals.
I disagree that the HVXs media is a problem at all I just did a shoot with the varicam with tapes running $60-$70 for 30mins and then requiring a $25,000 VTR and a capture card capable of HD-SDI capture the initial investment is through the roof. HVX offers an image very competitive with the varicam, I know I have shot them both, at a fraction of the initial cost. To me P2 is not a weakness but an additional strength of the camera. Is it aimed at event video? No, but for commercial or film markets its unbelievable.
If I had to do shoots where I needed to roll hours of tape then please stick needles in my eyes and just get it over with!
Okay… i worked on a shoot on which we used both the Panasonic HVX and the Sony V1U to shoot two different storylines in some of the same locations… the picture quality
of the V1u was far superior to that of the HVX, even when used with the same settings and lighting setups. The V1u is compressed, which in a lot of people’s opinions is bad. However, simply comparing the final image quality to that of the HVX, you will see that, even compressed, the final result is considerably better on the V1u.
I’ve not personally shot with the V1U, but have a lot of experience with the FX1 and Z1U, and have shot both of those cams next to the HVX 200. In my opinion, Sony HDV appears sharper, but the color rendition and motion signature of the HVX is much more pleasing to the eye. More “filmic” as they say. And filmic trumps resolution, IMHO.
Assuming that the V1U image quality and color rendition is more or less comparable to the Z1U, then I think most folks would tend to raise an eyebrow at your statement that the image quality of the V1U is “considerably better” than that of the HVX. Of course, these sort of comparisons are largely a study in tastes.
-MJ
I’m going to RAGE here, so I apologize in advance.
Matthew, Who’s calling the V1U a P2 Killer? What are you calling AVCHD to HDV? I shoot both cameras, I own the HVX200. Anyone who picks HDV over DVCPRO-HD does not understand that 4:2:2 color is critical. As for “considerably better” picture, I’d have to ask, based on what criteria? Who are you to do the judging? Because I have hoards of Pro-shooters, studios, and labs who disagree with you!
Here’s my review of the Sony HVR V1U: 1.) iris and focus are clunky at best. Just try to adjust the iris while shooting.
2.) 4:2:0 What color do you want to NOT SAMPLE? Blue? Welcome, low-light noise.
3.) 1/4″ CMOS sensors are susceptible to low-level noise, UNLIKE CCDs.
4.) Horror trying to blue-screen, guess why? HDV and 4:2:0 ring a bell?
5.) Posting HDV is silly and requires conversion to PRORES422 codec.
6.) Audio compressed on capture is the worst in the marketplace. If you don’t get 16-bit uncompressed audio…
7.) Oh yea, I forgot. It has to be crushed down to 35Mbps or maybe all the way up to 50Mbps. My HD is 100Mbps AND I don’t need an audio guy to get 4 tracks of XLR input!!!
Shoot what you’d like, buy whatever logo makes you feel good, but don’t cry when Sony dumps HDV to the consumer platform where it belongs. If HDV is so good, why doesn’t Sony use it in their PRO cameras? What does that say for those who use it? Pro-sumer? or Con-fessional? Not pro-video. Read: http://www.tvtechnology.com 12/19 issue, Focus on Editing bby Jay Ankeney. Also for color space see our flog: http://hd2o.tv/flog
Happy New Media,
Easy there cameraflyer…if you read my comment (it’s the one directly above yours), you’ll see that I’m on your side.
-Matt Jeppsen
Sorry about that Matt, I did read your comment, I was piling on WITH you. LOL My problem with HDV is the pro-sumer shooters who raced out with their sub-$5,000 camera and soiled on the market by calling HDV content ‘just as good as’ other HD formats. Now, I qualify every client who uses HD in a sentence by asking, “What acquisition HD format do you need?” Most don’t know, but they’ve been sold a bill of goods and march into post with mini-DV tapes like they’ve shot it with a VariCam or CineAlta. Worst yet, Sony affixed the CineAlta logo to a HDV product. Playing the Brand game? It’s Sony and therefore it’s better. Remember those VW bugs with the RR grill? Did that make it ‘as good as’ a Rolls?
AVCHD isn’t my answer either, but it IS coming (this year) as a native format based on MPEG-4 & H.264. SWAPPING INTERframe (looooong-GOP) with INTRAframe profiles. It’s a quantum leap forward to near D-5 quality. Should we start to call AVC the HDV KILLER… for pros anyway.
Again, sorry Matt. Hows that half-chewed ear of yours? LOL peace
I’ll agree AVCHD is an upgrade but come on, near D5? I’m not sure I would go that far thats a bit of a stretch in my book.
Ah, I see. Apologies, misread your comment. I agree that HDV is sometimes oversold…once more, let’s not forget that the format does have it’s place. I use it for much of my production work, including some small local commercials which are posted in SD. My ears are fine, thanks. :-)
Are you guys talking about AVC-Intra? AVCHD while technically superior to HDV has been hobbled by very poor camcorder implementations. I am beginning to doubt if it will be used in anything but base-level consumer camcorders…
As to Sony slapping a Cinealta badge on the EX1…well, it does produce some amazing video footage. And while 35mb XDCAM ain’t exactly the best acquisition format, it’s a sight better than 25mb HDV. With the exception of some rolling shutter CMOS issues, I would say the EX is worthy of the Cinealta branding.
-Matt Jeppsen
Not a big fan of either format P2 or HDV but this much I know, P2 gives me clearity and nice color without much in the way of motion issues while HDV gives me ease of archivability and media management . . however, it’s picture that is important above all, thus it’s P2.