Empty V
Contributor
So what recording mechanism does the DVX100 have ? I thought it was P2 cards, no ?
It shoots to MiniDV. HVX200 uses the P2 cards or streams it to an HDD.
Billy
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
So what recording mechanism does the DVX100 have ? I thought it was P2 cards, no ?
It shoots to MiniDV. HVX200 uses the P2 cards or streams it to an HDD.
Billy
No you won't. You'll just have to play with it like the big boys do. And like I do when I work with your 1080p stuff. Use proxy files. Cut an SD proxy, edit and color correct that, then replace that with the original file come render time. It's clean and fast. You will need to jump out of FCE though.
Yea, shooting true 2k or better will be lovely. BUT depending on lens size, that thing is going to need a ton of light. You'll be set with your new ones. I just hope it shoots RAW. If it does, it'll be exciting times for prosumers.
Since MiniDV is 25Mbps (just like my old PC350) I'd be interested to see in reality how much better the footage could be within the MiniDV/DV constraints.
WIth 72mm of Leica Glass in front of it, it's gonna be a major difference to the PC350.
The lens is not interchangable. It came standard with 72mm of Leica Glass. It's also why it retailed at over $5k new. Well, that and it was the first ever true 24p camera released to the masses.
The coding of DV is not less efficient. It simply does not throw as much information away. DV does not use a GOP structure, so each frame can stand on it's own. This is why it's motion is so much cleaner than HDV, and why it can be edited frame for frame in it's native format unlike HDV.
HDV gives far more resolution than DV. That is certain and it is easily observed. DV gives less motion artifacting than HDV. That is it's advantage. That and it needs less light to give an optimal image given the same size sensor(s).
Really, it comes down to what you need.
I want you to take a close look at something:
Apple - Trailers - Iraq In Fragments - Trailer
Tell me what you think of it.
The lens is not interchangable. It came standard with 72mm of Leica Glass. It's also why it retailed at over $5k new. Well, that and it was the first ever true 24p camera released to the masses.
The coding of DV is not less efficient. It simply does not throw as much information away. DV does not use a GOP structure, so each frame can stand on it's own. This is why it's motion is so much cleaner than HDV, and why it can be edited frame for frame in it's native format unlike HDV.
HDV gives far more resolution than DV. That is certain and it is easily observed. DV gives less motion artifacting than HDV. That is it's advantage. That and it needs less light to give an optimal image given the same size sensor(s).
Really, it comes down to what you need.
I want you to take a close look at something:
Apple - Trailers - Iraq In Fragments - Trailer
Or Select an HD one:
Apple - Trailers - Iraq In Fragments - HD
Tell me what you think of it.
I guess what I am getting at is that I don't think miniDV is all that bad. It can't compete with the HDV coming out of YOUR camera, but compared to some of the smaller HDV cameras.
In terms of the lens, I think that miniDV with good glass is as good as a basic HDV camera. Once you get to the level of the FX1 and certainly the EX1, then miniDV is always going to fall down.
The thing behind the trailer was to simply say that minDV, when shot well, can look pretty darn good. That movie was blown up to 35mm and played in theatres around the country. HDV has the advantage of better resolution and probably would have looked "cleaner" but miniDV got the job done.
I wish there was someone near me who I could do a A/B test with using a good HDV camera and my DVX. I'd lose badly on resolution, but if there was motion, I think that would level things out a bit.
Both technologies right now I think have advantages. But with AVCHD and AVCam (Panasonic flavor) on the horizon, I think the days are numbered for them both. And if Scarlet does what everyone expects, we could see wavelet compression move down in the the sub $5k market and then all bets are off. RAW video in the hands of prosumers or consumers will change everything, just as it did in digital SLR.