Panasonic HVX200 vs. DVX100BP
by Scot Sheely
on
Feb 1, 2008 at 12:24:59 am
I need a quick answer to the following question concerning these two cameras:
The Panasonic HVX200 vs. DVX100BP.
I know that the HVX200 natively shoots 16x9 screen resolution and is not even capable of shooting in 4:3. Conversely, the DVX100BP shoots natively in 4:3 and cannot shoot in 16x9.
The question is, how would one go about converting video from the HVX200 to a non-squeezed looking 4:3? Would you have to crop it, or recompress it or what?
Concerning the quality of the video, is there a noticeable difference in quality when that video is converted to 4:3 compared to the original 16x9?
Also, comparing that final output in 4:3 from the HVX200 to the native 4:3 video output from the DVX100BP, is there a noticeable difference between the two? Which looks better in 4:3 when viewing on a 4:3 display or T.V.?
Here are the specifics: the HVX200 would be shooting in SD ONLY, not HD. Both cameras would be using the tape transports built into each camera respectively.
I would like to hear from people who actually have personally used the HVX200 and the DVX100 series cameras, or at the very least, edited footage from both of these cameras and have had personal experience comparing the video imaging side-by-side.
Thanks in advance for your input, I appreciate it very much.
Re: Panasonic HVX200 vs. DVX100BP by David Rosberg on Feb 1, 2008 at 4:32:40 pm
I shoot with an HVX200... Typically I shoot in 1080i 16:9, and most of what I shoot is distributed in 16:9 via web app. in SD, down-converted from HD to SD when I export the finished product from my timeline. Recently I produced a live broadcast in 4:3 SD, which contained roll-ins which I had shot on my HVX200 in 1080i 16:9. I didn't want the roll-ins squeezed, so I had to choose between cropping, which I would have done in my timeline during/as part of the editing process, or letterboxing. I chose letterboxing. I edited the roll-ins in 1080i 16:9, exported them that way, then put them back into an 8-bit uncompressed SD 4:3 timeline, which gave the full width and height of what I shot, plus black above and below the picture (letterboxing). This then also conformed technically to what the control room was using for the broadcast.
On live broadcasts I did last year I shot roll-ins with a Canon XL-1S in good old fashioned 4:3 SD. Even though the final product both this year and last was in 4:3 SD, the stuff originally shot and edited in 1080i 16:9 looks a lot better than the 4:3 SD footage shot last year.
My point is that if you have the capability of shooting and editing in HD, do it, even if your final product is SD. "Monk" is shot 16:9 and cropped to 4:3. It's not an uncommon practice, and the footage you get will look a lot better than shooting in SD. Even if you crop and export the 1080i HD timeline as 480 4:3, it will look a whole lot better than actually shooting and editing in SD.
Re: Panasonic HVX200 vs. DVX100BP by Scot Sheely on Feb 2, 2008 at 1:17:02 am
WOW!
GREAT responses, guys, thank you so very much!
This was exactly the info I was looking for. I finally found the info on Panny's website on the HVX200's specs, but your answer was what I was reallt fishing for, David.
GREAT info! Thanks again to the both of you, I appreciate your help.
Scot Sheely
IMG - Interactive Media Gurus
Columbia, SC
Re: Panasonic HVX200 vs. DVX100BP by Barry Green on Feb 2, 2008 at 7:30:36 pm
HVX shoots either 16:9 or 4:3 SD, your choice. Both methods are created by downconverting the internal 1920x1080 image to SD and then writing that to tape.
HVX will be one stop slower than the DVX when shooting 24p/30p, and two stops slower when using 60i. Also, 480/60i on the HVX suffers from excessive aliasing and stairstepping.
For 24p/30p, if you have enough light, the HVX produces a better 4:3 picture than the DVX, and a way better 16:9 picture. For 60i, I'd go with the DVX instead.
-----------------
Get the most from your DVX camera. The DVX Book and DVX DVD are now available on ebay and at Amazon (http://www.fiftv.com/db)
