Getaugie - I gotta call bullshit on ya. The sony has 960x1080 pixels per chip and does the same oversampling/pixel shift (like all cameras under 60 grand) a HVX does to get 1080 resolution. Think about it 960x1080 is basically a square chip so half of thise 960 horizontal pixels aren't even used when shooting 16x9 footage. The pixels are there so the camera can shoot fullscreen stuff and hold the resolution.
If I was shooting the news or a Soap opera the Sony would be a better choice. If your shooting a movie, A progressive SD DVX-100 is better than the Sony HDV.
Yes it is a little sharper than the HVX but that sharpness translates into a MORE VIDEOish look. Now if you use the M2 lens adapter you might need that extra sharpness, like Augie does, that sharpness is going to help because the M2 (or any lens adapter) softens the picture.
Also keep in mind that the HVX has twice the color resolution of any HDV camera. TWO TIMES THE COLOR RESOLUTION. Those few extra pixels the sony might have don't mean shit if your trying to get a film look. In fact the actual pixel resolution between the Sony and HVX is only noticable on a true 1080p monitor or projector if you look real close.
AUGIE - Tell me if the following is not true:
The biggest reason not to use the Sony HDV camera is, like you said, it's interlaced. It shoot's 60 INTERLACED frames in a second, not 24 progressive frames a second. By the time you run it through another program to de-interlace the footage IT WILL NOT BE AS SHARP AS AN HVX ANYMORE. Your taking 25Mb's a second MPEG 2 footage and re-encoding it just to get 24 progressive frames. Then you have to edit it and color correct it. Losing one more generation of footage.
Speaking of color correcting. The HVX's DVCPROHD codec's 4:2:2 color space gives you so much color correctiong latitude it's simply stunning. Besides the fact that you have Panasonics AWESOME cine-gamma you can color correct your footage to an amazing degree not possible before.
I know me and Augie are basically just defending our cameras but this is fact. THE HVX LOOKS LIKE FILM more than any other camera under 60 grand. They shot parts of Munich, Fast and furious Tokyo Drift, Spiderman 3 and a bunch more with the HVX. Peter Jackson and Weta did extensive test between the HVX and the Sony XDCAM (a really expensive sony HD camera) and found that the HVX hands down beat any other camera. So Weta just bought a bunch of them to use on their future film projects.
Oh yeah about the HVX noise. It is such a non issue it is stupid. If your shooting a movie you have movie lights to light stuff so it is less noisy. If your running around shooting with natural light sources the Sony is less noisy. Even so, the HVX noise looks like fucking filmgrain anyway.
BRIAN - If you want to make a movie that looks like film and you only plan on releasing it to DVD spend the 3 grand on a DVX-100 not the Sony HDV.
If you have 5 grand get the JVC HDV camera Augie just got cause it shoots progressive 24 frames a second. You can also use other lenses on it which will give you more filmic depth of field. Just keep in mind that a good film lens can cost another 5 grand.
If you have 8 grand to spend and want to show your film in theaters get the panasonic HVX. You can do really good greenscreen work on it and also shoot true SLOW MOTION with it's variable frame rates. Plus you never have to capture footage again.
BTW Augie and I are friends and talk to each other on the phone regularly so don't think I'm aurguing with someone I don't know. Also keep in might that Augie uses the M2 lens adapter when using the Sony HDV camera so it of course looks more filmish to him.
Re: camera suggestions?
Rise - I like the JVC camera. Before I bought the HVX200 I checked it out and shot some footage with it. It's a great camera and it has a much better picture than the Sony because it actually shoots true 24p. If the additional lenses wern't so damn expensive I would have went with it. It's also a much bigger camera, it sits on your shoulder (which is a good thing).
MORBID FILMS - Read this article before deciding to buy the Sony HVX camera. It goes into extreme detail comparing the XL2 to the DVX100 to the Sony Fx1. dvxuser.com/articles/shoot3/
Here's a quote that sums it up nicely:
"For an indie filmmaker customer, who typically doesn’t have a lot of cash, think about it this way: why spend a lot of money you don’t have, to buy something that doesn’t do what you want, just to get a feature (HD) you don’t need? Should you really sacrifice high-quality audio, professional lens control, 24P shooting, gamma adjustment, low light performance, latitude, picture controls, and other features, just to get high-definition recording? Especially when, in nearly all likelihood, your project will be distributed at standard-definition on DVD?"
Re: camera suggestions?
Thanks for all the info Josh! The most important thing to me right now is I want to shoot 24p. I don't mind going without HD.
I'm shooting for making a movie that looks like film for distribution on dvd.
Ok, after reading that article it taught me that HD is kinda pointless right now. The Panasonic seems like the right choice.
Edited by: Morbidfilm at: 9/11/06 9:58 pm
Re: camera suggestions?
Cool. The DVX100 is a great camera and can really look like film even using the presets.
Not that HD is pointless so much as interlaced HD is pointless when it comes to filmmaking. The JVC HDV model Augie has is true 24p but it'll cost ya some 2 grand more than a DVX.
Before you write off HD think about this. In the next couple of years HD DVD/Blu-ray will be selling more and having a movie with the extra picture info HD has will come in handy when people make the transition.
In 3 years more people will own HD tv's than regular SD tv's. If you've watched a regular DVD on a HD TV it looks.....well... shitty. Movies shot on film will be able to make the transition to HD more gracefully because they have resolution to spare. However movies shot on SD (standard definition cameras) will really suffer when everyone has HD players and TV's a few years from now.
Re: camera suggestions
getaugie josh townsend is a professional movie maker and he would know what is good and what is shit. the video feel is only good if you want to make some of your scenes look real but it's not recommended by most film makers. 24p is the way to go this day and age if you want to keep up. josh is a good friend of mine that has been helping me pick the right camera to do a good job for what amount i'm ready to splurge on.
If you ever see me getting beaten by the police, put down the video camera and come help me!
Getaugie Decaying Corpse
Posts: 136
(9/12/06 9:01 am) Reply
Re: camera suggestions
did anyone read any of the words I said? all of you responses seem to have missed the point of my post.
Getaugie Decaying Corpse
Posts: 137
(9/12/06 9:14 am) Reply
Re: camera suggestions
Hey Guys, i was not trying to start a war, but the fact I was trying to get across is that none of these low cast cams are perfect. Sorry just the HVX really is not leaps and bounds better than the others. But, what should be the deciding factor for you is how you want you on set and post production workflows to work, and what can you fit into your budget. Because talent trumps technology, you could have an HDCAM SR cam and still shoot like shit. I am not a brand evanhelist so you can put your guard down, I was just tying to talk sensibly.
Re: camera suggestions
Fuck. Deadguy thanks and all but shut up dude. Getaugie and have been friends for over a year now, as in we talk to each other on the phone and are friendly.
Getaugie is WAY more proffesional than me and has been shooting movies for longer than me so listen to him and you'll learn a lot.
I had to talk shit about that Sony camera 'cause I hate the picture. Really that's what it comes down to. Sorry but the HVX has a better more film-like image than any camera near it's price range. Speilberg, Raimi and Peter Jackson aren't shooting picks ups and VFX with the Sony, JVC or Cannon they use the HVX-200 for some of their shots and nobody notices the difference between it and 35mm film.
I gotta disagree the HVX is head and shoulders above the others. 4:2:2 color space and variable framerates are something you can't get with the other the other cameras.
BTW Your a loser if you haven't seen Augie's movie The Holy Terror.
Re: camera suggestions
Augie - why don't you help deadguy pick a camera. I don't want to help the guy any more if he's gonna talk shit my friends like that. That's totally fucked up.
I ain't helping you anymore deadguy unless you apologies to Augie and buy a copy of his movie so you can see what real low budget filmmaking is.
The first flick in our double feature is "The Holy Terror," written and directed by Augustine Arredondo, who may or may not be Catholic himself, but who definitely has a chip on his shoulder toward the Catholic Church. Practically the first thing we hear is supporting character Charlie (Brendan McNamara) denouncing the Church as "those cannibals" who never really helped anybody. I don't know what religious persuasion his friend Glenn (Robert Harvick) is; but since this conversation takes place while Glenn is bleeding from his eyes, I don't suppose he's feeling up to a debate on the finer points of doctrinal merit. The bleeding started with a full-blown possession episode while the two were packing up the home of Glenn's recently deceased grandmother, and now Charlie is driving Glenn to the only person he thinks he can help: Hector (Chris Mortimore), a bargain-basement occultist. (Seriously. His sanctum sanctorum is a wood-paneled basement.)
Hector is confident that he can help rid Glenn of the demon within him (named "Orphiel" in Glenn's earlier possessed ravings), and has Glenn lie down in the center of the pentacle in the middle of the rec room carpet. Unfortunately, the simple ritual doesn't go exactly as advertised; instead of giving up the demon, Glenn grabs Hector's girlfriend, hauls her across his lap, and rips out her guts while roaring like Zuul.
The transition to the next scene is kind of jarring, since we next see Glenn in a confessional, trying not to sound like a raving lunatic to the priest (Jacques Freydont). (He's clean-faced, too. Makes you wonder exactly what you do and say after you've just gutted your local spellcaster's main squeeze -- "Sorry about the carpet?") The priest gets very prickly very quickly, despite the fact that this is probably the most reasonable-sounding claim of possession he's heard this week. Gee, someone has the affrontery to approach a church based on the life of an itinerant exorcist and ask for help with an exorcism? The very nerve! The priest waits until Glenn leaves, then makes a hurried cellphone call...
Next thing you know, Glenn is walking despondently through the park when a cleancut man in a white shirt and tie attacks him with a knife. (Your first impression may be that it's a Mormon missionary, but remember, they usually travel in pairs.) He's then saved by a mysterious man in black (Miles Beardsley Banwell), more from the "Johnny Cash" mold than the "Will Smith" one. This mystery man also helpfully throws several pieces of information at Glenn:
Not happy clown. Sad clown.
1. For two thousand years, the Catholic Church has never managed to exorcise a single demon.
2. The Church has an official assassin "hush force," that liquidates anyone coming to them with a credible claim of possession, just so that people won't know how slack they are.
3. Oh, and Glenn's pretty much the Messiah to the mystery man's religion, so long as he keeps Orphiel inside him and learns to control its power.
So, we now have Glenn trying to keep away from cadres of Catholic assassins (who may not be that great at exorcisms, but you think they'd be a little better at whackjobs with two millennia to practice). Fortunately, the Orphiel cultists aren't dangerous to Glenn personally, but they have a nasty habit of killing anyone who might give him a clue as to how to get the demon out of him before it takes over completely.
It's not high art, but the tale does hold a viewer's interest; adequate acting, good pacing, some well-conceived visuals peeking through the budgetary restrictions, and appropriate use of music (unlike the blundering death metal used for the main opening credits) add up to an interesting and at least partially satisfying short feature. And no one can resist a good conspiracy, right? (And lest I forget to mention the gore, spurting blood and rubbery entrails abound.)
Of course, in hindsight, it makes little sense, and makes even less as more exposition comes down the pike about how Glenn got this demon inside him in the first place (and even worse, the requisite technicality by which he should be able to banish it). It ends on an indeterminate note, probably intended to bea mildly shocking little twist, that doesn't pretend to resolve Glenn's main story problems. (I mean, his problem that is the main crux of the story, not "If Bill left his house at 10am going north at 40 mph...")
But at least Arredondo didn't try to pad things out the extra ten minutes that would put it over the minimum acceptable running time for a standalone feature. Nothing saps horror more than obvious padding.
Re: camera suggestions?
Here's another good review.
Envisioned as a fun roller coaster ride of gore and horror, the new Goregoyles series (a co-production between Helltimate Studios and Brimstone Productions) are expected to crank out a double feature gore-fest a year. This first installment is set to hit the shelves of Hollywood Video in August and Brimstone was kind enough to give The Monsters a little sneak peak at what to expect. It's not high art here folks, that's for sure, but then again, the filmmakers never intended it to be.
A scraggly looking fella named Uncle Dodo (Sebastian Croteau) who makes his appearance before and after each feature hosts the Goregoyles series. Dodo presents us with such a buildup he makes it very hard to deny his advances. He seems to REALLY believe what he's saying - so why shouldn't we? His opinions are important, and he seems to love everything. It's his enthusiasm that allows him to become an integral part of the series and while he's no Cryptkeeper, he's still added value to the presentation as a whole.
The Holy Terror - Directed by Augustine Arredondo
The first story entitled The Holy Terror which runs just under an hour, tells the tale of a man possessed by an inner demon that he seemingly has very little to no control of. Glenn is first seen sitting in the desert by his car, battered and bloodied. He's having a conflict with the voices in his head and his story is told through the magic of flashbacks. The whole thing began one day when Glenn started speaking in tongues and bleeding from his eyes. Finding the situation to be just slightly odd, Glenn's friend Charlie drives him to get some help. Help is in the form of Hector - a Satanist of sorts ready to perform an exorcism (once again, of sorts). The demon gets the best of Glenn as he tears into Hector's gothed out girlfriend literally disemboweling her before some very frightened eyes. Glenn heads to the nearest church to confide in a priest, which turns out to be his worst move to date. Glenn meets up with a guy who explains to him that the church is trying to cover up their lack of successful exorcisms by disposing of those who claim to be possessed. Before too long Glenn is being chased by knife wielding maniacs and folks in black robes with an inner lining of red. Glenn doesn't know who he can trust - not his friends, not the church, not his family and worst of all...not himself.
Berserkers - Directed by Kevin Lindenmuth
The second story entitled Berserkers runs just under 1/2 hour and was produced by Brimstone Productions. After their car breaks down, a young mother and her two kids are assaulted by a pack of zombies. The son is the only one to survive, flash forward 12 years. Zombies have overtaken and a group of rebels are camped out in the forest, including the young boy from the opening, now 12-years older (early twenties?). Legend tells us that a meteor crash caused an ancient (and very giant) Viking to rise from the dead, which in turn causes an unnatural number of the living dead to rise from the grave as well. Two young ladies are almost held hostage by this guy until the dead (or the Viking) have had their ways with them.
One thing that I really appreciated about Goregoyles is that it delivers on its promises and the fact is that the filmmakers obviously just wanted to have some fun with their subject matter. Both films had ample amounts of stabbings, disembowelments and head bashings - particularly with The Holy Terror, which I found to be well written and gory as hell. For a quickie indie flick, it was quite stylish and boasted some impressive performances along with an effective sound mix. Berserkers is a little short, so it's tougher to grasp onto, especially considering how quickly these characters just fly by, but as an homage to the cheesy zombie flicks of the 80's it succeeds. Performances aren't as great in Berserkers (they're a bit too over the top) but it's still entertaining enough nonetheless.
Both stories (as well as the intros) put out a really fun vibe - the whole thing has a clever and most wicked sense of humor. Despite the fact that the filmmakers are constantly winking at the audience, it's never annoying or pretentious. Each filmmaker has set out to make a fun, gory little flick and to this end, they have succeeded.
One can only do so much analysis on films that were made simply for fun. These flicks were designed for late night rentals and in this regard Goregoyles is definitely worth a once over. The screener also featured a brief interview with executive producer Alexandre Michaud which is slated to be an extra on the DVD release. Don't forget to check out your local Hollywood Video for a copy of Goregoyles in August 2003.
Re: camera suggestions?
Another good review - The HVX rules all other sub 15 grand camera BTW.
Holy Terror
Augustine Arredondo’s Holy Terror opens up with Glenn (wonderfully played by Robert Harvick) sitting on the side of the road, listening to the voices in his head. We quickly find out that Glenn is possessed by the baddest demon this side of the lake of fire, and his friend John is taking him to get the demon out, during the supposed exorcism, Glenn freaks out and chows down on exorcism dudes girlfriends intestines, and she doesn’t seem to give a shit, get it? Give a shit? Intestines? Ah hell, nevermind.
Obviously the exorcism failed miserably so Glenn's cruising around with wicked demon in tow. Meanwhile the Catholics want him dead; Satanists want him to keep the demon inside because if he can handle the demon inside so far, he’s strong enough to harness the power and help them take over the world.
During the course of the story, we’re treated to a gnarly neck stabbing, an equally gnarly pus oozing elbow wound, a bitchin’ scimitar like knife that gets wasted, an incredibly disturbing anal rape, a few VERY hip scenes of bones being broken in ways that make you cringe. But most of all, pay attention to the ritual scenes involving Glenn lying in a pentagram, that’s some of the best gore in the film. These scenes include some awesome head pounding destruction, and tons of SPLAT! Arredondo uses some good lighting, camera angles, and cuts (even though some of the edits are a little too obvious and harsh) But overall his direction enhances the story, it doesn't detract from it.
Me being the brewhound that I am, I was very amused at a scene near the end where we find Glenn drinking a bottle of La Fin Du Monde (End of the world) by Unibroue, good choice. I personally would have had him drinking Maudite (The Damned One) also by Unibroue, which also harbors a killer looking demon on the label.
Re: camera suggestions?
One more good review to fuck up Deadguys thread -
This first anthology in a proposed series is a collaboration between Kevin Lindenmuth’s Brimstone Media Corp. and Alexandre Michaud’s Helltimate Studios, and consists of two 45-minute tales, introduced by Uncle Dodo (Sébastien Croteau), and accompanied by a frenzied death metal soundtrack by the likes of Anonymus, Willow Wisp, and Seasons of the Wolf.
The first tale is entitled THE HOLY TERROR and concerns Glenn (Robert Harvick) who is convinced he is possessed by a demon, when he starts hearing strange voices and displays signs of stigmata. Accompanied by his best friend, Charlie (Brendan McNamara), Glenn visits the house of an occultist, called Hector (Chris Mortimore) who attempts to summon the demon; instead Hector’s Gothy female priestess is disembowelled. Glenn flees to a local church, where the priest (Jacque Freydon) hears his confession of murder but is unable to provide absolution, as Glenn won’t turn himself in. Once Glenn has left the priest contacts a secret society of Catholic demon hunters, whose work entails destroying demonic entities along with the possessed host, as all recent attempts by the Church to perform peaceful exorcism have failed. Also on Glenn’s trail is a satanic guardian (Miles Beardsley Banwell) who offers to take Glenn under his wing.
HOLY TERROR’s director, Augustine Arredondo admits the script was influenced in part by Iglesia’s DAY OF THE BEAST (1995). For a first time effort it’s pretty good, containing decent performances from the cast and several splatter effects by Brad Palmer that should appease the film’s target audience. The scenes set within Satanic circles are convincing, and special mention must go to the production design that includes surreal paintings by Polish artist Lukasz Banach that bring a definite touch of mysticism to proceedings. Most of the shooting was conducted without lighting due to financial shortages, but this doesn’t hinder the production and, if anything, adds an air of further menace.
BESERKERS rounds off the first collection and stands as writer/director/producer Lindenmuth’s tribute to the films of Lucio Fulci. A mother (Susie Vestevich) and her two kids (Piers Burrill and Wynter Burrill) find themselves stranded in the woods, after a fruitless search for the father. They stumble across an ancient Viking burial ground, (if Kevin had set the film in the year 2000, it would have been pretty apt as Vikings landed in North America in the year 1000 AD); unfortunately it would appear the place is inhabited by a number of zombies, who have fallen prey, over the centuries, to a resurrected Norse warrior. The family flee to a nearby farmstead but are attacked.
Twelve years elapse and the zombies have invaded the rest of the world (odd that it should take several centuries for the undead plague to get beyond the graveyard, and then just twelve years to take over the earth). A hot-air balloon, carrying two women (Christina Geyer and Kristin Seta) and a guy (played by renowned fantasy/horror illustrator Matt Busch), crash-lands in the same woods and come across the farmstead which is now home to a weird survivalist (Nathan King) – who has his own dark reasons for staying in the vicinity.p> The zombies (latex make-up by Lindenmuth) are pretty hunky specimens and recall to mind Savini’s make-up for John Amplas in the “Father’s Day” segment from Romero’s CREEPSHOW, other gore effects and the main Viking make-up are supplied by Roger Beckett. Whilst the acting isn’t of the same calibre as THE HOLY TERROR it’s above average for such a low budget production (apparently, intended several leads failed to show up for filming and Lindenmuth, ever the improviser, ended up utilising the talents of family members), the forest scenes are suitably atmospheric, and this is definitely one of the director’s better efforts.
I look forward to the second instalment in the GOREGOYLES series, rumoured to contain segments by Ron Ford and Alexandre Michaud, in the meantime I recommend you join deranged host Uncle Dodo (Death Metal fans may recognize Croteau as former vocalist for 90s band Necrotic Mutation) in his video parlour for this entertaining throwback to the nostalgic terrors of EC comics, TV horror hosts, and the Amicus anthology series.
GoreGoyles:First Cut presents two very different stories. The first one called THE HOLY TERROR is a crazy horror/kung-fu tale about satanism. This stylish piece of indy moviemaking was directed with much flair by newcomer Augie Arredondo. The second story, BERSERKERS, is a cheesy but gory zombie movie a la Lucio Fulci. Directed by indy veteran Kevin Lindenmuth, this is something that will please all the horror connaisseurs. GoreGoyles:First Cut will make you laugh, it will disgust you and and it will even scare you a bit! Buy it! Support indy filmmaking!
Re: camera suggestions?
Back on topic - here's a article by Adam Wilt from DV.com explaining why pixel count doesn't matter as much as you think. BTW this was written before the HVX came out but the arguement for a low pixel count CCD for DVCPROHD is still there.
Getaugie Decaying Corpse
Posts: 138
(9/12/06 12:06 pm) Reply
Re: camera suggestions?
Thanks for the support Josh, but I really wasn't offended. I am an just an indie guy who just wants to get the info out there. There are a lot of alternatives for us to produce good looking HD. that's all. For an unbiased review from a bunch of pro shooters of all the new low cost cams check out the "Texas Shootout" article at www.dv.com
they put all of the cameras through their paces and the end result of it all is very surprising.
Shit man, it's a good thing that we can argue this shit out. Proves we're kind of passionate, no?
Getaugie Decaying Corpse
Posts: 139
(9/12/06 12:29 pm) Reply
Re: camera suggestions?
Looks like the texas shootout article will be posted shortly, here is the first round of tests run by Adam Wilt and a few of his DV Guru cohorts - still the results are quite similar to the texas shootout. dv.com/news/news_item.jht...cameratest
Re: camera suggestions?
sorry augie. i didn't know you were one of josh's best friends, i'm a nice guy and i'm sorry for the shit i said. i was just saying shit to you because of the way the video looked like,josh were friends too you know that.
If you ever see me getting beaten by the police, put down the video camera and come help me!
Quote: Thanks for the support Josh, but I really wasn't offended
Yeah well I was quite offended by Deadguys comments. I try to help the guy out then he slams you when has no clue what he's talking about. I'm friendly to the guy but it's not like I've ever even talked to him on the phone. You've been helping me out for a while and I've had many great talks with you.
Quote:Shit man, it's a good thing that we can argue this shit out. Proves we're kind of passionate, no?
Hell yeah. That was why I called BS on ya. I was trying to bait you into a HDV vs. DVCPROHD arguement. Been having trouble getting you on the phone lately. :)
So the resolution tests are pretty close to being equal. Notice how the resolution goes down on the Sony and Canon cameras when they are forced into 24p. I said repeatedly I like the JVC camera a lot and the resolution tests proved the JVC kicks ass. But it was also the noisiest camera which shoots down your arguement that a higher pixel count on the CCD's creates more noise. (sorry had to get in that dig)
You know as well as I do that the HDV mpeg codec vs. the DVCPROHD codec will end with DVCPROHD winning hands down when it comes to editing/color correcting the footage for more film like product. There is no way you can disagree that the improved color resolution will make keying and compositing easier as well as giving you a whole lot more latitude when color correcting. To me a little more resolution means squat when you have a block of four pixels that are all shades of the same color.
1) No more tapes or capturing. It's all on a harddrive ready to be editing.
2)Thumbnail clips. If I have a bad take I can quickly erase the clip in about 5 seconds saving storage space. This is not possible with tape.
3)quick start up. No moving parts in the camera means there is no 2 second delay when pressing record. Hell I can turn the power on and be recording in 2 seconds. Try that with any tape based machine.
4)recording buffer. You can set the camera to always be recording so when you push the record button it will already have the few seconds recorded before you pushed the record button if you want.
5) No moving parts. No more drop outs!! Ever. No head cleaning.
6) No noise from the camera at all because no moving parts.
7)Metadata! there's button on the camera that lets you even leave a voice note that corresponds to the clip. That's right, speak into the camera and make a note after each take. Also you can set it up to mark which clips are really good and they'll show up on the thumbnail.
8)Everytime to push record you have a new clip records a thumbnail of the first frame. This is carried over as metadata and it lets you see what takes your looking up without having to type in extensive notes when capturing. This is also very helpfull when your on set and you want to check...say continuity from earlier in the day. No more rewinding and searching.
9) Evl Dt function. The HVX has a zoomed in focus assist like the Canon and JVC except the camera also helps you focus by sharpening the lines around what is in focus so you can be spot on. HD focusing is very unforgiving and this feature helps alot when your not hooked up to a monitor.
10) XML notes. You can add any notes to a clip and then do search and find what clip your looking for based on what you type in. You can put in data like actor names, time of day, dates ect and just do a search helping find clips in flash. Very usefull.
11)DVX type zebras with a cool marker function. Push the zebra button 3 times and you get a tiny box on the viewfinder which you can point anywhere in frame and get an IRE reading. It's like a BUILT IN LIGHTMETER.
12) Filmlike shutter readings. It's measured in degrees like a real film camera. 180 degrees is for normal 24p. 90 degrees is like saving private ryan action. It also measure focus in feet and inches along with the 0-99 like on the DVX.
13) If your used to shooting with a DVX you'll be right at home with this camera. They fixed all the little things that sucked with the DVX. Bigger iris control wheel and glow in the dark audio pan buttons are just a few of the many cool things they made better. A nice lens cap and a bigger shroud around the lens (almost like a built in mattebox) makes for less lens flare.
14) Ability to downconvert the HD footage to miniDV in camera if you want. This includes the variable frame rates.
15) More recording possibilities than any camera existing. You can shoot mini dv, dvcpro, dvcpro50,720p or i,1080p or i.
Those are just the little things. The big things are.
1)4:2:2 color space.
2)BETTER AUDIO QUALITY. 4 channels of uncompressed 48k audio. HDV camera record mpeg cd quality audio (BLEH)
3)VARIABLE FUCKING FRAME RATES BABY. I'm gonna put up some 60fps clips that will make your come your pants. Also has a very handy 22fps for action scenes.
Email This To a Friend
Topic Commands
Click to receive email notification of replies 
Click to stop receiving email notification of replies