|
|
Posted by Spex on 12/31/06 09:24
Martin Heffels wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Dec 2006 22:23:47 +0100, st.luckyNOSPAM@katamail.com wrote:
>
>> But what I like to know if it is better to purchase a HDV or HD
>> camera.
>
> A HD-camera will set you back at least US$30k. Then you should start
> thinking in terms of the HVX250. The HVX200 is of the same category as HDV.
> While it may have a codec, which records at a higher bitrate, it's sensor
> (CCD), is only half of the HD-resolution, which is worse than the Sony ZX1.
>
> -martin-
Correct!
The myth of HDV is being debunked daily. My HVR-V1 produces an image
that in every way is HD. The encoder is clearly superior to the
previous generation of HDV cameras.
I could have afforded to purchase ANY of the compact HD cameras from
Canon XL-H1, JVC HD200, Panasonic HVX200 and any of the Sony models.
There were two stand out cameras, the Canon XH-A1 and the Sony HVR-V1.
The quality of the HVX200 is poor when compared to the best of the rest.
I have said it elsewhere on this newsgroup but it is worth saying it
again. The HVX is a standard definition camera that happens to record
in a HD codec. As a SD camera it is fine but it cannot compete with the
Canon and Sony 2nd generation HDV cameras.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|