FX-1 and HV-30

[ObiMcD]

So, this summer I'm going to be travelling out to Scotland to do a documentary on Scottish Nationalism. I have the option of renting an FX-1 from my school's rental cage for 600 for the duration of my trip. Alternatively, I could purchase an HV-30 for about $800. Are there any features or specs in the FX-1 that would make it a better choice rather than throwing down an extra couple hundred bucks and have one I can keep, not to mention one i can sneak into some more places and get away with.

[Michael P. Schmidt]

So, this summer I'm going to be travelling out to Scotland to do a documentary on Scottish Nationalism. I have the option of renting an FX-1 from my school's rental cage for 600 for the duration of my trip. Alternatively, I could purchase an HV-30 for about $800. Are there any features or specs in the FX-1 that would make it a better choice rather than throwing down an extra couple hundred bucks and have one I can keep, not to mention one i can sneak into some more places and get away with.

ok at first the sony is bigger ... thats good(handling) and bad(transport)
but on the other hand the HV30 has better spec's ... except the lens
the sony has an much better "zeiss" lens ... (and better battery too)

so in the end you have to decide what to you want to shoot, and what matters mobility to you ...

image quality: your choice depends on your delivery-format (bluray, SD DVD or web)

probably i would rent the sony (better lens, handling...)

BTW: HV-30 is still tape-based ... i wouldn't purchase an tape cam these days ... probably in a "few months" SD-Card based Cam's are (much) cheaper.

[sbcooler]

I have the Sony Z1u which is almost identical to the FX1 (just some feature differences and XLR ports for sound).

Anyways, the FX1 will do MUCH better I'd guess in low light. It is a 3 chip sensor as opposed to the Canon which is a single chip sensor. In darker scenes or where you cannot control the light as well the FX1 should do MUCH better.

Also you'll be able to manually adjust focus, iris and gain manually if you should choose to...

Theres a reason you can get the Canon for $800 and the FX1 cost $3,000. Yes and the lense is quite a bit better..like the other poster said. No 30p if that's important to you.

[Jared Caldwell]

BTW: HV-30 is still tape-based ... i wouldn't purchase an tape cam these days ... probably in a "few months" SD-Card based Cam's are (much) cheaper.

I thought the HV-20 was taped based, and the HV-30 was solid state...

[GPSchnyder]

Anyways, the FX1 will do MUCH better I'd guess in low light. It is a 3 chip sensor as opposed to the Canon which is a single chip sensor. In darker scenes or where you cannot control the light as well the FX1 should do MUCH better.

That's right. You have way less noise in darker scenes. I've done a feature with the FX1 and an HC-1 (both Sony) and in the darker scenes the HC-1 Footage is not really usable compared to the FX1s Footage. And If you need to go handheld the extra Weight will make your Images look better, less shaky.

[Michael P. Schmidt]

That's right. You have way less noise in darker scenes. I've done a feature with the FX1 and an HC-1 (both Sony) and in the darker scenes the HC-1 Footage is not really usable compared to the FX1s Footage. And If you need to go handheld the extra Weight will make your Images look better, less shaky.


yes the extra weight is better !

HV-30 is still MiniDV/HDV tape based (SD-Card only for stills)
3 CCD vs. CMOS ... but still there are some weaknesses in relation to darker scenes, the noise could be a problem

so ... i still would prefer the Sony :)

[David Gray]

The fx1 is tape based too isn't it? Same format as the hv's HDV.

[Michael P. Schmidt]

The fx1 is tape based too isn't it? Same format as the hv's HDV.

yep FX1 = HDV (1440x1080 anamorph) on MiniDV(HDV)Tapes

[ObiMcD]

See from the reviews I read I heard that the FX-1 is absolutely terrible in low light, which is one of the reasons I started looking at the HV-30, that and the fact that the FX-1 doesn't have XLR so audio is gonna be just as much of a pain either way. But if the FX-1 really does work better in low-light that might be the way to go. I suppose there's another option but i had kind of thrown it out. For a bit more I could rent an EX-1 which while I know its a better camera, I don't know how to handle a non-tape-based workflow for a documentary where I'm gonna be away from my computer, which is why i was planning on going with tape based. But if any of you guys have any ideas, I'm all ears.

[Michael P. Schmidt]

i can't say something about the sony Fx1 on low light, sorry ... but the HV30 is not really better ... (the same in/on audio) ...

so, the EX1 is much better - in both!

and about non-tape-workflow: one 16GB SxS Card is almost one Tape (around 50 min.) so if you have tow of them with you, you can shoot quite much ... and at night you can backup with you MacbookPro (or equal)


perhaps, you have to work in a little - but it could work ...

[sbcooler]

I personally will vouch for the Sony FX1 in low light conditions as I have shot many concerts with it. Alongside the Sony FX1 I have used my Z1u and my Sony HC1 and Sony HC7....my friend uses a Canon HV20...all tape based HDV 1,440 x 1,080 60i cameras. Same identical format.

I've tested these cameras out in different situations and have had them now for 3-5 years. There is NO doubt in my mind that the FX1 will do great in low light situations...very little noise. The single chip cmos does well in light compared to consumer (under $1,000 cams), but does not compare to the clean images of the FX1 in low light. I mean dark concert settings between songs...just much, MUCH better...the single chip cmos are not very useable at night or during dark scenes...way too much grain for my taste...looks cheap. Sony FX1 never looks that way.

Now Sony's EX1 is a step up for sure from the Sony FX1....the sensor is 1/2" as opposed to 1/3 inch and that's quite a bit better for low light situations...I've seen test sample between this and the FX1 and the EX1 is for sure superior in low light...I don't know for me that it is necessary based on the price right now...but for sure it's a full step up from the FX1.

I would not have any qualms about shooting most things with the FX1...so if its a choice between any of the single chip consumer cams and the FX1...the FX1 kills.

My 2 cents-

[ObiMcD]

yeah my problem there is that my editing computer is a Mac Pro tower and my laptop has very very little HD space. Anybody here used a card based workflow for doc work?

[Michael P. Schmidt]

yeah my problem there is that my editing computer is a Mac Pro tower and my laptop has very very little HD space. Anybody here used a card based workflow for doc work?

maybe you should look here:

http://www.dvxuser.com/

or/and here:

http://reduser.net/

:thumbsup:

[todd folts]

i shoot solid state (p2 cards) all the time all over the place (japan and south korea recently). we dump the cards to an external hard drive using fcp. if you are diligent you can accomplish a lot work when logging and tranfering. usually we take three 32gb cards and three 16 gb cards.

conceptually its not really that much different, a card is a card, log and tranfer is log and transfer, and an external hard drive is an external hard drive. some gear may be better and all that but the idea and execution are basicly the same.