<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: HVX200 vs HD100 (a shootout)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.filmdailies.com/archives/hvx200-hd100-shootout/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.filmdailies.com/archives/hvx200-hd100-shootout/</link>
	<description>Low/no budget filmmaker blogs daily on subjects like video production, HD cameras, screenwriting, etc.</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 23:49:59 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://www.filmdailies.com/archives/hvx200-hd100-shootout/#comment-27702</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Nov 2007 20:22:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmdailies.com/?p=162#comment-27702</guid>
		<description>Hey, calm down, you seem really biased towards Panasonic. Don't be insulted that a test by someone who wasn't being paid ruled in the other party's favor. Let's calmly face it, the HVX200 has 650,000 pixel CCD's, and thus cannot reproduce equal detail to a camera with 1.3 million pixel CCD's like the HD100.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey, calm down, you seem really biased towards Panasonic. Don&#8217;t be insulted that a test by someone who wasn&#8217;t being paid ruled in the other party&#8217;s favor. Let&#8217;s calmly face it, the HVX200 has 650,000 pixel CCD&#8217;s, and thus cannot reproduce equal detail to a camera with 1.3 million pixel CCD&#8217;s like the HD100.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Yoyo</title>
		<link>http://www.filmdailies.com/archives/hvx200-hd100-shootout/#comment-27670</link>
		<dc:creator>Yoyo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Nov 2007 03:45:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmdailies.com/?p=162#comment-27670</guid>
		<description>Yeah yeah, all your fucking fixed positions. Joel, noob, the HD100 is a heap of shit, stop being loyal to a dead manufacturer of lame gear.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah yeah, all your fucking fixed positions. Joel, noob, the HD100 is a heap of shit, stop being loyal to a dead manufacturer of lame gear.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joel</title>
		<link>http://www.filmdailies.com/archives/hvx200-hd100-shootout/#comment-1571</link>
		<dc:creator>Joel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jun 2006 13:47:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmdailies.com/?p=162#comment-1571</guid>
		<description>This particular test of Barry's was not particularly well done for a variety of reasons. Virtually no other side by side test seems to match the results Barry,  a paid Panasonic consultant, seems to get.

Here are two better comparisons:
http://www.dv.com/print_me.jhtml?articleId=189500064
http://www.bluesky-web.com/HDVHVX.htm

My conclusion after personally testing both side by side - if you don't need 60P or P2 get an HD-100.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This particular test of Barry&#8217;s was not particularly well done for a variety of reasons. Virtually no other side by side test seems to match the results Barry,  a paid Panasonic consultant, seems to get.</p>
<p>Here are two better comparisons:<br />
<a href="http://www.dv.com/print_me.jhtml?articleId=189500064" rel="nofollow">http://www.dv.com/print_me.jhtml?articleId=189500064</a><br />
<a href="http://www.bluesky-web.com/HDVHVX.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.bluesky-web.com/HDVHVX.htm</a></p>
<p>My conclusion after personally testing both side by side - if you don&#8217;t need 60P or P2 get an HD-100.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
