XL2/A1, any info on this?

[HBlack]

I know that if they're going for the same price the A1 is a better idea, but I've seen XL2s going used for around 2200, whereas A1s usually sell for closer to 3000 used.

Does anyone have any comparison footage/stills? High resolution stills would be best. I'd like to see what the XL2 looks like blown up to HD. Basically the deciding factor for me is how standard definition looks on a large HDTV.

I'm probably going to go with the A1, but I'd like to see what the XL2 is capable of.

[HelloEvo]

I can't help you with the stills, but I was recently debating between the two cameras (up until tonight actually) until I finally pulled the trigger and got the XL2.

[HBlack]

Why did you choose it?

[jdmoviemaker]

the a1 seems to be a better choice if you plan to travel , its more portable than the xl2 , but then again the xl2 has xlr inputs and more image flexability.... it depends on what you plan on doing with the camera do you do shorts , nature , films , docs.:undecided

[ryanweiss89]

The A1 would most likely be the better choice, and the A1 also has XLR inputs and a lot more options when it comes to image flexibility, also there are a lot of user presets for the A1 to imitate different film looks.

[jdmoviemaker]

the g1 has the xlr inputs not the a1 , and there is more image flexability with the xl2 ( better gamma , color and black flexability.) I would say go withe the camera that meets your needs and has what you want :thumbsup:

[jdmoviemaker]

I Do Agree Though On The "film Look" Though, It Does Give A Great Tone But The Image Can Be A Little Bit Red. You Can Fix This With Editing , But It Can Take A While Depending On How Long Your Project Is The Xl2 Has A More Bleached And High Gain Look By Default , Which Gives You More Flexability With Color And Contrast No Matter If Its On Or Off Camera Color Editing :happy:

[Huy Vu]

the g1 has the xlr inputs not the a1 , and there is more image flexability with the xl2 ( better gamma , color and black flexability.) I would say go withe the camera that meets your needs and has what you want :thumbsup:

Wrong. The A1 has XLR input as well with a ton more image control option than the XL2. I should know. I have one. About the only major thing the XL2 does that the A1 doesn't is interchangable lense. The G1 is identical to the A1 except that it has HD-SDI out, Genlock etc.

[jdmoviemaker]

you are right!!!!! im going to have to look in more on this ..... my mistake:dankk2:

[HBlack]

Thanks for the input, but so far it seems only one person knows of some of the actually differences between the cameras.

My questions:
1) Apart from resolution and size, what are the differences between the cameras in terms of image and sound control? Looking for specifics here.
2) Is high def really necessary? Of course it's a selling point, but can standard definition look alright on large screens?

[Kdawg]

As far as a hobby, SD is great for now. But if you are getting into producing for clients, Just the letters HD raise their eyebrows. With my DVX100b it was... wow, cool camera, are you a professional? Is that HD?... no.... eh ok then.

For me, using HDV so far, I have been able to do more stablizing, and a bit of zooming in post since I am producing SD from the HD footage. You end up with more lattitude going with HD. I have not used the XL2, but I am a DVXuser for a couple of years. Since I have recieved my XH A1 2 months ago, I have not touched my DVX.

[Huy Vu]

Thanks for the input, but so far it seems only one person knows of some of the actually differences between the cameras.

My questions:
1) Apart from resolution and size, what are the differences between the cameras in terms of image and sound control? Looking for specifics here.

The A1 doesn't really seem to play nice with mixers. Last project my sound guy was running an SD 302 into the A1 and no matter what he couldn't feed me decent levels when it's on Line, even when his levels were running hot. My on-tape audio ends up being really low. Luckily we had a recorder backup. I read up more on this on DVinfo and it seems like Canon cut corner when it comes to mixer input with the A1. I've had no experience with the XL2 in this regard so I don't know whether it's an improvement.

2) Is high def really necessary? Of course it's a selling point, but can standard definition look alright on large screens?

There's no point in trying to rationalize this. Hi-def looks better than standard dev, period. There's no way an SD image projected on an HD screen is going to compared to native HD image. I'm not talking content or whatever here; resolution wise it's just no contest. The question is, do you need HD? Are you going to have an opportunity to display your work in HD? Are your clients requesting HD? Everybody forgets that the A1 shoots DV SD, and it does a great job at it. So now the question becomes: do you need interchangable lense?

I've said it before and I'll say it now: I think the XL series interchangable lense makes no sense. None of the lenses do everything that you need and to get them all you'll have to spend thousands beyond the cost of your camera. At the sub-10k price range, it's hard to justify the benefits, especially since most of us went broke buying the camera in the first place. Maybe if the XL2 were $500 cheaper, it might be worth a look at. But at $3000 it just doesn't compare to the A1, IMO.

[ecking]

I've said it before and I'll say it now: I think the XL series interchangable lense makes no sense. None of the lenses do everything that you need and to get them all you'll have to spend thousands beyond the cost of your camera. At the sub-10k price range, it's hard to justify the benefits, especially since most of us went broke buying the camera in the first place. Maybe if the XL2 were $500 cheaper, it might be worth a look at. But at $3000 it just doesn't compare to the A1, IMO.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[HBlack]

This is comparing used prices, in which you can find the XL2 or a DVX for around $800 less. That would allow me to spend more on a 35mm adapter and lights, things which may never afford if I spend the money for an A1. Also, although I plan on doing some professional work, most of my time would be spent on my own short films. I know many standard def films have won major film festivals, and I'm kinda thinking it would make more sense to spend the money on lighting and an adapter which (I think) would make it better than some more resolution.

[William_Robinette]

Those SD films that won in festivals won because of their story.

And if it allows you to get lights, then I would get the XL2. I would trade well lit SD footage for available light HD footage any day, and I bet a lot of other people would too.

[dogmeat]

Canon has really hit a sweet spot with this camera and it shouldn't be ignored. The price point for the image quality you get is incredible with the A1. For buying technology I always follow a simple rule: buy the newest quality camera available within the budget you have. XL2 is old and dated already...in 6 months it will be history. The A1 has been thoroughly tested and proven.

[HBlack]

Any thoughts on HV20+Adapter over an A1?

[Huy Vu]

Any thoughts on HV20+Adapter over an A1?

Not even a fair comparison. If you have the money for it then A1 is obviously going to be better in everyway.

[ffaf07]

Just some quick specs one might not find immediately:

The XH A1 has a "rule of thirds grid," several white balance features, excellent in-camera color correction, better ergonomics an LCD etc. in order for you to control your image properly on the spot.

Standard Def. can look fine on TV's, since most are Standard Def. anyway, but man, even if you plug your Camera into an HDTV and display the raw footage...you'll flatline. Plus, the XH A1 allows you to record Hi Def. info to tape and then downconvert it via. the camera so your computer captures it as downrezzed Standard Def size, but with excellent Hi Def. resolution. Plus if you ever upgrade your computer situation to handle HDV editing you'll have th HD info on your tapes.

Barry Green compared the HVX and XH A1 extensively, and wrote a lot about the A1's features in that article. I'd Google "HVX200 vs. XH A1" and it should be in the first five results or so.

[HBlack]

I haven't been able to get a straight answer on this. If I'm running a pentium D 820 dual core with 2.5GB ram, how will I be for editing HD in premiere and AE?

[elrond_2003]

I haven't been able to get a straight answer on this. If I'm running a pentium D 820 dual core with 2.5GB ram, how will I be for editing HD in premiere and AE?

The straight answer is "It depends". It depends on how long you are willing to wait between cycles (rendering in the editor), how long a shot you need to have in one peice (it takes a lot more of everything to do a 2 hr take vs a 30 sec one), and how much that time is worth to you. I am using a dual 2.7 GHz PowerMAC (w/4GB ram and 2x375GB drives)ence and it occupies about 60-100Gb in disk space (original RAW HD footage + rendered footage + output files (SD) + DVD images + backups +temp files). YMMV since I use FCP for editing.

Then again my MACBookPro is great for a 10 min series of interviews I am doing for my church (also using FCP).

[HBlack]

Well could anyone tell me approximately how my NLE would respond to it, as well as a ballpark for render times in AE on simple colour correction and effects?