DVX100 Becoming Obsolete Fast

[grjohnson]

Buying my AG-DVX100 camera three years was a major investment for me. Now, with the world abandoning SD video, I feel more than a wee bit disappointed. Three years ago it was a top of the line camera. Soon it will be dog [expletive deleted]! :crybaby:

I am just now really learning and mastering what this wonderful little camera will do. I have a movie planned for this year, but now I'm wondering if shooting it with the DVX100 will be an exercise in futility. Of course its SD video will still be more than adaquate for movies distributed over the Internet. And it will be for some time; due to Internet bandwidth limitations. Still, the artist in me wants to master the production in the highest resolution possible and affordable.

The switch to HD video production is going to be problematic for many of us. I had an epithany on this at Christmas when I bought my wife a consumer grade Canon HD camera. When I went to download and edit her first clips reality hit hard.

First, that particular camera saved and delivered its HD video in a compressed format right out of the camera. Secondly, when I attempted to edit the clips in my Sony Vegas 8 system (running on Windows XP) the data stream was more than my 2 mb RAM terminal could handle. I actually had to convert the compressed HD files into wide-screen .avi video files to work with them. The output product looked nice (widescreen) but the resulting picture quality looked only about as good as my DVX SD.

So, it looks as though I am not only going to need to purchase a good HD camera system (Like the HVX200), but I will also need to switch to a MAC computer and Final Cut Pro to do my editing work. We are talking major $$$ here. :badputer: I'm really fuming about that.

I would be interested in knowing if anyone else has made similar observations. And, does anybody out there want to buy a well maintained AG-DVX100 camera? I think I need to cut my losses and move on! :dankk2:

[Barry_Green]

First of all, look at the new HMC150, that's the camera that is going to be introduced that is basically the high-def DVX.

Second, why on earth would you have to go to a Mac just to edit HD video? Re-examine your system, but Vegas 8 on a halfway decent computer can handle HDV at full realtime rates. There are many, many editing programs for the Windows systems that all handle HD just fine. If you've got a dual-core system that's really all you need.

Oh, as for your DVX soon becoming dog expletive, don't tell that to the Academy Awards folks! They've nominated DVX films for an Oscar three years in a row. In 2006 it was for Murderball in the Best Doc category, in 2007 it was for Iraq In Fragments in the Best Doc category, and in 2008 James Longley got nominated for an Oscar in the Short Film category for something he shot on a DVX.

Yes the world's going HD finally. Yes, if you upgraded you could make footage that's sharper and clearer. But the DVX is still plenty fine for doing DVD stuff, and if your content's good enough it can still make it into theatrical release and be nominated for Oscars. So don't sweat having to spend a lot of money right now (and certainly don't go thinking you have to torch a lot of money to go to a Mac... )

[Jason Wilson]

with the low light capabilities of the dvx its still the camera considering what kinda work you do

[Jacquot]

Use what you have. Be happy.

And realize that with video and anything digital you will always be chasing technology.

Otherwise shoot film and quit chasing.

I'm always impressed with excellent work. The way it was captured doesn't matter to me. I'm unimpressed with the video work I see that is perfect technically but ever so mindless.

There's always something new over the horizon. After all, it's an industry that must stay alive through profitability: i.e., sales.

My colleagues rarely talk about the tools. Instead we discuss our work.

Do your work with the tools you have. And when those tools fail you, and only when they fail you, think about getting new tools.

[grjohnson]

Use what you have. Be happy....
....Do your work with the tools you have. And when those tools fail you, and only when they fail you, think about getting new tools.

Thanks for all the great advice. I needed a reality check.
Much appreciation to all.
Gaines

[Jason Adams]

A press release will not make the DVX 100 obsolete over night. This is almost like saying, well I spent all this money on this Blackberry and now the Iphone is out so my phone won't work any more.

I have more than a dozen projects slated for the next 8 weeks and they will all be shot on the DVX 100B. Some are Broadcast. Some are Corporate DVD. Some are web only.

You can see my reel at www.dreamoncreative.com (http://www.dreamoncreative.com). 99% of everything I have on my reel was shot on a DVX 100, 100A or 100B. Obsolete I think not, and my clients are very pleased with the results.

There is always something newer and better. It does not negate the current tools and technology. I plan to make an HD purchase this year, but I will be keeping my DVX and I have a feeling I will run that little camera till the heads fall off.

Keep creating and make a new gear purchase when it suits your needs and your clients requests. Not when a press release announces new gear.

[keynstring]

Man I HATE, HATE, HATE threads like this. I always have to jump in just for my own sanity. Not because I own 2 DVX's but because they prove themselves to me daily.

I've recently wrapped a shoot on a feature where I was side by side HVX's and HDX900's. People always praise the twin DVX's for the quality of the footage. I actually had 3 on set two B's and an A. The result...i'm editing a feature Doc about the film and the Producers and Directors are equally excited about their narrative and my Documentary. When i'm done I will be here shouting from the mountain top but until then...I will never forsake my twin DVX's. I will never sell them even after I own twin REDS.

Majority of the time it's the shooter. Shooters always win. CONTENT, CONTENT, CONTENT.

[J.R. Hudson]

Thanks for all the great advice. I needed a reality check.
Much appreciation to all.
Gaines


That's the spirit ! :beer:

[grjohnson]

That's the spirit ! :beer:
Wow! I am overwhelmed by the spirit of all the responses. All of this encouragement has made me do a lot of re-thinking about my beloved AG-DVX100. I guess both it and I are not as obsolete as I imagined.

I want everyone to know that, because of all the positive feedback, yesterday I decided to invest more in my DVX camera system and ordered a Panasonic 16:9 Anamorphic Lens and a Century Optics LCD Widescreen Magnifier. I will shoot my planned movie in good widescreen, instead of letterboxing the SD video to get the desired look.

Much thanks to all of you! :2vrolijk_08:
Gaines

[matt s.]

I'm interested in this HMC150. Any footage? Price?

there are 2 threads already in the news section and the cam isnt even released yet so there is no footage.

[Barry_Green]

It's not going to be released for probably six to nine months. You won't see footage for a long, long time. As for price, perhaps we'll hear pricing info at NAB, mid-April.

[leecho7]

I know what you mean. I purchased the 100a about 5 years ago, and am starting to feel the sting of advancing technology.
Although one could argue it is becoming obsolete, the works you create with it won't.
I did a lot of research, and I decided instead of getting a whole new camera, I'm looking into getting a couple of adapters like the Letus Extreme.
If you look on youtube, you can see several examples of the Letus Extreme on a DVX100, and it looks phenomenal given the limitations of the site.

[dory_breaux]

I just got my 100b a few months ago. I dont think I'll ever git rid of it.

[Zim]

I just bought a new DVX100b last year. It is such a good camera. I'll go HD someday.

There are programs like Instant HD to convert SD to HD.

[dory_breaux]

i just watched my DVX footy on a 50 inch 1080p HDTV. I was fucking blown away by how good it looked. it was re-fucking-diculious.

[Daniel_Runyon]

To attempt to keep up with the pace of this technology will only lead to insanity and brokeness. Content will always be king.

[justmarvin]

I just got my DVX100b too,

And I just thought, isn't the HVX more crisp, higher res, etc... which means everything is more sharp. Isn't the beauty of film the more organic, soft look? Isn't that the advantage of an DV100b SD? Any thoughts?

JM

[justmarvin]

By the way, how much do you think the price will fall on the DVX100?

I think I bought mine for something like $2400

[junkmail878]

I just got my DVX100b too,

And I just thought, isn't the HVX more crisp, higher res, etc... which means everything is more sharp. Isn't the beauty of film the more organic, soft look? Isn't that the advantage of an DV100b SD? Any thoughts?

JM
Amen, justmarvin! Rather than just chase technology, we should talk aesthetics. HD is crisp, but sometimes crisp just looks like shit - hyperreal. If you're not shooting baby birds in a nest or penquins at the pole, dvx has a beautiful look for narrative. Oh, yeah... there's that thing called story.

[NOMADIC]

...sd projected looks like crap.

This has been my main beef with some people. We talk about how film is organic and soft, but thats because we have sd rez dvd's or even old films on vhs. Watch an old film on a 35mm print, there is nothing soft about it (in most cases).

[dory_breaux]

well theres HD and then theres HD with that V tacked on to the end. Films resolution is 2k and up, and in reality the crisper the picture the better. Not the sharper, the crisper.

[Captain Pierce]

ob·so·lete

1.no longer in general use; fallen into disuse: an obsolete expression.
2.of a discarded or outmoded type; out of date: an obsolete battleship.

Well, since the DVX still seems to be in general use, and many aren't discarding it, I'm going to have to say that it's not obsolete. :)

It seems to me that these days, when somebody says something is "obsolete," what they really mean is that it's not the newest, sexiest thing on the planet. I had a customer last week ask me if a document camera they were interested in would be "obsolete" in a year or two. I almost laughed, because by that new meaning, the model they were interested in was already "obsolete"--and the reason they were interested in that model was that it was noticeably cheaper than the newest, sexiest one on the planet. :D

[PerroneFord]

Reading this thread reminds me of something that happened when I was a young fellow in high school. (Still camera related)

I shot a LOT of film back then. Bulk loaded tri-x, in the dark room every day. My senor year, we had gotten a brand new scoreboard donated to us. Same one the Dallas Cowboys had. BIG deal, in a small town. The yearbook teacher game her little pet student (cute blonde with zero talent) the directove to get some good shots of it, and to shoot the color footage for the first 12 pages of the yearbook.

Little miss, proceeded to burn up 25 rolls of professional color film, 36 exposres each, and came back with 4 printable shots. I laughed my A$$ off. So in class, as I was chuckling and shaking my head, she complains to the teacher and then tells me that you can't get a clean shot of the scoreboard becuase of the light motion and patterns. I smiled, loaded about 6 exposures worth of tri-x in a canister, put it in one of the school 's beat up cameras, leaned out the window, and took 3 shots. I went in the darkroom, developed them, went to the print room, and gave handed her 3 5x7s that were printable for yearbook. Then walked out.

Ansel Adams took photos that hang in museums today. And he took them with a camera that had zero electronics. I've watched silent films from the early 1900s that were better shot than some of the garbage leaving hollywood right now. The guys who shot Blair Witch would have DIED for a DVX100.

As the lovely lady said at the Oscars... "Make ART!". And you don't need HD, RED, Panavision, or $50k in lights to do that.

One thing I learned FAST when I started taking video seriously. Video cameras love light. They CRAVE it. The difference between shooting with a couple of practicals in a room, and 10k lumens in a room is literally night and day. I would never have believed how noise free the DVX could be until I started working with enough light for it to ask me for the 1/64 ND filter.

Want nicer video? Light correctly, frame and compose nicely, and move the camera well. You'll be well on your way. And leave HD alone until HDV and low bitrate AVCHD goes away.

[justmarvin]

...sd projected looks like crap.

This has been my main beef with some people. We talk about how film is organic and soft, but thats because we have sd rez dvd's or even old films on vhs. Watch an old film on a 35mm print, there is nothing soft about it (in most cases).



What about award winning dvx100b films like November? I don't think it looked like crap when it was projected..? Your thoughts?

JM

[dory_breaux]

^^ Well shot, and in alot of cases uprezed professionally ;)

[grjohnson]

As the lovely lady said at the Oscars... "Make ART!". And you don't need HD, RED, Panavision, or $50k in lights to do that.


I think that sums it up.

To all: By the way, since I made my original posting I have received my anamorphic lens and mag viewer and have experimented with it. I have found that the combined optics now somewhat limit my zoom range. That is, there is noticable distortion when either zoomed all the way in, or pulled all the way out. HOWEVER, in between, it is a great picture.

Now, I am going to take my trusty DVX and make some art and stop worrying about it being obsolete. I'm 57 years old and I'm not obsolete. (I hope - smile). I should have given my DVX the same consideration. My bad.

[dory_breaux]

It seems to me that these days, when somebody says something is "obsolete," what they really mean is that it's not the newest, sexiest thing on the planet.

Ay! are you saying that my wife isnt sexy?!?!?! (my wife being the dvx)