Buying a camera in a week or two XL2 Vs DVX [Archive] - DVXuser.com -- The online community for filmmaking

Double_IT

02-04-2005, 12:31 PM

So its finally time to buy a camera. I have used the DVX at school and really liked it - good size, light weight and great image and its a decent price. But then therse the XL2 thats a little bigger and heavier (which can be good - more 'pro' looking) and of course the native 16:9, interchangable lenses and a better 'raw' image. So does it really come down to price? If you can afford the Xl2 is that what you should get? I am going to be doing short and features on it and want all the control possible. Why wouldnt I want the xl2 besides it costs about 1,000 more (And for that 1,000 i could probably get a wide angle lens and do that 35mm lens conversion to a DVX - and on that note is THAT a better option?)

I've spent a lot of time researching it and i'm just not sure yet. I know that I do not want to go the way of the HD sony so it's really the xl2 or the dvx. The other nice thing about the DVX is this forum. It's a great community of pros and amatures helping each other out and I think its just awsome. So im conflicted and I wnat to buy one asap.

VIDEOMIKE

02-04-2005, 01:18 PM

Maybe you have contact with someone that has an XL2 so you can check it out, since you have experience with a DVX. Then you could make a better decision. Posablely you could rent one for a day. The balance takes getting used to.
*Wait until you have enought info to make a clear decision.

* * * * * * * * * * * * :D

Double_IT

02-04-2005, 01:28 PM

Dont know anyone who has one else I would, although maybe i could rent one. Am I going to be able to use the xl2 on my GlideCam 2000Pro?

David Jimerson

02-04-2005, 01:34 PM

So its finally time to buy a camera. I have used the DVX at school and really liked it - good size, light weight and great image and its a decent price. But then therse the XL2 thats a little bigger and heavier (which can be good - more 'pro' looking) and of course the native 16:9, interchangable lenses and a better 'raw' image. So does it really come down to price? If you can afford the Xl2 is that what you should get? I am going to be doing short and features on it and want all the control possible. Why wouldnt I want the xl2 besides it costs about 1,000 more (And for that 1,000 i could probably get a wide angle lens and do that 35mm lens conversion to a DVX *- and on that note is THAT a better option?)

I've spent a lot of time researching it and i'm just not sure yet. I know that I do not want to go the way of the HD sony so it's really the xl2 or the dvx. The other nice thing about the DVX is this forum. It's a great community of pros and amatures helping each other out and I think its just awsome. So im conflicted and I wnat to buy one asap.

http://www.dvxuser.com/cgi-bin/DVX2/YaBB.pl?board=nws;action=display;num=1105070695;st art=0#0

There is no better answer. *This is as thorough and as objective a comparison as you'll find, and anything it doesn't address is probably a matter of personal preference or only answerable by having both machines in your hands.

Double_IT

02-04-2005, 02:34 PM

After reading that I think im going to go back to the DVX.

dakotapod

02-04-2005, 07:04 PM

If still in doubt even a little - videomike gave some good advise. You know the DVX. Rent the XL2 and play with it for a day. Then you will know for sure. It's a fair bit of coin to put out so worth the rental price to be doubt free with your purchase. Nothing worse then second guessing or regretting your purchase.

Double_IT

02-04-2005, 07:08 PM

True, although Im not sure if there is anywhere to rent one around me and after reading that review I really dont like the XL2 - It seems like its a sweet camera if you have an extra 5 grand to put into it for lenses, the view finder, etc. I can get the DVX, then get a wide angle lens, maybe the 35mm adaptor, a dolly and a crane and still be under the cost of an XL2. For what im doing im pretty confident thats best. Plus i loved the DVX and didnt know of half the features. I think i might try and order it this week.

dakotapod

02-04-2005, 07:16 PM

Plus you already know your way around the DVX ;)

johnnyspacecommand

02-04-2005, 09:01 PM

if you are going to do a lot of running and gunning with no time to think about shots, the XL2 with its 20X and killer OIS will do wonders.

I've had some experience with Canon OIS lenses and their ridiculous zoom and image stabilization came in mighty handy in the field.

For "film school" type movies, the debate keeps raging on and I think that good results can be had from either camera, although the more rez you can get, the better. (Given that you are working with 24P, control over contrast, black curves, and control over color saturation/hue) You're probably going to change lenses on both DVX100a and XL2 for this type of creation.

Personally, I wish I had the XL2, the mini35, and a box of primes...

Coco Bermudez

02-04-2005, 11:01 PM

I myself have done months of research on all three cameras.

After reading the comparisons between the three cameras at:

http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/shoot3/

I pretty much gave up on buying the Sony HD camera. I mean if the review says that the FX1 looks like sharp video....who wants that right?

Then I saw a music video done on an FX1:

http://homepage.mac.com/nweaver/.Movies/DOAFD.mov

Freaking awesome! what the heck happened with the FX1 looking like "sharp video"?
This music video looks a lot like film...if it doesn't maybe I need a new pair of eyeglasses.

What this simply shows is that that no matter what camera you use...if you know what the heck you are doing, you can obtain amazing images. Many are seduced by the notion that this camera or that camera looks like film and fail to realize that a lot depends on the shooter.

I see it this way...personally I think the XL2 is the Mercedes Benz of this group of cameras. Yes, with the same amount of money you would spend on buying an XL2 you can buy a DVX100A and get a nice wide angle lens,adapters and what have you and still have change left. Yet using this same mentality you could say...rather than buying a Merces Benz I could buy a Hyundai Sonata and get leather interiors, kick a@@ alloy wheels, plasma screens for each seat, cd stereo system and still have money left.......yet at the end of the day, no matter how souped up your Sonata looks...it's still no Mercedes. (no disrespect to Hyundai owners....I owned one for 5 years and I loved that goofy bastard)

I've bought one to many equipment on initial impulse and salivation factor only to wish i had tested all my options out. The best advice has already been given....get to play with all of them if you can...you will not regret it.

MovieSwede

02-05-2005, 04:53 AM

I wouldn´t say that comparing the two cameras with a Mercedes benz and a Hyundai Sonata.

Both has their strenght and weakness.

So in the end its more what will you shoot? What do you need?

Myself has more need for more wideangle than gigantic zoom.

Coco Bermudez

02-05-2005, 11:40 AM

That's why I said in my own personal opinion
:)

chalbers

02-05-2005, 12:28 PM

I'll probably fall in repetition again here, but ...

I totally understand people that want to get the what they call "film look" straight out of the camera. My problem with that is that you loose the full dynamic range. Like for example detail in the dark areas.

I much rather get the fullest dynamic range possible out of the cam and fiddle for the right look afterwards since I then have a lot of data to play with.

One drawback is, it takes a shitloads of time to color correct your final product. That's why I normally edit all the raw footage first and do the color correction at the end. I just have that calculated overnight ! :-)

That's why I prefer the XL2 raw footage. It may not look film , but boy can I make it look any way I want once I have that kind of dynamic range !!!

Just a few more days till it delivers ... :-)

Frank

Dests

02-05-2005, 10:12 PM

I just bought an XL2 and I'm very satisfied with my purchase. The picture quality is great. I have been doing a couple of camera test with the Xl for the last couple of days and I have been blown away by the images that I have been getting. I connected the XL to my parents Samsung 50 inch DLP HDTV and the detail was crisp. I was even surprised by the 60i mode. It almost looked like HD. It's probably because of my parents TV, but atleast it looked great on an HD monitor. The reason I bought the camera was the 24p mode. I'm still exploring it, but the potential is very promising.

dakotapod

02-05-2005, 10:35 PM

A lot of great points and opinions. The raw data and "do with it as you will in post" is a biggie. The 16:9 is a huge biggie. The lens is a biggie. Hell, your favorite color is a biggie. What you plan to use it for is an even bigger biggie. Like I said, Double IT has a pretty nice advantage that he is familiar with the DVX. Not too many people faced with the "what to buy" dilemma [and it's a big club] know one of the two cameras. I still suggest, since you know what you can get out of the DVX, getting your hands on the XL and finding out what you dig between the two.

They both have so many pluses & minuses that it's like picking a girlfriend. Only you can really decide and be happy. I honestly believe both cameras are "the best" under separate circumstances. There is no "one is better then the other" [I've been there, believe me!] BUT, There is most certainly a "this one is better for me" situation! Make the decision on your needs and personal preferences and that is really all that matters.

johnnyspacecommand

02-05-2005, 11:48 PM

:PWhat a useful diatribe, Dakota. *"They both have so many pluses and minuses that it's like picking a girlfriend."

If girls would only act like cameras with knobs and buttons to respond to your every command, you'd get'em all right? ::) ::) ::) :P

dakotapod

02-05-2005, 11:59 PM

My point was nobody can make the choice for you.

I hope you don't make your choices based on someone else opinion. ;)

johnnyspacecommand

02-06-2005, 12:44 AM

Indeed. *Gotta agree with you there Dakota....But how many people do you know who have a brain of their own?

It's sad that given enough media representation and peer pressure, you can convince some people to buy "s**t on a stick" and have them think it was a diamond ring...

tonight I have no life except "Reservoir Dogs", "Hero", and the DVD player, but that's OK. Nice to kick back after an insanely hectic January.

translumination

02-06-2005, 03:37 AM

I own the dx100a pro's: small size, wide lens, mechanical zoom, peaking function, rugged yet light.

cons: useless image stabilizer, limited zoom range, useless automatic white balance, grain grain grain even in good light with darker areas of the picture, low light grainy

xl2 I've tested in the shop.
pro: phenomenal image stabilizer, its smooth even at the end of the phenomenal 20x zoom handheld! 16:9, less grain then dvx but lens is slower. However compared to the vx2k or pd170 neither of these camera's can compare.

con: large size, extra cost, need more cash for wider lens, viewfinder is such low resolution, no lcd screen on the side- extremely useful for high or low handheld shots

if they come out with a dvx100b with same small size,true 16:9 good image stabilizer and longer zoom i'd be in it

Zig_Zigman

02-07-2005, 04:29 PM

Get the Sony.

johnnyspacecommand

02-07-2005, 09:49 PM

I dunno Zig... :-/

"“I’d shot a previous feature with the Sony camcorder, and hadn’t been overly impressed,” Parmet recounted. *“I did some research on the Panasonic model, and spoke to colleagues who had used it (including DP Nancy Schreiber, who won the Excellence in Cinematography Award at Sundance last year, for her work shooting the film November with the DVX100). I persuaded InDigEnt to invest in a couple of DVX100As (upgrade to the DVX100), and had some brief time to shoot tests with it through film-out. I found it to be a magnitude better than the PD150, with its progressive scan delivering a much more film-like feel.”

from: http://www.creativecow.net/forum/read_post.php?postid=110621052864621&forumid=105

regarding: "Lonesome Jim"

If you mean the Sony HD, I still dunno Zig *:-/ *Played with it and found that the lens is nice but still has that "retarded" infinitely spinning wheel that everyone hates on the 20X Canon (although I don't mind). *Also, no 24P, and I personally found the images harsh and contrasty. *It's weird that people are calling what is around a megapixel of resolution "high definition". *Kind of like calling tap water "super water" compared to lake water...

I would rather have a great standard definition camera (Panasonic or Canon) as opposed to a not so great "HD" camera. The big reason that the HD CineAlta's and Varicam's are out of consumer or prosumer price range is that their hardware tech is functionally superior...I hear that the Panasonic pro-HD has warmer colors than the Sony (just like the DVX100a gets accolades for its color), but that's just the grapevine...If I ever get my hands on a pro-HD camera, I will have moved a notch up from where I am in the ranks.

Kidster

02-08-2005, 05:47 AM

I'm sure this is has been said here before, but I say it again. Buying the Sony isn't all the cost invloved in delievering HD to the client. I doubt that many of the Sony buyers or "want to be buyers" have the horse power under their computers hood. We are talking some serious coin to upgrade to dual xeon's, HD studio monitor, massive storage space etc. Also, you will need a deck for the tapes you record. There's more coin going towards HD. So making the move will cost some bucks. Buying a new DVX or XL2, no upgrading needed.

Zig_Zigman

02-08-2005, 12:10 PM

I meant the sony trv900! ;D

I need a new cam soon, and I don't think I can wait for Panny. I want a 16x9 dvx, but it looks like september before I get one...

Gleeeps. Have to take another look at that Canon..

xray

02-08-2005, 05:20 PM

if they come out with a dvx100b with same small size,true 16:9 good image stabilizer and longer zoom i'd be in it
But they did not even reported a timetable for bringing up something like that. We only know that there will be a P2 card based camera (NAB?). For now the XL2 gives you true native 16x9 and so is the new Sony. For progressive AND 16x9 Canon gives you a shot today and it is a good one.

Zig_Zigman

02-08-2005, 07:01 PM

Shaw

02-08-2005, 07:07 PM

I'm not familiar with the 20x but all the canon lenses I have seen breathe like none other. I haven't seen the DVX do this yet - at least nothing that is noticable. Could be important depending on your needs. I think I have heard that the 20x is better in this regard. Anyone know?

johnnyspacecommand

02-08-2005, 07:42 PM

[quote author=Zig_Zigman link=board=XL2;num=1107545492;start=15#24 date=02/08/05 at 18:01:30]It's just the form factor of the Canon is so suck ass; I used an XL1 for a day, my shoulder was killing me for days from the handheld; and it almost tipped the tripod over when we set it up for stationary.

Just about any camera will kill you if you have to do handheld or standing shots for 8+ hours. *Not that I am some pro-DP or anything..I occasionally get these gigs that are so intense. A full day's tripod work made my feet hurt so insanely bad, and looking through the eyepiece that long nearly made me need glasses after that.

MattC

02-08-2005, 09:31 PM

See, this is what Dakota was saying about all of this being subjective - I prefer the larger size of the XL2, of course I usually have it mounted on something. Have had ZERO issues with it on a tripod. You do need beefy equipment to handle it though. I have both the 20X and the 3X and I like both lenses. The 20X is a GREAT lens.. The quality of it, for a prosumer lens is, in my opinion, outstanding and the OIS is fantastic. For narrative work, I would get, and am getting, the 16X manual. But I would definitely want the 20X no matter what.

I don't find breathing to be an issue with either lens - have done a few rack focuses without problem. They do breath a little but not that much, and it seems to depend on how the shot is composed and, well, shot. That said, I was with a friend who shoots film, HD and Digibeta and he says all of his lenses breath. Now I don't own, nor have I used, a DVX but if that lens doesn't breath at all, I'd be surprised.

Matt

Kidster

02-09-2005, 05:21 AM

It's just the form factor of the Canon is so suck ass; I used an XL1 for a day, my shoulder was killing me for days from the handheld; and it almost tipped the tripod over when we set it up for stationary.

Nice looking footage from it though. I'd get a "bare" (no lens) model and buy a used 3x wide angle lens.

I must be in great shape ( not really) I think the XL2 is very easy to use hand held. The small but useful shoulder mount works great! And getting the body only is really not a good buy. You get so much more for your buck buying the "kit" the the 20X then adding a 3X wide angle.

I have to say, I own a DVX and also a XL2, and I find myself shooting with the XL2 almost exclusively. BTW, the XL2 is becoming more affordable. I bought one shipping (overnight) and two 6000mah batteries for $4,100. I guess I have the Sony Z1 to thank for that.

keithinator

02-09-2005, 06:12 AM

A lot of it depends on your budget. I own a DVX100a and love it, while the XL2 also gets very good reviews, such as the latest one in DV magazine. BUT: by saving over a grand on my camera (more if you're talking about extra lenses), I have more money left over for lights and mics. For me, at least, that's a big deal.

Dests

02-09-2005, 11:26 AM

I like the size of the XL2. Panasonic has a great picture so does the Xl2, but externally, it still looks like a consumer camera. Sounds a bit silly, but I feel more like a pro handling the XL2. Most higher class cams are beefy and the XL trains you for the weight if you ever plan on going any further in the future. Of course you could always pack the weight on the Pani, but that will cost you.

If you just plan on pointing and shooting, then go with the Panasonic. Its well percieved by everyone like the Windows format. You could probably always find someone with the camera that can help you on your productions. Maybe they might have accessories you might want to borrow. Of course not to upset anyone who loves the Pani...I honestly believe its a great camera for its price. But I recently bought the XL2, actually only a week ago because its the newer camera of the two. Also, the newer features like 16x9, higher pixel count per ccd for more raw footage, and of course the interchangeable lens with the new 20x were big factors in my decision. I needed a camera now, and I wasn't going to wait a couple of months or so for an upgraded version of the Panasonic. But if you only plan on using it for a couple of months or so...if they ever do...until the new one comes out then go with the panisonic. You could always sell it then get the newer model.

Also, I felt like the XL2 was perfect for my situation. I could afford to spend the extra grand because I'm still in school and they supply the lights, mics, and other crap that I need. I only need to focus my finance on the camera.

David Jimerson

02-09-2005, 02:58 PM

Hmmm.

I never had $4500 lying around when I was in school.

MattC

02-09-2005, 08:32 PM

I was a musician, I think you video guys should take a lesson from your musical brethren. *Act real arrogant and dismissive, this will attract a certain type of trashy woman (strippers work best as they have plenty of disposable income and it's all cash). *Treat her poorly, and sleep with all her friends, this will insure that she can't live without you. *Then let her support YOU while you work on your craft.

How can you guys not know this!!??!!

Dests

02-09-2005, 08:32 PM

Credit Cards! :P

MattC

02-09-2005, 08:34 PM

Credit cards suck, have you looked at the interest rates??

Go with the stripper - much better ROI.

Dests

02-09-2005, 08:47 PM

0% intro and 3.9% after is not bad. And I have half of the camera's price when I have to pay it off.

:-XAlso...hope I didn't sound to cocky or anything with the last statement. I just wanted to help with a promising new XL2 or DVX user. Not trying to sell the XL, just wanted to help in any way with my experience. Someone said earlier that it really comes down to your preference. I just wanted to explain why I got the XL instead of the DVX. It really came down to my current situation and preference. This site was a very big factor to my decision. Just wanted to add my two cents to help anyone out.

J.R. Hudson

02-10-2005, 04:54 PM

If you just plan on pointing and shooting...

If you plan on 'pointing and shooting' then the DVX is the wrong camera.

Jacques_Meov

02-23-2005, 01:16 AM

Get strippers that are twins. Then you get three things:
1. Two for the price of one...every man's dream!
2. Automatic jealousy, they throw ever increasing amounts of dough after you...read this more camera equipment.
3. BRAGGINF RIGHTS FOIR LIFE!

icicle22

02-24-2005, 08:18 AM

If you plan on 'pointing and shooting' then the DVX is the wrong camera.

I agree for the most part. But honestly in comparing the DVX and XL2 the DVX is much more forgiving. I used it for years for pro work and for "home/family" stuff. Honestly just turning it on and making a few minor tweaks I could run around all day with it and it always looked good. I am not saying it looked professional all the time but it always looked good.

With the XL2 if you don't tweak it and really pay super attention to every setting all the time you can get bad footage in lower light areas. The DVX didn't have this penalty in lower light areas or at least not so much since it has bigger pixels to catch more light.

All I am saying is the the XL2 has extremes. IMHO if you light and take proper measures the XL2 can and does look more clear and sharp than the DVX. However if you don't light proper and even shoot in slightly dark areas the DVX really outshines the XL2.

Think of it like this. A scale form 1-10 repesenting video quality.

XL2 in bad lighting=2
XL2 in good lighting=10
DVX in bad lighting=5
DVX in good lighting=9

So the XL scores a 12 and the DVX scores a 14. (totally made up numbers to show relationship)Depending on what end of the scale you will be working on will make a significant difference in which camera fits your needs best....plus you have to take the unique features of each into account.

And to clarify one last time....neither unit is designed for simple point and shoot. But in all fairness the DVX does come close. In all fairness the Xl2 is great in daylight and well lit scenes too.....just a little less forgiving in dim settings.

Peace!

geffy

03-05-2005, 10:29 AM

xl2 wont compete with the new panasonic, rent/ second hand till its available!!!!!!!!!!!!!

MattC

03-05-2005, 10:41 AM

No it wont, and it isn't meant to. For that matter the DVX100A wont compete with the new Panasonic. I'm as anxious as anyone to see what Panasonic has instore, but you're comparing apples to oranges. It's like saying the XL2 doesn't compare to the SDX900, well, yeah it doesn't, but again, neither does the DVX...

mgalvan

03-05-2005, 11:21 AM

Very true MattC ...

You really can't compare the two (at least with the HDX shooting in any other mode beside DV25 or DVCPRO) ...

The XL2 seems to be the direct competitor to the DVX100a and indeed it has seem to have both advantages and disadvantages. I ended up purchasing the XL2 over the DVX and I do not regret it. The image does seem crisper, but I suggest you try them both out to get a feel of what you would like.

Dests

03-05-2005, 03:55 PM

I guess there is certian situations where you would have bad lighting, but if you act in a profesional manner and not desregard lighting as one of the main aspect of production, then you would have great footage to play around in in post. The idea of which camera has the best low light capability shouldn't justify which camera is better. It's sound more of a preference to me. I prefer having the better picture quality out of the two without considering the new pani because its not even out yet. Not even part of the equation. If you can't light it, why even bother shooting it.