It's here.. part 2

[Zoomforce]

sorry had to clear out the XL2 posts.. something funky was going on with the thread.

Carry on :)

[MovieSwede]

Well thats just great, how shall we now start.

;)

[Zoomforce]

just carry on and pretend nothing happened lol..

Maybe it was a sign.

[MovieSwede]

Yea maybe this was all a bad dream

the XL2 doesnt exist, the DVX is still the undisputed king of the hill.

Well as i written before, think the release of the canon XL2 shows what a great cam panasonic have made. Canon have copied almost every feuture of the DVX.

[Zoomforce]

yes indeed.. I swear they took a hammer and just hit the DVX, took the parts out and stuffed them into an XL1 Body :)

[MovieSwede]

Cant wait to se the first side by side test between the DVX and XL2.

[Mike_Donis]

That'll be the start of the Film Geek's Holy war.

[MovieSwede]

Yes but I really like what you can do with the anamorpic adapeter on the DVX.

Ive even had problem with too narrow DOF with it.

wasnt it anybody here who would release a tutorial on filming with it?

[Antoine_Fabi]

...too bad, there was quite good info and comments here this afternoon...


...anyway... just a camera...

...but i would like to see some A\B grabs...curious...

[Bsmith]

how much does anamorpic adaptor cost? and what exactly does it do? Is it something that comes in real handy?

[Barry_Green]

Tutorial should be done tonight!

[MovieSwede]

well what can it be 800 dollars? unless you live here (the land with the big taxes) :'(

It optically squezes so you get "native" 16:9 on the DVX. Kepping the full res i height.

576 PAL
480 NTSC

Other side effects is Narrower DOF and a bit softer image. Its great for filmlook, when ive filmed with correct lights and exposed right it can be really hard to se the differance between DVX video and 35mm film outputed to DVD.

[Zoomforce]

yes Barry's guide is gonna be a must have :)

[Josicleverson]

I almost bought my first DVX today... This morning (in Brazil)...
But a communication problem between the store and my credit card company doesn't let the purchase continues... I called my c.c company here in Brazil... And will be OK to buy tomorrow!!!

But I need to ask something here:
Do you guys think it's better to wait a few days??
To see some comparison 'bout DVX & XL2...
Or maybe the DVX price goes down...
I don't know...
This must be not the greatest moment to buy my camera...

What do U think??

Thanx a lot for helping me in this difficult situation!!!

[Zoomforce]

tough call Josicleverson.. It's a hard decision right now because nobody really knows if the XL2 actually works yet. The safest play would be to get the DVX, we all know it works and works well. Expect to wait a good month or 2 before you can actually buy the XL2.

[Bsmith]

I say wait...I would say make sure you are positive before you get anything...3-5K won't just come back.

[Zoomforce]

yes.. at least wait for a couple days till the first hands on review comes back.

[Josicleverson]

Do you think that's any possibility to DVX prices goes down in the next few months?? Or just next year??
Speculations (?!?) I know!!!

[mc]

I say wait...I would say make sure you are positive before you get anything...3-5K won't just come back.

www.ebay.com

the only place you can pay MORE for a used cam than for a new one somewhere else!

:)

[magicdavek]

While I can drool at the XL2, this announcement has no value for me. I really had to stretch a great deal financially to get my DVX100A. There's no way in the world I'd be able to afford the XL2. Also, I have no use for 16:9 at this point, so I'm no less happy with my DVX today than I was before the XL2 announcement.

I think the "geek wars" referenced earlier are rather interesting. Why should we feel the need to justify our purchases of the DVX relative to the XL2? Let's face it, the DVX was the only game in town for 24p and we knew that was temporary. The DVX can do today what it did yesterday. I can read the info on the XL2 and say "cool -wish I had the bucks" and not feel the least bit insecure about my DVX purchase. I always thought the XL1 took top honors in the "cool look" category, even if the DVX was a better camera. Now if it turns out the XL2 takes better pictures - I could care less. I couldn't afford it, and my DVX takes outstanding pictures. Best wishes to everyone out there purchasing XL2s, I hope it's a wonderful camera. I just won't be joining that crowd anytime soon.

[mc]

been said before by much better shooters than I, but it only takes better pictures if the guy shooting it has skills.


i have seen some really poor movies shot in panaflex.

[Zoomforce]

good point you 2.

[magicdavek]

yep, yep.

Hey, that 20x zoom is cool, but ching, ching, there goes the cash register to get a new, expensive heavy duty tripod to keep it steady at that range.

Also, am I wrong, but does the DVX start at a wider angle? The specs listed suggest that it does. I really like that.

[Barry_Green]

Not only does the DVX start at a wider angle (32mm equiv. vs. 42mm on the XL2), but in 4:3 mode, the XL2 actually starts at a 51mm equivalent. So it's got long reach, but not much in the way of wide.

[David Jimerson]

I came to appreciate the wide angle of the DVX over the weekend when I was trying to get an entire kitchen in to the frame . . . and did. Onlookers were amazed.

Don't know if any were mentally comparing it to the XL1, though.

[Mogambi]

Oh man. I have to admit. That is one NICE looking camera, everything I think the 100A needs, like native 16:9, a shoulder rest, and 20x zoom.

Wow.

And believe it or not, I was about order my DVX100A tomorrow. Have at least to wait and see how much the XL2 is. Looks neat.

Only wish it did HD.

Oh well.

[Josicleverson]

I was about order my DVX100A tomorrow. Have at least to wait and see how much the XL2 is.



I'm in the same situation!!!

[Zoomforce]

the XL2 isnt native 16:9.. its a full crop 16:9.

But. yes you should wait a few days till a true indy review of the camera.

[Mogambi]

True, not 'native' 16:9, but in practicality, it IS, right? I mean, it's got MORE pixels in 16:9, and the 4:3 is a subset of the used 16:9 area, so even though it's a 4:3 shapped sensor, the top and bottom are never used, so it's just the same as a 460k native 16:9!

In any case, it's a massive improvement over the DVX's sort of compromised 16:9, giving us maybe 920x480 as opposed to what, 720x320? That's a pretty big difference, even if it's not native.

[mc]

proof is in the footage.


as someone noted, (barry?) the actual pixels are smaller to fit on the same size chips, so smearing/image quality could be compromised.


kudos to canon for misleading everyone on this. full on blindside.

and probably the biggest online PR coup in two years.

[sunseril]

I have heard through the grapevine that Canon divided the market for these cameras into two basic genres: event videography (legal, weddings, security, etc.) and indie filmmaking. They're main goal, as far as I have been led to understand, was to take over the first market and make increased headway into the second by offering features like 16:9 (though not native), etc. They're main goal wasn't to lead the way in indie filmmaking, which was Panasonic's goal. From what I understand, the DVX will still be the more versatile and powerful filmmaking tool, however.

[David Jimerson]

I'd buy that.

[magicdavek]

proof is in the footage.


as someone noted, (barry?) the actual pixels are smaller to fit on the same size chips, so smearing/image quality could be compromised.


Ah, I didn't notice that. True, it is still a 1/3 in chip, isn't it? So that will be interesting to see. Even so, I can't imagine the pictures are going to be anything but very good to excellent.

[Antoine_Fabi]

a couple of hours shooting res charts and real life with both cams should reveal the truth...

Barry ?...

[MovieSwede]

Ah, I didn't notice that. True, it is still a 1/3 in chip, isn't it? So that will be interesting to see. Even so, I can't imagine the pictures are going to be anything but very good to excellent.

Well the thing is that its not using the entire surface of the native 4:3 ccd. So the XL2 has the same surface area as the DVX has when its crops to 16:9.

DVX with 16:9 adapter has a "theoretical" area that is bigger than 1/3

DVX in 4:3 has a 1/3 area

DVX in cropped 16:9 has a smaller area than 1/3

XL2 has an area that is smaller than 1/3 (same as DVX cropped)

[Barry_Green]

The problem with quoting numbers is that it may or may not have any relevance to the real world performance. So we do just have to wait. It'll probably be at least a month before anyone has one in their hands.

Until then, lots of good solid info on dvinfo.net's XL2 Watchdog site.

[Woodson]

Not sure if this link was posted... but anyway here is a Canon XL2 and DVX Comparison.

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-XL2-and-Panasonic-AG-DVX100-compared.htm

Honestly I agree with what this person had said "Nobody can do a legitimate comparison until someone knowledgeable (like Adam Wilt) gets one of the cameras in their hands and actually use it, test it, and report."

[ajalali]

Hi guys - too bad the old thread was killed.

Did anybody else comment on the DVX's 12-bit DSP vs. the Canon's 8-bit DSP? See the link below:

http://www.dvinfo.net/canonxl2/articles/article06.php

I think this means that "theoretically" the DVX should have better color rendition, right?

[Zoomforce]

Thats a good comparison.. but your right, This thing needs to be tested, and we will know for sure. I am about 90% sure though that the images are going to look very good.

[Rich Lee]

the only problem that is see right now is that the image being projected is smaller, so the old lenses will be more telephoto, and since the image is smaller there is MORE depth of field, and we all know how much we fight that damn depth of field thing. anyway, looks like it should be a bitchin cam, i'll check it out when it gets in town.

[shuiproductions]

josicleverson,
where are you in Brasil rapaz?

planning to shoot there in mid Sep.

We will need a solid sound recordist...

um abraco
Michael Ramsey

marloshui@hotmail.com

[nullphonic]

Another link...

http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelFeaturesAct&fcategoryid=114&mo delid=10350#top

[Michael_Bott]

Sorry to bang on about this (well, I did in the deleted thread), but unless the Canon chip turns out to have serious problems (how likely is that?) the choice between the DVX and the XL2 should not be governed by picture quality - we'll tie oursleves in knots arguing over subjective issues. I own both an XL1s and my new DVX and it is clear to me that the DVX and XL concepts are designed to be SUCH DIFFERENT TOOLS despite folk pointing to the similarities.

It's simple now: if you're in the market to buy, and you can see that your work demands that you pull in the long shots from time to time - nature/candid for documentary or you want an authoritative bit of kit that screams PRO (to the general public, at least) - order your XL2 now.

If you want a camera that is equally at home in the studio and the formal shoot as it is out on the streets - goes anywhere and allows you to get those shots without drawing a crowd, stick with or be happy ordering a DVX.

These two cameras are probably the best that prosumer SD cameras are ever going to get - next time around we WILL be agonising about the image because next time we will get HDV.

[JanBee]

Right now I could not see anything that would make the XL2 better than the DVX; with an XL2 pro of having the ability to change the lens (what for?) and the XL2 con of having virtually NO wide angle range AT ALL.

'K, we'll have to wait for actual footage.

[theos]

I still think the DVX dressed up in full armour, that is matte box to eye piece still looks bitchn and closer to a pro setup. The xl1 xl2 design looks cool but rather like a limb that has fallen of Bjork in her white robot video

http://www.desktopcreations.com.mt/dvx/bjork01.jpg

SPOT THE XL2 :P

[TC]

Unless you use the Matteblox. In which case your DVX kinda looks like a nun. (That joke was made at my expence earlier today)

[taubkin]

I'm in the same situation!!!

Hey Josicleverson, I'm in São Paulo, and just bought mine. I will have it by the weekend and can post you my impressions then. I bought it because I needed to shoot a doc this month, knowing that the XL2 was nearby. If you can wait, by all means do. All the speculation saying this cam will be a piece of shit doesn't take into the account that it's a XL2! Well have anybody here seen a XL1? The camera rocked when it was launched, and there is a good chance it's newer brother is still going to rock today! But for 1000 bucks less, I feel truly relieved to have gone with the DVX... The only think I would wait for is to see if we have a drop in price of the DVX until the end of the year... Ayway, there is a lot of information missing, like reviews, street price, etc... So I would at least wait for those...

[Josicleverson]

I will wait a few weeks...
Just trying not to spend all the money in girls 'n' beer!!!
You know what I mean... Dinheiro na mão coça!!!
;D ;D ;D

[Josh_Boelter]

I wasn't going to buy a camera before mid-August anyway (maybe later), so this is good news for me. I can wait for the comparisons, hopefully see some good tests by independent reveiwers, and then make my decision.

[taubkin]

I will wait a few weeks...
Just trying not to spend all the money in girls 'n' beer!!!
You know what I mean... Dinheiro na mão coça!!!
;D *;D *;D

Yeah, but imagine how many girls you are going to get when you are in the middle of the street, shooting with your new panny or canon later this year. Well, now that I think about it, it's better not to think about that at all... Someone want to buy a DVX? ;D

And about what you said... "Podicrê!" I live a lot more economically when my bank account is negative (just like right now...) :( Just find a Hobby! ;D

[okoku]

Well, I am pretty much sure that Sony will join the game sooner or later...

[theos]

Hey guys did you see the camera I pasted into the pic or not! It took me 20 mins to doctor! Something mention of it man! or did you just fly by the bjork pic to quick to notice? :D :D

[Neil Rowe]

i just did! ;D hilarious! .. i do like bjork though.. shes my favorite musical artist. is that video in collaboration with the film " I- robot " ?

[Mogambi]

"Right now I could not see anything that would make the XL2 better than the DVX; with an XL2 pro of having the ability to change the lens (what for?) and the XL2 con of having virtually NO wide angle range AT ALL."

20x Zoom. Shoulder Mount. 4 Channel Audio. Better optical image stabilization. True 16:9 (whether 'native' or not, it's significantly higher res). Ability to use about 100 different lenses. Viewfinder that's correctly off to the side, to facilitate shoulder mount shooting. Did I mention 20x zoom?

For me, those are all very good reasons.

[Michael_Bott]

UK dealer Optex have a grab and a clip here http://www.xl1s.com/photos4.php

[Barry_S]

Hey guys did you see the camera I pasted into the pic or not! It took me 20 mins to doctor! Something mention of it man! or did you just fly by the bjork pic to quick to notice? *:D :D

Matthew--That was great PS work--it looks seamless. IAL--another big Bjork fan here too. Her music videos by Gondry et al are consistently amazing too.

[sunseril]

Beautiful job, Matthew ;)

[Bsmith]

so is the XL2 available to purchase now? Or was it just annnouced as a product someday?

[magicdavek]

20x Zoom. Shoulder Mount. 4 Channel Audio. Better optical image stabilization. True 16:9 (whether 'native' or not, it's significantly higher res). Ability to use about 100 different lenses. Viewfinder that's correctly off to the side, to facilitate shoulder mount shooting. Did I mention 20x zoom?

For me, those are all very good reasons.

And if those reasons justify the extra $1000-$1500 USD, then the choice is clear. For me, the DVX was probably too much for me to spend in the first place (but I did). No way could I justify $5000 when I get what I wanted for $3400. It all boils down to what one wants/needs relative to what one can afford. Both cameras have their place in that regard.

[Zoomforce]

The biggest problem for me is the lack of Focus marks and Zoom marks on the lens or the display. I just cant do that as matching frames and etc becomes a lucky guess... that is the big problem I have with the PD150 as well. I dont really understand how anyone works without the marks, maybe I am just old school.

[Antoine_Fabi]

no you're not old school.

I sold my two PD150 for that, and did not buy the XL1s for the same reason...unless i am old school too :-/

...and the image quality of the DVX100A was just...so much better, the difference was not subtle at all.

but we'll have to see...maybe it is better than we think.

I can't wait to see real life grabs in real life high contrast environment,
color repro (8 bits) ergonomy etc...etc...

[xander76]

Actually, one of the things that excites me the most about the XL2 (after 16:9) is programmable focus pulls and zooms, but no one seems to have commented on it here. From Canon's website:

-Zoom preset position
This function allows memorization of a zoom point, so that the lens can return to that framing by a push of the button. The speed of the zoom can easily be controlled.

-Focus preset position
This function allows memorization of a focus point, so that the lens can return to that focus by a push of the button. A 'pull focus' can easily be accomplished. The speed of the focus can easily be controlled.

I have no idea if there are multiple programmable focus points (i.e. if you can rack focus from subject A to subject B and then back again) or really how easily the speed can be controlled, but this is something I've desperately wanted on a miniDV camera. Being able to rack focus in between subjects or follow focus as the camera dollies are two huge problems with most DV cameras.

As many folks have said, though, we obviously will only know how good the feature is once we test it.

[pedro_emauz]

Hi all,
glad to be on this community :)
To answer Josicleverson's post, I think you should see if the DVX fits your current camera needs. Do you need a camera tomorrow or can you wait? if you can wait, do whatever tests you need to do and then decide.
There will allways be another new toy and electronic devices are changing every 6 months. A few months ago the DVX100A was born, then Sony presented the PD170, now Canon is coming into play with the XL2, and then by the end of the year the new HDV cameras will start to hit the stores, so you see, if one is not certain about the buy, it´s best to compare cameras and then decide.
I for instance bought my DVX100A two weeks ago, after extensive comparison tests with the PD170, and opted for the DVX100a because:
1- its more ergonomic, more centrally balanced
2 - has already a wide angle zoom, and a better designed lens, better image quality in progressive despite having less 50 lines of res compared to PD170 (PAL versions)
3- Camera controls are better located on the body, their design is friendlier for operators used to professional cameras - WB memoriess and Gain button, for instance, are designed the same as pro cameras(I do not understand why sony put the iris control next to the LCD ???)
4- DVX has progressive scan, PD hasnt - that is a big difference, imagewise.
5- DVX has extensive image control menus, wich i feel is great.
6- DVX permits full manual operation instantly, while with PD170 you have to remenber to shut all automatic parameters off because it will continue to run on auto if you forget to turn any parameter's auto function off. Let´s face it, the PD is design to perform its best at full auto, and I hate that.
7- All in all, I think the DVX is a better camera, and for me there is no fundamental difference between MiniDV and MiniDVCAM formats other than tape speed and audio recording.

[Zoomforce]

the programable zooms and focus are nice... but there is nothing to indicate where you actually are at.

[Contact_Therapy]

UK dealer Optex have a grab and a clip here http://www.xl1s.com/photos4.php

There's something eery about that clown. I don't truss it!

I wish they would have shot that clip outside instead of against that monotone backdrop.

[Edalgo_Alvarez]

Heh, I found myself staring at the clown for quite some time :). Hey on a side note, anybody have any good links regarding the XL2? My rental facility takes requests for equipment so I thought I might as well see if I can get them to buy an XL2. I'll need to send them an email with a link so they can learn more about it. Thanks!

Edalgo

[Antoine_Fabi]

if the grab is authentic, and if it is the best it has to offer, the DVX100A is still, and by far, the best cam.

look at the edging effects on the vertical lines...

maybe the detail setting has been "pumped up" to the limit...

You can easyly achieve that sharpeness level with the DVX100A, but WITHOUT that visible and annoying edge enhancement.

but again, the grab may have been taken with "right of the box" setting...

[Zoomforce]

wholly crap that clown scares the hell out of me.. I think hes still watching me.

[Rich Lee]

that clowns got some serious issues.

[Josicleverson]

Thanx for your quote Pedro...
I will wait a few weeks... To read some reviews 'bout both cameras...
I don't need this camera "for yesterday"... If I'm going to spend all my savings, it's better to be absolutely sure about that!!!
Probably I'll buy the DVX... Almost 2k cheaper... And awsome resolution...
But... Let's wait!!!

By the way... Felipão não trouxe o caneco da Euro... Acontece ::)

[Guest]

The clown frame grab was in 50i, and spooky nonetheless.

[Michael_Bott]

Those pics remind me of a silly joke:

1st guy: "My mother made me a homosexual".

2nd guy "If I give her the wool, will she knit me one too?"

Sorry. ::)

[David Jimerson]

Creepy, but not like the Poltergeist clown.

[tuface]

:o

[Isaac_Brody]

no more resurrections or exorcisms please...

[hvpz]

it seems to be a game for tuface (btw, i like your avatar)...

He did the same thing with the "XL2 vs DVX100a Price vs Quality" thread...

Disjecta started a thread some weeks ago to complain about guys taking their delorean to come back in dead threads.