Indie Filmmaker needs help on what to buy!

[BigWilly1231]

So I hve been back and forth back and forth for the last week on what to buy, DVX100A or the XL2, well before you say well we cant make a decision because the XL2 is not out yet, let me just say I know...What the point of this post is, is for the money is the DVX the way to go, as I said I am very indie and I need to get a camera, The XL2 is more then likely going to be much more expensive, and without even seeing results do you think it will be worth it I mean, isnt it the way you shoot then what gear you have, I mean I thought it was always what you make out of what you have, but anyway lets hear some decent suggestions on what I should do, Wait to see results of the XL2 then ponder where Im getting the extra money or pick up a DVX100A and dive right in....

[David Jimerson]

Aren't you just asking the same question again? This has been discussed at length . . .

You sound like you really really really really want a camera now. If so, then the DVX is a tested and proven machine is available now.

But if you really do want to know which cam is better (even taking price difference into consideration), you're going to have to wait to find out.

[BigWilly1231]

Yeah I do keep asking the same question because Im sure I am just like you were before you bought your DVX I mean I am leaning towards the DVX because of the money but I was just trying to get everyones opinion, I mean Im pulling my hair out here and I just want some one to reasure me that if I buy the DVX now, today that I wont be sorry 2 months from now, from either Panasonic or Canon....

[David Jimerson]

That's the risk you always take with incomplete information. If you're that worried about it, then you need to wait.

[BigWilly1231]

Yeah your right, I guess I can just hold off production, Now the real question any word on when the XL2's will be hitting stores, or even hitting reviewers...

[Ranger]

BigWilly,

You're getting lazy. Do your homework bra. It seems like you are desperately searching for some justification to give you the green light before dropping the hammer to buy the DVX.

Look, you have to ask yourself several questions:
1) What's your threshold point in what you are willing to spend?
2) What features are you looking for in a camera?
3) Is the added features worth the additional cost?

For the sake of this discussion, lets assume the XL2 is everything they promised it would be and then some, and it was also currently available on the market today - would you still get the DVX?

Try to show some patience. The Canon is about 2 to 4 weeks away from some reliable reviews. Soon after that the camera will be available for sale to the general public. Use this time at your disposal to make an informed decision versus throwing your money into an impulse buy.

[BigWilly1231]

Well I need 16x9 and 24p not to mention good quality.....So yeah the DVX has all of those things, well 16x9 only with an adapter, but so does the XL2 the real question is going to be quality and is the quality of the XL2 going to be that much better to justify the extra cost.....

[J.R. Hudson]

Quality of what?

Build? Image?

[BigWilly1231]

Image mainly because we know the build quality of the DVX is great....So at this point as I said Its going to be, do you think that the image quality is going to be that much better, to have to fork out all the extra money....Once again I thank you for all of your help...

[J.R. Hudson]

My first instinct is too say that the Xl2 will be of very comparable design and function. I am assuming in some areas it will be a step-up and in some areas a step don and in other areas very similar/same.

Waiting is the hardest part and I doubt one or the other is going to make or break your production.

[Barry_Green]

For raw 16:9 quality, it has the potential of being better than the DVX with the anamorphic adapter. For raw 4:3 quality, my guess (and it's only a guess) is that the DVX will hold a noticeable edge.

But by what degree of quality will it be better? And is that extra degree of quality worth the loss of manual zoom and manual focus with readouts? And is that loss offset by the longer zoom? And does that all add up to $1400 more value? And what value do you put on being a "beta-tester", picking up the first unit off the truck, vs. a camera that's basically nearly two years on the market?

Seems like you're going to have to wait, unless the $$$ question answers your question for you.

[stephenvv]

I'm currently considering the DX100a vs. XL2. I owned an XL1 which I sold a couple of years ago including all lenses etc. I owned a couple of DVX100's for about a month before a financial scam forced me to sell them.

While both are great cams (at least the XL2 looks so far), here's my take after reading extensively:

Bottom line is, unless you are heavily invested XL1 user, is native 16:9 & long telephoto worth several thousand dollars more?

The DVX costs $3500. The XL2 is $4900. Or body only at $3900. You need the 3X lens to get as wide as the DVX. Plus you need a second lens, either 16x manual or 20x OIS.

The glass on the XL2 looks nice, but the manual offers no OIS, yet the DVX offers OIS and smooth manual feel with focus display and has a manual focus adaptor (CO).

Certainly nature or event users that need huge telephoto ranges benefit with the XL2, but I'm dissapointed Canon does not make a more useful wide lens for the XL2. You still have to slap a WA on front of the 3X to get wider than 32mm (35mm equivalent), identical to the DVX.

Native 16:9 is very compelling - but the dollars are steep, too steep I think. And $800 gets you native via anamorphic on DVX, albeit with an adaptor on the lens and tricky operation.

The CCD block overall and few test shots look excellent. But the combo CCD/viewfinder is not exciting nor do I care for the shoulder mount, heavy design (I direct and DP).

But I think for "bang for the buck" the XL2 falls short. If either the price were lowered dramatically or the lens offerings were better for wide and normal focus lengths and/or it offered HDV or SDI output or some factor that would make a dramatic, not subtle difference in image quality, I'm don't see the value for new camera buyers, only for existing XL1/s users.

Kind of analogous to the Mac G5 - compelling upgrade for existing Mac users, but not much bang for the buck for most PC user to switch platforms.

I don't see the XL2 being a big threat to DVX100a at the current price levels unless the XL2 pulls some magic out of the DV format image quality that I don't think it technicially possible.

[gcaus]

I think this is the potential killer feature for me:

"Native 16:9 is very compelling - but the dollars are steep, too steep I think. And $800 gets you native via anamorphic on DVX, albeit with an adaptor on the lens and tricky operation. "

Native support without tricky operations is a big deal.
Interchangeable lenses pretty nice, too.

-Jerry

[Barry_Green]

Interchangeable lenses would be very nice... IF there were any lenses worth interchanging. This is one of my big gripes with Canon, all their lenses are limited somehow. You can't get it all. If you want true manual control, you have to go with the 16x manual lens, but then you give up image stabilization, and you lose any ability for autofocus. If you want image stabilization and autofocus, then you can go with the 20x, but then you forever lose real manual iris control, there's no real manual focus and no real manual zoom.

The DVX100A lens is a nearly perfect implementation on a prosumer camera. You have autofocus, power zoom, and OIS. You have true manual zoom, and you have precise manual focus control. Why isn't there an XL lens that lets you do all that?

Downright irritating.

However, for a dedicated mini35 camera, the XL2 may indeed be "the bomb". Now that the chips are high-enough res, and with full-res 16:9, and direct attachment with (hopefully) no back-focus issues, the XL2 might be the ultimate rig for the mini35.

If they'd give us an end-all-be-all lens option, the XL2 could be a serious contender for my next camera purchase. But not with the current offerings.

[stephenvv]

Barry:

You hit the nail on the head - if Canon had great glass offerings (like a manual lens 20-100mm or manual 20x with OIS), I would feel it's worth the extra bucks. That's what really surprised me - that the 20x lens had no pro features other than the focus presets. I have a Canon still with some nice 35mm glass, but the cost of the XL2 plus a mini35 is too steep for me.

Of course, once several people test the cam with native 16:9 and mini35, maybe the results we cause me to rethink.

But for right now I happy with my newly arrived DVX100a - other than the lack of native 16:9 (though the squeeze mode looks pretty good, even on full wide) it's a pretty good cam for me. Of course, I still have DV but then I again, I don't won't to pay for processing and HD telecine of 16mm/35mm ;)

[nullphonic]

However, for a dedicated mini35 camera, the XL2 may indeed be "the bomb". *Now that the chips are high-enough res, and with full-res 16:9, and direct attachment with (hopefully) no back-focus issues, the XL2 might be the ultimate rig for the mini35.

That's what I'm waiting for, there is apparently quite a bit of footage being shot now with the XL2/mini35 (PAL version). That'll push me one way or another on the XL2 ultimately. (Then I'll wait for the body-only package and go from there ;D)