FX1 vs VX2100 shootout!

[alpi69]

http://www.supervideo.com/shtoutsvFXVX.htm

this FX1 is HUGE compared to the 2100....;-)

this is NOT my link, but from a guy i met on a SpeedRazor forum. i will tell him that there is a discussion about it here, so he can maybe fill us in a bit more.

[Barry_Green]

The FX1 seems rather beefy, yes. It's quite light though. The VX2000 seems "dense", the FX1 is a bit "airy", so even though it's thick, it's not any heavier than a DVX.

[Antoine_Fabi]

...the difference in image quality (not only res) is simply amazing, really...

[BLUESPIDER]

I don't think that was a fair comparision. Its like comparing an ugly girl to a cute girl. A fair comparision should be the JVC HD1 ? model and the FX1.

[TimeKoder13]

I'm out the loop a bit, been trouble shooting my laptop the last month, but I like what I see. And this is the lower end of the two they're offering, with something else this Summer? I may find a new big brother for my starting to aile VX2K after all. Thought we we're gonna get a Panny something, probably still will. But it'll definitely be with the company's money, looks like I'm saving mine for a Sony.

[TotalX]

You know, when you blow up the lettering you can see the difference. But, really, are you going to be so fanatical to buy this camera for so little difference?

If the majority of consumers had HD monitors, HD-DVD players and etc., I could see buying this camera right now. Way too early.

[Ranger]

You know, when you blow up the lettering you can see the difference. But, really, are you going to be so fanatical to buy this camera for so little difference?
So little difference? :o

Maybe if you're Ray Charles. 8)
http://www.fredmiranda.com/hosting/data//500/30743Ray-Charles-DVX.jpg

However, for the rest of us that is currently in the market for a video camera, then YOU BET the FX1/Z1 is worth consideration!

[TotalX]

Sometime enthusiasm blinds reality. :-*

You should see for yourself - but, take off the sunglasses first.

[Barry_Green]

Depends on what you want. I believe Ranger has said that he doesn't need nor especially care for 24P -- if that's the case, the FX1 may be exactly what he's looking for. The high-def content, when viewed on a high-def monitor, is quite impressive. When downrezzed to DVD it doesn't hold up as well as DVX or XL2 footage, but for HD display it definitely has the market to itself right now.

If you want to make high-def film-looking video, like most DVXUser members do, then I'd say skip the FX1/Z1 and wait for JVC or Panasonic's response. If you want to make DVD's, the DVX is here today, costs less, and does a better job than the FX1. If you want to make high-def interlaced video, the FX1 delivers an amazing picture for such a reasonable price.

[Guest]

Barry did you actually take Z1 or Fx1 footage and downrez it to a dvd? And it had artifacts?

That's not good. Must be that finally dvd compression that "overcompressed" the data. Bummer.

[Barry_Green]

I'm viewing all three cameras side-by-side, same footage on a DVD. It's not so much artifacts as that the FX1's footage is just softer and muddier -- the lack of latitude, the overall downsampling issue, etc... it just makes for footage that looks worse than the other cameras. For DVD viewing, the XL2 and the DVX just look better than the FX1 does.

[Ranger]

Sometime enthusiasm blinds reality. :-*

I agree wholeheartedly, but which side of the looking glass you are on?

For the record, I have said on several occasions that the DVX is a good camera for film makers (where achieving a particular cinematic look is paramount). *Likewise, I have also been very critical of Sony for what seemingly appears as their intentional omission of 24p. *I also feel that they have done an atrocious job in disseminating product information (e.g. Cineframe details and recently the significant Z1 price change). *Additionally, HDV has some painful teething to go through before it starts to mature. *However, all that being said, for the price the FX1/Z1 seems to be a great deal for us non-24p types.

Time will tell.

[Ranger]

I'm viewing all three cameras side-by-side, same footage on a DVD. *It's not so much artifacts as that the FX1's footage is just softer and muddier -- the lack of latitude, the overall downsampling issue, etc... it just makes for footage that looks worse than the other cameras. *For DVD viewing, the XL2 and the DVX just look better than the FX1 does.
Interesting. *I would not have expected downrezzing HDV footage to show such underwhelming results. *Looking forward to seeing the findings of the shootout.

[Kenn_Christenson]

I just downloaded some FX1E footage, conformed it to 24p in Apple's Cinema Tools, and exported it from After Effects w/3:2 pulldown.

The picture is super sharp, so sharp in fact that if I were going to use it in a production, I'd have to soften it to get rid of the line twitter in the fine details.

[TotalX]

I wouldn't mind seeing examples form users who have both cameras.

I talked to a Panasonic rep and it seems that by NAB 2005, they will have a plan for an HDV version later that year - whatever that means. ::)