DVX100 or SONY 1080i HDR-FX1

[Guest]

:-/

I plan to shoot a short film very soon and plan to purchase either
DVX100 or coming-soon SONY 1080i HDR-FX1, and I'm not sure which one to get. Please give me great help without using difficult technical words, as I'm not a cinematographer.

I want to shoot a film and send out the film to festivals.

Any detailed, non-detailed info is wanted.

I understand that the good thing about DVX100 is that it shoots at 24 f/sec and comes out really like a 16mm film. Is it true that Sony shoots at HD but not at 24 f/sec? Which one will look better on the big screen?

thanks

[Guest]

Forgot to mention...

Is Panasonic going to introduce a HD camcorder for about $3000-
that shoots at 24 f/se?

[scharky]

The HDV sony will probably look sharper on the big screen, but that doesn't mean that it will look better. Truthfully it is hard to say right now, becasue there is a complete lack of footage available for that camera. I think I have seen a 30sec clip and some screen grabs but nothing to right home about. The color rendering on the DVX is absolutly fabulous, and is hard to be matched. However, with newer cameras on the horizon it is really hard to say. The Hdr-FX1 could be the best camera ever, highly doubtful, but possible. The HDr-FX1 is also the consumer model, there will be a pro model released next year. IT does not have true 24p but rather a simulation that I am quite skeptical of, as far as motion rendering. So there you have, a completely definitive answer of, I HAVE NO IDEA. :D

[Scottdvx100]

If you're going to be buying a camera and making a film then you're going to have to deal with some technical words and learn some cinematography. Otherwise just shoot videos with a video camera from your local store.

[Barry_Green]

There's no way to know yet if the Sony will look better on the big screen. *It'll be higher-resolution, yes, but we don't know about color, frame rate conversion, artifacting, etc. until we see the footage. Given that it's a 3CCD camera, at high resolution, the guess is that it probably will look better, but until it's tested, we can't know for sure.

Regarding Panasonic and an affordable HD: who knows? *The only thing I would say is that I would be stunned if any Panasonic entrant DIDN'T have 24P. *They sure seem to be in touch with what the consumer wants, so I would strongly suspect that if they were to introduce a new consumer HD cam, they'd offer 24P.

[theos]

what sort of image aquisition are you after? ask yourself the right questions . . . ;D

[Guest]

Thanks, all, for the great comments/thoughts.

Okay, I'm learning more technical aspect of film/video making...
But still a very beginner... and my English is not my first language.
So please bear with me....

Is it correct that...

1) SONY 1080i HDR-FX1 (FX1) will probably look better on an HD TV's.
2) FX1 will look better on a computer screen (i.e. posted the film online)
3) FX1 will look better on an HD theatre . (Big screen that shows digitally)
4) The issue is when the footage shot by either camera is transferred to film. Then, we do not know which will look better. FX1 will probably look sharper, but color and etc., we do not yet because we don't have enough footage available to compare.

5) FX1 will use miniDV but records in HD mode.

6) when we transfer the footage shot by FX1 in HD mode to the miniDV standard mode, then, would it look better than the footage shot at standard mode by DXV100??? (????)

7) Is editing very different between those?

8) Does it use more memories on the computer during editing if shot on HD? (This may be an obvious qusetion.)


Thanks,

[BigMucho]

I saw the prototype unit at NAB last year, and it is impressive. The image quality was just what you'd expect for 1080i, it was like looking through a window.

But...

There's something about ultra high-rez 60i footage that still looks very "Live-at-5", or like something like you'd see broadcast from your local news channel. Is the FX1 sharp? Yes. Does it look cinematic? No.

I just shot some stedicam footage at a concert Sat night with my DVX, after the show many people who were walking by the sound booth where we were checking the footage, mentioned how good the footage looked, how almost "old-school" it looked... like a vintage live concert shot on 16 or 35.

The DVX still produces a better cinematic look than anything else out there, even the new XL2.

Another thing to consider is tha FX1 has no progressive shooting modes, and to fit a 1080i image into a 25mps stream on a Mini DV tape means there is _allot_ of compression happening. This also means long-GOP encoding which is always difficult to edit... like working with a native MPG2 video stream on your NLE time line.

So, in a nutshell, I'm still quite satisfied with my investment in a DVX, and I don't expect to be getting "camera-envy" anytime real soon.

Ethan

[Ranger]

Is it correct that...

1) SONY 1080i HDR-FX1 (FX1) will probably look better on an HD TV's.

2) FX1 will look better on a computer screen (i.e. posted the film online)

3) FX1 will look better on an HD theatre . (Big screen that shows digitally)

4) The issue is when the footage shot by either camera is transferred to film. Then, we do not know which will look better. FX1 will probably look sharper, but color and etc., we do not yet because we don't have enough footage available to compare.

5) FX1 will use miniDV but records in HD mode.

6) when we transfer the footage shot by FX1 in HD mode to the miniDV standard mode, then, would it look better than the footage shot at standard mode by DXV100??? * (????)

7) Is editing very different between those?

8 ) Does it use more memories on the computer during editing if shot on HD? *(This may be an obvious qusetion.)
1) Theoretically yes, but we will not know for sure for at least a few more weeks when it’s released in mid-October.

2) Probably.

3) Probably.

4) Initial tests with other high-end HD cameras are showing that the FX1 holds up well in accurate color rendition.
http://www.creativecow.net/forum/read_post.php?postid=109678551560528&forumid=162

5) Yes.

6) Again, an HD image will probably look better transferred to SD than if the footage was originally recorded in SD.

7) Don’t know, but probably not. *However, it depends on what you mean by different. *The difference will mainly be in hardware requirements. *Anything below a 3 gig processor and 2 gigs of RAM will have a difficult time handling HD. *It can be done, but with HDV, you are pushing a significant amount of information into immature technology. *Additionally, hard drive space will be at a premium (meaning a person cannot have enough hard drive space available).

8 ) See above question.

At this point, the best thing you can do is wait. *The camera is due to be released in Japan in less than two weeks and later in November for everyone else. *Allow some time for the early adopters and experts to play around with the footage to see how it handles, especially in regards to the conversion to 24p and the cinematic look and feel of film.

My only other suggestion is let your eyes be the judge into the cameras film-like qualities. *The DVXuser board is filled with extremely knowledgeable and helpful people, but far too many of them have grown accustomed to the "look" of the DVX to be completely objective. * If the previous experience with the XL2 was any indicator, then undoubtably the FX1 will also go through the same gauntlet of naysayers from the "it still looks like video" crowd regardless of how great the picture looks on the screen. *You'll also see words like "mojo" being used periodically to describe the DVX. *There's nothing wrong with that. *This is a DVX forum, so naturally it only makes sense that people espouse such opinions. *However, after all is said and done, it's still video. *Only difference is that some cameras just do a better job of creating the illusion of film. *DVX is one of those cameras.

And as Forrest Gump used to say, "And that's all I got to say about that."

[Jestorius]

24p or cinematic look isn't a target for Sony. Broadcasters and videographers working for tv-stations are the target. HDV FX1 with its nativ 16:9 and high resolution can be a god start.

But nothing is a film before it is on celluloid. And in the process there is an 2k DaVinci or your Magic something doing the filmlook.

[eat@me]

:-/

I plan to shoot a short film very soon and plan to purchase either
DVX100 or coming-soon SONY 1080i HDR-FX1, and I'm not sure which one to get. Please give me great help without using difficult technical words, as I'm not a cinematographer.

I want to shoot a film and send out the film to festivals.

Any detailed, non-detailed info is wanted.

I understand that the good thing about DVX100 is that it shoots at 24 f/sec and comes out really like a 16mm film. Is it true that Sony shoots at HD but not at 24 f/sec? Which one will look better on the big screen?

thanks



who needs film?

[scharky]

24p or cinematic look isn't a target for Sony. Broadcasters and videographers working for tv-stations are the target. HDV FX1 with its nativ 16:9 and high resolution can be a god start.


I don't think this is even the target for this camera, as it has been branded (CONSUMER) all over it, by sony. No XLR's will play a big part in this. Now it's bigger brother, the (PRO) version, I can definatly see being used for this. I see the HDV FX1 being used for two things. 1, very sharp birthday parties! YAY. 2, very sharp, video looking, low budget, no script or storyboard, spur of the moment, home-made short films. YAY YAY.

[darkstyle8]

I just got a dvx last week. I fell in love............My girlfriend is jealous

[Barry_Green]

Lack of XLR's is an EXTREMELY IRRITATING, intentional hampering of the camera, something Sony obviously did on purpose, and quite annoying...

... but that doesn't mean broadcasters won't buy it. Broadcasters bought lots of VX1000's, and the BBC bought lots of VX2000's as well.

[deronbauman]

But if you bought a beachtek xlr adapter you'd have pro sound, right?

[Barry_Green]

Not necessarily.

You'd have the ability to connect pro audio equipment, but what are you connecting it to? A beachtek box, first of all, which then outputs to a 1/8" unbalanced mini plug, which then plugs into a 1/8" unbalanced mini socket, and what will it find in there? Quality pre-amps? Quality audio circuitry?

Just because you can connect pro hardware doesn't mean you have a pro solution. You can pour jet fuel into a Volkswagen Beetle's gas tank, but it won't make a lick of difference in its performance.

It's possible the Sony has superb audio circuitry and only needs a connector adapter. Or it's possible that the audio is quite substandard (as has been Sony's history) and just plugging in pro audio accessories won't really help that. We'll see soon.

[Guest]

The Sony will be the next big porn cam, even if I have to pioneer it. Just watch! ;D

[Ranger]

The Sony will be the next big porn cam, even if I have to pioneer it. Just *watch! ;D
Hee Hee. How true.

Jenna in HD. :o

[Flintstone]

The Sony will be the next big porn cam, even if I have to pioneer it. Just *watch! ;D
LOL!!!

Yep, you're probably right. ;D