XL H1 'closes' the new market

[theHeadlessPuppy]

One thing that no-one seems to notice is the radical change in the market configuration.

On DV you had 4 leading manufacturers offering 7 different cameras. These could be labeled as 'low-end' and 'high-end' prosumer cameras. So at the bottom were GL2, VX2100, DVC30 and at the top the PD170, DVX100, XL2 and DV300.

Now it's all a different story... with Canon's new cam out in the open we have 2 choices: the cheaper 'all-in-one' options from Sony and JVC (Z1 and HD100) and the expensive 'we-can-do-pretty-much-anything' XLH1 and HVX100. The first are cheaper and most likely will be used with few add-ons most of the time, but the latter two will be prone for massive upgrades. Not that you have to, but you know you'll want to (after you splash 8-9K on just the camera).

I personally prefer the new market configuration and don't understand the constant arguing about which cam's the best or even the best option... The market has changed, and the battle between chosing between 4 different cameras within the same price range is over. It's not like anyone will go 'should I spend $3.5k on the Sony or $9k on the Canon. It's almost a 3x price difference... Even between Sony and JVC we're talking about nearly $2k here.

It's just a completely new scenario.

[roxics]

And its too bad that market is over. Because some of use just can't afford 9K. Yet aren't getting what we want out of the $5k stuff so we won't buy that either.

I guess it's really not all that much of a problem. I really can't afford to go HD just yet anyway. I'd need to buy an HD TV and build up my computer, add more hard drives to the four I already have. I should just invest in a used DVX100 at $2k and a Micro35. Plus things like better lights, field recorder, jib and dolly. Things that will make a bigger difference then the camera itself.

But my next film will be shot with a good old XL1. Just like my last feature. Because it's there, trustworthy and we know how to use it. And we can't afford to use anything else right now.

I think when it comes to extremely low budget indie filmmakers liek myself, we are just lookign for that ultiamte 16mm/35mm replacement. We put all this time and effort into our films and yet it all gets captured to such low resolution we can't even print out a decent sized still photo frame from our film.

But it's still better then nothing.

When I sat in the back of the sold out theater watching the premiere of my first feature film I realized no one cared about the type of camera we used. It all came down to the acting and the story and the scenary. Only I cared about the picture so much (and will continue to do so).

[safarijoe]

And its too bad that market is over. Because some of use just can't afford 9K. Yet aren't getting what we want out of the $5k stuff so we won't buy that either.

I guess it's really not all that much of a problem. I really can't afford to go HD just yet anyway. I'd need to buy an HD TV and build up my computer, add more hard drives to the four I already have. I should just invest in a used DVX100 at $2k and a Micro35. Plus things like better lights, field recorder, jib and dolly. Things that will make a bigger difference then the camera itself.

But my next film will be shot with a good old XL1. Just like my last feature. Because it's there, trustworthy and we know how to use it. And we can't afford to use anything else right now.

I think when it comes to extremely low budget indie filmmakers liek myself, we are just lookign for that ultiamte 16mm/35mm replacement. We put all this time and effort into our films and yet it all gets captured to such low resolution we can't even print out a decent sized still photo frame from our film.

But it's still better then nothing.

When I sat in the back of the sold out theater watching the premiere of my first feature film I realized no one cared about the type of camera we used. It all came down to the acting and the story and the scenary. Only I cared about the picture so much (and will continue to do so).:smiley_up :laugh:
Ditto. Maybe in a few years after the ungrades have come out.:evil:

[stephenlnoe]

Now it's all a different story... with Canon's new cam out in the open we have 2 choices: the cheaper 'all-in-one' options from Sony and JVC (Z1 and HD100) and the expensive 'we-can-do-pretty-much-anything' XLH1 and HVX100.

I think you meant "all-in-one" options of HVX and Z1 or 'we-can-do-pretty-much-anything' XLH1 and HD-100.

The Z1 and HVX are handycams.

The HD-100 and H1 are eng style.

I do understand your meaning though.

[Nathyn]

I understand both. It may be a while before I invest in HDV and if I do it sooner than later I'd want something that could shoot DV until I upgrade everything. With HDV the only thing I really see having to upgrade is your output monitor and small HD compatible monitors aren't that expensive but with HD that's whole different story, storage concerns and processing power becomes a question. Right now I just shot a spec trailer with the DVX100 and unless I get a big influx in cash it'll stay that way for awhile. But even then I'd want to know what these new cameras offer in terms of picture ect.

-Nate

[Spiff_2]

And its too bad that market is over. Because some of use just can't afford 9K

Yup... there's definitely a premium on HD right now. I own an FX1 and that's the absolute most I could justify for the expense of a camcorder. With time the price of the systems will trickle down - you can be sure of that... and so far Sony is the only person at the "bottom" end of the HDV market eith the HDR-HC1. Hopefully there will be $1k HDV camcorder soon to help brink down the prices.

People have to keep reminding themselves that the art is more important than the technology.

-Spiff

[theHeadlessPuppy]

Stephane... I suppose since the JVC has a detachable lens it's not that 'all-in-one' as I said, but I was kinda focusing more on the idea that if someone buys a Sony or JVC they'll use it 'as is', while with the Panny you can't even record in HD if you only buy the camera!

As to Sony being the only one on the 'budget HD', don't forget the HD1. Granted, it's not the best thing ever but I own one... :)

JVC HD1/HD10, Sony HC1/A1 = Poor man's HD. If you really want it, well, you can have it.
FX1/Z1 - Weddings, documentaries, ENG, you name it and you can do it, but not the best option for film.
HD100U - You can make the new Star Wars with it. Well, almost.
HVX - No HDV means it's unkown territory but will that really matter with so many features available? Great option for those who can afford it.
XLH1 - If you want better than this than you'll have to go pro. Actually if you want to work it at full strength, you'll have to have a pro's budget...

[MattC]

The HVX is not unknown territory at all, at least as I understand it. It shoots DVCProHD - that is very established territory. Even the use of P2 is now established, no? Don't get me wrong, I love Canon, for a variety of reasons, but for a narrative feature on a low budget? HVX is looking pretty good.

The caveat of course is if Canon knows something we don't. If, for example, firestore released a capture device that took SDI and put it through the DVCProHD codec and then wrote the data to disk (eliminating the need for a very costly deck) then the Canon might be much more interesting to me (actually it already is interesting but only because I'm doing some weird stuff which requires almost telescopic lenses). But again, for a narrative short or feature? I'm diggin the HVX, just don't know how I'll feel about it's lens, we'll have to see.

[theHeadlessPuppy]

Most people haven't dealt with DVCProHD, but my main point was the storage type. HDV is tape, and all of us are used to tape. Buy 20 tapes online and you're set for your new short, wedding and whatever else you want to shoot. With the HVX the process is entirely different. I'm sure it end up being feasible, it has to, but it's new territory.

As to the XLH1, why not buy it for a short or feature when you suggest getting the HVX? Aren't they almost the same cost after you add the P2 card or firestore to the HVX?

IMO a lot of people are going to struggle to get the HVX/XLH1... too expensive to make $2k-$8k short/feature films.

[MattC]

Well, for starters, the capture device I would want for the Canon does not exist yet... The HVX has DVCProHD built in. I love Canon's products, don't get me wrong. I like having a modular system, and I like the feel of my XL2 much better than that of the DVX. However, even with that said, The XLH1 or whatever it's called will cost significantly more when you include a usable capture device. You then have to ask if it's worth it. I'm looking at doing a doc which would essentially require me to perform surveillance and include some footage filmed from a great distance. If this is the case (as with other stuff I've done) then the Canon is really the only choice for me. But this isn't the case for a short or a narrative. I'm confident that I could film a short film with the fixed lens of the HVX and a wide angle adapter. Of course, if I were shooting a "feature" I'd want to rent a P+S Mini35 (or one of the new alternatives) and a set of primes. If I were to do that, I would again like to go with the Canon if possible, to eliminate a certain amount of glass. We'll have to see how the glass is on the HVX, but even if it's very good, I'd still rather go through a simple, high-quality relay lens then the HVX lens (but I don't think I'd sweat it). Then there is resolution. It looks like the Canon my be a bit ahead on that, but if this 24"F" thing is B.S. then none of the rest matters and the HVX would be, as far as I'm concerned the only real contender.

At the end of the day we don't know, we can only guess. Based on what we know of the DVX and other Panny technology, we can make some pretty accurate guesses (I think) regarding the HVX. If I'm right about my guessing, it won't be a camera that I'm THRILLED with, but it will be more than capable, and I could certainly get used to using a handycam and I know it would deliver a fine picture. The Canon is a big unknown. I don't know what 24F is, I don't know if or when they'll come out with a good manual lens for it (a must in my book), I don't know if or when there'll be a decent capture storage solution for it......

So, based on what we know, If I had to advise someone making a narrative film on which camera to pre-order, based on current knowledge - I'd say the HVX. If it was someone shooting a wildlife documentary in Central Africa, I would tell them to wait and test out the Canon.

Just because you don't use a tack hammer to frame a house, doesn't mean the tack hammer is no good and without purpose.

[stephenlnoe]

As to Sony being the only one on the 'budget HD', don't forget the HD1. Granted, it's not the best thing ever but I own one... :)


Now have you been editing the HD1 footage? Sounds like you're already set for HDV's workflow. Fact is that when I edit an HD(V) project and get used to it's resolution and then follow it by a DV25 project edit I think, "DV25 is crap!".

You probably have that same reaction when you edit your HD1 and then try DV25. It's that much better. Even lower cost HD cameras have a wow factor. Once you learn the given camera's capabilities then you can get creative!

I'll be personally seeing what's what at Resfest here in Chicago. I've handled the HD-100 and it is a fine camera. What's unique about it is the firmware upgradeability. I've never seen that on a camera. JVC literally plans on allowing downloads of special gamma curves and film effect from their web site. And modifications can be updated through the SD card when they become available from JVC. That's nice.

I like them all....

[mezelf27]

Yup... there's definitely a premium on HD right now. I own an FX1 and that's the absolute most I could justify for the expense of a camcorder. With time the price of the systems will trickle down - you can be sure of that...

The JVC is the only one that'll stay expensive due to the interchangable lens and the market it's marketed in. You should wait on some other solutions (the small sony or the small JVC HD10?)

[theHeadlessPuppy]

Well Matt, if the 24F is BS than the XLH1 will be the biggest fiasco ever. From what I read in Chris Hurd's article it seems 24F is just semantics for 'Progressive image captured and stored as interlaced', so the camera still uses 2 fields but since they are synchronized at 24hz you get them aligned temporarily (not temporary!). So it's 24P, but they just didn't want to get into trouble with tech geeks like us that would go 'but the sensor is not progressive, blah blah'. If what I just said turns out to be uncorrect then $9k is crazy for a camera like that.

Stephane, yes I edit HD footage occasionally and it's hard to go back to the GL2 sometimes. However I have to be much more careful when shooting with the HD1/HD10 since it's so easy to overexpose. I'm in San Diego until the end of the week and have been shooting some stuff around here, so will do some editing and post a little video later next week.

I think who hasn't tried HD yet doesn't fully understand the difference - you just get used to the better resolution.