Could someone point me in the right direction? HVX/Z1U

[Existentialist]

I need your help in choosing between two cameras. I've been reading info on them for the past few months, and I think it's best if I list here what exactly I need a camera for then the pros out there can give me some hint, because I really need it. So here's the deal.
I"m between the HVX200 and the Z1U. I have seen tons of footage from both of these cameras and they both seem to have pros and cons, so here's what I need it for, if you feel you kn ow the answer to this riddle, please pitch in:
First, I need a camera to make indie films, I need as close to the film look as possible BUT I don't intend to blow it up to 35mm. It will be just to have it on DVD and show it on a nice tv. But I do care for good sharp and quality images where people won't be as much saying: "hmmm...but is it film?" but rather "wow, great quality, I wonder what camera he used?" I hope that makes sense.
2. Shoulder mounts are out of question because I need something light to sort of whip around and such, so the JVC and XL's don't concern me.
3. I currently live in Hawaii but am moving permanently back home to Brazil where my wife and I intend on starting a video production, i.e., weddings, events, etc, so the ability to shoot well in low lit places is a must.
4. I personally prefer the final look of the HVX, from what I've seen, love that 24p look, but it just doesn't sink in with me the whole P2 thing, and spending a thousand bucks for a couple of minutes of HD shooting, so that's my number one turn off in that camera. Plus, I really wanted to shoot the weddings not having to worry about dumping footage into my hard drive every few minutes. Thus the Z1U has the edge in that aspect, unless I'm overlooking something and someone could point me in the right direction.
The mullah now. I'll be in the 5k range, but wouldn't mind spending the extra money on the HVX if I saw it was really worth it.
So, if you were in my shoes, and were given 6-7k to spend, what would you do?
Thanks !!! :D

[HVXguy]

Questions 1, 2, 4
HVX is the way to go.
People have been looking at footage that
I have made SD DVD of and they are
impressed with how much it does look like film.
Much depends on the post-processing but the
quality from 720p 24pn to DVD is very "salable".

The P2 issue is really overblown. It takes a few minutes to
dump footage. Unless you are doing talking heads....

Question 3 - Use the Sony for that kind of work or even a DVX.....
Do you need to deliver HD for a wedding or event?
The HVX will shoot DV tape as well but the other cameras are suited better for low light shooting....

[Existentialist]

hey hvxguy, you 'da man! the first two answers make a lot of sense.
As for using HD in a wedding, no I'm not in a "it's HD or die" state for that, Im sure shooting sd would be very acceptable, but it seems that clients are seeking hd professionals more and more having heard that it is state of the art for their event. So I want to have that option open. As far as low light cameras, so you're saying that the HVX and the Sony suck totally for low lit environments? And which other cameras were you refering to?

[HVXguy]

Hello,
Low light is always a problem with ANY video camera.
I know the DVX was OK for that. I know the HVX would not be OK for low light. You cannot go wrong with the HVX for most of your work. I just know that wedding videographers tend to the Sony HDV because of the long record times and the ability to gain up when need be. 60i footage for a wedding is fine but no so great for TV spots or programs that go to DVD. I guess most weddings would go to DVD!!! You could probably do with the lower end spectrum HDV cameras for weddings. See if you could try one out from a distributor before you buy??? I know many shooters who have both the HVX and an HDV camera. It's not really a buy a camera and use it for 5 years kinda world anymore.

[THE HONEST LIAR]

Hi Existentialist

Straight off the bat if you want a filmic look it's the HVX.
If you were doing TV documentary work I'd go for the Z1, with a heavy heart.
I to stood at the same crossroad for a long time Z1 or HVX until the HVX was finally out. The HVX just offers so many other features the Z1 doesn't.

Not only in terms of image quality but key for me was the sound option.

Kind regards
THE HONEST LIAR

[Existentialist]

thanx, that's how I like it, straight off the bat! how was your experience with the hvx for low lit places?

[evinsky]

thanx, that's how I like it, straight off the bat! how was your experience with the hvx for low lit places?

It's not that the HVX dosen't do well for low light it's just less sensitive than the DVX is. The DVX is about the equivelent of ISO 500. The HVX is 320. So you need 2/3 of a stop more light to get the same exposure. I find the HVX still looks great even with +3Db of gain. There will always be a baseline of noise in 1/3" video cameras, so it's a personal decision as to how much is acceptable. If the light gets bad I will usually go to +3db if that's not enough I go to a 1/24th (360º Shutter) if that's not enough I go to +6db. I usually won't go to +9 or +12 but then again I usually have control of my lighting.

Another very usefull tool is the light panel, stap one on your HVX and you always have enough subject light.

[richkuhr]

It would be great to see some low light footage with the HVX.

Does anyone know what the effective ASA rating is on the DVX-100B with the M2 adapter on it? I know that the HVX is rated at an ASA of 64 with the M2 adapter on it, which probably translates to a LOT of lights needed on set to get proper exposure.

Any thoughts on this?

[Barry_Green]

You can't rate the camera with the adapter by itself, because a lot depends on what the lens in front is rated at. If you mount an f/1.0 lens on there, it'll be three stops faster than if you have an f/2.8 lens mounted on the front...

[THE HONEST LIAR]

I can't answer for low light settings. I try as much as possible to use as much light as I can. This camera loves light (HVX).

Kind regards
THE HONEST LIAR

[DavidBeier]

If you are making narrative films then there is simply no debate. The HVX200 is the way to go blown up or not. Of the recent crop of under 10k HD cameras, I'd say the HVX200 produces the most filmic images and the Z1 the least filmic. I worked with a Z1 and what it produces is very sharp, clean video images (flat lighting, video colors, video gamma). It's great for shooting documentaries,, TV, and weddings. Not filmic images.

The P2 thing can be avoided with the Firestore 100 now availlible.

Honestly, HVX200 is an infinitly better choice for the film look. If you wanted to argue between the HVX200, the XLH1, and the HD100 then there might be some debate but this should be clear.

[Existentialist]

thanx for the reply. yeah, i'm probably going for the HVX, based all that I have read, the p2 was the only issue for me, but with the new firestore that's just the cherry on the top. Now reponding to what you said about the Z1 being excellent for weddings, I have seen loads of footage from the DVX100 of weddings and they flat out blew me away. Seems like Panny really has the edge after all....

[THE HONEST LIAR]

thanx for the reply. yeah, i'm probably going for the HVX, based all that I have read, the p2 was the only issue for me, but with the new firestore that's just the cherry on the top. Now reponding to what you said about the Z1 being excellent for weddings, I have seen loads of footage from the DVX100 of weddings and they flat out blew me away. Seems like Panny really has the edge after all....

PROBABLY!!!

Kind regards
THE HONEST LIAR

[DavidBeier]

Now reponding to what you said about the Z1 being excellent for weddings, I have seen loads of footage from the DVX100 of weddings and they flat out blew me away. Seems like Panny really has the edge after all....

Yeah, I have a friend who shoots weddings with the DVX. The bottom line is that panasonics cameras tend to look the most filmic. The colors and gamma simply look closer to film than any of it's competitors are able to achieve.

However, most people wanting stuff like weddings don't care all that much about the colors and gamma, they just want it to be sharp. Hence, the Z1 is much better suited for that sort of things. It looks like very sharp video and you can use HDV tapes for long runs.

[J P]

I agree with David.

I've used the ZlU alot for TV work. It is better in low light, it shoots to tape, it has a more solid LCD and smoother manual zoom. So it's good for TV and for docs.

But for movies. I would choose the HVX in a heartbeat. Better picture. More filmic. 24p. P2 workflow shouldn't slow down a film set if you have ACs.