Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 21
  1. Collapse Details
    What New camcorders are better than the EX1r right now under $5k?
    #1
    Senior Member JoeJITSU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    1,210
    Default
    Otherwise, I will likely just pick up an Ex1r. THank you
    Philip Bloom Certified Cinematographer




    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #2
    Default
    "better" in what way?

    There are no 1/2" cameras under $5k, if that's what you're looking for.

    The BMC is a lot less than $5k and does things the EX1R can't, but obviously there are tons of things the EX1R can do that the BMC can't, so again, the question is "better for what purpose"?

    The AC130 will provide an image comparably sharp, with a lot more zoom, for a lot less than the EX1R. The AC160 will do all that and add variable frame rates and 1080/60P, which the EX1R can't do. The HPX250 will go two better by adding 10-bit and 4:2:2 recording, which the EX1R can't do; all of those are under $5K. But they're all 1/3" chipsets, not 1/2", so -- does that qualify as better? That's a question only you can answer.

    It really comes down to "better for what purpose"?


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #3
    Senior Member JoeJITSU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    1,210
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Barry_Green View Post
    "better" in what way?

    There are no 1/2" cameras under $5k, if that's what you're looking for.

    The BMC is a lot less than $5k and does things the EX1R can't, but obviously there are tons of things the EX1R can do that the BMC can't, so again, the question is "better for what purpose"?

    The AC130 will provide an image comparably sharp, with a lot more zoom, for a lot less than the EX1R. The AC160 will do all that and add variable frame rates and 1080/60P, which the EX1R can't do. The HPX250 will go two better by adding 10-bit and 4:2:2 recording, which the EX1R can't do; all of those are under $5K. But they're all 1/3" chipsets, not 1/2", so -- does that qualify as better? That's a question only you can answer.

    It really comes down to "better for what purpose"?
    Thank you Barry for your answer.
    I am looking to find something that is an all around camera that will work well with my 5D Mark II's as well. I do all kinds of events here in Las Vegas and we primarily do weddings and seminar gigs but The lowlight of my Brand New XF100 is not doing what I thought it could do and might just send it back to B&H. I know that I see in the wanted ads on CL "EX1 or EX3 camerman needed" So that is why I have been debating on that camera.
    Philip Bloom Certified Cinematographer




    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    208
    Default
    Hi

    I am putting 2 XF105 in my budget for purchase. Can you elaborate on your low light complaint. Compared to what? Can you quantify it?
    I haven't heard that as an issue with the XF100 /XF105.

    I don't want to make a mistake. These cameras will be used for Interviews, Events, and micro-docs by a historical society. Can anyone say that the XF305 would be much better? I was thinking getting the Canon look right out of the camera with a C100, XF105 (2) 5D MKIII (mostly stills), and Vixia HF M500 (stealth and for high school volunteers to break).

    Please forgive me if this is hijacking or bordering on high jacking this thread -> if so just ignore. But I had hoped to shoot lots of stuff with the XF105 and not a lot of lights.


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #5
    Senior Member FrameFarmMedia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,921
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeJITSU View Post
    The lowlight of my Brand New XF100 is not doing what I thought it could do and might just send it back to B&H.
    I consider the EX1 to be garbage in lowlight (Can't push the gain much without massive noise). Is the XF100 that much worse or have you compared them?


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #6
    Senior Member JoeJITSU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    1,210
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Blit View Post
    Hi

    I am putting 2 XF105 in my budget for purchase. Can you elaborate on your low light complaint. Compared to what? Can you quantify it?
    I haven't heard that as an issue with the XF100 /XF105.

    I don't want to make a mistake. These cameras will be used for Interviews, Events, and micro-docs by a historical society. Can anyone say that the XF305 would be much better? I was thinking getting the Canon look right out of the camera with a C100, XF105 (2) 5D MKIII (mostly stills), and Vixia HF M500 (stealth and for high school volunteers to break).

    Please forgive me if this is hijacking or bordering on high jacking this thread -> if so just ignore. But I had hoped to shoot lots of stuff with the XF105 and not a lot of lights.
    Hijacking? Of course not. How else are you going to learn. I don't thinks its that bad but when you hit that gain from 6.0 on up, The noise is pretty bad. I am shooting a seminar right now with poor lighting. I was considering the XF100 to be my A Cam for this gig but I ended up shooting with the 5D Mark II with the 70-200mm f4.0 IS with a shutter of 50 and ISO of 1250 at f4.0. I had the ISO up to 1600 but the noise was bad mostly because the speaker had the video screen to his back which was pretty bright and no good lighting on the speaker at all.
    Philip Bloom Certified Cinematographer




    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #7
    Senior Member JoeJITSU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    1,210
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by RatLabProductions View Post
    I consider the EX1 to be garbage in lowlight (Can't push the gain much without massive noise). Is the XF100 that much worse or have you compared them?
    Never had an Ex1 or Ex1r but before buying the XF100, I did consider buying one. Are you sure that the Ex1/Ex1r is that bad in lowlight? 3CCD though. My HMC150 did better than this, unless im doing something wrong. Most people are just saying to use Neat Video.
    Philip Bloom Certified Cinematographer




    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    208
    Default
    Hi

    I guess Gain <6dB then. I have had the same issue with speaker in darkened room speaking and PowerPoint screen lit behind them. I have gone after it three ways. First; see if I can get the house lights up a bit. Two; see if I can move my camera to not have the screen behind the speaker. Third; and the one I use most is to get either a little book light LED that you clamp to a book for reading or a cheap LED small flashlight and light the speaker. Put the light on the podium if I can stand low, up the nose lighting scary effect or tape it or clamp it to either a mic stand or C-stand to get a proper angel. Still only one light. But light versus no light - no contest.

    On the Sony side the new PMW-200 looks great but I went all Canon for two reasons. Skin looks the best without correction and I like the C100 and 5DMKII (for stills especially) better than the Sony equivalents. The small size of the XF105 is also great for what we do. We currently use an HMC 150 (GREAT camera), 7D, and GL1.

    On the Panasonic side the lack of love for the autofocus on the ac130/160 has scared me off. I also like the canon aps-c sensor size better than micro4/3 by a little. But it is close. Really the Autofocus thing where lots of volunteers will be leaving it on auto-focus. I probably should stop reading about it and go test one, what a concept now that I think about it. Though maybe auto-focus on the AF100 is better than the C100. I have no idea -> off to go look that one up. I know the C100 has one shot auto-focus but the AF100 I don't know about. However the AF100 has time code??? and the C100 I know doesn't. So many factors deciding between what are all variations of great cameras.


    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    #9
    Senior Member JoeJITSU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    1,210
    Default
    Blit here is a pretty good comparison here against the Ex1 and the XF100
    http://camcorder-test.slashcam.com/c...vergleich.html
    Philip Bloom Certified Cinematographer




    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    208
    Default
    Hi
    Both great cameras. For me Canon is smaller, lighter, less expensive. I think a fairer comparison is the XF305 against the Sony PMW-EX1R.
    I think I am okay with the Canons except I will miss timecode on the C100(C300 not in the budget). Also will try to hang on and see when the 7D replacement will be out and what it offers.


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •