The 3 way shoot out

Thank you!

Thank you!

Thank you Jarred for this excellent and thorough article. I was was 80% certain of my choice and now I know.
 
Good job! :)

Good job! :)

I searched the web for a comparison between camcorders in this class and found lots of airy discussions based on what people have heard... This however, is something quite different! A very good article!

My vote was with the HDR-FX1 (actually the HDR-Z1U). I was very close to buy the Z1U too. But you've pinpointed many problems and bad solutions about the camera, so I'm in doubt again. You've been very harsh on Sony, and this may be for a reason. HDV is an advantage, but it won't affect that many, yet.

My use for a new camera would be shooting snowboard and skateboard. Do you have a recommendation for me? I've not been into this for long, and this will be my first prosumer or proffesional camera. HELP! We'll be filming out in the streets in all kind of weather, good lux may be an issue.

Martin
 
Jarred, where did you guys have this article posted originally? I read it back in early March on another web site somewhere, it was what convinced me top buy the DVX, great article, thx!
 
Great Article !!! If I understand correctly from your testing, the DVX100A is superior in some ways to the Canon FX2. However, if the great majority of the work to be done involved nature wildlife (whales, salmon fishing, bears, etc) and nature scenes (waterfalls, passages, ocean, docks) taken from a 60' boat (stabilized) you would you then probably suggest the Canon? The 20x zoom, shoulder mount, and some other traits lead me to think that is the way I should go... then again I read about low light capability and color quality and I lean toward the DVX. Because I am going to produce this on DVD's for distribution I have stayed away from HD and staying with SD. My project will, ultimately, take about three years and involve filming from WA to Alaska on the inland waterway. Thanks, in advance, for any assistance
 
If the telephoto reach is a necessary part of your shooting, the XL2 will have a decided advantage over the DVX (not only because of the 20x zoom, but because you can also use still-camera lenses for incredible telephoto range). And if 16:9 origination is important to you (for making 16x9-native DVDs), the XL2 will have an advantage. The DVX is a great camera for many uses, but it is not the hands-down favorite for all uses, and it sounds like for your purposes the XL2 (or maybe the JVC HD100?) may be the more suitable choice.

Ultimately you should try to get your hands on each and see how you like them.
 
Hey Barry, where else have I seen this article posted, did you guys have it on a commercial site for a while prior to this?
 
ok, perhaps it was posted here a couple months back and I just didn't realize this is where I read it first, I think I got confused because the article has a posting date of June 3rd, did you guys write it a couple of months ago and just post it again? (I think I'm losing my mind because this article is definitely the one I used to make my decision to buy the DVX in mid-March)
 
We did that shootout last November, I think the article was first posted in January.

Probably the switch to the new site software that's confusing you -- the articles are in a different section and have a different look to them now. But this is the same article, and it was posted on this site (just under the old board software).
 
FX1: But what about the PAL and standard options?

FX1: But what about the PAL and standard options?

Hey there! great article, amazingly thorough. Upon going to B&H and looking at the VX1 and the DVX, I was going to get the FX1 hands down: I loved the fat that it has a PAL setting (I've had a PAL camera for the last 4 years, and need to continue shooting in PAL for some doc projects) and had a zoom iris with a quick racking nob. And hey- HD! BUT after reading your article, yikes! The sound situaton, for starters, seems really sad. IDo have one question-- my DP friend seemed to say that you CAN shoot the FX1 in standard def mode, and then it is fine... but that yes, in HDV mode it is going to fall appart (given that yes, we all mostly show on standard def monitors, etc).

Can you talk a bit about those features, PAL and what the FX1 is like shooting in standard def (or maybe it doesn't)? Also, when i went to BH it was $1500 more expensive than the DVX! Thanks!
 
The FX1 is either NTSC or PAL, it cannot do both. And it is less expensive than the DVX.

So presumably you meant the Z1? The Z1 is more expensive and does both PAL and NTSC, and HD50i as well as HD60i.

In standard-def DV mode, the Z1's audio is, according to Oleg, quite competitive to the DVX. But, again according to Oleg, when you go into HD mode it most definitely isn't competitive.

You can definitely shoot the FX1/Z1 in standard-def or in high-def. In standard-def you get a native 16:9 image, but with lower-sensitivity (it's about 2 stops slower than a PD150) and with a contrastier image because of lower latitude. Some people like the look. In standard-def it shoots regular DV, so it has none of the motion artifacts/variable resolution of HDV, it's a regular DV camcorder when in standard def.
 
Wow! This article really cleared up a lot of worries I was having about my dvx going out of date. It is easily the most informative article I've ever read on the subject of camcorders.
Ron Earley
 
DVX Quandry Part II?

DVX Quandry Part II?

Oopps! A bit quick on the "enter" Button :embarasse

Barry and Jared,

First, excellent article. It has been very helpful to my consideration of a DV camera.

Let me ask you though, as a video professional for 20+ years, I've been through alot of formats/equipment. I'm working on a project for distribution to several PBS stations and I'm seriously looking at the DVX 100A as an aquisition camera for this 30-60 minute show. It's a "nature" show w/interviews and beauty shots. All tripod.

I plan to bring this into a Media 100 system via the component out of a DSR-1500 (I don't have firewire on my legacy M100 system). I'm planning on 3:1 compression. I would then output component to a Digibeta for distribution.

Given my long history with 2/3" tube & chip cameras AND Beta/MII formats, do you think I might be satisfied with the image quality I'm gonna get using the
DVX-100a in this way?

I've got a demo 100A coming, but it won't be for several weeks and I'm a bit uneasy about this given my production schedule and relatively small production budget.

Thoughts on using the 100A as a principle aquisition tool?

Thanks much for your consideration!

Tim
 
The only valid response I can give you is the one you don't want to hear: "you have to judge for yourself."

Obviously the SDX900 or SPX800 would exceed your expectations for quality. But that's $20,000 - $25,000, vs. $3,000. The DVX in 24p mode is unparalleled as to what it can do, vs. the older Beta/MII cameras. But there's no denying the big glass and big chips of the big cameras.

A DVX can do a superb job, I can confidently say that. But as to whether it'll meet your expectations, only you can answer that.
 
Barry, my expectation would be that, until my project(s) are funded to where I can afford a higher end unit, I'm going to walk hand-in-hand with DVX based on what I've seen and read. I'm more than willing to compromise some quality issues for cost.

My concern is that when I take a finished digibeta tape to an engineer at my local PBS station (based on the production process I outlined), is he/she going to have reason to say "we can't air this"? Will he/she have some OBJECTIVE technical reason to say material shot on a DVX is not suitable for broadcast?

You obviously have worked/studied with the DVX, and I look forward to reading your book when it comes with my new DVX, but while I may be the "only" person who can "judge" the quality issue. Are there any inherent technical deficiencies in the DVX that would cause some red flags in a technical evaluation of my project as described.

Is that a "better" question for you to consider?

Thanks (a bunch!)

Tim
 
I can't answer as to whether a particular PBS tech may approve or disapprove -- there's no accounting for what a particular individual may decide. I can say that I've had DVX stuff broadcast on every local station and cable station here, and it's *never* caused as much as a raised eyebrow.

Keep in mind the DVX is designed and sold by Panasonic's professional division, not their consumer division. It's really quite good. I know PBS techs can be some of the most demanding, and I haven't had to run my footage past a PBS tech yet. But I would be surprised if it wouldn't pass muster. Many shows have been shot on PD150's in years past, and the DVX easily matches/surpasses the PD150 in quality, so I would say you're likely not going to have a problem. But as always, I must caveat that by saying "there's no guarantee".

Hope that helps!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top