Shall i buy washed out colours of the XL2

The fact that the DVX has far more credits in indie-films only further proves my point. That is really two fold. First reason, besides the ease of use, is that it is a small contained package
Click to expand...

I respectfully, but completely disagree with this statement and your reasons Ash.

My opinion on why we see more productions using the DVX100 would be:

1. The DVX just produces a better looking image and this has nothing to do with pixel count (When does it ever unless it's SD to HD?).

2. The DVX100 has simply been out that much longer than the XL2

I also dont see it being used terribly for it's 'Ease of use', especially when people are using 35mm adapters and Matteboxes on thier units.

The XL2 is the preference for most cinematographers coming from already having made a movie
Click to expand...

Stop the propaganda ! No no no. The XL2 missed that boat with the introduction of the HD Cameras now available !

A quick imdb search shows:

30 Productions for the Canon XL2

-

316 productions for the DVX100 !

To be fair, the XL2 was released on 9/1/04 and the DVX100 on 10/10/02 but these numbers say something. A year and half later and there doesn't seem to be much going on in the XL2 production market.


The XL2 Group is a small one (For indiependent filmmaking I mean).

XL2 footage into 720P HVX footage and it holds up pretty dang well...
Click to expand...

I'd pay to see these side by side and would put money on this not being true. I have seen XL2 footage and I have seen 720p HVX and I say the difference is light and day. Perhaps you mean with the extra pixels it would hold up better than an DVX ? But on that note:

Who cares ?

-

I don't doubt for a second the XL2 has it's use and it's place in the field. I mean, hell, even 28 Daus Later was shot on the XL1 (God bless her) but once again, all things being equal ? They ain't.
 
1109277181_Dirty_Harry.jpg
 
Imdb is not the end all be all for this information, I know for a fact the XL2 numbers are higher than that... that being said... those numbers dont prove anything but the popularity of the camera. The DVX is by far THE most popular DV camera with THE most loyal following. I will never ever argue that. The community is fantastic and robust.

No need to pay for a side by side, I will post some footage when this project is complete and I will even send you a DVCproHD tape if you like. The project was shot with a Varicam but I incorporated some HVX b-roll and XL2 b-roll... the HVX and XL2 are indistiguishable most the time...


ash =o)


PS you keep saying the DVX looks better to you, shoot something simple that I can replicate, post it and I will shoot an identical shot with an XL2 and post the setting on how to get that exact look
 
By the way, my reference to Cinematography.com was not meant to mean NOW, I meant after the XL2 was released it was the camera of choice for many of the working DPs. Also, remember that a lot of middle-end productions dont like to announce that they were shot on DV.

Since you are going back to the DVX-100, why not include the XL1 and XL1s, there were a ton of indie features shot on those cameras. In you search, remember that many DPs used the PAL versions as they were 25P, the Pal versions were XM, not XL. Like I said, before, IMDB is not the end all... heck, even I am on there!





ash =o)
 
I don't even know what we're talking about anymore Ash; I'm just having fun.

I do want to see some XL2 stuff though that rocks. I'm a looking.
 
Wow Ash, this is a new side I've never seen of you. Over at DVinfo.net you are just the go to know it all about the XL2, but I've never seen you in a situation to stand up for this camera so much. I'm glad you are on our team. Oh, and I'd like in on the shoot something on the DVX and match it with the XL2 challenge, except we'll have to name it something else.

I'm on IMDB too :highfive:
 
John_Hudson said:
I don't even know what we're talking about anymore Ash; I'm just having fun.

I do want to see some XL2 stuff though that rocks. I'm a looking.
Click to expand...
Someone needs to take away your italics button.

But like I said earlier, even though I think it was missed. I'm working on a few productions right now, but I can't have the footage yet since they are cutting and I'm moving from one project to another. However, once I get the footage back for my reel, I'll post some up. I'm really happy with some of the stuff we got today.
 
AshG said:
PS you keep saying the DVX looks better to you, shoot something simple that I can replicate, post it and I will shoot an identical shot with an XL2 and post the setting on how to get that exact look
Click to expand...

LOL, we keep challenging each other and asking for proof-footage. But in the end, we're all just too damn lazy to shoot anything and the discussion reallity isn't worth the effort. :grin:

I think, it's better for me to stay neutral; but based on what I do know, I prefer the DVX, as if fits me more. But to be totally unbiased; and if I was held at gun point to choose which is "better", I would need to see footage side-by-side of the two. My criteria for "better" is geared towards the filmmaker, and also, for myself.
 
Last edited:
Gordon JL said:
LOL, we keep challenging each other and asking for proof-footage. But in the end, we're all just too damn lazy to shoot anything and the discussion reallity isn't worth the effort. :grin:
Click to expand...
"What!? Shoot something for free!? Nah, that's ok."
 
The DVX footage is already out there in this forum ! It;s the XL2 stuff I;m looking for!

:)

Okay okay

Im lazy too

The truth is I am stoked on every camera out there more or less. If I was given any one of them to shoot with, how can one complain, really ?

I have some some very nice stuff form the XL2 (mostly music vidoes or Kprince's Hawaii stuff)

The real deal is what we do with it. And that's something I still haven't done.

I mean really; this whole conversation started with me saying 'I wouldn't use
the XL2 for a film'.

Can I ? Of course.

I just don't want to. That's all, plain and simple. No disrespect to anyone.

This is why there are many options for us.
 
I swear, I'm taking your button away.

Anyway, I have some B&W footage. I need to get around to chopping it up in color though.
 
AshG said:
The fact that the DVX has far more credits in indie-films only further proves my point. That is really two fold. First reason, besides the ease of use, is that it is a small contained package, easy to grab, easy to set-up, etc. The other reason is because of the ease of use/price. It has empowered many people who would be lost on a film camera, or even a Varicam to achieve their goal of making a movie.

The XL2 is the preference for most cinematographers coming from already having made a movie.


ash =o)
Click to expand...

Look, if you read through this thread you'll see I'm not strictly a Panny loyalist. That said, please back up your last statement with some facts. Who are these experienced cinematographers choosing the XL2?

DVX credits:

Lonesome Jim (Steve Buscemi - not a first timer or industry newcomer, of course)
November (cinematography prize at Sundance)
Murderball (oscar nomination)
Mad Hot Ballroom (mainstream release)

Others could add to this list. But, please, give me some XL2 films - I'm sure they're out there, I just don't know of them.

To say that people have chosen the DVX because they're intimidated by or ignorant of the XL's complexity is simply innaccurate for the successful features the DVX has to its credit. Yes, it may the case for someone like me, but not for the above films.
 
Squally said:
I wouldn't consider documentary films as something that looks great for it's cinematography.
Click to expand...


I can't argue with that - especially in the case of Murderball. I loved that film - but alot of it did not look good. Just to keep stoking the flames (and to satisfy my curiousity), that still leaves two big lines on the DVX resume. What does the XL2 have out there? Again, that's not a challenge so much as a genuine inquiry.

EDIT: as someone who loves docs, though, I don't agree that they never provide examples of great cinematography
 
Gordon JL said:
It does seem that filmmakers mostly choose to use the DVX; almost like an "industry standard". Who knows; I've yet to see comparison footage side by side to really say anything; it could just be because they feel the DVX is good enough; and don't feel the need to change (sort of like how the majority of films are edited on Avid, even when there are other qualified NLEs).
Click to expand...


The DVX came out with 24p waaay before the XL2 even hit the scene with its 24p. That would clearly make it a favorite over its intial competiton the XL1s. The comment about "industry standards" is a very much a reality in circumstances like these. I reckon if the XL2 had come out with 24p before the DVX, you would see more film credits to its name. As many as the DVX now enjoys? Maybe, maybe not.
 
Last edited:
dustino said:
I can't argue with that - especially in the case of Murderball. I loved that film - but alot of it did not look good. Just to keep stoking the flames (and to satisfy my curiousity), that still leaves two big lines on the DVX resume. What does the XL2 have out there? Again, that's not a challenge so much as a genuine inquiry.

EDIT: as someone who loves docs, though, I don't agree that they never provide examples of great cinematography
Click to expand...

unless you are werner herzog......
 
I have been on various forums for a while and the cinematography forum had some nice debates after the release of the XL2, many guys with great credits and the general consensus was that the XL2 would be a better choice. So what? Both are capable and surely do work just fine.

Of the movies you have listed, all of which I have seen, only November showcased what the camera is capable of. Like I said, many many films do not have the tech credits... my 3 projects on IMDB dont have a single tech credit.



ash =o)
 
AshG said:
I have been on various forums for a while and the cinematography forum had some nice debates after the release of the XL2, many guys with great credits and the general consensus was that the XL2 would be a better choice. So what? Both are capable and surely do work just fine.

Of the movies you have listed, all of which I have seen, only November showcased what the camera is capable of. Like I said, many many films do not have the tech credits... my 3 projects on IMDB dont have a single tech credit.



ash =o)
Click to expand...

Regardless of whether they have a tech credit - what has been made? I'm sure word still gets out if a film along the lines of what I've listed above was made using the xl.

The bottom line is that the films listed above - especially the narrative films (November, Lonesome Jim) were not made by directors or cinematographers who needed the "training wheels" of the dvx. That's flat wrong. So, once more, who are the experienced cinematographers you speak of that have chosen the xl over the dvx?

To say it once more, 1) i'm no expert flimmaker; 2) i'm not a panasonic loyalist - my previous posts in this thread should attest to that. Nevertheless, your implication that directors choose the dvx over the xl because they lack experience is just plain wrong in the case of films with nationwide distribution. It may be true of Joe Schmoe's production house, but you're telling me Steve Buscemi chose the dvx because he couldn't find a cinematographer experienced enough to work another prosumer camera - the XL2?

So, man, I'm with you that the xl has some serious advantages over the dvx - I already stated as much. But to imply that the dvx's industry resume results from fear of the XL2's technical demands is something we will never agree on.
 
Most all of the 300+ films listed on IMDB that have a DVX in the tech credits are the directors first and most of the time, only, film. The DVX empowered them to get there, not only thru the ease of use but thru the great community support and lower cost. I personally think it is great. I have no problem with people who prefer the DVX, I do for some things. My issue, let me state again, is with those who constantly dismiss the XL2 with poor information and very little if ANY experience with the camera.

They are both GREAT cameras.



ash =o)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top