Dont laugh but I need opinions on...
- Thread starter Jdaniels
- Start date
Barry_Green
Moderator
I haven't spent any time with it, but I've heard and read reviews that say it does a remarkable job considering the price point (well, at least the HC1 does, with its $1400 price point).
Keep in mind that HDV's nearing the end of its lifespan, Sony and Panasonic are going to replace HDV with AVC-HD. So if you don't have any need for it today, you might want to wait and see what AVC-HD cams get introduced. But if you have need for one now, there are many positive reports about the HC1 and A1U.
Keep in mind that HDV's nearing the end of its lifespan, Sony and Panasonic are going to replace HDV with AVC-HD. So if you don't have any need for it today, you might want to wait and see what AVC-HD cams get introduced. But if you have need for one now, there are many positive reports about the HC1 and A1U.
cinemakinoeye
Well-known member
Jdaniels said:
Barry is very right about this, the A1U does a remarkable job for its price/size. I've been shooting lately with the AG-HVX200, HVR-Z1U, and HVR-A1U, and I can tell you, if you take the HVR-A1U out for a spin, it will surprise you. Now my eyes are used to the look of film, the DVX and now the HVX, so I find the 1080i interlace disturbing (I guess I could "fix it in post" if it really bothered me), but other than than that... it's a nice little camera if you need something small and can live with 1080i HDV.Barry_Green said:
I purchased an HVR-A1U in order to continue shooting a series of documentary interviews I had started shooting with the HVR-Z1U and I'm pleased with it, for what it is. You can buy three HVR-A1Us for what you buy a single HVX200, and the cameras are in different leagues in terms of image quality, the HVX200 wins by a long shot. But when it comes to price, weight, and shooting on tape... then there's a place for the Sony HVR-A1U. You can read more of my thoughts on the HVR-A1U in my blog entry "The little camcorder that could" that includes some links to images comparing the Z1U and A1U.
Last edited:
Jdaniels
Well-known member
Thanks Cine, and Barry.
Perhaps I should elaborate on my skepticism. I am buying into a video franchise where the owner wants me to use the A1U for my main camera. It is part of the equipment package I am buying.
I lean towards video production as a professional, and a professional IMO should not walk into a pre-production meeting with a client with this obviously consumer grade HD cam. Size does matter in this instance. The owner assures me that I will be pleased with this cam. Even with the xlr inputs and CMOS chip. I am still very much a 3 chip camera kind of guy.
Cine, Great article, but there is not enough good I can say about Sony products that convinces me to adopt this camera as my main gear. If I want to be taken seriously by my future clients, then this is not the one for me. However, to be fair to the owner of the franchise, I am researching this camera thoroughly so as to give him an argument to exchange it for the HVX200. BTW I cant stand dropouts and the thought of being stuck with $20 per tape needles me.
Thanks for the replies
JD
Perhaps I should elaborate on my skepticism. I am buying into a video franchise where the owner wants me to use the A1U for my main camera. It is part of the equipment package I am buying.
I lean towards video production as a professional, and a professional IMO should not walk into a pre-production meeting with a client with this obviously consumer grade HD cam. Size does matter in this instance. The owner assures me that I will be pleased with this cam. Even with the xlr inputs and CMOS chip. I am still very much a 3 chip camera kind of guy.
Cine, Great article, but there is not enough good I can say about Sony products that convinces me to adopt this camera as my main gear. If I want to be taken seriously by my future clients, then this is not the one for me. However, to be fair to the owner of the franchise, I am researching this camera thoroughly so as to give him an argument to exchange it for the HVX200. BTW I cant stand dropouts and the thought of being stuck with $20 per tape needles me.
Thanks for the replies
JD
Last edited:
Barry_Green
Moderator
Well, assuming you're talking consumer HD, there's basically three different versions of HDV out there. Sony makes 1080i, which is incompatible with JVC, which makes 720p. Then there's Canon, which is also incompatible with JVC, but has partial compatibility with Sony; of the three modes that the Canon shoots, the Sony gear can play one of them.Jdaniels said:
All this is likely going to be swept aside by AVC-HD, which is a new and much-improved consumer HD recording format that's based on H.264. Sony and Panasonic jointly developed and implemented AVC-HD, and it will be cross-compatible across manufacturers and the one format supports 1080/24p, 1080/60i, 720/24p and 720/60p. Better audio (uncompressed PCM in 7.1 channels, or Dolby Digital AC-3 in 5.1 channels!) and better video (H.264/AVC at up to 18 megabits, which should equal the performance of MPEG-2 at 36 megabits), full-raster recording, and tapeless (Sony records to mini-DVDs, Panasonic's announced that they'll have camcorders that record straight to SD cards).
Barry_Green
Moderator
Ah. Whole different ball of wax there.Jdaniels said:
No way on earth would I want to use an A1U as my main camera in a video production business.
cinemakinoeye
Well-known member
I would not advocate the A1U as a main camera (unless tiny size was a requirement, as it is in some of my doc work). There are many cameras that are by far better including Sony's impressive new 1/2" 3-CCD XDCAM HD camcorder to the current crop of prosumer gear (Pana HVX200, JVC HD100, Canon XL H1, Sony Z1U and it's ilk). So many cameras, so little time. I miss the days when the decision was simply 16mm or Betacam SP.Jdaniels said:
cinemakinoeye
Well-known member
I'm really looking forward to that, the buzz over H.264 at NAB this year was refreshing, however, if we need to shoot something tomorrow, as in 24 hours from now, I think we're sadly stuck with HDV for the moment when it comes to under $8K cameras (unless we're shooting with the HVX)Barry_Green said:
Jdaniels
Well-known member
cinemakinoeye said:
I miss my Ikegami 47 digital head with my Sony betacam dock from my tv news photog days (sigh)
I agree that the a1u is not the 1st choice. I may have to take some of my working capital and purchase the hvx200. I would prefer the canon simply account of the lens but price is an issue here.
XDCAM HD (Drool) or the 200's big brother the panavision (pavlov's dog has nothing on this)
JD
cinemakinoeye
Well-known member
I willing to bet you will not regret it. I've been shooting with an HVX200 on and off for three months now on several short projects and I have to say, it's an amazing camera given the price-point.Jdaniels said:
I come from this perspective, the Varicam was the first video camera that did not suck (in my opinion) and was the first worthy substitute for 16mm film, as soon as one became available from my favorite rental house I shot a short film with it and the timer doing the color correction on the 35mm film out did not realize he was timing video to film until he got to the third scene. Everyone at the time was blown away. Today the HVX is having the same effect, it's the worthy "son of Varicam" an order of magnitude cheaper. It's like almost, finally, Moore's law is starting to apply to cameras. And I'm drawn to variable frame rate the way most cats are to catnip.
cinemakinoeye
Well-known member
By that do you mean the Varicam?Jdaniels said:
hawkmankt
Active member
Personally, I'd push to bump up to the Z1U or at least the FX1. I have an FX1 and I've seen footage from it side by side with the CMOS chippers and I have to say that it's superior in my opinion. That's one reason I bought it to shoot my documentary. Couldn't reason the wife up from $3000 to $4500 for the Z1U though.
Plus, in the situation you're talking about, the FX1 looks more pro. I've been using it to shoot some pieces for a local charity organization and people are impressed when I pull it out of the case.
Plus, in the situation you're talking about, the FX1 looks more pro. I've been using it to shoot some pieces for a local charity organization and people are impressed when I pull it out of the case.
Heath McKnight
Active member
I didn't know that HDV was coming to the end of its lifespan. I just figured AVC-HD was another flavor of HD. HDV seems to be something that's going to be around for a while, imho.
heath
heath
cinemakinoeye
Well-known member
Yes, the FX1/Z1 images are better, but depending on the applications, the small size, or using two cameras vs. one as you can get two A1s for the price of a Z1, might lead one to choose the smaller camera.Here's a link to a comparison chart I made when I was making my purchase decision: http://kino-eye.com/2006/03/22/a1u-fx1-z1u/ (it's got a link to some images too). And in the end, Just to be clear, I much perfer shooting with the HVX in many situations, as I write this an HVX is staring at me as if it was saying, "why do you bother with that little camera, I can give you everything you need or want..."hawkmankt said:
Barry_Green said:
Although it will definitely have much better recording quality with great color and less compressing artifacts, I believe that it's big disadvantage will be the need for a "Godzilla" class computer for importing and exporting to h.264 that simply does not exist today and I doubt it will in one year from now.
Of course you'll have to use intermediate formats for editting but the real pain will be to export to this format. A solution might be a hardware h.264 acceleration card, but a good one will be very expensive and the new cameras will be expensive too. So I think that the total cost will be initially double or triple and for this reason it will let the present cameras live a few years more.