to sell xl-2 or not

R

raw911

Active member
hey all - im trying to get some feed back here - i currently have an XL-2 and am really looking at the HVX-200 - my delima is should i go ahead and sell the XL-2 to help fray the total cost of the hvx-200 or would it be worth keeping. I saw a post stating that the XL-2 will soon be out and the new thing is the HD P2 - which makes me think that maybe i should sell .


and on the other hand i there are times that 2 camera's are very helpful - but then there is the compatabilty issue in editing the 2 footages . would there be such a difference that it wouldnt be worth it .

all comments are welcome
 
Do you really think you are going to by someone on this board who will say "NO KEEP YOUR XL" ahahaha

Serious though, grow up to high definition. You wont regret it, and sit and read this entire forum and when you are done, if you have any questions that have not been answered on this forum, than post. Also get Barry's book. (do a Search) and that will help ya out with with beast can do.

good luck
 
I'm not going to try to convince you how great the HVX is. Just read this board.

But my recommendation is to do whatever makes more sense to you and your projects now.

I'm a strong believer of getting just what you really need.

To update your camera just because the HVX is better than the XL2 makes no sense.
You'll never stop and will spent the rest of your days broke and very anxious. There’ll always be a newer, better, shinier toy around the corner.
Some people on this community are already asking for a improved and upgraded HVX, probably barely used their cameras yet.
P2 technology is excellent (my opinion) but still limited in ceratin areas and it will add more peripherals to your workflow than just a new camera.

The XL2 is a great SD camera; if that’s working for you right now, keep it. In a few months the HVX will be cheaper or maybe something more appropriate to your kind of work will be available.
 
The XL2 cuts really well with the HVX even in 720p. Remember the XL2 may only record 720 X 480 but the CCDs are 960X480, pretty much the same as the HVX. I will soon post a music video shot with both cameras so everyone can see how well they cut together.


ash =o)
 
I am keeping my XL-2.. even though I bought my first HVX200 last week. I think that it should cut well with the 720p mode in the HVX. I am always shooting progressive mode with the XL2 anyway. I am in love with this camera (HVX200) so definitely buy one if you can afford it. I recently shot a bee digging in the sand @720p 60f and down converted to SD for a DVD sample reel.... Amazing how nice it looked.

Jim Kinsey

" Cheers...No worries Mate..."
 
It depends on how much cash you have and what you think you'll need the two cameras for. The XL2 and the HVX200 have the same size chips though the HVX uses pixel shift to achieve HD resolutions. In SD though, you'll probably end up with a similar amount of detail. As far as other things go, panasonics colors and gamma look different than canon's (personally, I think better but the point is DIFFERENT). That's something you'll have to worry about in CC. Also, if you're gonna shoot P2, the HVX200 will give you twice the color depth which is nice but will also create discrepancies. I'd suggest shooting both to tape if you want them to match up.

It comes down to how much cash you have. If you can afford not to sell the XL2 and think there are a number of occasions where you'll need a second camera then go ahead. On the other hand, if you're not gonna be able to afford important HVX200 equipment without selling the XL2 then don't bother keepin it.
 
DavidBeier said:
important HVX200 equipment without selling the XL2 then don't bother keepin it.
Click to expand...

besides the P2 cards and P2 logger for mac - what else would be mandatory to get?
 
Well, I don't know what kind of work you do and what you're plannin to do with the camera.

For instance, are you going to need a new tripod? If you're just using the two cameras for hand-held wedding stuff than probably not but, for anything else, you'll need a new tripod if you're planning to use both cameras and the heavier HVX200 might take something bigger and more expensive than your XL2 did (many are using the new Cartoni Focus which runs about $1500).

There's also the expense of P2 cards. Currently, it's still 550 for a 4 gig (10 minutes of 720 pN footage) and 1300 for an 8 gig (20 min). If you want to be able to shoot for longer without buying too many cards you'll need a P2 store which runs about $1600 (and holds 60 gigs for a total of 150 minutes). Or perhaps later you may want to invest in the Cineporter of Firestore 100 to avoid dealing with the smaller P2 cards. A FS-100 will run you $2200 for a 100 gig model but won't record in native mode so you'll only get 100 minutes out of it. A Cineporter 160 will also cost $2200 and but acts as a giant P2, giving you about 400 minutes of 720pN footage (not bad at all).

Then there's the fact that to handle HD footage you may need to upgrade your PC. Also, with the more professional look the HVX offers you may want to invest in more professional audio.

All these are possabilities. I'm not trying to scare you about the HVX200; I love this camera. All I'm saying is it depends on your needs.

My own philosophy is to get less equipment but make sure it's great quality. For a while I was thinking of getting a steady cam but if I did it would mean I wouldn't be able to afford a Cartoni Focus and get stuck with a cheaper tripod I hated (sorry Bogen but I just don't like you). I decided that a reliable tripod was a much bigger priority so I went with the more expensive one at the cost of a steadycam.

What do you want a second camera for? For narrative stuff I find it's more of a hassle than anything else; having to shoot around the other camera and split your attention. If you mean for stuff like event shooting you'ld need to get someone to man the other camera anyway so you might be better off just finding someone who already has a decent camera. I find it's better to invest in getting some good equipment then skimp in favor of getting more stuff. That's just me though.
 
DavidBeier said:
Also, with the more professional look the HVX offers you may want to invest in more professional audio.
Click to expand...
I don't think the HVX gives you more of a professional look than the XL2. More resolution, sure, but not more professional.

I've owned the XL2 for 2 years and I've had my HVX since March. I do miss the shoulder mounted operation of my XL2 and I really miss the 20x zoom lens. I also miss the -3, 0, 3, 6, 12 gain knob which was sweet and I loved looking through the comfortably placed eyepiece.

In terms of SD image comparisons, the HVX renders a sharper image. I've recently compared all my XL2 projects to some SD HVX footage I've shoot and the HVX really benefits from the downcoverted HD image. But the HVX is still very light hungry in SD mode so the XL2 will perform better in low light conditions.

Also, the BOKEH from the XL2 was nicer than that of the HVX. Also, it's harder to achieve shallow DOF with the HVX stock lens even at extreme telephoto compared to the XL2. It's probably attributed to the HVX having a wider lens with only 13x zoom.

What I miss most of all from the XL2 is the ability to choose Variable or Constant zoom speeds with the flick of a switch and adjust the speed of the zoom with a small dial. It was a really cool feature.

What I really like about the HVX is the stock manual lens. My follow focus marks hold true every time and isn't prone to the gimmicky servo focus fluctuations.

The HVX blows the XL2 out of the water with their AUDIO inputs. The XL2 was very noisy (hiss from the pre-amp) even when fed through a Sound Devices 302 with a Senn 416. The HVX has very low noise with the same setup.

Scene files are great on the HVX. I can save my settings and switch them around as fast as I can turn the dial. It saves a lot of time.

With that said, XL2 SD doesn't come close to HVX HD. Sensor pixel wise, they are similar but pixel shift really makes a huge difference. And 4:2:2 is sweet too!

People have given you some great advice but at the end of the day, if switching to HD now with all it's added costs doesn't make sense, stick with the XL2 until the costs of HD is even more affordable than it is now. Who knows, by then, we'll have the HVX400 with 2/3" HD CCD's with interchangeable lenses in 4:4:4.

Hope that helps and good luck.
 
Nice post presario. The xl2 is a fine cam, perhaps a couple of limitations short of being a world beater.

Have any xl2 owners tried uprezzing their footage to HD? I'll be getting a HVX this week and will keep my xl2. Those pal chips on the xl2 are 1049x576. Mmmmm..pal.
 
It seems pretty simple to me -- if you need HD now(!), and can't afford it without selling the XL2, then you sell. If you don't need HD now, you keep it. And if you can afford to get the HVX AND keep the XL2, you do that.

I bought my HVX planning to keep my DVX, but decided to sell the DVX to get more equipment to help me make beautiful HD images. If you keep your XL2, I suspect you'll end up doing the same. The HD is just too cool to not want to do it right.
 
I don't think the HVX gives you more of a professional look than the XL2. More resolution, sure, but not more professional.

In terms of SD image comparisons, the HVX renders a sharper image. I've recently compared all my XL2 projects to some SD HVX footage I've shoot and the HVX really benefits from the downcoverted HD image. But the HVX is still very light hungry in SD mode so the XL2 will perform better in low light conditions.
Click to expand...

You're actually making my case for me. Yes the HVX200 is more light hungry which tends to mean you'll need to light scenes more often instead of just using availible lighting. This, along with the sharper image and greater color depth will give a more professional look to what you are doing which then would be helped by more professional audio. The point is that by going to HVX200 you're moving into more expensive territory with everything.
 
Of course the HVX gives you a more professional look. It's a more professional camera. The DVDs I've made from the 720pn content I've shot look soooo much better than the stuff shot with my DVX. The 4:2:2 color space alone will give you a more "professional" looking image. Plus, the DVCProHD holds up to color correction so much better than DV. You'd have to be seeing impared not to notice how much better -- and more professional -- the HVX looks (all other things being even).
 
I am not sure you know what you are talking about... DVCproHD is not a great format to CC, it works but not a LOT better than DV. Using the term "more professional" is SILLY. Have you even seen how incredible sharp and CLEAN a 24P DVD from XL2 footage looks? On 480P DVDs, the sharpness difference between XL2 and HVX is not discernable by most with perfect vision. The HVX footage will be slightly more noisy but have more poppy colors.

If you are needing to deliver in HD, the HVX is the winner not doubt but for SD, the XL2 is just as good, if not better due to lower noise and better low light. Neither is "more professional"


ash =o)
 
OMG! Do you have an HVX? Have you color-corrected DVCProHD? What are you talking about? The difference is overwhelming!!!! Particularly when you're going for a really dramatic color correction for dramatic/stylized purposes. Try "Magic Bulleting" the hell out of DV. Then try the same thing on the DVCProHD. There's a world of difference. Now, try compressing that down to MPEG2 for DVD. It's night and day!

And if you think SD/4:1:1 source DVDs look at good as HD/4:2:2 source DVDs, what can I say? Either you're doing something wrong or we just don't live on the same planet. I've shown HD source DVDs to all of my DV shooter buddies and ALL of them are blown away by how much better things look.

DV has been great. It's been a work-around for those of us who can't afford more professional cameras. But to compare the HVX and XL2 and say that neither is "more professional" (despite the laundry list of "more professional" features) is absurd.
 
I am probably one of the most experienced digital shooters on this forum. That doesnt make me great or mean I know everything but I got a lot of stuff figured out. I currently own an XL2, and HVX and multitides of filters, accessories, etc. for each. I frequently shoot, XLH, Varicam and SDX900 footage as well.

The only time I ever have noticed an "overwhelming" difference in CCing is uncompressed. DVCproHD tends to get noisy, even from the Varicam but especially from the HVX. DV is noisy too but the XL2 and also many Sony cams, produce very clean images. Sorry but there is a difference between dropping a bunch of Magic Bullet filters on something and true CC.

Maybe the problem is your definition of "better" are you referring to more poppy colors? Sharpness? Clean image? Also your definition of professional is pretty screwed up. There are many broadcast programs shot on, by your definition, "less professional cameras." I made a very good living last year shooting on "work-around" "less professional cameras" I think your ideas of what is professional is rather absurd.

I shot a music video on the HVX in 720P and cut it with the second camera which was an XL2 shot in 24P. The project is being edited in 720P with the XL2 footage being resized (editor might use InstantHD). When it is done I will author a 16:9 24P DVD and send you one, that will end your confusion. I have already done this on one project (cant send that one out) and it looked fabulous, trust me there was nobody questioning the XL2 footage. Have you shot edited and made 24P DVDs with XL2 footage? I wont argue that the HVX looks sharper in the HD modes but for SD delivery, it is just not so and certainly not as overt as you claim. The XL2 has native 16:9 CCDs that are 960X480, the HVX 960X540. Are you comparing 16:9 DVX to HVX? Because in that case it is a very discernable difference.



ash =o)
 
Last edited:
StMad said:
Nice post presario. The xl2 is a fine cam, perhaps a couple of limitations short of being a world beater.

Have any xl2 owners tried uprezzing their footage to HD? I'll be getting a HVX this week and will keep my xl2. Those pal chips on the xl2 are 1049x576. Mmmmm..pal.
Click to expand...


XL2 uprezzes great... the ACTIVE pixels on the PAL XL2 are actually 960X576, more than the HVX but of course it is not recorded as that.


ash =o)
 
AshG said:
I am probably one of the most experienced digital shooters on this forum. That doesnt make me great or mean I know everything but I got a lot of stuff figured out. I currently own an XL2, and HVX and multitides of filters, accessories, etc. for each. I frequently shoot, XLH, Varicam and SDX900 footage as well.

The only time I ever have noticed an "overwhelming" difference in CCing is uncompressed. DVCproHD tends to get noisy, even from the Varicam but especially from the HVX. DV is noisy too but the XL2 and also many Sony cams, produce very clean images. Sorry but there is a difference between dropping a bunch of Magic Bullet filters on something and true CC.

Maybe the problem is your definition of "better" are you referring to more poppy colors? Sharpness? Clean image? Also your definition of professional is pretty screwed up. There are many broadcast programs shot on, by your definition, "less professional cameras." I made a very good living last year shooting on "work-around" "less professional cameras" I think your ideas of what is professional is rather absurd.

I shot a music video on the HVX in 720P and cut it with the second camera which was an XL2 shot in 24P. The project is being edited in 720P with the XL2 footage being resized (editor might use InstantHD). When it is done I will author a 16:9 24P DVD and send you one, that will end your confusion. I have already done this on one project (cant send that one out) and it looked fabulous, trust me there was nobody questioning the XL2 footage. Have you shot edited and made 24P DVDs with XL2 footage? I wont argue that the HVX looks sharper in the HD modes but for SD delivery, it is just not so and certainly not as overt as you claim. The XL2 has native 16:9 CCDs that are 960X480, the HVX 960X540. Are you comparing 16:9 DVX to HVX? Because in that case it is a very discernable difference.

ash =o)
Click to expand...


Sorry. You're tremendous experience is not enough to make me trust you over my own eyes. Like I said, we live on different planets. I am curious though, do you consider the Varicam and SDX900 to be more professional cameras than your XL2?
 
IMHO, there is professional or hobbyist/amateur... "more professional" is a pretty silly thing to say, do you mean higher end? I think the SDX and Varicam are much better cameras than BOTH the XL2 and HVX. PM me your address I will send you a reel on DVD of 24P XL2 footage authored at 24P 16:9 anamorphic... it gets lots of "wows" as well...


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