My reasons not to buy A1

M

max99

Member
I know this gets discussed to death, but times change and opinions change, and I'm hoping your insights may help me, so here goes:

I want to upgrade from my 3-chip SD Sony.

Here is why I haven't pulled the trigger on the leading contenders:

1. HV20 - If I go through the pain of working with HDV (FCE on a G4 1.67 Mac), learning shots, learning how to light and bettering my craft overall, why not invest in a camera that will let me become the best videographer/filmmaker that I can be? I won't buy another camera for years and years. This is it. No focus ring, so-so zoom button, manual limitations, an overall consumer-feeling camera. Just go for HDV gold and get the Canon XH-A1. Anything you do on this camera will simply be better on the A1, which has the heft to make your shots look like film instead of video. In the end, you can afford the upgrade IF you really are committed to making it worthwhile.


2. Canon XH-A1 - You won't be taking this monster on half the trips you take the HV20. For the $2k extra, are you really going to use all the manual stuff? You'll need a much bigger tripod, too. And what about a new monitor for color correcting? Why not get an HV20 and spend your savings on lighting, and maybe a 35mm adapter. Guys who are real filmmakers are using the HV20 as both primary and secondary cameras, and cranking out good stuff. Just use the tripod a lot. If you are so interested in making "films", dump the sub-standard HDV format altogether and buy an HVX200. P2 cards will only become cheaper, solid state P2 format editing is easier on the MAC, and you will REALLY have the gold standard of entry-pro cameras. The extra $2k will make a dramatic difference.

3. Panasonic HVX200 - Who are you kidding, kid? This camera is way out of your league. And if you thought the size and extra cost of the A1 was tough, wait to you lug around this guy to the local park on a Sunday afternoon. You'll have to upgrade to FCP just to handle the footage. Talk about using a sledgehammer on a nail. Make one decent film before you spend your money.

4. No rush. Wait until HDV or the cameras figure themselves out. That 3-chip Sony will last you another year. SD is easy to work with and has a better picture than the other Jones' on the block. If you really want to upgrade, get a DVX and learn the trade. You can edit easily and you'll be ready for the HVX when the time is right.

5. DVX100b - OMG, why buy SD these days, with HD around the corner? You don't have clients for whom you need to produce product this instant! Shoot in HD, future-proof your life, and burn when Blu-ray is affordable. This is a step backwards.


So, can anyone help me pull the trigger on something? Thanks.
 
Seems like you have a pretty good handle on it, actually. Every one of those arguments is solid. The question is: what do you need? What are you doing? What will you be doing? And what do you have now? Why do you think that what you have is inadequate -- what are you looking to upgrade to?
 
Sorry, I should have made that clearer. I am a hobbyist with big dreams. I mostly make home videos, but I am creative and want to do them well. I will make short films for fun. I enjoy it. I like the Sony 3-chip, but it's about a decade long in the tooth, and I'm ready for an upgrade in all respects (picture, HD, audio, etc.). I have a full-time job in an unrelated industry, so I don't really have time to learn on a practice camera or shoot lots of practice footage, or practice editing. I use FCE, but could upgrade to FCP ($1300!) if it became necessary.

Frankly, the HV20 is the leading contender for me, and the A1 second. Just no clear winners yet.
 
In my opinion, if you want to learn how to shoot, practice in standard def.

All of the fundamentals are the same. You are working with light and shadow. If you look at a movie like 'Iraq In Fragments' you will see that you can make amazing films in standard def. Moving to hi-def only gives you more complications and technical hurdles to overcome.

If you shot one really great piece in standard def, spending 3,400 on an A1 or twice that on an HVX would not make you hesitate. You know it would be worth it. I think that getting the HV20 to learn on might not be helpful because many of the 'manual' controls you would use are buried in menus. It is a great camera in the hands of a knowledgeble person. But if you don't know what you are doing it will just look like hi-rez home movies. It would be like saying you want to learn photography so you are buying an 8megapixel point-and-shoot camera instead of 2megapixel SLR.

I think a camera like the DVX is maybe the best camera to train on. All of your skills will carry forward when you are ready to upgrade.

If you are determined to upgrade now, I would get the A1 which hits the sweet spot of performance/value in the HD world in my opinion. This is the video that convinced me of the A1. It shows you the power of a camera in the hands of a talented person. He could have made something like that (in standard def) with your current camera. So can you. It is a matter of practice.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Oynk. (great domain name. where are the active links?)

Believe me, the prospect of simply upgrading my camera and sticking with SD for a while is very attractive. No hassles. I could work with FCE on my current system and not spend time and money and time, (and did I mention time) to get a 3-minute HDV clip to render into footage that I couldn't burn for another year.

But I'd hate to lose the ability to capture my life, and my family, and my projects, on HD. (BTW, I know, I know: it's less about the camera, and more about the story/lighting/skill, etc. But whether my work is mediocre, good, or great, it is made relatively better if I use a better camera to capture it, no?) Can't I capture now and figure out how to edit and burn later? Isn't that the beauty of $5 tapes?

Still . . . DVX would be fun to learn.

Ahh.
 
max99 said:
Sorry, I should have made that clearer. I am a hobbyist with big dreams. I mostly make home videos, but I am creative and want to do them well. I will make short films for fun. I enjoy it. I like the Sony 3-chip, but it's about a decade long in the tooth, and I'm ready for an upgrade in all respects (picture, HD, audio, etc.). I have a full-time job in an unrelated industry, so I don't really have time to learn on a practice camera or shoot lots of practice footage, or practice editing. I use FCE, but could upgrade to FCP ($1300!) if it became necessary.

Frankly, the HV20 is the leading contender for me, and the A1 second. Just no clear winners yet.
Click to expand...

If you are ready to upgrade in all respects then I would shy away from HD. How much audio equipment do you have. A shotgun, lav, portable recording device, etc. If you plan on editing HD you will need a fast computer with some decent software. I would list up everything you need first before jumping for the camera. I own a dvx as my primary camera, but I plan on purchasing a mac pro before upgrading to an HD camera. Although I might go for an hv20 or similar as a backup 2nd camera before going for the Primary HVX camera or something similar. Hope that helps.
 
Perhaps a used DVX is better for you. A great camera to learn on, and leaves money for your editing upgrade, the cheapest apple laptop is probably more than 3 times faster than your current G4. IF you decide to get FCS2 for $1300 rest assured it would be the best $1300 you ever spent.

This is if you are serious about doing shorts and whatnot and maybe one day leaving your current full time job. You say you dont have time to learn manual controls, well no matter what camera you get you will have to spend time learning it.

Which 3 chip Sony do you have? I cant imagine it being much smaller than the A1. Your description of the A1 makes it sound like it's troublesome to use and though some people might exaggerate their problems with HDV, this section of DVXUSER wouldnt be so popular if it was such a terrible format as you make it sound.

Good luck.
 
Thanks for the feedback.

Daniel: I have no audio equipment (except a couple Shure condensor mics for my guitar amp). I've been told that my G4 and FCE can handle the HDV (albeit, barely). I know it would take me a while to build all I would want, but I would think I could start shooting and editing with an HV20 tonight if I wanted. (When I get XLR mics, the sound would be better. On or off-camera lights would improve the picture, etc. I'm okay doing it by steps, so long as my first step isn't off a cliff.)

Hazard: Sure, a faster computer and FCS2 would be better, but not necessary, right? I am serious about doing shorts, but not about making this my day job. 10 years down the road, who know? But I am purely a hobbyist.

I didn't mean to imply that I don't have time to learn manual controls. What I meant is: I only have time to learn on the camera that I'll be using for the years to come.

I have the Sony TRV-900, which is only slightly larger than the HV20.

I think my OP was meant to highlight the troublesome aspects of the various choices; at least the reasons some people (myself included) hesitate to buy. And I don't think I am the voice making HDV sound bad; I'm only echoing what I've heard. In fact, I am really pulling for HDV to be the route for me despite what others say about it.
 
Uh guys, I think we're all forgetting one thing: the A1 shoots SD as well as HD! I don't know why this never ever comes up in these discussion. We're all talking as if the camera is only capable of HDV and if you get it you have to shoot HD. There is a 24p DV SD option that's just the same as any other 24p camera.

If you don't like HD, shoot SD first. When I first got my FX1 for the first four months I shot nothing but SD because I was afraid that I couldn't "handle" HD editing. But then I gave it a shot and I realized, "hey, it's not so bad!"

Or you can just shoot HD and do a downconvert in camera.
 
Thanks Jade. That's an excellent point. Definitely ups the immediate utility of the camera.

I'll search the boards regarding whether there a quality difference shooting in SD vs. shooting in HDV and downconverting in camera.
 
Wanting to pick up a second "good" camera, I've been agonizing over the A1/100B decsion for the last few weeks. I've read just about every article on here about this very repetitive subject. I've got one 100B already and finally decided on a second one last night and placed my order.
In the end I realize my skills are nowhere near utilizing either camera to it's fullest. Technology will have advanced far beyond what it is now before I get good enough to know and utilize their potential.
I still love the 100B picture and the HD option wasn't worth the extra few hundred bucks to me compared to having two cameras that match exactly.
As for HDV, I messed with some footage and had no patients for the render times- honestly none of my projects are worth the extra drain.(very impatient person I am..)
The A1 is a great camera whether using it for SD or HD, just not right for me at this time.
But coming to that conclusion was a real PITA...... and like all tough descions, I'll forever wonder "what if".


DDP
 
I'd suggest the DVX. With HD, you have to buy both the camera AND computer to properly edit, as well as editing software. If money is an issue, this will be around $3500-4000 even if you go HV20.

With the DVX, you're more than capable of making great looking films, and you can pretty much edit on any decent computer. In terms of output, it's more than capable of broadcasting on TV or showing at film festivals. Of course HD be crisper and more "clean", but that doesn't mean your STORY will be better. Again, if money is an issue, the DVX is the best way to go to start making films ASAP.

I recently bought the A1 (incredible camera) and also had to buy a new Mac to edit HD. I use almost every manual function on the A1 and couldn't live with a largely auto-camera. The HV20 is a sweet camera, just wasn't what I was looking for... I was looking for something that was similar to the DVX (focusing and zooming) and couldn't imagine handling that tiny HV20. But it burned a gargantuan hole in my pocket and will be depending on this setup for a while (unless I win the lottery or mistakenly rob a bank).

The DVX is a sweet ass cam and you'll love it. But so is the A1, and you'll love that as well. But it depends on what you want to do with it... If you're outputting to web only, no point going HD. For TV and festivals, HD always helps.

BTW, downconverting will look better than shooting SD.
 
sorry, but the hv20 rolling shutter and sub-par low lighting conditions keeps me from buying it. i'm gonna save a little more and buy the xh-a1 and get the whole shibang.
 
Ok, everyone is saying to get the DVX, and why not. It's a great camera for what it does. However, why invest almost 3,000 bucks on a camera that is becoming increasingly outdated when you can drop a few hundred more and get the A1. They both shoot 24 frames a second (which is what the dvx's main selling point was and still is) but with the A1 you get a camera that makes you SO much more marketable with the capability for HD. I am getting alot more calls these days about shooting hd, and it seemes like within the next few years that's pretty much what everyone is going to be requesting.

I love my DVX and its been the best camcorder I've owned over the past 3 years, but now its time to get the additional camera, and there is almost no way that I would drop my hard earned money into another one, when I see what great things are coming out of the A1.
 
The editing requirement for HDV is also grossly exaggerated. First time I edit HD was last year in my 3 years old single core PC. To my surprise I was able to make basic cuts with no problem and even preview transitions with little slow down. For an extra $300 I was able to upgrade my PC to the point where I can comfortably edit and preview most effects and even render time isn't such an issue any more.

The ONLY time HDV gives me problem is when I do compositing and other special FX in After Effect. The HDV implementation of AE is truly horrible; in fact, I plan to shoot my next FX heavy project in SD so that I don't have to deal with this. But most people aren't likely to require AE for most of their project, and in this regard HDV is completely viable and affordable to edit.
 
Very helpful discussion. Thanks for the input. So, here's a question: Let's say you were to make a straight-up comparison of the DVX with the A1, but taking price and HDV out of the equation. In other words, pretend they both sold for the same price and that you could only either shoot in SD or downconvert to SD. Which camera would you get?

(You see where I'm going: If the A1 meets or exceeds the DVX on the SD front, then the question becomes whether the HDV option is worth the extra money, right?)
 
cecil995 said:
Ok, everyone is saying to get the DVX, and why not. It's a great camera for what it does. However, why invest almost 3,000 bucks on a camera that is becoming increasingly outdated when you can drop a few hundred more and get the A1. They both shoot 24 frames a second (which is what the dvx's main selling point was and still is) but with the A1 you get a camera that makes you SO much more marketable with the capability for HD. I am getting alot more calls these days about shooting hd, and it seemes like within the next few years that's pretty much what everyone is going to be requesting.

I love my DVX and its been the best camcorder I've owned over the past 3 years, but now its time to get the additional camera, and there is almost no way that I would drop my hard earned money into another one, when I see what great things are coming out of the A1.
Click to expand...


If you're getting the calls then it's a no-brainer. When you're making money with your camera it's just another wrench-in-the-toolbox. But lets face it, the majority of 100b and A1 owners aren't making (enough) money using their cameras. The "increasingly outdated" formats are the least of their (our) problems.

DDP
 
max99 said:
Very helpful discussion. Thanks for the input. So, here's a question: Let's say you were to make a straight-up comparison of the DVX with the A1, but taking price and HDV out of the equation. In other words, pretend they both sold for the same price and that you could only either shoot in SD or downconvert to SD. Which camera would you get?

(You see where I'm going: If the A1 meets or exceeds the DVX on the SD front, then the question becomes whether the HDV option is worth the extra money, right?)
Click to expand...

They're both great cameras and the format isn't going to be the difference between getting laughed at and a cinematography award.
Define your needs and goals and go with that.
DDP
 
max99 said:
Very helpful discussion. Thanks for the input. So, here's a question: Let's say you were to make a straight-up comparison of the DVX with the A1, but taking price and HDV out of the equation. In other words, pretend they both sold for the same price and that you could only either shoot in SD or downconvert to SD. Which camera would you get?
Click to expand...

This has been discussed plenty of time before and other people have tried to boil it down to this. But the A1 doesn't do everything that the DVX do and the DVX doesn't do everything that the A1 do. You want true 16:9? The A1 does it. You want true manual focus and zoom? The A1 doesn't do it. What about the 20x zoom? The A1 has that. But do you want the ability to independently control your audio channel? Well the A1 doesn't do that. Get where I'm going with this? It's hard to set up a situation where "all things being equal, this camera is clearly superior." Usually all things aren't equal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top