Canon XH A1 vs HVX200

[drdimento]

I have no clue...but I was shocked! It wasn't an overtly bright day. And we were shooting in the shade of a huge tree.

Rob, since we're on this part of the subject at hand, did you notice at all that the image seemed to loose dimension (depth) and appear almost dimensionless flat and even almost plastic looking? The Sony cameras we used gave us that appearance and it looked really fake as compared to the HVX200 footage side by side wherein the P2 format media looked absolutely astonishing and full color real although at moments somewhat underlit when indoors with a large picture window (which altogether is my single largest complaint with the camera other than I wished it were about 1# lighter) however the HVX did not show grain if there was even the least bit of artificial reflected light applied (like shooting an Arri 300 or 650 at the ceiling) but the Sony HDV looked horribly grainy under that same scenario and yet blown out overexposed when outdoors which brings me to wonder if it is a camera issue or a codec issue since you are talking about a different camera and yet a similiar situation.

 

[robmneilson]

The image did look pretty flat, BUT I would imagine thats only due to have the lens at its widest point, and the exposure closed down as much as possible. It was months ago that I shot this though, and I am a bit hazy on the details.

Shooting indoors even at a higher exposure with sun blasting in the window I remember had a huge amount of grain.

I started the shot looking down at the street in the early morning, and then panned over to a couple sleeping in the bed. I hid an exposure change of two stops with the wipe against the wall, but no matter how much light I brought into the scene the grain was still there.

I ended up shooting with a 4' bank of kinos on an avenger 4 feet above the subjects...I would have refused to shoot with the camera again, but the director owned it and was far too cheap to rent a better cam.

 

[robmneilson]

Im sorry if I didn't answer your question my mind has tried to block out all of my experiences with that camera.

 

[Robert M Wright]

I shot four shorts for a friend with his Canon A1, and I own an HVX. That said I really was not impressed with the A1. It shows grain like crazy, and the ND's don't seem to work that well.

Shooting outside in the park with the ND's on full, and the lens closed down as far as it could go and it was still blown out.

Also not very impressed with the glass on the A1.

All I can think of, is that either somehow you had gain on (and set pretty high), or the camera is defective.

I just opened my window and aimed my XH-A1 at the neighbor's house. It's snowing here in Minnesota. With ND at 1/32, aperture at F9.5 and zoomed all the way wide, the image is underexposed (even the snow on the neighbor's roof doesn't blow out) and there's no grain to speak of. I even tried engaging gain at 6db without blowing out the image.

Edit: I had the camera shooting 24F at 1/48 shutter.

 

[robmneilson]

Maybe the cam was defective, but the gain was not engaged and all of the settings in camera were as they should be.

 

[drdimento]

The image did look pretty flat, . . . Shooting indoors even at a higher exposure with sun blasting in the window I remember had a huge amount of grain. I started the shot looking down at the street in the early morning, and then panned over to a couple sleeping in the bed. I hid an exposure change of two stops with the wipe against the wall, but no matter how much light I brought into the scene the grain was still there . . .

This was pretty much our experience also on the flat part and exactly the exposure I would have described were I to have used the Sony that way. Now the HVX would have just burped and not gone grainy but just been underexposed as we have experienced UNLESS shooting miniDV or 720 then some grain would have appeared although the whole image would have been underexposed. Now here's the rub, apply just the slightest amout of artificial light and it would have been OK . . OR . . if their was a lot of window light the camera would have given a nice picture in that scenario. When we are on set with the DVX100B and use the HVX as a 3rd camera in miniDV we have to boost the light by about 1 to 1.5 f stop to make a good image on the HVX without grain. However, shoot in 1080 and the grain disappears but is underexposed.

It has been told me that the reason for this is that the HVX is a 1080 codec/chip by design and any other size change results in image compression which will act more like a high f stop lens'd camera. Based on experience I would have to agree. It's almost like the differnce between a 50mm 1.8 Nikon lens and a 50mm 2.8 Nikon lens. Just seems that way on the images.

Another thing, when looking at the LCD one has to always remember that what is seen is not what the image looks like. I have played around with image settings to get the "right look" on the LCD and never did but shot it anyway figuring I'll get as close as I can and fix it in post but the fact was that the actual image was far better than the LCD. Why? I'm guessing it's an SD LCD and that we should have used an external HD monitor.

 

[Huy Vu]

Maybe the cam was defective, but the gain was not engaged and all of the settings in camera were as they should be.

The most common mistake is having the AGC (Auto Gain Control) button on the side of the camera on without realizing it. The A1 is very clean. I had to shoot 3db on several scenes on my last film, and you can't see it at all in the final product.

 

[robmneilson]

The HVX LCD is oh so bad...the first time I used the camera I really thought it was crap based on what I was seeing in camera, but I was pleasantly surprised when viewed on a good monitor.

Although luckilly Im shooting with a brevis now and Ill never have to suffer with the crap LCD again. I'll soon be dropping some cash on the Panasonic BT-L80 monitor, and I cant wait to put it to use.

 

[Robert M Wright]

I don't know what the LCD is like on the HVX, but the XH-A1 LCD pretty much sucks.

 

[drdimento]

I don't know what the LCD is like on the HVX, but the XH-A1 LCD pretty much sucks.

When trying to visualize what the final image is going to look like . . the HVX LCD is baaaaaaaad and not a good reference. The viewfinder is much closer to "real."

As I say adjusting the sensor settings to get the right picture is a risk on the LCD and how the viewfinder can be closer I DON'T KNOW . . but it is.

Whatever Rob did on that camera we must have done on the Sony's because both of them had the same issue.

EDIT: Maybe that AGC thing was the spoiler . . not sure.

 

[Robert M Wright]

When I first got my XH-A1 and tried it out the first time, I didn't realize AGC was on, and the noise in the image was pretty awful. When I looked at those first images on my computer, my initial reaction was to think the camera was defective.

 

[drdimento]

When I first got my XH-A1 and tried it out the first time, I didn't realize AGC was on, and the noise in the image was pretty awful. When I looked at those first images on my computer, my initial reaction was to think the camera was defective.

Where can one rent this camera very inexpensive? I'd be willing to take one more HDV shot just to see what gives but would much prefer someone mail me some tapes shot on one and compare it to similiar HVX footage because as of the Sony footage side beside I wouldn't give 10 cents for either of those HDV cameras.

EDIT: I don't want downloadable files but want the actual tapes so that we can digitize them into our Avid NLE and see how it handles the material side by side with 1080 x 1920 DVCProHD otherwise it's just compressed data downloaded. I want the original tapes that we can digitize. Wait can I digitize off a regular camera OR do I have to have any (consumer or prosumer) HDV camera?

 

[Robert M Wright]

I really suggest you purchase an XH-A1, and try it for a good month. If it just won't work for your purposes, you can sell it and your cost to "rent" for a month will probably be lower than renting for even just 2 days (which really isn't enough time to check out an XH-A1very well).

There are plenty of used XH-A1s available, barely used and in excellent condition, for around $2800-$3000. Personally, I have no issue with purchasing a barely used camera, if I know the owner is a pro and takes proper care of their gear. If you go that route, you can try an XH-A1 out for a while, basically for free (shop around and you might even wind up pocketing a minor profit if you do decide to sell it in a month).

If you work with the camera for awhile, I think you will find the XH-A1 can shoot a superb image for producing work like weddings videos, when the delivery will be in SD on a DVD (and excellent for high end weddings, so long as the delivery is on a standard DVD).

 

[Robert M Wright]

Is push autofocus useful at all, for shooting events, on the HVX?

 

[drdimento]

Is push autofocus useful at all, for shooting events, on the HVX?

Push Autofocus - sometimes yes. If in a push, can't see well what's going on, low light, tight spot, depress and hold and it works. However, what really works GREAT is the ZoomFocus button where when in 1080 hit the button above the focus switch controller and half the screen zooms in about 10 more times than full zoom or even more (someone may know exactlly how much) and one can manually focus on a nose hair if that's what is wanted and it auto offs after about 10 secs. This is extremely handy in manual fucus.

 

[drdimento]

I really suggest you purchase an XH-A1, and try it for a good month. If it just won't work for your purposes, you can sell it and your cost to "rent" for a month will probably be lower than renting for even just 2 days (which really isn't enough time to check out an XH-A1very well). . .

To do this we'd have to sell a DVX100B since we're a three camera shop currently with two DVX100B's and one HVX200 and thus we'd have to sell one of the DVX100B's and add to the sale price to get an A1. I'm just not 100% sure of what I would gain over the 200 other than if its' footprint and weight is more like the 100 because the size and weight are the only physical issues we have with the 200 and the only image issues is the light requirement which always reserves the 100 for the receptions )

 

[Huy Vu]

I don't know what the LCD is like on the HVX, but the XH-A1 LCD pretty much sucks.

The A1 has the best LCD except for the FX1/Z1U and the EX1 in term of resolution. It absolutely kicks the HVX's LCD in the teeth and leaves it unconscious on the side of the road. It's smaller, but way sharper. I've been using nothing but the A1's LCD for focusing on my Letus Extreme, and the result is perfect every single time. Can't say the same about the HVX.

Colorwise, none of the LCD are good. They're not meant to be. That's why you pay big bucks for calibrated field monitors.

 

[Robert M Wright]

To do this we'd have to sell a DVX100B since we're a three camera shop currently with two DVX100B's and one HVX200 and thus we'd have to sell one of the DVX100B's and add to the sale price to get an A1. I'm just not 100% sure of what I would gain over the 200 other than if its' footprint and weight is more like the 100 because the size and weight are the only physical issues we have with the 200 and the only image issues is the light requirement which always reserves the 100 for the receptions )

I would think the biggest potential advantage for you, would likely be for shooting weddings (and any other live event). With an A1, you could shoot up to 80 minutes straight, without having to change tape. When you do change tape, there's also no need to dump the data while still in production (like to reuse a P2 card). If you use an unmanned camera at weddings or events (for B roll or whatever), it could be especially useful to be able to leave it unattended for over an hour at a time.

Also, for the cost of one HVX, you could almost get two A1s.

 

[Barry_Green]

Manual zoom (instead of servo)

The HVX has a manual zoom exactly the same as the EX1 does. Perhaps you meant manual focus?

Also the cheaper media, SxS, was a reason to go for the EX1 over the HVX.

How is SxS "cheaper"? It's exactly the same cost.

 

[Robert M Wright]

For most editing, an IDE or SATA drive over USB2 will work just as well as a SATA drive over eSATA.

Edit: I posted this in the wrong thread.