Why do people use XH G1 and XH A1?

P

princigalli

Well-known member
I don't understand the appeal of those cameras except for their design. Crappy interlaced HDV, only with interpolated progressive mode... in 2008!!!!

Their lens are OK but present huge amounts of Canon's typical Chromatic Aberration. In fact any image or video with CA is a company signature for Canon equipment.

Even the consumer Canon HV20 is vastly superior to those prosumer canons.
 
What mariotorres said...

It's obvious you haven't done enough research nor shot with either of these cams.
 
I don't understand why people don't have better things to do then to dig up old arguments and try to get something started on an online forum. But that's just me.
 
He's been spreading the same unsupported statements about the HVX too. This is just approaching trolling.
 
princigalli said:
I don't understand the appeal of those cameras except for their design. Crappy interlaced HDV, only with interpolated progressive mode.
Click to expand...

:kali:Oh boy. Don't even get me started because I'm an A1 fanboy, but I'll try to restrain myself.

HDV is not as bad as you claim. Not even close. As for interlaced, a lot of cameras both in this price range and above have interlaced modes. Why not put it in the camera? Have you ever shot a dance recital or a play? 24p isn't always the best for this type of event. 60i works great in these situations. Also, the consensus is that Canon's HDV codec is the best implementation of the HDV format when compared to Sony and JVC's HDV codecs.

As for the "interpolated progressive" 24F modes on Canon's HDV line it has been tested and confirmed back in 2006 that the 24F modes end up outputting a true 24p signal to tape or external recording devices. The CCD's are scanned differently but the signal ends up a true 24p signal in the end. There were also comparison tests between Canon's HDV line, Sony's HDV line, JVC's HDV line, and Panasonic's DVC-PRO HD HVX. It was concluded that the 24F mode's motion rendition is indistinguishable from the 24p motion rendition on the other cameras. If you want to dig up the old threads you can, but basically the case has been closed.

princigalli said:
Their lens are OK but present huge amounts of Canon's typical Chromatic Aberration. In fact any image or video with CA is a company signature for Canon equipment.
Click to expand...

You're right, the A1/G1 is not perfect. The chromatic abberation is there. I will not deny that, however, it is not nearly as bad as you make it out to be. Many of the other cameras in this price range have chromatic aberration as well as other faults. Ask Barry Green, he'll tell you that all the cameras in this price range will have something that is not as perfect as could be. That is just how it is. Even the RED One is not perfect, and it costs 5 times as much as an A1 just for the body alone.

princigalli said:
Even the consumer Canon HV20 is vastly superior to those prosumer canons.
Click to expand...

I will agree with you as far as saying that the HV20 is a great camera. Well worth the money for what you get. It is not superior to an A1/G1, not even close. Go shoot manually with both under stressful conditions. Not just in a controlled setting like a film or a music video, which even then I'd easily choose my A1 as the main camera. HV20 is good for a B-cam though. In good light you can match them pretty well. Shoot a wedding or event video with both and tell me which one works better. Ergonomically the A1 smokes the HV20. Low light shooting easily goes to the A1. It is not even close.

princigalli said:
... in 2008!!!!
Click to expand...

For every swing you take against the A1/G1, you could just as easily find as many faults for the other cameras out there. Why are people shooting with a DVX anymore? Why are all these darned HVX's and HPX-170's hanging around anymore? Well the answer is simple... because these various cameras fulfill the needs of different individuals with different projects, workflows, and financial constraints. If you want to even compare the A1 to a newer camera like the HMC-150, then you could. Guess what though, the HMC doesn't beat the A1 in every department. The tech on the A1 is not outdated yet. Won't be for a while longer. Even the DVX is still going strong. Nothing wrong with that at all.
 
I chose the A1 over an HVX/HPX for several reasons.
1. The Iris ring.
2. 2.35:1 guidelines.
3. MiniDv tapes are cheap easy storage for tons of footage.
4. I already had an HV20, so this was the logical step up.
5. I like Canon.
6. The XHA1 uses a 1.5 megapixel sensor and downsamples to 1080i whereas the panasonic cameras shoot at 960x720 (lower than 720p quality) and upres through pixel shifting to 720p or 1080p.

This is not to say that it's hands down better, but the XHA1 is definitely the most underrated camera in it's class.
 
princigalli said:
I don't understand the appeal of those cameras except for their design. Crappy interlaced HDV, only with interpolated progressive mode... in 2008!!!!

Their lens are OK but present huge amounts of Canon's typical Chromatic Aberration. In fact any image or video with CA is a company signature for Canon equipment.

Even the consumer Canon HV20 is vastly superior to those prosumer canons.
Click to expand...

Even your own logic in it's self is flawed. You state all these "bad points" about the cameras and they say another canon is better? I thought all canon's are crap? GTFO you can't even get your own weak argument straight.
 
Hey princigalli guess you havent seen footage from these cameras. In fact many of these cameras have been used on feature film productions. Do your research and stop being a noob!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top