Agonizing over dvx100B or Canon A1
- Thread starter sharky
- Start date
triplej96
Veteran
downsouth said:
For me it was an easy choice. I bought a used DVX 100b for 2 k can't go wrong there. I have a nice computer hp 8200 workstation dual processors 4 gigs of ram, adboe production studio premium, and avid. HD looks nice for sure but going HD cost more money in general not to mention a pretty decent computer upgrade. I saved money going with a used dvx which enabled me to buy software, tripod, light kit... After spending just a little time with the dvx I know I made the right decision.
The dvx is perfect for me but for others the A1 may be perfect.
So we are back to the point. Is Panasonic awake and aware that there is still a market for the $3000 camera? The DVX (in good hands) has help produce award winning projects, proving that it was possible with a reasonnable budget to do work of passion and quality.
So is there a AVC-HD-DVX waiting for us next month?
So is there a AVC-HD-DVX waiting for us next month?
Barry_Green
Moderator
Yes, it did. It said, and images were posted to show, that you can max out the colors to pull some punch into the XHA1 image, but even so it only begins to approach the HVX's default settings. The HVX can be pushed much further (if that's what's desired).jade8472 said:
That is exactly true. There's no single overriding case of "better", there's only what you prefer, and that's subjective in all cases.
Barry_Green
Moderator
No, it isn't. It may be everything you need, but it isn't everything the DVX is. DVX includes manual zoom, cinegamma, is at least a stop faster, has precise repeatable focus, better audio, individually controllable audio channels for line/mic and phantom power and routing one mic to both channels, two levels of zebras, zebras and peaking at the same time, etc. The XHA1 has many things to it that the DVX doesn't as well. They're not the same, and the XHA1 does many things the DVX doesn't (including high def!) But to say that it's "everything the DVX is" is just not true. Might be everything you needed from a DVX, but that won't apply to everyone.jade8472 said:
As compared to the DVX, I'd say the XHA1 takes six steps forward and two steps back. But with the aggressive pricing, it's the better buy for most circumstances; a prospective owner would have to look at the list of things the DVX does that the XHA1 doesn't and determine if those were dealbreakers. If they can live without those features, get the XHA1 by all means. If the user can't live without those features, the XHA1 is not the better camera for them.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Including two Oscar-nominated documentaries! All these cameras are good enough, and buying a better-quality camera isn't going to be the difference between success and failure anymore; just buy the one that's right for what it is you do. Each has different features and capabilities.Sirocco said:
No indication whatsoever. I've been nagging for exactly this for a long time, and have not gotten any encouraging feedback that it's coming anytime soon.
ryan brown
lOwEr CaSe Member
Barry_Green said:
AND... there's your answer, people.
Well put (as usual) Barry.
better audio, individually controllable audio channels for line/mic and phantom power and routing one mic to both channels,
Hi Barry,
Would you please give an example (or two) when you would use both the line and mic settings? On the DVX, how would you route one mic to both channels? If I had 2 separate mics plugged in to the A1, can I set both to different levels?
Thanks!
Hi Barry,
Would you please give an example (or two) when you would use both the line and mic settings? On the DVX, how would you route one mic to both channels? If I had 2 separate mics plugged in to the A1, can I set both to different levels?
Thanks!
cardmaverick
Well-known member
Barry's right about cameras taking time to develop. I remember when Andromeda came out, it wasn't producing a very hot looking HD image... but now they are gearing up to release a 12 bit linear firmware upgrade, and the current 10 bit system is WAY better than it was back in late 2005.
As for low light, the smiley says it all:
:huh:
I have yet to see any really good low light footage from any video camera, heck, even film. Cameras need light, get ready for noise, it sounds like your gonna have to accept that fact.
Ever consider buying a highly portable light kit instead? I'm not talking on camera light (blah, those suck). I mean something super compact and lite weight, like a Lowell kit? I don't ever use Lowell's for my projects, but if I needed something lite weight, and could possibly run off a robust battery system, I'd get some Lowell lights.
A newer "better" camera isn't always the right answer...
As for low light, the smiley says it all:
:huh:
I have yet to see any really good low light footage from any video camera, heck, even film. Cameras need light, get ready for noise, it sounds like your gonna have to accept that fact.
Ever consider buying a highly portable light kit instead? I'm not talking on camera light (blah, those suck). I mean something super compact and lite weight, like a Lowell kit? I don't ever use Lowell's for my projects, but if I needed something lite weight, and could possibly run off a robust battery system, I'd get some Lowell lights.
A newer "better" camera isn't always the right answer...
Captain Pierce
Veteran
Well, I'm not Barry, but an immediate scenario that would come to mind for using both line and mic at the same time is getting a feed from some sort of sound board (which is typically line-level) but wanting to run a separate mic into the camera as well. Granted, that's more of an event-based scenario (which is where I work).
As for routing one mic (or line feed, for that matter) to both DVX channels, you have to use Input 2 and then just set both channels to take their audio from Input 2.