Any justification to invest in SD?

V

ventureforth

New member
I'm about to purchase a camera. It will mostly be for personal use (i.e. personal projects, docs, etc.), but if I can make some money with it as far as stock footage, etc., I wouldn't object. Looking at B&H I see that for about the same amount of cash, I can get a DVX100, a Canon XL2, or a XHA1. My question is why I would invest in the DVX or XL2 when I can get the XH for just about the same price? Now, I love the look of the DVX. One of the first feature films I worked on as a PA was NOVEMBER, shot on an early model DVX and which won Best Cinematography at Sundance. I think it makes amazing images!! AMAZING!! I still use it from time to time and am in awe of the pictures it produces. I also think the XL2 produces outstanding footage. Continuing on, I think the A1 is a stellar camera, as well. Just take a look at some of the Steven Dempsey footage over at ExposureRoom. So, I guess I am wondering how I could justify the DVX or the XL, both of which I would have no hesitation using when all is said and done, when an A1 comes in at an equal (approx.) cost and gives me the cache of HD and beautiful imagery to boot? Am I missing something?

I hope this isn't a ridiculous inquiry. Just thought I might get some perspective on the subject.

Cheers,

Trip
 
Last edited:
ventureforth said:
?

I hope this isn't a ridiculous inquiry. Just thought I might get some perspective on the subject.

Cheers,

Trip
Click to expand...

I don't know of any reason. However I can think of many reasons to go with a Beta Cam. They're cheap and produce an awesome picture. BetaSP is by far the most widely accepted format around the world. Most countries think HD is some sort of sexually transmitted disease.
 
I think its worth it if you are not planning on relying on it for money. Everyone wants at least HDV now. If you are using it to build your film making skills then getting something HD might last your experience longer meaning you won't outgrow it as fast. Once you shoot something in HD its hard to go back to SD, once you shoot something on RED its hard to go back to HD.
 
I think if it was just about a cost-effective solution to producing good images, I would get a Brevis or Letus or SGPro and a Canon HV30 (or the upcoming HS10). The footage I've seen looks great and perfectly fine for throwing stuff up on the web or making DVDs. If I didn't really care about any narrative or true "filmmaking" work, I might consider spending a little extra on a 5D Mark II and really indulge the photographer side of myself and maybe even be able to sell some stock stills.

In the end, I guess I am looking for something that can grow with me. If it ends up just being for personal use and the joy of videography, that's fine, but if the opportunity arises to use it in a professional or semi-professional capacity...then I wouldn't want to be held back by it. It would be great to have the camera pay for itself, if you know what I mean. I've gotten some paid work as a videographer on industrials/mini docs. Nothing for broadcast, just web stuff and interactive CDROM delivery.

Now, as often as not, when perusing the job sites I see the DVX called out for over an HDV camera. I imagine that will become less and less the case as time wears on. The flip side is that I've seen people demand HD who could absolutely be more than satisfied with SD as far as their final delivery method is concerned (small web stuff, etc.)...but they are just enamored with the concept of HD just for the sake of it.

I don't know if I'm answering my own question here. Perhaps, it's more of a curiosity thing. When I see a dated (albeit top-notch) SD camera (i.e., DVX or XL2) selling for the same price as a well-respected HD camera (i.e., XHA1), I'm left to wonder who is purchasing the former?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top