Cant make up my mind dvx or xh a1

M

mozwald

Member
Im going to be shooting a 20min short in the next few weeks, and I need a camera to use for many shoots to come. I just cant make up my mind about the DVX or XH-A1. If I could, I would wait 3 months to buy something new or see if there are price drops, but I cant...what should i do, here are the pros and cons.

XH-A1 is about $3250 after rebate
DVX is $2500 (at full compass)

I could afford the A1, but it would be pushing my limit, and i dont know if i could make that money back anytime soon, (in college at the moment, but graduating in a few months)

HD is where everything is going...I feel like i need to get my foot in the door now...

I have a Brevis 35 adapter, that ive been using with other cameras, and i want to get the most out of it...

choices... :crybaby:
 
You might consider renting cameras for a couple of days to shoot your shorts. There are quite a few rental houses that will allow you to borrow a camera for free over a weekend if you're interested in buying one - it allows you try out a couple of different cameras without having to make the plunge and purchase before you're certain what you want.

That's my plan for the immediate future. I was going to buy a mac pro and probably an xha1 all at once, but now i'm thinking that I might buy the computer and FCP and then try out a few different cameras before I buy. With the new tapeless HD cameras that are appearing on the market at the moment (and word of a Mini-RED starting to circulate) holding off for a little while seems like a good idea at the moment.
 
I use a dvx 100b and it has amazed me just how good it is. By stepping back a few meters and zooming more it can give nice depth of field and although everyone is going HD just remember that most TV stations still film their news on SD.

Its better to get a great SD camera then a lousy HD one for the same price!

Good Luck
 
The XH-A1 really shoots in sub-standard HD. You need to do a lot of post-processing to match the quality that comes straight from the HVX without any tinkering. If you're gonna go HD, go HD the right way. I'd reccomend getting the DVX especially since you're going to be suffereing in the financial department after getting out of college. SD is still very functional and will be for another 3-4 years. After that, the push for HD is going to be so strong you'll HAVE to upgrade. But until then, go with the DVX. Once the time comes, HD cameras will be cheaper and you'll have more options.
 
I have to highly disagree with the last two posts. Now granted this is in the DVX section so it will most likely be very pro DVX. First let me say that I have owned a DVX for over 2 1/2 years, have had a great run with it, and made lots of money with it, but compared to the A1 there really isn't much comparison. First of all the A1, as well as all other HD cameras for that matter have true 16x9 CCD's or Cmos sensors which is a huge advantage right off the start. To say that the A1 needs alot of post processing to look as good as other HD cameras in this price range is complete BS. The A1 is the most customizable prosumer HD camera currently available.
Yes it is true that most broadcasts do not currently offer HD, but HD is still a huge selling point to our clients and having an HD master is not only beneficial for the future but also gives many more options in post.

I love the DVX, it's a great camera, I still have mine and I rent it out quite often, but I have to say that for a very similar price the A1 more than makes up for the small price difference.

Just as an example here is a trailer for a short film that I Dp'd not long ago shot with the A1 and a 35mm adapter. Could it have been shot with the DVX, most likely, but I know I would not be nearly as satisfied with the image if it had been. And about the whole post thing, the only post that was done with this footage was slight curves and slight 3 wheel color correction.

http://www.stefweb.net/mantoman/Trailer%20TEST%205.wmv
 
Last edited:
LilGryphMaster said:
The XH-A1 really shoots in sub-standard HD. You need to do a lot of post-processing to match the quality that comes straight from the HVX without any tinkering. If you're gonna go HD, go HD the right way. I'd reccomend getting the DVX especially since you're going to be suffereing in the financial department after getting out of college. SD is still very functional and will be for another 3-4 years. After that, the push for HD is going to be so strong you'll HAVE to upgrade. But until then, go with the DVX. Once the time comes, HD cameras will be cheaper and you'll have more options.
Click to expand...

Did you ever use an A1 or even see footage from it? To say that it shoots "substandard" HD is borderline trolling.
 
Yes I have an compared to the footage from the HVX the A1's footage is muddy, less detailed and less sharp.

I am not trolling, I'm merely suggesting he save his money until he can afford a higher end HD camera when it's at a lower price.
 
LilGryphMaster said:
Yes I have an compared to the footage from the HVX the A1's footage is muddy, less detailed and less sharp.

I am not trolling, I'm merely suggesting he save his money until he can afford a higher end HD camera when it's at a lower price.
Click to expand...

Really you've compared footage that you shot from both cameras? honestly can't believe that. The HVX while a great camera is in no way sharper than the A1, infact the A1 has slightly higher resolution. If you're only comparing footage that you have found online, then I really don't think that qualifies as having compared footage. Compression, settings, user all play a factor in determining what the footage looks like.
 
scharky said:
infact the A1 has slightly higher resolution.
Click to expand...

Maybe... but the A1 is 4 time more compressed than the HVX 25meg/s vs 100meg/sec and the HVX is 4:2:2 color space while Canon is 4:1:1

Sorry but slightly higher resolution which is then super compressed + sub-quality color space = much lower resolution in my book. Ask any engineers...
 
Don't ask engineers, just look at the footage. It's easy enough to do.

HVX and A1 deliver comparably sharp images. A1 appears to be maybe 5% sharper. If you want to bring compression into it, the A1 uses long-GOP which works fine in many instances, and lousy in some; the HVX uses intraframe which performs predictably and equally in all circumstances.
 
Again, I don't care what engineers say, I have shot with all sorts of cameras and for my own personal camera I chose the A1, the proof really is in the pudding. you can throw stats at me all day long but in the end the footage is what is being delivered and this is where the A1 delivers. I'm in no way saying that the A1 is the best HD camera out there, far from it, but for a little over 3 grand it is the best HD camera in it's class hands down. I have shot alot with the HVX, the V1U, the JVCHd100, the Z1 and for me the camera of choice goes back to the A1. This for me was not about the cost but about the image that I got out of the camera. I personally prefere the image of the A1 to that of the HVX, but like everyone else on here I have my opinion and I prefere the image that Canon has achieved with the A1. I have never had compression artifacts enter my footage, it holds up great in post, and it is a great workflow.

You try and sell me on numbers when you have to remember that in a few years as compression continues to get better and better, and data rates stay relatively low, the image that cameras produce will be much better.
 
i have to agree with scharky. i dont know which footage lilgryphmaster was look at but ive noticed the A1 is very sharp. And most of the time sharper than the hvx. I think the canon's win in general on sharpness. The hvx has deeper color but the A1 has more tweeks. Tomato - Tomoto

I have to admit i dont know why anyone would get a dvx over a A1 (inless they got it used for alot less)
 
I pretty much think I'm going the DVX100 route. I don't feel like messing with all the upgrades for HD.
 
Zim said:
I pretty much think I'm going the DVX100 route. I don't feel like messing with all the upgrades for HD.
Click to expand...

Um, frankly and IMHO, the A1 blows the DVX out of the water. Ain't even close.

And btw the A1 also shoots native 16:9 and 4:3 SD very nicely, so you wouldn't be obligated to upgrade to HD until you're ready.
 
buy what you can afford put it to use and create something great with it ive looked at tons of footage on here from all different cams and ive seen things shot with a DVX that blew so called higher end cameras away just because of the talent behind the production and vice versa with the HVX and A1.Crap can also be produced with all these cams too. build your skills with the tools you have and have fun creating and not getting hung up on which cam is better they are all excellent tools :)
 
Last edited:
Metrolens said:
Um, frankly and IMHO, the A1 blows the DVX out of the water. Ain't even close.

And btw the A1 also shoots native 16:9 and 4:3 SD very nicely, so you wouldn't be obligated to upgrade to HD until you're ready.
Click to expand...


frankly it depends on who your asking. But I do like the idea of native 16:9 SD, but it is around another $700 that I could spend on sound. Plus I know the DVX100 can do a lot. It did not go out of date yet. I really thought I might do the HV20 too but I'm not sold on it.
 
Last edited:
matt s. said:
buy what you can afford put it to use and create something great with it ive looked at tons of footage on here from all different cams and ive seen things shot with a DVX that blew so called higher end cameras away just because of the talent behind the production and vice versa with the HVX and A1.Crap can also be produced with all these cams too. build your skills with the tools you have and have fun creating and not getting hung up on which cam is better they are all excellent tools :)
Click to expand...

good advice.
 
I think I see an orderly progression for this type of thread.

1. Someone posts wondering whether they should go DVX or A1
2. Someone else jumps in about how they love the HVX/DVX "mojo"
3. Another person chimes in about the A1 "inferior" color space and "unusable" GOP compression
4. A1 user counters with the A1's "superior" resolution
5. Inevitably, someone says that 24F is "not true 24p"
6. Barry went in, smooths out the technical debate.
7. Thread ends with the suggestion that "it's not the camera, it's the operator"

Let's just skip straight to step 7 from now on. All of this have been debated ad nauseum.
 
They're both really nice cams, it's true. However:

I got my A1 this week for $3050 (after rebate) from onecall, an authorized dealer. That was a great deal. But I'm pretty sure you can find A1s now for around $3150 (again after rebate).

B&H right now lists the DVX for $2749. So is full compass an authorized, reputable dealer? I'd want to make sure it is. In any event, the A1 is easily worth $500 or even $700 more than the DVX.

Here's another thing to consider: Nothing, I repeat nothing I saw on these boards even came close to showing the true image the A1 produces on a proper plasma. I promise you that. I've shot with both cams - and when and only when you see the image of the A1 on a HD plasma you will understand. In no uncertain terms, and again respectfully and IMHO: Ain't even close. Kinda like equating a GL2 to the HVX.

Anyway, hope this helps.
 
Last edited:
jade8472 said:
I think I see an orderly progression for this type of thread.

1. Someone posts wondering whether they should go DVX or A1
2. Someone else jumps in about how they love the HVX/DVX "mojo"
3. Another person chimes in about the A1 "inferior" color space and "unusable" GOP compression
4. A1 user counters with the A1's "superior" resolution
5. Inevitably, someone says that 24F is "not true 24p"
6. Barry went in, smooths out the technical debate.
7. Thread ends with the suggestion that "it's not the camera, it's the operator"

Let's just skip straight to step 7 from now on. All of this have been debated ad nauseum.
Click to expand...

Oh yes, this thread has existed many many times before in all sorts of incarnations, but I'm here to say it isn't just about the operator, otherwise forums like this with tech specs and all the good jazz would not exist. Sure it's important to know what your doing with the camera, lighting etc. but having new and improved technology that gets you closer to your vision is a big plus. Why do you think so many people are so "RED Crazy". could it be that all of these people feel that having a good camera will make them a better artist? No, it's becasue part of being a good artist is selecting the proper tools to let your art come alive, and 99% of the time in this profession a $200 JVC handycam is not that tool (Trust me that is where this thread would have gone next) :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top