Im looking at getting a used DVX to save about a grand so i can put that into a wide angle and some other toys... but it is a 100 not a 100a. What are the big differences between the 'regular' and the 'a'? Anything big enough to make me not want to buy it? I am doing short and feature length dramas on it and want, like all of us, that nice beautiful film like look.
dvx 100 vs. dvx 100a
- Thread starter DoubleIt
- Start date
..theres a list a mile long of people here and abroad who still have the 100 because the 100a wasnt worth upgrading to. in all honesty i woud say that most people who did make the upgrade upgragded to the 100a to simply have the newest thing out and not out of any sort of necessity or client request, even though id be willing to wager that it hasnt offered them anything of real production value over the 100. and of course we all know that either camera can make the same stunning images.
all in all the 100a offers some stuff over the 100 that most pros consider useless for pro level dramatic film production(gain in 24p, focus assist). and it also offers some nice choices that the 100 doesnt have as far as a couple other gamma settings, and so on. but the 100a will never make anything that the 100 can not do. and none of us have seen anything from the 100a that sets it apart from the 100 whatsoever. any frame grab or clip here you see,.. nobody usually asks if it was 100 or 100a because theres no real difference, and nobody really cares. for all practical purposes its the same thing.
1,000.00 is alot of money for an independent to spend on other things. its really a question of whether you want a camera with some features you would probably never miss, or if you want to get some other gear that you couldnt make something quality without. youll find once you get into it all that youd probably beg for 1000.00 to get some specific gear you need. IMHO ..well seeing as i have the 100 and could have sold it and bought the 100a at any time.. well that should speak for itself.:thumbsup:
all in all the 100a offers some stuff over the 100 that most pros consider useless for pro level dramatic film production(gain in 24p, focus assist). and it also offers some nice choices that the 100 doesnt have as far as a couple other gamma settings, and so on. but the 100a will never make anything that the 100 can not do. and none of us have seen anything from the 100a that sets it apart from the 100 whatsoever. any frame grab or clip here you see,.. nobody usually asks if it was 100 or 100a because theres no real difference, and nobody really cares. for all practical purposes its the same thing.
1,000.00 is alot of money for an independent to spend on other things. its really a question of whether you want a camera with some features you would probably never miss, or if you want to get some other gear that you couldnt make something quality without. youll find once you get into it all that youd probably beg for 1000.00 to get some specific gear you need. IMHO ..well seeing as i have the 100 and could have sold it and bought the 100a at any time.. well that should speak for itself.:thumbsup:
Gordo88
Member
Rented a 100 while my 100a was in the shop.
Things I missed. In 24p mode, AF does not work, Iris Function in 24p mode SEEMED to be different, perhaps a bit more stagee. GAIN does not work in 24P mode, very important for a verite shooter who needs stuff like GAIN in awkward lighting situations.
Overall liked the look of my 100A better, as I spend time tweaking the proc amp and I noticed that amount of tweakiness was dumbed down in the 100.
Thats it, IMHO buy the 100a, pani knew they released a lesser camera, you should too
Gordo
Things I missed. In 24p mode, AF does not work, Iris Function in 24p mode SEEMED to be different, perhaps a bit more stagee. GAIN does not work in 24P mode, very important for a verite shooter who needs stuff like GAIN in awkward lighting situations.
Overall liked the look of my 100A better, as I spend time tweaking the proc amp and I noticed that amount of tweakiness was dumbed down in the 100.
Thats it, IMHO buy the 100a, pani knew they released a lesser camera, you should too
Gordo
smkoch
Well-known member
It was a big decision when I bought my camera, there was a dealer in my city who had a 100 as a demo and they wanted to clear it out for a pretty good deal, after reading adam wilts review I really had to sit and think about not just what I wanted now or how I could use it, but how It might limit what I want in the future or if I would end up regreting it.... needless to say I could have used a light kit but ended up getting the 100a. And now have no regrets' I love the camera
I've shot with both and I find the 100a to be a little noisier.
And I never use autofocus or gain. I try to shoot pretty clean and if the footage is a little dark I try and boost the shadows and midtones in post.
If I purchased another one I would probably try and pick up another 100.
And I never use autofocus or gain. I try to shoot pretty clean and if the footage is a little dark I try and boost the shadows and midtones in post.
If I purchased another one I would probably try and pick up another 100.
There's 2 things in the 100A that I use often that's not present on the 100: 24pA and gain in 24p mode. I do use some of the other features like gamma, etc., but those are not really noticeable. The autofocus in 24p mode is very slow and pretty much useless.
You just have to decide how often you will be using these features and if it's worth $1000 to you.
You just have to decide how often you will be using these features and if it's worth $1000 to you.
Gordo88 said:
“Dumbed down”? That’s a ridiculous statement, especially as the 100 was released a year before the 100A – what was it “dumbed down” from? Was the Model T a “dumbed down” Mustang? Hardly.
“Lesser camera” is also a ridiculous statement to describe a camera as revolutionary as the 100. It was certainly first-generation, but any tweaks added to a later model do NOT diminish that revolutionary nature. It was, make no mistake about it, a home run. Just because the 100A made it out of the park a little bit further doesn’t take that run off the board.
Never shot with a 100. Does it have squeeze? Thought I remember reading somewhere that it didn't. If not, I would miss it.
And, I have to admit (though I'm hesitant in this group) that I do use the auto focus in 24p sometimes. I shoot 70% corporate training and 30% weddings and there are times in good light that it works fine for my needs. (Please don't barrage me with your opinions about this---the autofocus or shooting events in 24p---I'm just being honest. It works for me.)
And, I have to admit (though I'm hesitant in this group) that I do use the auto focus in 24p sometimes. I shoot 70% corporate training and 30% weddings and there are times in good light that it works fine for my needs. (Please don't barrage me with your opinions about this---the autofocus or shooting events in 24p---I'm just being honest. It works for me.)
Barry_Green
Moderator
The 100 is a great camera, but I do wish I had a 100A. "Peaking" in the viewfinder is nice to have, as is the 105% zebra setting, and I really like the smoother zoom ring of the 100A. The closer focus distance is a nice feature, as is squeeze mode. And the color reproduction is different, the new prism makes the 100A footage look a little different, although you can pretty much get them to match if you tweak the menu settings.
If the price were comparable, I'd take the 100A in a heartbeat. But for $1,000? That's a lot of dough. The 100A upgrades are nice, but I don't think they're worth a grand.
If the price were comparable, I'd take the 100A in a heartbeat. But for $1,000? That's a lot of dough. The 100A upgrades are nice, but I don't think they're worth a grand.