dvx 100a or xl2?

S

steve32

Member
For quite a while now I've been trying to decide which is a better camera, the dvx 100a or the xl2. I know that both are progessive and will produce a quality image, but over all what would be a better choice.
 
steve32 said:
For quite a while now I've been trying to decide which is a better camera, the dvx 100a or the xl2. I know that both are progessive and will produce a quality image, but over all what would be a better choice.
Click to expand...
Ahhh the age old question

its a choice of tradeoffs.

DVX100a

PROS:
  • best cinegama / S curves (handles light more like film)
  • true discreet 24 frames per second for output to DVD / blow up to film -- 24fps ADVANCED (100a and 100b not 100)
  • best resource book/dvd for operating camera
  • part of this dynamic community and support -- big selling factor beyond the technical advantages above.
  • HVX is the best Hi Def variable frame rate camera out there PERIOD. And when you are ready to upgrade 90% of your familiarity with the DVX will transfer.
CONS:
  • No native full resolution wide screen solution. So you'll lose some resolution of you go to 16X9 widescreen. But the film NOVEMBER won best cinematography award at Sundance in 2005 and that was blown all the way up to 35mm film using a real time uprezz, and there are tons of features and docs at Sundance every year shot on the DVX
  • headphones are noisy and delayed on the DVX100 and 100A, fixed on the 100B
XL2
PROS
  • Native 16X9 wide screen.
  • Changeable lenses. (but taking advantage of this feature is VERY expensive)
CONS
  • more video like in terms of light an color, flatter S curves
  • simulated faux 24p
Some XL2 guys will probably chime in and tell me I'm wrong on something and they will probably be right, but that's my impression, though I am clearly biased towards the DVX.

I think basically in termns of the cameras themselves comes down to prettier naturally warmer image vs. higher resolution image for widescreen, but you can kick ass with both.

In term so of the clincher for me it would come down to this website and the HUGE supporty group here.

I mean you can PM the guy that wrote what has to be the best camera manul ever on here for the DVX and he'll answer your questions.
 
[*]simulated faux 24p[/LIST]Some XL2 guys will probably chime in and tell me I'm wrong .[/QUOTE]


The XL2 has true 24p capability just like the DVX. Your confusing it with the XL-H1.
Selecting either is a matter of taste.
 
Last edited:
Go for either the Original DVX, which ad better chips than the 100a, or go for the the XL2. Bare in mind that the XL2 gives you a flat image straight out. It does pretty well in Post production, tough.
 
I'm getting some gorgeous xl2 footage with a couple of notches of colour gain and crushing blacks (mildly) in camera. The xl2 is very low contrast out of the box, but this is easily adjusted in cam. I'm not a huge fan of altering my footage too much in post. Less destruction of the image if you get it right first go. To my eye there's not a great deal of difference between the cams with slight adjustment.

Lighting, compostion, acting, sound design (don't neglect sound!), story etc will have a greater impact on your work (and it's effect on your audience) than the camera you use. Hell, there's a trailer shot on a gl2 floating around that suspended my disbelief. But here I'm assuming you'll be indie filmmaking.

Make sure you chose a camera which suits your purposes. Form factor, online support and ease of use should certainly be considerations. Price too?

Interchangable lenses has been irrelevant for me. It's not a professional cam (for me at least) - when I shoot something serious I'll be renting a better cam, not spending money on SD lenses.

I love the xl2's loooooong lens. I'm getting some sexy shallow dof but at the expense of field of view. I'm looking forward to getting a hold of a 35mm adaptor (but maybe when I upgrade to hidef)

The lens is good and bad. Focusing requires too much guess work imo, and I don't know that I've developed skills in this area with the "mushy" ergonomics and control (10 months regular shooting). Sharp as a tack picture though when you get it right. The dvx lens sounds better to me and I think I'd prefer the dvx's go anywhere form factor.

The xl2 isn't a quick learn either. On the plus side it has forced me to become familiar with many elements of photgraphy and video to get the most out of the camera.

Whichever way you go, hit the ground running. There's no world like this world. Everyday is a challenge, motivating, a learning experience, and a hell of a lot of fun if you get stuck in. Sometimes frustrating too, but everyday you'll get just a little bit better.

Steve
 
I recently shot 2 music videos with the XL2 and my XL1. I studied these while deciding whether to get an XL2 or the DVX. When I thought about the recent commercial I shot with the SDX-900, I started giving the Panasonic the edge based on the Cine Gamma features.

I've been shooting with an XL1 for at least 6 years now and have accessories for the XL series camera and have really loved using the Canons.

I made the switch to the DVX after ruling out the HVX for what I think are good reasons, and so far I'm pretty happy with it.

I like the smaller (DVX) camera and the LCD screen. I think the viewfinders on these cameras are useless in general. I also like the fact that my (DVX) rig will be shorter when I add the M2 as opposed to the M2 with the XL2.

The other drawback about the XL series cameras is they look so strange that they attract attention in public like no other camera. One of the things I love about the DVX is its inconspicuous shape, color, and design.
 
There is alot of misinformation going on in this thread. To the original poster, see if you can get your hands on both cameras, and see which one works better for you.
 
"There is alot of misinformation going on in this thread. To the original poster, see if you can get your hands on both cameras, and see which one works better for you."


Misinformation? A lot? Jeez, feel free to point some of it out...
 
oneinfiniteloop said:
I'm confused, I just shot a video in 24pA on the original DVX100.

:huh:
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure you shot a video in 24p, not 24pA

24p makes a movie play at 23.98 frames per second on a 29.97 timeline with every 3rd or 5th frame interlaced ... (i forget which). This is the way movies have traditioanlly plaid on video and is probablu indestinguishable from 24pA on an interlaced monitor.

24PA plays 23.98 frames per second on a 23.98 timeline with 24(23.98) discreet frames with no interlacing and is used to make 24 fps DVD's and 24fps film transfers.

That's what I mean by TRUE 24 frames per second.

I think thats why the DVX100A is the 100A ... 24pA (24p ADVANCED) although the logic doesn't follow through to the 100B, but what else would they call it.

But point is 24pA was the big innovation from the 100 - 100a

Otherwise what's the difference in 24p and 24pA of which the DVX100A / B has both
 
Last edited:
blckhawk542 said:
http://dvxuser.com/articles/shoot3/

Maybe this article might help?
Click to expand...

lol I already posted that NOOB! :laugh:

scharky said:
There is alot of misinformation going on in this thread. To the original poster, see if you can get your hands on both cameras, and see which one works better for you.
Click to expand...

I've PMed Barry green to come clear things up this morning, but he must be busy or away from his computer.l
 
Sure...though I was thinking it might be better for Scharky to explain himself - rather than just invalidating everyone's efforts to help.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top