DVX is not HD - does that matter?

T

thegoldfi

Active member
first, let me apologize in advance if the issues in this post are covered in similar other posts. i tried searching around a bit, and i am not sure if my points have been covered in the same manner.

early this year, i bought a 7D. i bought it under the assumption that i would not be worried about the usual HDSLR problems - no auto focus, audio, etc. - but it turns out that a few of these cause me headaches. primarily the fact that i need to sync audio later. although i really like the "filmic" look that the 7D provides, it seems that the physical layout of a camcorder also seems appealing. thus, i am tempted to expand my gear and purchase a camcorder of some sort.

i have been watching the for sale section, and it appears that DVX' can be acquired at a relatively low cost. so low, in fact, that it would not phase me to expand my set up. i wouldn't say that i "can't" afford a newer and fancier camera, but the truth is i am not a professional and doubt that any of my work would provide any money right away.

that leads me to my next point: my usage. the first project i embarked upon was a wedding video for my brother (which is still in post, btw). i used the 7D and an HV20 that i borrowed from a friend. i am happy with how the footage turned out, but i know that assembling my video with audio will be a pain, which is in part why the project is still not complete. i have also done a few BMX web-edits here and there, and some general "I just got my 7D" goof-off vids. needless to say, nothing major and nothing paying.

however, i recently decided that i want to start putting in a bit of effort and maybe getting into some small wedding stuff or possibly other events. i have a growing desire to write and produce a documentary at some point in the not-so-distant future as well. i work a normal desk job during the day, and would like to find some type of creative outlet. my thoughts are that if i have some other "job" it would force me to expend my energy creatively.

i suspect that my method of delivery would be a combo of web and DVD. so, if you have read over this entire post, i put these questions to you (pardon my ignorance):

1. in the era of HD, is it worthwhile to start with something like a DVX, or would it be worthwhile to go straight to HVX or HMC or something?
2. can HD content be delivered on DVD? are there issues with this?
3. if you were in my position, what would you do?

the option to keep my 7D is always there. (in fact, i will keep it for photos if nothing else.) but it seems like if i want to use the 7D as a video machine, i need to spend loads of cash on a rig of somesort. i went the LCDVF route, and even that was a bit uncomfortable.

if you read this, i really appreciate it.

TTYS.
 
I'd get an HMC150 or 40 if I was buying now. Not that the DVX is not still great. It is, and I still use mine. However, SD is in its final days. With that being said, if your budget is limited, remember that shooting Squeeze with a DVX100B and uprezzing it can result in a very fine image.

You can put HD content on a DVD.
 
The biggest downfall with the DVX is not that it shoots SD, but that it is not 16:9 native. You lose even more resolution when shooting widescreen on the DVX so it does become quite noticable on a decent-sized flatscreen TV.

For any sort of paid work, it would be great to have something something newer - The HMC150 is probably the modern day equivelant of the DVX. People are still producing great works with the DVX, but for someone who is just getting started in the industry, don't underestimate the marketing power of HD. I've had plenty of clients who ask "what cameras do you shoot with" and as soon as you mention High Definition they are satisfied.

If you can stretch for something better then I would really recommend it. You'll get good use out of a DVX initially but in two or three years when HD becomes the norm you will really feel left behind.
 
Yeah, if you have not bought a camcorder, and you are thinking of doing work like events, then I would strongly suggest getting a camera like the HMC-150. The 7D, and other video DSLRs can also produce great images, but I really think that their production work flow is more suited for shooting fictional narrative, commercials, music videos, or other projects that would normally be shot on film. A camera like the HMC-150, and it's ease of use, compared to the video DSLRs, is much more suited for event work, or other projects that are normally shot on video. I know that there are folks using the video DSLRs for event work, especially wedding videos, but I can't help think that they have invested a lot of money for the necessary extra gear to make these cameras event friendly. While there are some exciting advances happening with video equipment now, none of them is going to render a camera like the HMC-150 obsolete for a good while. While the DVX, a great camera, if quickly becoming obsolete.
 
I am currently going through the same struggle. It really is just a struggle, getting opinions and then trying to apply them to what I am going to do personally.

I am a freelance editor. I have media composer 5 and a great i7 cpu. I have the tools on the edit side to do what I need to do in SD or HD.

I am currently writing the treatment still for a documentary I am attempting! I have an interview shoot scheduled for august.

So I have the same questions/worries/concerns and thoughts as the OP. HD or SD

In my head I kept telling my self to go hpx170 or hvx 200 or A.

But the price of the camera and the p2 workflow is too limiting for my budget currently.

I have been encouraged to get a dvx100b and shoot on tape then just bring it in dv25411 to offline and when the time comes 1:1 through SDI downconvert with the panasonic deck I have to use. I trust the pro who told me this.

It makes sense for me personally to do this because outisde of the interview I am going to shoot B-Roll for most of the day with the person in and around his house. The p2 workflow just doesnt make this hassle free for me.

So I have essentially decided to go dvx100b, wireless lav, tripod, light kit. I feel confident in the image the 100 b produces, I feel like personally as an editor first the story is more important than anything. As a consumer I will watch a good story over a great image everytime.

So with the cost of the equipment I need and funding it myself for now, it is really the only thing that makes sense. I am confident that if I use the camera correctly, light the interview correctly and then handle it properly in th edit and color correction the image from the 100b wiill be good enough.

and having said all that, my plan is to shoot this first interview this way and then before I set up more interviews try to save some pennies and keep looking for a 170, 150 or 200a.

and if I can justify it and afford the workflow shoot it in HD the rest of the way and uprez the 100b shots.

So if anyone has any recommendations on a lighting kit that would be great, and any thoughts on my idea and workflow here it would be greatly appreciated.

Right now I have tired head from chasing a camera down and all the other stuff while trying to work and write on the side!!!
 
The DVX is still a valid choice, especially in this day and age of web video where people are going to be watching most of what you make in a lower resolution than you shot it in anyway.

The dvx still produces the best images of any 1/3rd sd camera hands down, and often comes close to producing images close to what you would expect out of professional 2/3rds cams costing 5 or 6 times more than the DVX.

I also ride BMX and one of the main reasons i bought the dvx was to shoot some riding, haven't got round to making anything bmx related yet, but the link below will take you to some MTB stuff i shot, which i think shows that the dvx is perfectly capable of shooting decent quality fast moving riding footage:

http://www.vimeo.com/11043341

(also on that note, a decent bmx edit comes ultimately comes down to the riders: a couple of years ago i encountered stew jhonstone filming the likes of chris doyle and brian yeagle for anthem 2 at an undisclosed trails spot near london. The guy was still using a vx2000, but you know when that vid finally drops it'll most likely crap on everything made in the past 10 years with perhaps the exception of the etnies and little devil vids...)

At the end of the day a Hvx or Hpx is great if you can afford it, but it's still hard to justify making that investment unless you can make the money back from the work you do with the said camera.
 
I will say that I recently saw a short film I shot on the DVX100b projected on a theater screen and I was not disappointed in the least. It made me question whether I want to upgrade to HD. That said, I would be mighty tempted to buy an HMC-150 if I needed a new camera for video work. Right now I am debating getting a GH1 to hold me over until the AF-100 comes out.
 
Don't do it!

If you already have a DVX100B, they're about as good as it gets, for a standard def camera at that price point. However, without a doubt, HD is the future and NTSC is the past.

Yes, of course content is important, but this is a false dichotomy. Why limit yourself to standard def NTSC in the year 2010 if you are just starting out? You are going to have the same content whether you point an NTSC camera or an HD camera at it.

Since you mention weddings and documentaries... these are once in a lifetime events. Wouldn't you want to capture them in the best quality possible, knowing you could never go back and shoot them over? Wouldn't it have been better if famous events in history could have been captured with an HD camera instead of NTSC?

You have to fight for quality at every step of a production. In an age of highly affordable HD cameras, and already owning a 7D no less, you shouldn't give in without more of a fight. Don't throw away 3/4 of your resolution, interlace your video, and give yourself the color problems that NTSC brings for no better reason than a little convenience. Unless you don't really care about video quality, you will almost certainly regret it later.

I have worked with NTSC since 1990. Now that I've moved on to HD, I am never going back, and don't miss it for a second. Embrace the future!
 
Yeah...if I was jumping now I'd prolly go HD. I got my 100B about a year and a half ago. HD has advantages. I'll jump sometime but I'm keeping the 100B. It's too awesome.
 
I have used my DVX100 exactly 3 times since jumping to HD 2 years ago. And I wouldn't look back. Yes, the DVX100 is a fine camera. I actually am going to shoot it tomorrow for the first time this year. But other than for some VERY specific things, I'd make the move to any one of the mid-range HD cams like the HMC150 or the AX2000 or HM100U.

Very few disadvantages, and a TON of advantages (like tapeless storage).
 
Honestly, I still love the dvx, but I am gonna get a t2i purely to make myself happy, and because I need to actually shoot hd. ahahahha

I was showing dailies of a dvx music video a week ago on the clients 50 inch dlp hd P.O.S. tv. I plugged the dvx to the tv via rca composite cables.
The client was blown away! " This looks awesome! This is a great HD camera!" -client

There are still a lot of people that don;t know what HD is.

****also remember about sensor size and the progressive 24pa mode of the dvx. the dvx will always be better than an hdv 1080i p.o.s. cam
 
renegadewill said:
the dvx will always be better than an hdv 1080i p.o.s. cam
Click to expand...

Yes, but these days, there really isn't any such thing as a 1080i p.o.s cam. All the HDV cams these days are in the Prosumer segment (with the exception of the HC9 & the HV30/40 which many people 'upgraded' to from their DVX because of the stunning picture and 24p) Most of them these days have 24p, the lowlight is getting better with sensor technology and even the woeful HDV codec has been improved and implemented a lot better over the years.

And this is just talking about HDV - the lowest common demoninator in the HD camcorder codec world. Step up to AVCHD and you get a whole world of improvements - more efficient codec, tapelss workflow, better audio compression, etc.

The DVX was and still is a great camera, but it won't get you very far into the future...
 
Spend the money to be relevent and current. You won't find too many people looking for an SD camera and if you do, well then the majority of times it'll be for web content only. A cheap HD camera will knock the pants of the DVX.... IF there is sufficent light. That's the kicker to even cheaper cameras...

Buy the 150 which I totally love and it is a logical upgrade. The canon DSLRs are nice but there are workflow issues, and overheating to contend with. A 12 minute record time does also offer some unique workarounds too.
 
Sell your 7D and buy 2 GH1's and some lenses :-D

Seriously though, the DVX100 is an awesome camera and still very viable (I still use mine) for many types of work, including weddings. But if you are going to make a purchase and you don't already have a DVX I'd go with the HMC150 or HVX200A or HPX170. That way you are going to be content for a lot longer. Yes you'll pay more, but not THAT much more in the long run.

I disagree that a cheap HD camera will outdo the DVX - there is SO much more to picture quality than just resolution, and the DVX pretty much offers nearly everything except HD. But if you go with a 150/170/200a - you get it all.

HD is cool, but tons of the HD fascination we see today is mostly marketing from the electronics companies. If you do tests, you'll find that average Joe (and most brides) STILL can't reliably tell the difference between HD and SD, and tons of people still mistakenly think that DVD=HD or digital=better or CDs are better than vinyl :2vrolijk_08:etc. etc. You can still fool most people (consumers) with a good SD upconversion. (Please nobody mention pixel-shifting in Panasonic HD cameras or I'll scream :-)

You can put HD on a DVD, but there are limitations and issues. You have to create the disc as an HD-DVD, and not many people have those players these days. Or it can be only playable in a computer and such if you write a data DVD with HD content on it, but if you are doing weddings and such, you'll have a lot of people confused when they try to put it in their regular DVD players and it won't play (or they don't have the right codec on the computer etc.).
 
lvlinux said:
You can put HD on a DVD, but there are limitations and issues. You have to create the disc as an HD-DVD, and not many people have those players these days.
Click to expand...

I agreed with most of what you said, but this bit of information is simply not correct. I've put promo material on DVDs burned as BluRay. It's true that not all BluRay players will play them, but many do (especially Sony's and the Playstations) and computers recognize them as BluRays and they play fine.

I would NOT use this solution for commercial work however. Burn a real BluRay or just make an SD DVD.
 
Hmmmm..

I'll agree with Will Darosa - The real lens and real exposure controls on the DVX continue to surprise me.

The HV30 is the bare minimum for usable HD if you ask me. And it STILL has image skew from the small inexpensive lens.

I was just editing someones stuff today - shot with a $500 HD camera and YES it had a "certain" crispness to it - but there was image skew from the small lens, and plenty of visible (to ME) artifacts from lower grade internal processing and compression.

YOU HAVE TO SHOOT THROUGH A REAL LENS.

Now if we're talking something like a HMC150 or the like - there's no discussion - it's better.

But I just SMOKED another client with the DVX by delivering a piece for them with the usual VIVID color, and solid realistic physical accuracy that just made the end product look so REAL...despite it being SD. That's the DVX mojo.
 
Contrary to what the rate of new camera releases might make one think, there is not much that can be done for the basic affordable camcorder.

I would get an HPX170.
 
Well, I was in the same situation. A deskboy with a strong cinematographic desire and I wanted to buy myself a good camera to make short films and, if possible, make some money by doing weddings and other stuff. It took me 9 months to make a decision; SD or HD. I almost bought a Z1 but there was so many hours on the board and no warranty that I was a bit sceptical, my budget was kind of tight (around 2.500 euros) I checked so many stuff, I couldn't find a perfect answer, I changed my mind so many time, I was thinkking of increasing my budget buy maybe a z5, than a V1... I bought a dvx 102 2 months ago, and I can say that I love it and, since I'm not a professional, (yet) I think it was the smartest move for me. Wim Wenders and Steve Buscemi both shot movies in 2006 with this camera. Who am I to think that this won't be good enough ? Anyway, that's just my feedback, but I'm really happy with this great and cheap camcorder. Check some stuff that has been done with this cam, it's pretty amazing. good luck in your search cuz it can be really tricky.
 
After borrowing an HVX for a wedding, it is hard to go back to the DVX, but it is still a fantastic camera! No, it is not HD, but that is what the 7D is for! If you are delivering a project on DVD, it has to be downrezzed to SD anyway (unless it is HD DVD)... In which case you can uprez to 720p... If your destination is for the web, either resolution works, although HD is becoming the default resolution for online; even YouTube plays back in 4k if applicable!!!

Also, there are still several shows on TV shot with the DVX. The ones that I know of are It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia, Nitro Circus, and Mind Of Mencia (when it was on air)...

Hopefully in a couple of years, I can upgrade to an HD camera that is actually a camera, but sadly, Canon has put too many limitations on the DSLR's that I need (XLR audio, longer recording time, better ports, etc...).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top