DVX100 vs HV20

S

srproductions

Well-known member
Hey Guys!

I am about to purchase a camera. I have $1300. I can either get a VERY used DVX100 (not a or b) or the Canon HV20. Which do you guys think I should get? I will be making indie films, music videos, etc. Hopefully will try to sell my films. Which one would most suit my needs? Thanks!
 
Either of those would be a camera you'll upgrade from eventually if you're serious. The DVX is a better camera to train on since it has completely manual controls. The HV20, on the other hand, while HD, doesn't have fully manual controls and could impede your learning process as a camera operator somewhat. But it could make a decent B-camera for a higher-end HD camera, while DVX footage doesn't cut very well with 720P. So if (or when) you upgrade, you'd likely end up regulating the DVX to BTS camera or selling it--and the selling point for the first-model DVX is only going to drop. So my point is that while the HV20 probably has more staying power, the DVX is definitely a better beginner's camera.
 
Remember that the biggest selling point your feature can have is that it's good. If it's a good movie, they're not going to care what camera it was shot with.
 
HorseFilms said:
Remember that the biggest selling point your feature can have is that it's good. If it's a good movie, they're not going to care what camera it was shot with.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
I don't want to say yeah, but it's a possibility. People can respect the DVX because it's a workhorse camera, it's been around and many, MANY projects have been shot on it. If you show up with a DVX, people know you're serious.

If you show up with a handycam, some people will lose respect for you. The quality of the camera is not important to these people, they want to see a big, serious camera. But that said, those people could either A) change their tune when they see the footage or B) generally be disregarded because they don't know sh*t if they're making a judgement based on the look of the camera over its footage. BUT, they still exist, and some of them are people with money who could make or break your project.

I would go with the DVX because, as was said before, it's a great camera to learn on. I've seen footage shot on the DVX that looks HD because it was such a good image. It will be a relevant camera for years to come. The HV20 is slightly future-proof because it's HD, but it will quickly be eclipsed by better HD handycams once the technology arrives.
 
Also, if I am the director/dp, and I show up on set with an HV20, will I lose respect from the cast/crew?
Click to expand...
Have you seen an HV20? :)

In other words, if someone is likely to be impressed by the size of the camera, you would unquestionably *not* impress them by an HV20. It's a palmcorder. One that's capable of a beautiful picture, but a palmcorder nonetheless.
 
I guess you could but you need to show that you're well prepared. Show them previous films you did, not equip yourself only with that camera too. Rent some sound stuff, lights, a good tripod, matte box. I don't know how much you have for your feature, but I saw little camcorders that looked so monstruous with a 35mm adapter and a matte box.

Again, prepare yourself well, storyboard, a good script, know what you want and the way you want it, the crew will follow the captain if the captains knows his game. That's for sure.
 
HorseFilms said:
Remember that the biggest selling point your feature can have is that it's good. If it's a good movie, they're not going to care what camera it was shot with.
Click to expand...
It wasn't always this way. Originally there were a few stories of people being turned down when distributors found out their movies were shot on DV. Digital Video had a pretty sketchy beginning. Film companies were running scared yet there was no real reason as the chose delivery format was still (and is still) film. Things have changed a lot in the past ten years.

-Nate
 
Barry_Green said:
Have you seen an HV20? :)

In other words, if someone is likely to be impressed by the size of the camera, you would unquestionably *not* impress them by an HV20. It's a palmcorder. One that's capable of a beautiful picture, but a palmcorder nonetheless.
Click to expand...
And people are impressed/turned off by the size of camcorders. When the DVX came out people were impressed by the look. Put it on a tri-pod open the door screen and it looked real space agey (add a matte box and that certainly sold it) but still some people even on some of the forums complained about losing jobs to people with bigger (think shoulder mounted) cameras.

The XL2 was the best hybrid of a small shoulder mounted camera with 24p. I used to teach FCP and how to use the XL (which I had to learn by doing, as I was a DVXUser) and I did like it. The shoulder mount and look of the XL did look very professional. But the beauty of the DVX and smaller cameras is that they don't[/a] attract as much attention. People expect that if you're using an XL you're making a film, that's not always the case with smaller cameras.

Actors my also be turned off by this. Some actors like Kiefer Sutherland (they used this camera a few times as well as the HVX and Sony for some shots on 24) are used to bigger cameras and had problems with even the likes of the JVCHD100 but in the end it all worked out, Sutherland did his things and all was fine. But the more professional your equipment looks on the indy scene, the more confidence your actors will have.

BUT don't let that detour you. Our first film was shot on the Panasonic PVDV 100 with a dead pixel. It wasn't a feature but it still got us used to using the camera as well as editing and directing and editng. You are far more advance. I to considered the HV20 but I know I want the A1 and since I have the DVX100 I'm not really panicked for HD. I want to do it but I just shot my second feature on the DVX and I think I may get another one or two from it before I give it up, who knows. Plus I know rendering HDV on a G4 1gb will take forever.

-Nate
 
Honestly, just looking at the technology, HDV is pretty silly. You have the same bandwidth (25), and even less if you decide to shoot in SD on an HDV system (19.7).

Imagine you have two Honda Civics. They're good 4 cylinder cars. In their league they're hard to beat. Now imagine you get a semi chassis and decide to take the engine out of one of the Honda Civics and put it into the big rig frame. Which vehicle is more feasible? Which one is kind of a silly concept? Do you get the picture?

Yeah, with HDV you'll get a bigger image. Just like with the semi, you'll get a bigger chassis. In both cases you won't move as well. Motion artifacting is a big thing. Also the chroma subsampling standard on HDV is 4:2:0 not 4:2:2. I don't know why there are rumors to the contrary. 4:2:0 is almost identical to 4:1:1, so no more color depth to be had on HDV.

If I had to pick between the HV20 and the DVX100 I would pick the DVX100. You would also see me driving a Honda instead of a big rig with a 4 cycle engine. If I could afford it I would get a Porsche (HVX200, DVCPRO HD), or a Ferrari (RED camera), or just shoot 35mm (LearJet).
 
Aaron Marshall said:
Honestly, just looking at the technology, HDV is pretty silly. You have the same bandwidth (25), and even less if you decide to shoot in SD on an HDV system (19.7).

Imagine you have two Honda Civics. They're good 4 cylinder cars. In their league they're hard to beat. Now imagine you get a semi chassis and decide to take the engine out of one of the Honda Civics and put it into the big rig frame. Which vehicle is more feasible? Which one is kind of a silly concept? Do you get the picture?

Yeah, with HDV you'll get a bigger image. Just like with the semi, you'll get a bigger chassis. In both cases you won't move as well. Motion artifacting is a big thing. Also the chroma subsampling standard on HDV is 4:2:0 not 4:2:2. I don't know why there are rumors to the contrary. 4:2:0 is almost identical to 4:1:1, so no more color depth to be had on HDV.

If I had to pick between the HV20 and the DVX100 I would pick the DVX100. You would also see me driving a Honda instead of a big rig with a 4 cycle engine. If I could afford it I would get a Porsche (HVX200, DVCPRO HD), or a Ferrari (RED camera), or just shoot 35mm (LearJet).
Click to expand...

HDV codec as way better than the mini dv codec. Don't let the datarate fool you. HDV is a newer technology. So you would be comparing a 1992 Honda Civic with a 2002 civic.

Get the HV20 and shoot with that. Use your left over money to by accessories that will make your HV20 more professional and functional.
 
OK. I've almost decided to buy the HV20. Just one more question.

I decided I don't want to buy an old, used, worn out camera, which is what I would have to get to afford a DVX. So, should I own an HV20, or just rent as needed a DVX or HVX?
 
can't you borrow like $1500? Get the DVX100 when they start hitting the stores later this month.
 
Don't take this the wrong way guys, But if you can't afford a high end Camcorder there is no way you're going to afford 6-8k for a 35mm adapter. Those things cost more then the average indie camera. Matte Boxes obviouslly serve a purpose on older video cameras but on the newer HD cameras, My understanding is they're already video taping in anamorphic so a matte box doesnt serve much purpose.. does it?
 
stigkam said:
Don't take this the wrong way guys, But if you can't afford a high end Camcorder there is no way you're going to afford 6-8k for a 35mm adapter. Those things cost more then the average indie camera. Matte Boxes obviouslly serve a purpose on older video cameras but on the newer HD cameras, My understanding is they're already video taping in anamorphic so a matte box doesnt serve much purpose.. does it?
Click to expand...


Matte box isnt about anamorfic footage. Thats what anamorfic adaptors are for, and for HD-cams they are pretty much useless.
 
srproductions said:
OK. I've almost decided to buy the HV20. Just one more question.

I decided I don't want to buy an old, used, worn out camera, which is what I would have to get to afford a DVX. So, should I own an HV20, or just rent as needed a DVX or HVX?
Click to expand...

depends on what you want to learn and what kind of stuff you want to make. if you want to be practice directing, and you're going to shoot a couple of shorts a year, just rent a camera. or better yet, hire a dp that has his own camera.

if you plan to shoot a lot, then yeah maybe buying the camera would be better. but be honest with yourself. how many shorts can you really make a year? you can always try renting the first couple times you make a movie to see if you'd really benefit from owning.

if you want to practice cinematography, buy the dvx.

good luck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top