DVX100AE or HDR-FX1?

D

Dave Moseley

New member
Someone tell me which would suit me better, since I'm hearing good and bad things about them both :P All I want is a decent, 'professional' camera (compared to my bog-standard home video JVC from 2002) that can film 16:9, with film-like color/gamma and framerate (preferably without having to do any post or using additional lenses).

I live in the UK, and the HDR-FX1 is much easier to find in stores, which is one reason why I'm starting to think about getting this instead. Which is better for an aspiring independent filmmaker?
 
better is an opinion.

but for you i guess it comes down to true 24p vs. true 16:9.

but im no expert my self so..uhh..i guess wait til someone that knows something to post?? haha. but look in the screengrabs section for both, dvx and fx1. see which you like better.
 
Nick_Lee said:
for you i guess it comes down to true 24p vs. true 16:9.
Click to expand...
Well to further complicate things, I live in the UK and that means different framerates... I'm informed 25p is 'filmlook' for Europe, and both cameras support that. And I've looked in the screengrabs section, but I see people using all these different lenses and effects in Vegas to get their films looking 35mm-y. So I hope someone could give me an opinion on both 'out-of-the-box' without any additional lenses or equipment.

(btw, I'm by no means a professional... all the films I've made so far have been with friends as actors, using available light and sometimes a mic off-screen. So a lot of opinions I've read on this forum won't help much because they're obviously from much more dedicated individuals who spend thousands more on the right tripods and boom mics. I'm really just looking for something n00b-friendly ;) but also that I can learn to get the most out of over time.)
 
haha noobfriendly.

I have had the fx1 for a few months, and I sometimes with that I had gotten the dvx. Only reasons for this is the lack of true 24/30p, and xlr. With sonys you would have to either spend an extra grand with the z1, or spend 300 bucks on a beachtek(or some kind of xlr port/input/whatever its called)

I'm not sure about this but even when shooting hdv, you lose resolution when shotting in cf24/30, and then when you have to downconvert, its resolution is lower then what the dvx would be.

I haven't used the dvx enough to say that its a better choice, but it seems to me that the only upside you get with the fx is 16 9.

p.s. sorry if anything I say sounds ignorant. im just trying to help someone who was in the same position as me make a good decision. and please correct me if anything I said was wrong.
 
I own the FX1 and have been blown away by it. True 16:9 and HD. You get neither with the DVX.

But with the DVX you get 25P ( In the UK) and that is very important to many on here.

Personally I would get the FX1 and deinterlace in post. Natress will give you the effect you are looking for, or Magice Bullet Suite.

better still wait for the HVX200, due out in the spring of 2006 in PAL land. ( and a shame they didn't do what the ZU1 does and make it dual pal/ntsc
 
If I was living in the UK, the basis for choosing a DVX over an FX1E would be colour curves, audio and lattitude.

The CF25 mode will blow away a progressive 25p mode on the DVX in terms of resolution and the motion signature isn't a problem... and if you're extra-fussy you can deinterlace (and spend the rest of your life rendering).

-Spiff
 
Can someone explain why the FX1 doesn't do 'true' 25p (or whatever it is in Europe)? I know about 'true' 16:9 compared to the DVX100A just stretching the image, but don't get what the difference is for framerates.
 
The FX1 only shoots interlaced footage. The DVX is a progressive camera. Everythiing the FX1 shoots is interlaced. To get the image to 24P, you would have to run the footage through Natress or Magic Bullet suite to d-interlace the image. this is time consuming as redering can take a long time. Results though, are very good. Don't use the FX1's cineframe modes. They are a fudge and you can do better in post with available software.
 
Steve Shovlar said:
The FX1 only shoots interlaced footage. The DVX is a progressive camera. Everythiing the FX1 shoots is interlaced. To get the image to 24P, you would have to run the footage through Natress or Magic Bullet suite to d-interlace the image. this is time consuming as redering can take a long time. Results though, are very good. Don't use the FX1's cineframe modes. They are a fudge and you can do better in post with available software.
Click to expand...

uh not to rain your parade, but the cineframe modes arent that bad. People make it sound like they look like ****, the interlaced images are protuding out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top