DVX100B Telephoto

L

lencap

New member
I have a variety of assignments -

1) Shoot Sunday services for a church group - I setup 40 feet or more from the stage, grab an audio feed from their audio mixer, feed into camcorder using XLR in.

2) Shoot occasional sports video for girls softball team - again distant setup, need to be able to keep focus in rapidly changing action. Some shots 150 feet distant.

3) Occasional documentary type shots - interview family members, capture video without "setup" - similar to run and gun ENG work, when possible place wireless mics on subjects, not always practical, often use shotgun mounted on camera (I work solo)

4) Some "planned shoots" - interviews between 2-4 people, some control over lighting, often not much, they plan the space and notify me with little lead time. They want "candid" look, no planned stage, etc.

5) Often would like to capture "local color" for public access TV - low viewership, generally 4x3 format, but require high quality look. Can ingest mini-dv, DVD or Quicktime movie format.

6) Often have to edit footage solo - using Final Cut Express on iMac or MacBook pro with separate HDD. Intel based Macbook, 2 GB memory is the primary system.

Given all this, I find the "reach" of the DVX100B is often not enough. Being tempted to add XL2 with 20X optical zoom. Both cameras are 24p capable, and Canon has benefit of 16:9 format, useful on occasion when I have to deliver "wide screen". Some of my footage is for car clubs shooting on track - fast action, often far away.

Is there a way to get the reach I need from the DVX, or is the XL2 an alternative? The main points are reach and 16x9 format.

Thanks in advance for the help.
 
If long reach and 16x9 are your requirements, the XL2 fits both of those. On a DVX, even with a 2x teleconverter, you're only going to be at about 90mm, vs. (IIRC) 110mm on the XL2, so the XL2 will still be closer.

Keeping focus on rapid action at tele distances is going to be nearly impossible though, especially with the rubbery focus controls of Canon's lens.
 
Thank you

Thank you

Thank you Barry for the comments. I enjoy reading your reviews, commentary and especially having you share your knowledge. I'm in Raleigh, and I see you're from NC as well. If you are ever in the area, I'd be glad to be your host.

I am torn between the SD and HD formats as well. For almost the same money as the DVX 100B or the XL2 I can buy a XH-A1. I'd love to go with the HVX 200, but the cost is pretty high since I have no income producing opportunity with the camcorder - just a hobbyist. Also not sure of the P2 format versus the new Sony 3X3 offering in the EX-1. Seems like things will continue to evolve at a rapid rate.

I'm tempted to go for the HDV format, but the long GOP format, extra computer power and limited format distribution still has me leaning toward the SD world. Your comments are welcome.

Thanks again.
 
I despise HDV, but -- if it was a choice between getting an XL2 or spending less to get an XHA1, I'd probably vote for the XHA1. It's also a DV camcorder so you don't have to use HDV if you don't want, but heck, it's got the HDV format also (which the XL2 doesn't).

If you don't need interchangeable lenses, the XHA1 is probably the better buy over the XL2. But, I think the lens on the XL2 is more telephoto than the 20x of the XHA1 (isn't the XHA1 4.5 - 90mm?) So you might need a teleconverter to get the full reach.

The DVX is a great camcorder and does several things the XHA1 doesn't, especially in low light performance it'll be one to two stops faster. But it doesn't have any decent telephoto reach so, if it won't do your job, why consider it?
 
Yeah, if you REALLY need telophoto the DVX isnt the best choice, unless you can work around its limits. barry is right though, look into either an xl2 or a XHA1, both of wich have a 20x lens.
 
Thank you for the help

Thank you for the help

Thanks to all for the replies, especially Barry for the detailed comments.

Barry, I very much respect your comments and opinions. You stated that the DVX will do things that the XL2 will not, and that you despise the HDV format. Not knowing the camera, and being a novice, I don't even know what I'm missing in terms of control and capture using the DVX or why you feel as you do. I have read your reviews, but that's different from first hand experience.

Right now all I have is a Panasonic GS-180 which I pair with a Beachtek adaptor to allow me to pull audio from a mixer board when I'm setup indoors. I use a Videomic when shooting solo, again through the Beachtek, and so far the camera meets most of my non critical needs.

The primary reason for the camera upgrade is to capture footage for a local church group for broadcast on public access TV. At the church I am setup about 30-40 feet (possibly more depending on the shot) from the stage, pulling sound from a mixing board. The lighting is not good, a mix of sunlight from an overhead skylight, and various color temps from a mix of overhead incandescent lights attached to ceiling fans and side lights shooting upward using halogen bulbs. White balance is a chore and getting tight shots of the speaker is also difficult given the limits of the lens length and the lack of professional focus controls.

For the cable TV access station the SD 4X3 format is perfectly fine. Several others use HDV or even full HD content, but I see no advantage to that format for standard broadcast. I also provide DVDs for the church to use, and they request SD DVD format only, again no need for HDV.

Given what I've described will the DVX100B work for me - especially with the light problems and the distance to the stage? My main concern about the DVX is relative value. As you noted in your comments I can get a new XH-A1 for only a few hundred dollars more than the DVX and the Canon does provide 16X9 HDV as well as SD.

By the way, I went with the GS-180 largely because of your comments about the DVX. I couldn't afford it then, but I found that the GS-180 did everything I wanted at a very attractive price, including mic in and a headphone out simultaneously. When I am editing footage at the TV station from the GS-180, it's interesting to see how many other producers like the look. When I show them the camera they can't believe it. Using tips about setup and lighting that you've commented on in several articles and books, I've learned enough to at least make a passable video on a tight budget. Now that I've had more experience I do want the control of a more professional camera.

Thanks again, I don't know how you find the time to do all that you do.
 
The distance from the stage is the sticking point. The DVX just doesn't have all that much telephoto reach. With a 2x teleconverter though, it'd be as telephoto as an XHA1 at full tele. Of course, you could always add a teleconverter to the Canon and get even closer...

The DVX is going to be more light-sensitive than the Canon, delivering equivalent brightness in 1/2 to 1/4 as much light. But the Canon's HD...

As for field of view, it looks like the GS-180 has about the same field of view as a DVX. Both are 10:1 zooms, with about the same 35mm equivalent fov. The XHA1 will let you zoom in twice as close. According to the Panavision field-of-view calculator, at 40 feet away a DVX100 should let you fill the frame with a 4' x 3' area. With the XHA1 you'd be able to fill the frame with about a 2' x 1.5' area.

There's no easy, simple answer. They're both fine choices. The DVX will give you the color and gamma that you're used to from the GS-180. The XHA1 has a very different look to it.

Relative value? Get what you need to do the job. Are you planning on reselling it anytime soon? If not, what does that matter? The point is to get what you need to get the job done.
 
Barry_Green said:
I despise HDV, but -- if it was a choice between getting an XL2 or spending less to get an XHA1, I'd probably vote for the XHA1. It's also a DV camcorder so you don't have to use HDV if you don't want, but heck, it's got the HDV format also (which the XL2 doesn't).

If you don't need interchangeable lenses, the XHA1 is probably the better buy over the XL2. But, I think the lens on the XL2 is more telephoto than the 20x of the XHA1 (isn't the XHA1 4.5 - 90mm?) So you might need a teleconverter to get the full reach.

The DVX is a great camcorder and does several things the XHA1 doesn't, especially in low light performance it'll be one to two stops faster. But it doesn't have any decent telephoto reach so, if it won't do your job, why consider it?
Click to expand...

? Shot something with DVX100A vs. the XHA1 in very low light...the A1 crushed the DVX100.
 
Odd - what model DVX?

Actually own both cameras myself...the original 100, the next models were better though and had a B for a bit before it fell off a tripod LOL.

Edited quite a few pieces - events mainly with a DVX and A1 side by side - A1 was better in low light considerably - not saying you're wrong, just what I saw...

One thing I do notice is the A1 is not as contrasty and often has a flatter look to it, which can be seen as bad in low light to some, but retained color and sharpness, so once in post it was very easy to boost it WAY better.

With the A1 one thing I can say is if you set the image control settings to match a DVX, YES it is much darker in low light, but I just have a separate custom preset for low light, that raw footage wise won't look like DVX raw footage, but since it's in HD/better lens/better color space, can be corrected in post, and generally if you don't care about exactly matching a DVX, you can set the A1 to get a much brighter image - that and the gain at -12 still holds up pretty well wheras I really don't want to go past -6 on a DVXA or B.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top