Dvx100B vs. Canon xh-a1

christriplet

christriplet

Active member
I don't know which one to purchase now. Obviously HD is superior in image quality and that is where the industry has moved but I still like the dvx100b.

I haven't seen the image difference between 24F and 24P, heck I don't even know much about
the canon24f deal. I don't have desires to see my work blown up on the big screen but I do want the best small screen 24frame rate image possible within my budget and that is the problem for me.

I can spend $3,000 and get a great deal with the DVX100b or spend $500
more and jump into the world of HD. What should I do? I just want a quality 24frame picture
that will look great on up to 42inch hdtv.
 
Youd need more than just the A1. Youd have to get an HD deck as well, the cheapest solution to that is the little HDV camera that canon as put out, forgot the name, but its under a grand on ebay.

Then of course, the computer, editing program, and of course like every one else suggests, better spend more money on equipment than camera itself.!
 
From what others have said on this board... if you can tell a great story, optimize your camera settings, set up great lighting and record good sound, most of your audience won't notice the difference... unless of course, your main audience are professional cameramen and cinematographers.

The DVX is tried and true. There are massive amounts of technical info on this board (and others).

I had the same internal struggle and opted for the DVX and am quite happy I did. I don't have to upgrade my computer or buy new software for processing HD. I am now able to afford to purchase a nice lighting package without having to do the old "Home Depot" worklight thing (though I would if I had to).

If I ever go pro, that would be the time to go HD for me. But for now, I like the easy route to the pseudo-film look of the DVX.

SD is good enough for me and I'm totally into this stuff.
 
You know, for the price, I'd have to say the A1 simply because it's every bit of camera the DVX is but has more to offer. Of course, if you can wait, I'd wait until NAB to see if Panasonic has anything to offer to compete with the A1.

Oh, by the way, you don't need to upgrade anything if you shoot in SD mode on the A1 so there's no need to use the whole "I need to upgrade my computer, decks, ect." excuse. The Canon F modes don't look any different than the DVX's 24P/24PA/30P modes and no matter what, when you play back the footage from tape or DVD or whatever, everything looks great, just as good as the DVX 24p stuff looks.

I'm currently using the DVX cameras in my film classes in college and I've gotta tell ya, I'd much rather have a native 16:9 camera than have to lug around my portable DVD player just to make sure I'm not getting something on the sides of the screen. I know what you mean, it is a magical camera and can do fantastic stuff when lit well and everything (and sometimes not even lit :) ), but I'm very sure that you and many others will ulitmately be better served by the A1 in the long run.

Lastly, the camera you were referring to FilmMakerr is the Canon HV10 and can be had for $950 new on B&H Photo. It is itself a great little camera and would be great for behind the scenes and stunt camera work.
 
I hear so much that HD is the norm? I don't buy it, we are years away from HD being the norm...... Not to mention if you are shooting a film and you want it to look like film, why would you shoot in HD? you want that grain look the soft look that's FILM. if you want a TV look then go for it.
 
I've also read that you'll really have to monkey with the A1 settings to get close to the cine-gamma of the DVX.

I'm no expert. Anyone?
 
At this point, it doesn't make much sense to get the DVX. The A1 can do what the DVX can and more and this is coming from a DVX devotee.

While HD will take a few more years to catch up, I like the option of a HD ready camera. It will suck to have to upgrade in a few years when HD becomes the norm.

For film look, other than the cine gamma, we also need higher resolution, period. Saying otherwise is just kidding yourself honestly. The DVX can give you great film look on SD TV but try displaying it on a large screen projector and it will start falling apart. It is just too soft even when compared to 16mm.

At least with HD, we get a lot more closer to the resolution of 35mm and when projected on the big screen, it will look fantastic.

With HDV and the right software, one can edit on any SD ready Mac or PC pretty much like how we would edit SD stuff.

Also, Canon's HDV is a lot more stable and robust than Sony's HDV.

As for the hocus pocus about the A1 lacked of 'rich' colour, that is not true. The A1 has a lot more customization for the 'look' than the DVX.

The A1 can give pretty much gives you any 'look' you want as long as you take the time to tweak it.
 
skrott said:
I hear so much that HD is the norm? I don't buy it, we are years away from HD being the norm...... Not to mention if you are shooting a film and you want it to look like film, why would you shoot in HD? you want that grain look the soft look that's FILM. if you want a TV look then go for it.
Click to expand...
Then why would you shoot on the DVX at all? Shoot on real film.
 
christriplet said:
<snip>
I just want a quality 24frame picture
that will look great on up to 42inch hdtv.
Click to expand...

Well I have an XH A1 and a 42" HDTV and I can tell you it looks freaking amazing.

The DVX is an awesome camera for what it is: a 4x3 chip standard defnition camera.
But if you want it to look great on a 42" HDTV... well you'll want the correct tool for that, and that would be something like an XH A1 or an HVX.
 
get the DVX and spend the extra (plus some more) money on lights and sound. You can have the sharpest picture and it will look like crap if it's not lit.
 
Vincent Wong Yoon Wei,

I'm not the type to use your own words against you....I'm just wondering what changed your opinion. If I remember correctly, you were down on HDV downconversions, and saying stick with the DVX and you'd get better looking SD DVD's.

Did you find a better method of downconversion, so that your HDV (downconverted to SD DVD) looks as good, or better, then a SD only camera can make?

Thanks.
 
well Chris are you more confused now? Both will be good. One thing that is is gaining ground is the small screen. iPods, YouTube, MySpace, internet stuff, cell phones. HD isn't going to matter much there.

I don't need a camera right now so I'm waiting alittle longer. If you need one right now I think either the DVX or the Canon A1 would be good. Tough choice.

Hopefully in the next month or two we are going to see the price come down on both of these cameras.
 
Well just to chime in. I was debating between the two and ended up getting a DVX. Why? Mainly because I have no reason for HD right now, nor do I have an HD TV. Plus I'm a relative newbie and figure a DVX is better to learn on due to virtually every possible DVX-related issue being discussed on these forums over the years. And I've seen tons of DVX footage and know it's more than capable of getting the type of look I want if used properly. PLUS, there is a roughly $1200 price difference. I got my DVX from Willoughbys for $2500 after rebate, plus Magic Bullet which I was gonna buy anyway. If you figure $200 for Magic Bullet, that puts the DVX at $2300, while the XH A1 goes for $3500. For that extra $1200, I can get a good tripid, decent mic, filters, and a bag. Plus, the XH A1 is still brand new, who knows what the verdict will end up being on it in a year or two. If it ends up being the DVX of HD, I could always just sell my DVX later when I feel I need an upgrade. By then, the A1 price may go down too.

So I guess it just depends on your situation, but anyway, that's my story.
 
John Trent said:
Vincent Wong Yoon Wei,

I'm not the type to use your own words against you....I'm just wondering what changed your opinion. If I remember correctly, you were down on HDV downconversions, and saying stick with the DVX and you'd get better looking SD DVD's.

Did you find a better method of downconversion, so that your HDV (downconverted to SD DVD) looks as good, or better, then a SD only camera can make?

Thanks.
Click to expand...
Firstly, I have to make clear that I am not the one who edited the HDV footages. I only shot it and the next time I saw those footages again was during the final stages of post production (which looks fantastic on the big ass Mac LCD) and again during the press screening which was projected from a DVD source (a far cry from what I saw during post).

Stuff I shot with the DVX and edited myself looks miles better.

Yet looking at numerous examples of HDV footages posted over here and dvinfo, I ultimately came to the conclusion that the person who edited the HDV footages simply did not use a proper downconversion method for best possible quality.

Also, when I made those remarks, the A1 wasn't out yet. With the A1 in the picture, the game changes considerably and suddenly, the DVX doesn't look so attractive anymore, especially when they are priced so close (the Pana rebate doesn't apply in my country).
 
apabari said:
Well just to chime in. I was debating between the two and ended up getting a DVX. Why? Mainly because I have no reason for HD right now, nor do I have an HD TV. Plus I'm a relative newbie and figure a DVX is better to learn on due to virtually every possible DVX-related issue being discussed on these forums over the years. And I've seen tons of DVX footage and know it's more than capable of getting the type of look I want if used properly. PLUS, there is a roughly $1200 price difference. I got my DVX from Willoughbys for $2500 after rebate, plus Magic Bullet which I was gonna buy anyway. If you figure $200 for Magic Bullet, that puts the DVX at $2300, while the XH A1 goes for $3500. For that extra $1200, I can get a good tripid, decent mic, filters, and a bag. Plus, the XH A1 is still brand new, who knows what the verdict will end up being on it in a year or two. If it ends up being the DVX of HD, I could always just sell my DVX later when I feel I need an upgrade. By then, the A1 price may go down too.

So I guess it just depends on your situation, but anyway, that's my story.
Click to expand...
With the rebate the DVX sure looks a lot more attractive but also keep in mind that the rebate only applies in the US of A. For other countries, the price gap between the DVX and the A1 is considerably smaller.
 
The price is about $1,000 difference from the A1 to the DVX100. But add up the computer upgrades if you don't have them and you have a big expense.

Plus how long will HDV be around? At some point tape will be gone.

I only wish Panasonic would have done the right thing and made a 16:9 DVX.


Jan,,,,,are we getting anywhere close to that day? I know. I know. We will never see that day!!
 
Sure tape might be gone soon but it wont be in the next year or so. Even Revenge Of The Sith was shot on a form of Tape lol (XDCAM I believe). I dont see it going away anytime soon. Tapeless becoming the norm like tape will take some time, it took many years (longer than many think) for DVD's to become the norm. Actually back to ROTS again, it was the first movie I remember that was huge not being released on VHS of some kind. DVD's been around for a while and only in the last 2 years or so have people stopped making VHS. Don't expect HDV to die too quickly.

- Kyle
 
it will be around for a long time. Just like the DVX100 well be.

Speaking of VHS. I still have one. I record 24 and few other things. One of these days I well replace my DVD player with one that records
 
I had this decision a couple months ago, and opted for a used DVX100a from Zacuto for $1800. Looking back it was the right decision for me, no question.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top