EX3 vs XF305 vs JVC HM790E

N

Nick Navaro

Well-known member
Hello there

I've recently been using the Canon XF305 but don't like how it performs in the dark. I need it for TV work, hence using it as it's BBC approved 50mbs 422 etc....

It's really poor in poor light and strobes and camera flashes.

I was thinking of going with the JVC http://www.creativevideo.co.uk/index.php?t=product/jvc_gy-hm790e as it has CCD chips and better for flashes... With a nano-flash...

Or maybe an EX3 with nano as it's 2/3", so should perform better in the dark...

The JVC is better for Final Cut too. As MXF is a bit of a pain and takes time to ingest.

I can't decide... Could you offer me some informed opinions please.

Thanks

Nick
 
The EX3 isn't 2/3", it's 1/2". Definitely arrange to try them out before committing to any of them. The JVC is CCD and therefore won't have any issues with flashes, but it's a 1/3" CCD chip and may exhibit a lot more trouble in low light than the others. And its 1/3" chip is 720p-native, unlike the others which are 1080p native.
 
EX-3 does not write MXF; it is MP4 which needs to be rewrapped by FCP. If you add a NanoFlash, you can record either to MXF or directly to .mov. Are you thinking of the Sony 350, which is 2/3" ?
 
ive seen recordings from the xf and jvc ,and honestly i think the jvc is worse than the xf in low light ,very very noisy when you use gain with the jvc as well

ex3/1/1r are very good in low light ,I use a pmw 350k and its phenomenal in low light (at least in comparison to my hmc 40)

then there's the F3 that's coming out that is supposed to be even better than the 350
 
That's helpful guys. I was thinking of the ex3, just forgot it's 1/2 not 2/3.

So JVC is out then, even if MOV recording and ease of use with FCP is so appealing. It's still relatively an expensive cam.

So it's between an EX3 with nano, or XF305.... The XF305 with gain was very noisy. I was shocked. I didn't pick it up on the LCD and when played back on a 30" monitor it's not good.

I'm assuming that an EX3 with a nano, would outdo the XF305....? In terms of low-light performance. Is the EX3 through nano 422 or higher?

And what about the AF101?? I think I'm definitely getting one, but worried about people not being able to focus it properly without red focus... Any truth in that??

Thanks!
 
The EX3 also uses CMOS chips, so it will probably suffer from the same effects from flashes as the XF305. I've used the EX3 a lot and really like the camera. I'm surprised you think the XF is grainy. The low light video I've seen doesn't look bad, noise wise. But, hey, you actually worked with one and I haven't.
Paired with a nano, the EX3 should give outstanding video. It will be 4:2:2 color as well. With 1/2" chips, it will perform better in low light than a 1/3" camera. I used to have a JVC HD200 and it was terrible in low light. As I understand it, the new HM700 isn't much better, but again, that's just what I've heard over the internet. I've seen video broadcast from an HM700 and it looked pretty good to me.
Price wise, all three cameras are pretty close.
Personally, I'd go with the XF305, as I like the codec and lens. I've heard it has a little better low light performance than an HVX200. I've used a 200 for years and never has any real issues with low light.
I'm going to check out an AF100 tomorrow. The inner geek in me can't wait!
 
I've heard that the XF series is supposed to be quite clean and on par with the EX1/EX3 series. Surprised to hear you say it's so noisy and grainy, I haven't heard anyone else say that.

EX3 with a Nano can be 4:2:2, it depends on what you set the Nano to record. If you choose 50mbps or higher it's all 4:2:2.

AF101 focusing - it doesn't have magnified focus assist, but it does have the focus in red, and if you use that it's quite easy to focus. Thing is, in very dark environments, the red doesn't show up all the time. If you can use a little flashlight to help it along once in a while, it'd work fine. The low light performance of an AF100 with a Voigtlander f/0.95 lens would be far superior to any of the cameras you've talked about so far. But if you need a zoom lens, it would be dependent on which lens. WIth the Olympus f/2.0 zooms, probably as good or better than the others. With an f/4 or slower lens, probably not quite as good as the others.
 
vanvideo - You'd go for an XF305 over an ex3 with nano? Interesting. 1/3 over 1/2.... Hmmm.. Flash/strobing on an xf305 ruins AF too... Really blurs the shot. I'm more manual focus now than I've ever been. Running around live events is good to have AF, and on CCD cams is works wonders. CMOS is very bad. I long for the day when the best of CCD and the best of CMOS is combined.

Barry, can magnified focus assist be added with one of those EVF toys you get on DSLR's? And do they work properly. I understand, but it's such a shame that you buy a camera that you can't focus properly... Everything else about the 101 (with a nano) seems great.... I'm definitely ordering a 101 with voigtlander soon, just legal stuff with contracts is dragging on... I hear the Nokton is hard to get hold of though....

I'm going to pull off some of the 'dark' xf305 shots with gain, so you can what I mean... I was in Brazil last week filming, and a lot of stuff at night...
 
No, I'd choose an XF305 over a stock EX3. I would not get a nano with an EX3. I don't like stuff hanging off my cameras. I prefer the camera give me a good codec without any external drives. Especially drives that cost north of 2 grand. I do not understand why Sony can't put at least a 50mbps, 4:2:2 codec on small frame cameras. Panasonic has been doing it for years, and now Canon has done it.
Why choose a 1/3" cam over a 1/2" cam? Better codec, better lens, cheaper media, full acceptance by the world-respected BBC. Those are pretty good credentials.

Don't get me wrong, the EX3 is a very good camera. I love working with it, but it's not perfect. Since I've never used an XF305, I'm going on faith. From what i've seen and the press it's received, the XF sems to make very good images. I sure wouldn't complain with either camera. But sure, the EX3 will give better low light capabilities than an XF305.
 
I don't like stuff hanging over cams either, but if it records MOV at 50mbs 422, then I can be swayed. With a 1/2 chip, it should be better than xf305. Stock lens may be an issue, but what decent and "affordable" zoom lens would you put on an ex3??

I've done a test of night time footage at +6 gain, and day time footage with an XF305, shot in Brazil last week. I'm uploading to Vimeo now. although my internet went down so I'm tethering a 46mb file through my iphone! Gonna take 2 hours! LOL!!! I feel like I'm in 1999! :-D

Going to sleep, will post in the morning... Speak soon....
 
Here's the clip

http://vimeo.com/19463823

XF305 Test Night & Day (Night at +6 gain)

It's not easy to see because of compression, but you can see the grain.. The night shots are awful. The day shots look great tho. Mic was switched off for helicopter clip....

I guess the EX3 would be better at night. I used the EX3 over a year ago, but can't remember what it was like! :-/
 
As I mentioned on another thread. I went for the EX3 in the end. Although a lot of people a raving about the XF305 right now, the low light is not great. Go for an EX3 with Nano or similar device. Ki pro or ninja and you'll get 50/100/140+ mbs and 4:2:2 10 bit. MUCH better than an XF305. Plus 1/2" sensor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top