Zim
Veteran
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred
Great review. It helps someone like myself who is trying to decided what to buy. You are right about the TV stations not going HD. My wife works for a PBS station and they are going digital and the government is giving TV stations more time, because alot are not making the deadline.
Great review. It helps someone like myself who is trying to decided what to buy. You are right about the TV stations not going HD. My wife works for a PBS station and they are going digital and the government is giving TV stations more time, because alot are not making the deadline.
HorseFilms
Look ma no hands
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred
Great work! Thanks a lot.
Great work! Thanks a lot.
Z
Zoomforce
Guest
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred
[quote author=ulisses link=board=nws;num=1105070695;start=15#15 date=01/07/05 at 03:17:22]Great review, the best I read in the net...
A question, where to find/buy the color charts you used ?
Thanks,
Ulisses[/quote]
You can get most of those charts at filmtools.com, You can get Acu charts in books and the Macbeth color chart is pretty much the standard for color.
[quote author=ulisses link=board=nws;num=1105070695;start=15#15 date=01/07/05 at 03:17:22]Great review, the best I read in the net...
A question, where to find/buy the color charts you used ?
Thanks,
Ulisses[/quote]
You can get most of those charts at filmtools.com, You can get Acu charts in books and the Macbeth color chart is pretty much the standard for color.
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred
I'm a novice with respect to the DVX camera. I own an XL1S and have the 14x manual and 3x wide to go with it. I found the discussion about 4:3 versus 16:9 shooting very informative. It seems to me that my xl1s will produce better results with 4:3 than the new xl2. If I intend to shoot a documentary and use the XL1s as a second camera shooting it in 4:3 at 1/60 should work out fine. Is that true Barry?
I loved the article and I purchased Barry's book because I was so impressed with his writing style and content.
One other thing I noted on my camera purchase is that they don't supply Magic Bullet with Canadian purchases. It has something to do with Panasonic Canada. I can't understand why they short change Canadians.
I'm a novice with respect to the DVX camera. I own an XL1S and have the 14x manual and 3x wide to go with it. I found the discussion about 4:3 versus 16:9 shooting very informative. It seems to me that my xl1s will produce better results with 4:3 than the new xl2. If I intend to shoot a documentary and use the XL1s as a second camera shooting it in 4:3 at 1/60 should work out fine. Is that true Barry?
I loved the article and I purchased Barry's book because I was so impressed with his writing style and content.
One other thing I noted on my camera purchase is that they don't supply Magic Bullet with Canadian purchases. It has something to do with Panasonic Canada. I can't understand why they short change Canadians.
alexdias
Well-known member
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred
Excellent Job Guys.
Very thorough, clear and informative.
When I read the article it sounded like knowledgeable friends discussing the cameras, your unbiased views and honest proposes make all the difference.
I'm very grateful to your generosity.
Thanks,
Alex.
Excellent Job Guys.
Very thorough, clear and informative.
When I read the article it sounded like knowledgeable friends discussing the cameras, your unbiased views and honest proposes make all the difference.
I'm very grateful to your generosity.
Thanks,
Alex.
Motherboard
Well-known member
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred
"DVX still the king " I like that ;D ;D ;D ;D
"DVX still the king " I like that ;D ;D ;D ;D
Jan_Crittenden
Veteran
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred
[quote author=dstone link=board=nws;num=1105070695;start=15#28 date=01/07/05 at 11:35:26]
One other thing I noted on my camera purchase is that they don't supply Magic Bullet with Canadian purchases. It has something to do with Panasonic Canada. I can't understand why they short change Canadians.[/quote]
It is a US program. The Magic Bullets are stuffed in the box by the Panasonic US company to help the US customer figure out which products were gray market. Those without it are most likely Gray Market and thus have no US warranty.
Hope that helps,
Jan
[quote author=dstone link=board=nws;num=1105070695;start=15#28 date=01/07/05 at 11:35:26]
One other thing I noted on my camera purchase is that they don't supply Magic Bullet with Canadian purchases. It has something to do with Panasonic Canada. I can't understand why they short change Canadians.[/quote]
It is a US program. The Magic Bullets are stuffed in the box by the Panasonic US company to help the US customer figure out which products were gray market. Those without it are most likely Gray Market and thus have no US warranty.
Hope that helps,
Jan
Z
Zoomforce
Guest
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred
[quote author=Jan_Crittenden link=board=nws;num=1105070695;start=30#32 date=01/07/05 at 11:53:20]
It is a US program. The Magic Bullets are stuffed in the box by the Panasonic US company to help the US customer figure out which products were gray market. Those without it are most likely Gray Market and thus have no US warranty.
Hope that helps,
Jan
[/quote]
which is one of the reasons I bought my DVX from an authorized US dealer... the Canadian Panasonic dealers, in fact even Panasonic Canada, can't hold a candle to the US dealers like EVS or the support Pana US gives.
[quote author=Jan_Crittenden link=board=nws;num=1105070695;start=30#32 date=01/07/05 at 11:53:20]
It is a US program. The Magic Bullets are stuffed in the box by the Panasonic US company to help the US customer figure out which products were gray market. Those without it are most likely Gray Market and thus have no US warranty.
Hope that helps,
Jan
[/quote]
which is one of the reasons I bought my DVX from an authorized US dealer... the Canadian Panasonic dealers, in fact even Panasonic Canada, can't hold a candle to the US dealers like EVS or the support Pana US gives.
Z
Zoomforce
Guest
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred
[quote author=alexdias link=board=nws;num=1105070695;start=15#29 date=01/07/05 at 11:46:58]Excellent Job Guys.
When I read the article it sounded like knowledgeable friends discussing the cameras, your unbiased views and honest proposes make all the difference.
Alex.
[/quote]
This is exactly what happened... me and Barry basically had all the cameras, shot each day then went back to the hotel and we yapped about our likes/dislikes till the wee hours of the morning.. Barry transcribed anything we talked about that was deemed usefull.
[quote author=alexdias link=board=nws;num=1105070695;start=15#29 date=01/07/05 at 11:46:58]Excellent Job Guys.
When I read the article it sounded like knowledgeable friends discussing the cameras, your unbiased views and honest proposes make all the difference.
Alex.
[/quote]
This is exactly what happened... me and Barry basically had all the cameras, shot each day then went back to the hotel and we yapped about our likes/dislikes till the wee hours of the morning.. Barry transcribed anything we talked about that was deemed usefull.
Prairieboy
Veteran
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred
The real question is what was you and Barry doing in a hotel room in NYC?
The real question is what was you and Barry doing in a hotel room in NYC?
Taylor Moore
Veteran
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred
Prarieboy ummm, I second that.
Racking focus in NYC
Prarieboy ummm, I second that.
Racking focus in NYC
xray
Well-known member
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred
Very nice test indeed. Thanks for the work!
I think that looking at the Z1 with all the better parts compared to the FX1 the price difference isn't that big. Even so, you can use the Z1 camera all over the world and I think that will dump the price soon. If you buy microphones, tripods, batteries, transmitters etc. the small 2.000 dollar extra want break the bank. Also for a filmstyle, the widescreen appearance (16:9 or wider) is important. I say, aesthetically spoken, it is a most important point in the 'film emotion' reference.
Sure you can shoot 4:3 but broadcasting it; it looks very soon outdated. Maybe shooting progressive (25p Europe) is more important (for a filmstyle feel and believe) combined with the cinema stretch gamma. But the downrezzed interlaced material 25i, with cinecurve will give you a good result also on DVD.
I really wish Panasonic brings out some kind of native 16:9 prosumer camera, be it SD or HD... , and shooting on a range of expensive 4 gig P2 cards without the possibility to dump it on a harddrive (you are in the middle of the jungle) is not the way to go for me. Or I need to take my new Ibook with me. Just some miniDV tapes are cheap and handy in those conditions.
I don't need HD, not for years. But I do need real widescreen imagery.
Very nice test indeed. Thanks for the work!
I think that looking at the Z1 with all the better parts compared to the FX1 the price difference isn't that big. Even so, you can use the Z1 camera all over the world and I think that will dump the price soon. If you buy microphones, tripods, batteries, transmitters etc. the small 2.000 dollar extra want break the bank. Also for a filmstyle, the widescreen appearance (16:9 or wider) is important. I say, aesthetically spoken, it is a most important point in the 'film emotion' reference.
Sure you can shoot 4:3 but broadcasting it; it looks very soon outdated. Maybe shooting progressive (25p Europe) is more important (for a filmstyle feel and believe) combined with the cinema stretch gamma. But the downrezzed interlaced material 25i, with cinecurve will give you a good result also on DVD.
I really wish Panasonic brings out some kind of native 16:9 prosumer camera, be it SD or HD... , and shooting on a range of expensive 4 gig P2 cards without the possibility to dump it on a harddrive (you are in the middle of the jungle) is not the way to go for me. Or I need to take my new Ibook with me. Just some miniDV tapes are cheap and handy in those conditions.
I don't need HD, not for years. But I do need real widescreen imagery.
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred
Yeah, great article... I was reading it and starting to feel a little insecure with my decision to buy XL2 until I hit the paragraph about 16:9. It then became obvious how bent the writers were towards the DVX. The uses of 16:9 were downplayed, the perks of 4:3 in response brought up.
A key point you should have mentioned: 16:9 is cinematic. Since you spent the previous parts of the article praising the cinematic and filmlike properties of the DVX, how convinient you should forget them now. Professional films haven't been shot in 1.78 for decades. TV-Movies nowadays rarely are. Shoot 16:9 and protect for 4:3 in case of pan&scan-idiots, that's what was taught to me.
Yeah most people still have 4:3 tv-sets but don't those sets also show interlaced imagery? Doesn't that mean that you should also _shoot_ interlaced? No, apparently it doesn't. So why would you shoot 4:3 if you are going for filmic imagery, which appeared to be one the key points of the article to this point? And if you agree with me, then why was this side of 16:9 downplayed?
Of course what should I expect, coming to a site called "DVX User"
I agree with just about everything else written there. The menu system of XL2 is questionable, the iris switch ridiculous. But 16:9 is the one thing it's got going against the DVX, and it's the main reason that I'm not changing my order.
Yeah, great article... I was reading it and starting to feel a little insecure with my decision to buy XL2 until I hit the paragraph about 16:9. It then became obvious how bent the writers were towards the DVX. The uses of 16:9 were downplayed, the perks of 4:3 in response brought up.
A key point you should have mentioned: 16:9 is cinematic. Since you spent the previous parts of the article praising the cinematic and filmlike properties of the DVX, how convinient you should forget them now. Professional films haven't been shot in 1.78 for decades. TV-Movies nowadays rarely are. Shoot 16:9 and protect for 4:3 in case of pan&scan-idiots, that's what was taught to me.
Yeah most people still have 4:3 tv-sets but don't those sets also show interlaced imagery? Doesn't that mean that you should also _shoot_ interlaced? No, apparently it doesn't. So why would you shoot 4:3 if you are going for filmic imagery, which appeared to be one the key points of the article to this point? And if you agree with me, then why was this side of 16:9 downplayed?
Of course what should I expect, coming to a site called "DVX User"
I agree with just about everything else written there. The menu system of XL2 is questionable, the iris switch ridiculous. But 16:9 is the one thing it's got going against the DVX, and it's the main reason that I'm not changing my order.
scharky
Veteran
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred
16:9 was not downplayed at all in that review. It clearly stated that the XL2 was native 16:9 and the DVX was not. However, what was brought up was that most television sets that people have are 4:3 at this time. So when showing 16:9 on most of these televisions you will have a letterbox picture. You will not see any gain in resolution in that situation. However, the Xl2 16:9 is great, it is sharp and full res, it would be nice if the DVX had that. It doesn't (unless you use the anamorphic adapter) but it does have the "DVX" look, that has yet to be rivaled by any other sub 10 grand camera IMNSHO (in my not so humble opinion). All the advantages of each camera were clearly stated. Sure the bias will be towards the DVX because like you said, it is DVX user.com, but many people have really fallen in love with the way the DVX looks and handles and that still has not been rivaled by any other camera.
16:9 was not downplayed at all in that review. It clearly stated that the XL2 was native 16:9 and the DVX was not. However, what was brought up was that most television sets that people have are 4:3 at this time. So when showing 16:9 on most of these televisions you will have a letterbox picture. You will not see any gain in resolution in that situation. However, the Xl2 16:9 is great, it is sharp and full res, it would be nice if the DVX had that. It doesn't (unless you use the anamorphic adapter) but it does have the "DVX" look, that has yet to be rivaled by any other sub 10 grand camera IMNSHO (in my not so humble opinion)
. All the advantages of each camera were clearly stated. Sure the bias will be towards the DVX because like you said, it is DVX user.com, but many people have really fallen in love with the way the DVX looks and handles and that still has not been rivaled by any other camera.