FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred

  • Thread starter Thread starter Zoomforce
  • Start date Start date
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred

So that long article was basicly just "You shouldn't consider buying anything else than DVX100A and here's why"?

If you people have the cameras you're satisfied with, why do you so eagerly check out new products? ::)

P.S. The filmic quality of 16:9 WAS downplayed. Read it again. The fact that 4:3 is the current configuration of most tv-sets is not (should not be) an issue for indie filmmakers.
 
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred

[quote author=Aejaz link=board=nws;num=1105070695;start=15#20 date=01/07/05 at 07:18:19]Barry! In the review you said that both DVX and XL2 GAIN resolution in the progressive mode....What that exactly means? Is it related to more CCD usage ::)[/quote]
In interlaced mode, all interlaced cameras employ a blur filter to blur detail across horizontal scan lines, to reduce flicker on thin line detail. This limits interlaced cameras to a maximum of about 360 to 380 scan lines. On the DVX and XL2, when you switch into progressive mode, you have the option to disable that blur filter (by choosing THIN on the DVX, for example). That lets you get a full 480 scan lines of resolution, so you get more resolution in progressive mode than is possible in interlaced mode.
 
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred

[quote author=booggerg link=board=nws;num=1105070695;start=15#22 date=01/07/05 at 07:58:18]awsome! Wow the DVX in squeeze stands up rather well to the other two. The FX1 doesn't even look that much higher in res from the grabs[/quote]
Remember, those grabs were from a DVD of the footage... we downrezzed the FX1 to SD and split-screened it with the SD cameras, then made a DVD of it. So those grabs are what you would expect to see on DVD, which is the de facto delivery medium available today.

On a high-def TV, playing back the footage straight from the camera, the FX1 dwarfs the others in resolution.
 
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]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?[/quote]
I haven't directly compared them, so I can't answer that authoritatively.  The XL1s does use a larger CCD when in 4:3 mode, it uses a full 1/3" CCD vs. the XL2's 1/4" patch (it uses only a 1/4"-sized patch off its 1/3" CCD when in 4:3 mode).  However, according to the resolution charts, the XL2's still delivering the full resolution... whereas the XL1s uses bigger pixels (only 250,000, I believe) so it doesn't get quite as sharp an image.  That's how the specs compare, but I really don't know how it sorts out on the television.  One difference is that the XL1s will deliver shallower DOF in 4:3 mode than the XL2 would, at any given subject size.

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.
Click to expand...
The Magic Bullet deal, and the DVX Book deal, are special arrangements made by the US marketing division of Panasonic.  Every country has their own Panasonic marketing company.  Only the US one is offering these special deals.  It's not that the Canadians are getting "short-changed", because Panasonic corporate is not doing these deals.  The US division receives the cameras from Japan, and then actually opens them up and inserts the Magic Bullet and DVX Book/DVD products, then re-seals the packages.  All other countries receive their cameras from Panasonic the same way, but then offer the camera for sale as they received it.  The USA division is just going the extra mile, eating into their profit margin a little in order to bring extra value to their consumer, while helping them track which cameras are genuine USA product vs. which are grey-market imports.
 
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred

Thank you for the wonderful review. Now I can show the review to my friends in Hong Kong, and tell them to shut up, as they said there is no side by side comparison between these 3 DV.

BTW, Barry & Jarred, when you guys are down in NY, any chances you were around the Wall street area? Because I was on business trip to NY back in Nov/Dec, and I see 2 guys carrying these 3 DV between the Water street and Pier 17, around 5:00 PM.
 
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred

[quote author=aquafox link=board=nws;num=1105070695;start=30#39 date=01/07/05 at 17:50:30]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. [/quote]
I know what you're saying -- it wasn't necessarily a bias towards the DVX, as it was a bias towards the US. By looking at your flag, it looks like you're in Europe, and I said in there that it's a whole different playing field in Europe... Europe is somewhere around 50% market penetration of 16:9 sets, and European broadcasters are actually requiring 16:9 video from producers. So for Europe, it's much more important.

For the US, there are no 16:9 broadcasts, so any "native 16:9" camera needs to be resized down to 4:3 anyway. So the "native 16:9" is a quite "sexy" idea, but its practical value for US customers is not nearly as viable as it is for Europeans. A few years down the road that may change.

A key point you should have mentioned: 16:9 is cinematic.
Click to expand...
Oh, indeed it is -- but in the US, 90% of the TV's will have to digitally resize and squash and letterbox the picture, leading to a lower-quality picture overall. Whereas with 4:3 and letterbox, no compromise to the picture is made, and the net result (widescreen imagery on the 4:3 TV with black bars) is retained.

I know what you're saying, and for Europe I totally agree, and for someone making an anamorphic DVD I think there's definite benefit, but for anything destined for viewing on a 4:3 TV, native 16:9 means you'll have some compromises (even if viewing it in "cinematic 16:9" on that 4:3 TV).

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.
Click to expand...
The purpose of the article was to illustrate the differences, to help cut through the clutter and show specifically which cameras were better for which purposes. Since you attach a high priority to 16:9 (and since you're in Europe, I don't blame you, I agree that that's wiser) then I think you're making the right choice.
 
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred

[quote author=wongwai link=board=nws;num=1105070695;start=45#45 date=01/07/05 at 18:40:35]BTW, Barry & Jarred, when you guys are down in NY, any chances you were around the Wall street area?  Because I was on business trip to NY back in Nov/Dec, and I see 2 guys carrying these 3 DV between the Water street and Pier 17, around 5:00 PM.  [/quote]
Was one of 'em about 9 feet tall?

If so, that would have been us.
 
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred

[quote author=Prairieboy link=board=nws;num=1105070695;start=30#36 date=01/07/05 at 15:02:46]The real question is what was you and Barry doing in a hotel room in NYC? :o[/quote]
TWO hotel rooms! TWO. Don't get any funny ideas now... ;D
 
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred

[quote author=booggerg link=board=nws;num=1105070695;start=30#33 date=01/07/05 at 13:30:10]Jan, I got my DVX from buydig.com which is not an "authorized" pana dealer. I was able to get my camera serviced under the manufacture's warranty...[/quote]
The dealer is not authorized, but it's possible that they sold you genuine US product, which would still be covered by a warranty. It depends on where they got it. If they imported it from another country, it would not have the US warranty. If they bought it from an authorized reseller and then re-sold it to you, it would carry the US warranty.
 
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred

yes, one of them is BIG!!

If I only knew, I would come forward and tell you guys how much I learned and Love the DVXuser.com.

FYI, you two did get quite a lot of attention, not because of you guys appearance, but the machines you were carrying. ;D
 
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred

I can't thank you guys enough for that article! You made my decision easy, answered all questions I had, and went beyond that.

Your efforts are massively appreciated. ;)
 
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred

I have a question: Are the menu and settings issues with the XL-2 (bars instead of numbers, etc) potentially fixable by a third party using the XL-2 SDK? I ask because it could be a huge boost to the camera if someone developed a more professional settings interface.

-tm
 
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred

aquafox

good for you. the purpose of the 'review' was not to bias anyone or make any decisons for anyone. sounds as if you know what you want; thats the most imporant item.

barry and jarred

totally cool of you guys to do this. one of the more insightful and detailed reviews I have seen.

Thanks guys! :)
 
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred

The Z1 has a streetprice of 4900,- US dollars so next month you can do the test again ;-)
 
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred

l plan on getting the z1 hopefully but i am glad there are all these options out there for any serious filmmaker or videographer I really disliked that fact that the z1 is not true Progressive sort of a let down in my opnion but i understand if they make the z1 Progressive then no one will want to buy the sony highend HD cinealta f300 camera/cameras I just feel its a new thing and i want to try it out and see what this baby can do.

Thanx for the review guys
great job
Cpt. Jack Sparrow
 
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred

[quote author=booggerg link=board=nws;num=1105070695;start=30#33 date=01/07/05 at 13:30:10]Jan, I got my DVX from buydig.com which is not an "authorized" pana dealer. I was able to get my camera serviced under the manufacture's warranty...[/quote]

They probably purchased it from a distributor who is a an authorized distributor. I am beginning to find that the Magic Bullet inclusion, and now the DVX Book nclusion, is having an impact; that the folks that were buying gray market are now buying from the distributors. This is not true for all of them, but some like buydig and even Tristate to a degree. Everyone just needs to make sure that they ask for the Magic Bullet and now the DVX Book.

Best regards,

Jan
 
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred

Being Canadian I also bought my DVX out of the states due to the overall lower price and the better relationship Panasonic has with this forum, and now with the Bundled versions it is obvious.

Rush, when are you setting up shop in Vancouver?
 
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred

You guys get a credit.

Alarming, astonishing, awe-inspiring, awful, beautiful, breathtaking, daunting, dreadful, exalted, far out, fearful, fearsome, formidable, frantic, frightening, grand, hairy, horrible, horrifying, imposing, impressive, intimidating, magnificent, majestic, mind-blowing, moving, nervous, overwhelming, shocking, striking, stunning, stupefying, terrible, terrifying, wonderful, wondrous, zero
 
Re: FX1 vs. DVX vs. XL2 .. By Barry and Jarred

[quote author=wongwai link=board=nws;num=1105070695;start=45#45 date=01/07/05 at 18:40:35]
BTW, Barry & Jarred, when you guys are down in NY, any chances you were around the Wall street area? Because I was on business trip to NY back in Nov/Dec, and I see 2 guys carrying these 3 DV between the Water street and Pier 17, around 5:00 PM. [/quote]

Yes indeed that was us.. even funnier at almost exactly that time we where on the phone with Oppressor, another DVXuser member in the area.. next time we should post a meeting place and DVXusers can storm Manhattan! ha ha.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top