I don't get it?

Rylan Zolinski

Rylan Zolinski

Well-known member
On paper, it seems that the XL2 is superior (in terms of specifications) to the DVX100B but the 100B always seems to look more close to film. I know this is a site dedicated to the DVX, but can someone (that isn't biased) fill me in and tell me, what gives?
 
DVX users are personalities of great skill and quality. Since they actually know how to use their cameras, they get better footage. Plus the DVX is sexier. Eat it, XL2ers.
 
In all honesty I'm not really sure, but I think it could be because the DVX gets better contrast whereas the XL2 is stronger on the color, and the contrast is easier to discern for most people. Barry or Jared or any number of other more experienced forum members than I could probably tell you better.
 
HappyGobo said:
DVX users are personalities of great skill and quality. Since they actually know how to use their cameras, they get better footage. Plus the DVX is sexier. Eat it, XL2ers.
Click to expand...

That make's no sense whatsoever. Ignorance for no particular reason will only rob yourself of learning the strong and weak points of VARIOUS camcorders.

I own one DVX100a and one XL2, and I use both of them depending on what the shoot/circumstance calls for. Both are good camcorders, and both have some strong points, and some not so strong points.

-brown

P.S. the XL2 is WAY sexier than the DVX, and demands much more attention. Clients that don't know anything about camera's see the thing, and it's size, and immediately want to dish out money to use it over the DVX. Sad but true.
 
Last edited:
It looks awesome? Who cares how it looks, it's the resulting image that's important. Specs are nothing but 'specs', it's not going to make you a better storyteller or cinematographer. You said "the 100B always seems to look more close to film"; if you like that look and that's what you're going for. I guess your decision is already made towards which camera you'd want to shoot with.

In terms of technicality, 'why does the DVX look better although on paper it may seem the XL2 is superior'?. This has been discussed all over the boards in different threads. Do a search if you interested in hearing about it, I'm sure you'll find plenty of information regarding the technical differences and such forth.

But in general, this is a very subjective topic. I'm sure there are those who think the 24f mode of the XL2 is nicer than Panny's 24p mode; in the end it doesn't matter what they think, only what you think.
 
Having a DVX in my arms does make me feel better about myself... kind of like when you have a hot girlfriend and you start showing her off to all your friends.... oh yea....
 
HappyGobo said:
Take a joke dude. I don't own either camera.
Click to expand...

I know it was a joke, but it could be misleading...


And Geoff_R., Paying clients DO care how it looks, and it can be a big seller to a lot of people. It's sad, but looks are huge part of making a project for a paying customer. To them, more gear and "badass equipment" = Better end result. That's why many/most production company's will unload an entire truck and set it up, even if they know they're only going to use a third of the gear. The producers, clients, and everyone else that doesn't know the tech side of it thinks thier getting better results.
 
I think i had this discusision before with people . Or at least put my input in. Again, i think if that's your mentality it's ludacris. **** what clients think of your camera, your work should make the most impact. It's not what you have or what it looks like, its what you can DO WITH IT! That's my motto for life. Screw that...no offense....
 
I think the best compromise is to put a rod support system with big ol' matte box and follow focus on your Panny. That way all the Keifer Sutherlands of the world should be satisfied.
 
Morox said:
On paper, it seems that the XL2 is superior (in terms of specifications) to the DVX100B but the 100B always seems to look more close to film. I know this is a site dedicated to the DVX, but can someone (that isn't biased) fill me in and tell me, what gives?
Click to expand...

Numbers don't make images. There are specs that matter, and there are specs that don't, and then there are specs that may matter to engineers but not to users.

If you're buying an image-making tool, you should judge it on the images it makes, and on the features it offers. Not on the specs it brags about on its spec sheet. There are some specs that people use for "bragging rights", and then there's the only thing that matters: what can you *do* with the product.
 
Like for example..... "800X digital zoom"...... "Night Alive technology"....... "Smooth slow record (sony)"........ "1/6 megapixel sensor".......

all sounds awesome when they describe it... looks like crap.

The dvx spec sheet really inst that impressive. what is it? 380,000 pixels per chip? thats like .3 megapixel sensors??? my Cellphone camera has "better" specs, 1.3 megapixels......
 
HappyGobo said:
In all honesty I'm not really sure, but I think it could be because the DVX gets better contrast whereas the XL2 is stronger on the color
Click to expand...


I think its the opposite. The DVX has more accurate color reproduction. whereas teh Xl2 is sharper? both are just about the same in Dynamic range. though the Gamma distribution on the DVX looks better out of camera.

However Ask BKLYNDV, he has thsi vidoe shot with an Xl2 that you would nt believe!!! it slooks AMAZING!!!!!!!!

its made by the guy that made "Gotmilk". Send him a PM he will send you a link.
 
I do know I like the contrast on the DVX more than the XL2, but all I've seen from the XL2 is...wedding videos. I'll check out that vid.
 
Its a poor Carpenter who blames his tools......You could have the best most expensive Cam out there, If all you know how to do is shoot in AUTO mode....thats all u gonna get! Learn to manipulate and be creative AND THATS WHAT CLIENTS WILL PAY FOR!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top