Is the DVX-100B Obsolete because of 4x3 format?

DVX100B still going strong

DVX100B still going strong

Our original 100B is > 3 years old and still works like a charm. (We now have 2 of them). We do some traditional video production, but most of our work is corporate talking heads at conferences, giving speeches, making presentations and nearly all of it designed to go online (either live streaming, VOD or both).

We shoot mostly in the native 4x3 format, with the occasional client asking for 16x9. Easy enough to do.

So why are we still using 100B's?

- They're reliable and produce a very good quality SD image
- Tape is cheap (we feed to a switcher and use the tape as backup)
- The workflow is very fast (a critical issue for us)
- They work well in low-light
- Excellent audio capture with dual XLR audio inputs
- They're paid for
- 8-10 hours of battery life

The only real complaint is that the zoom lens isn't as long as I'd like. The telephoto add-on helps, but it vignettes if you go wide. We generally use S-video. The composite signal can get ugly in low light. Component out would be nice. If it's a one-camera shoot, then we generally backup to tape and go FW into a laptop so we can start editing (DV) as soon as the shoot is done.

Bottom line: 100Bs work very well for us, and I'm not looking forward to replacing them, mainly because of the pain involved in re-jigging our workflow.

Cheers,
George
 
People seem to forget that when a new class of gear hits the market, your old gear loses none of its functionality... the DVX has won cinematography awards and makes a pretty image.

I haven't looked back since Canon's DSLR footage debuted - it looks good at full rez, and great when scaled down to SD, and I love the DOF available and the fact that I can pull keys that may not be perfect but are a huge leap from DV. Already having some pro-level SLR lenses made it an easier change for me as well.

But... the DVX has form factor and ND advantages (trying to come up with a good rail setup for a DSLR is tougher than just sticking a DVX on an existing set). Add fantastic & flexible audio and useable AF, and for certain projects (or entire business models) it's still a dynamite camera.
 
DPStewart said:
The "Pub Crawl" video:

24P
Detail = -3
Coring = +3
Chroma Level = -3
Master Ped = -8
A.Iris Level = -2
CINELIKE V
Matrix = CINELIKE
Skin Tone = OFF
V Detail = THIN

One on-camera light only:
TorchLED TL-50

Almost no color correction was done to this piece and I was once again surprised at how rich and varied the DVX colors can be.

Is this the piece you meant?

~DPS
Click to expand...

Right it was the one, thanks alot
 
Sorry, it's time to purchase HD only equipment. I've seen teenagers using the canon t2i on the internet and it blows away any DVX100b footage I've seen on youtube. Buy the dvx100b
if this is your hobby but not if you are wanting to make a living in video production.
 
It does still depend on what you are going to use the camera FOR.

If you cannot control your environments - like the pub-crawl shoot I had to do and posted here - a DSLR will be nearly useless. Everything comes with a price. I have seen DVX documentaries here that look and sound great and the shooter even used the stock microphone.

And as always - DVX footage can be edited and corrected on much less powerful (cheaper) computers.

I have been making the transition to Hi Def and the costs are really bumming me out.

~DPS
 
So you think because teens are using a camera that shoots HD everyone should give camera's like the DVX that have made oscar nominated films because you have seen it on YouTube videos? Teens on Youtube is the new standard...ok got it now.
christriplet said:
Sorry, it's time to purchase HD only equipment. I've seen teenagers using the canon t2i on the internet and it blows away any DVX100b footage I've seen on youtube. Buy the dvx100b
if this is your hobby but not if you are wanting to make a living in video production.
Click to expand...
 
Watch this film shot entirely with available light and no, I repeat no dof adapters, shot on DVX100a.

The result is more of what the photographer can get out of a camera, than what camera is best.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vBc_OrzzfI&feature=related


The things you should worry about are budget. Functionality. Format. and image quality. And balance all that to your needs.

If you are buying new, dslr's are cheaper, but they have limited or awkward audio solutions, which means you'll have to invest more money into that, and you'll have to play around with a seperate audio recorder. To balance it all in one piece, you'll also need a rail mount, which is more money. So, price savings are dwindling.


Shallow depth of field from dlsr's does hide lack of talent. but if you are not careful, you could interview an important person and find out your subject was way out of focus.

Find something that has everything you want to make your job easier.
 
James0b57 said:
Shallow depth of field from dlsr's does hide lack of talent.
Click to expand...

I do hope you're joking. All the shallow DOF in the world cannot cover up lack of talent. In fact, using all the shallow DOF in the world is usually a mark of unskilled film making.

James0b57 said:
Find something that has everything you want to make your job easier.
Click to expand...

There is no such thing. Film making is not a matter of "get this tool and you're going to go places." It's about the ability to craft a story through images. It does not matter what camera you use. If you can capture the story, you're well on your way. No camera - no camera - is going to improve your ability.
 
Owning an HPX-171, I still think that the footage of the DVX-100(A or B) looks great, if shot under the right conditions. When you uprez them to 720p it looks quite like 720p.

I don't think that 'sharpness' or resolution is the problem with the DVX. There is a problem however, and it is more about the codec and dynamic range. Especially in wide shots the codec affects the image quality. That is a pity. But with the right grading and shooting flat it is workable.

Watch this trailer, entirely shot on DVX-100A and jugde for yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eM_4S9GjeS4&hd=1
 
C2V said:
I do hope you're joking. All the shallow DOF in the world cannot cover up lack of talent. In fact, using all the shallow DOF in the world is usually a mark of unskilled film making.



There is no such thing. Film making is not a matter of "get this tool and you're going to go places." It's about the ability to craft a story through images. It does not matter what camera you use. If you can capture the story, you're well on your way. No camera - no camera - is going to improve your ability.
Click to expand...

It seems you ignored the first part of my post, which makes a similar point you do.

The audience loves shallow depth of field, and any novice who creates a properly focused shallow dof image gets oohs and aaahs from people. That does not mean the audience will enjoy the video or understand the story, but it can give people without talent a false sense of superiority when they get complimented on "how beautiful" their image is.

Finding a camera with everything you want means:
Do you want 24p?
Do you want good Audio?
Do you want autofocus?
Do you want power zoom?
Do you want tapeless workflow or tape based archival workflow?
etc....
So, yes there is such a thing, as long as it is not taken too literally.

You are coming from a good place, just letting you know that we are actually much in agreement.
 
hjrt said:
Owning an HPX-171, I still think that the footage of the DVX-100(A or B) looks great, if shot under the right conditions. When you uprez them to 720p it looks quite like 720p.

I don't think that 'sharpness' or resolution is the problem with the DVX. There is a problem however, and it is more about the codec and dynamic range. Especially in wide shots the codec affects the image quality. That is a pity. But with the right grading and shooting flat it is workable.

Watch this trailer, entirely shot on DVX-100A and jugde for yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eM_4S9GjeS4&hd=1
Click to expand...

Very nice. Another great example. Proper composition and set design.

..and no rolling shutter in those whip pans! lol
 
Thanks! Though I have to say, that - aside from a few small scenes - there wasn't any set design at all...or maybe there was if you count in the countless architects that build Rome over the past 3000 years:p
 
hjrt said:
Thanks! Though I have to say, that - aside from a few small scenes - there wasn't any set design at all...or maybe there was if you count in the countless architects that build Rome over the past 3000 years:p
Click to expand...

Yes, the Romans do deserve some credit there. Choice of set is all part of set design to me. ;)

btw, I noticed in the "making of" video, the mic zeppelin has the "long" end up in the air. Is that because you have a hyper-cardioid mic in there, or is that how you mount your shotguns?
 
It seems odd when I look at it as well. To be honest, this was the first time we actually shot a serieus thing and also the first time that we used a mic boom. I couldn't tell why the long side is up in the air, I think it has been mounted the wrong way...I now use a Rode NTG-3 mic in a rode blimp and the long end is always pointed toward the subject...so: no idea!
 
Haha, I had to ask. I was just wondering if you were recording from the back end of the shotty, or if you had a cool trick, or if that was your sound girl's preferred style. Well, if anyone ever needs to blimp a cardioid in a shotgun blimp, that is the way to do it when you need close mic proximity to speakers.


Anyway, back to the forum topic.
Summation:
-Personal use or in house company use: DVX is fine if you don't mind SD, tapes, 1/3" CCD
-Hiring out services: lack of HD may be an inhibiting factor to many potential jobs.
 
maybe i missed it but i saw the hmc40 mentioned. Why are you overlooking the hmc150? if ur considering the hvx200 but cant afford the expense of p2 ect...the hmc150 is the most logical choice for what u want. that said the dvx is still good ( i shot this with it and it looks nice to me http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HqIlJjB-T5Q ) but ur talking about lowlight...hmm...so i duno. the hmc150 is decent in lowlight i hear.
 
Define "Obsolete".

Personally, I bought this camera specifically for that "24 frames / Film" look and I very happy with the results! If you want to shoot the next "Planet Earth" series for Discovery channel in HD, you probably want to go with the HVX200 instead, but anything short of that I think the DVX100B does just fine.

I am using squeeze mode almost exclusively for 24ap because in squeeze mode the camera is actually using the whole 4:3 CCD sensor (then stretching it out horizontally, electronically) rather than using only a portion of the 4:3 CCD and then throwing away the top and bottom part of the sensor. With V-detail set to thin, the camera compensates for the "squeeze" and when the image is then stretched out it looks like it should. Personally I think that 16:9 squeeze mode looks great, but you have to import the footage correctly into your NLE to get the best results. If you import the 24ap footage incorrectly, it's going to look like crap.

But that's only if you plan on releasing in 16:9 format. If you are planning on releasing your work in 4:3 format, then either letterbox or normal 4:3 may be just fine.
 
This is my DEMO reel which contains footage from past projects including 2 films which have both won best cinematography awards at various film fests in the past year that were against films shot on T2i, 5D and other "better" cameras MY ENTIRE REEL IS ALL SHOT ON A STOCK DVX100B
 
I'd second the HMC150 suggestion.... though you may want to wait out the summer and see if the AG-AC130 is what you want!
 
http://vimeo.com/19943016 - password - deception1 (no caps) This is a link to my short "Deception" shot entirely with the DVX100A in squeeze mode - no filters or add ons (except occasional wide lens) I so want to keep shooting on this camera, but am a bit afraid to put all the time and energy into something and have a potential distributor say, "Why didn't you shoot in HD?" I feel like my DVX is my 16mm camera and the question is, "Do i want to shoot 35?" I've been playing with DSLR's and I bought a SDT750 for run and gun proof of concept videos, but I can't let go of my trusty DVX.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top