Is the DVX100B obsolete?

G

greb

New member
Pretty new to the "prosumer" camera game. Looking to make a purchase and really like what I've heard and read about the DVX100B (like the price too).

Ho ever, is it bordering on obsolte in this fresh world of HDV?

Don't want an obsolete machine but can't afford the HVX.

Advice?

greb
:huh:
 
I have to agree with Horse on this one! I still love my DVX and am in no hurry to jump on the HD bandwagon unless i was getting paid a lot for vid work and actually needed it :)
 
greb said:
Pretty new to the "prosumer" camera game. Looking to make a purchase and really like what I've heard and read about the DVX100B (like the price too).

Ho ever, is it bordering on obsolte in this fresh world of HDV?

Don't want an obsolete machine but can't afford the HVX.

Advice?

greb
:huh:
Click to expand...

the dvx may be more reliable than hdv cams when it comes to drop outs because hdv drop outs will last 15frames (because of the formats GOP recording). also when you shoot hdv, it is recommended to reformat the phootage to AIC (apple intermediate codec) before cutting.

the dvx is a great tool and this forum is serious proof. check out users films.
 
I had a DVX and then rented the HVX and am now buying the RED and I can honestly say that I am still impressed with what the good ol' DVX can do in the right hands (not mine) .

HD is the future and having the dynamic range of the RED will be great, but it is still more advanced than what is needed 95% of the time.

Most projects short of broad theatrical release and network TV is still in the DVX realm. And honestly IF the film were something so special that it had mass-appeal the DVX would still be able to go theatrical.


With the DVX the price is right and the platform tried and true.
 
greb said:
Pretty new to the "prosumer" camera game. Looking to make a purchase and really like what I've heard and read about the DVX100B (like the price too).

Ho ever, is it bordering on obsolte in this fresh world of HDV?

Don't want an obsolete machine but can't afford the HVX.

Advice?

greb
:huh:
Click to expand...
What these guys say is true.
BUt if I were going to buy a NEW camera now, it would be the HDV Canon which is the same price as the DVX ($3500)
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=Search&A=details&Q=&sku=447098&is=REG&addedTroughType=search
or ... buy my DVX100A for $1500 :), and yes I'm serious, and spend the rest on light and sound.
 
I think if the intention is to have the BEST, the Latest GADGETS....DVX is obsolete...otherwise it will remain 'IN' until 80% of the households shift to HD TVs.
 
However, is it bordering on obsolte in this fresh world of HDV?
Click to expand...

In my opinion (and am not alone, I guess...) HDV is a crappy format. The compression is too high and it artefacts a lot. If you want to go HD then the HVX is the only option in the "lower" price range.
So better get a DVX and shoot good quality SD before you waste your money on lowest quality HD (=HDV)
 
all depends what you need it for - the dvx is a lot better in low light than any of the hd cameras - if you're going to be making films with a good light set up then the canon is the way to go at that price range, but if you do run & gun docs or any other 'small/single crew' work then the dvx is still the easiest & best solution to getting high quality footage imho.
 
Last edited:
HDV is dead

HDV is dead

If you want to avoid obsolete technology then I'd avoid HDV. From what I gather from reading all of the press and whatnot, AVC HD is going to replace HDV much sooner than HD (in whatever format) will replace SD.

Sony and Panasonic have both embraced AVC HD, and HDV will only be supported as long as there is still consumer demand (I wouldn't expect any new HDV cameras form Sony). My impression is that consumers will quickly embrace AVC HD (which is better image quality, better compression-MPEG4 AVC/H.264, and is captured to standard SD cards, HDD, or DVD-no more tapes!) and any investment in HDV is an investment in obsolete technology. Unless of course you are planning to buy a JVC which will continue to support HDV because they missed the boat on AVC HD and have nothing else to offer. Canon has showed interest in AVC HD but only time will tell what they are going to do.

Personally, I think that the HVX is currently the best bet for shooting HD or SD (in small format prosumer cameras). For HD you're getting DVC Pro HD, which is better than both HDV AND AVC HD. For SD you get DVC Pro 50, which is better than standard DV. The HVX is good for the current SD market (still 80% or more) and the future HD market. If you can afford it, buy it. otherwise, buy the DVX and be as happy as the rest of us.

HDV is nothing more than a passing fancy.
 
Jack Daniel Stanley said:
What these guys say is true.
BUt if I were going to buy a NEW camera now, it would be the HDV Canon which is the same price as the DVX ($3500)
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=Search&A=details&Q=&sku=447098&is=REG&addedTroughType=search
or ... buy my DVX100A for $1500 :), and yes I'm serious, and spend the rest on light and sound.
Click to expand...

is this because of the a1's HDV '1080/24p' capabilities, or just overall (cuz that lcd is so whack, lol).
 
janusz said:
is this because of the a1's HDV '1080/24p' capabilities, or just overall (cuz that lcd is so whack, lol).
Click to expand...
yep. though some people wear by that LCD placement (if that's what you're refereing to) which is (I think) like the sony lcd's right?

Gauranga said:
If you want to avoid obsolete technology then I'd avoid HDV. From what I gather from reading all of the press and whatnot, AVC HD is going to replace HDV much sooner than HD (in whatever format) will replace SD.

Sony and Panasonic have both embraced AVC HD, and HDV will only be supported as long as there is still consumer demand (I wouldn't expect any new HDV cameras form Sony). My impression is that consumers will quickly embrace AVC HD (which is
better image quality, better compression-MPEG4 AVC/H.264, and is captured to standard SD cards, HDD, or DVD-no more tapes!) and any investment in HDV is an investment in obsolete technology. Unless of course you are planning to buy a JVC which will continue to support HDV because they missed the boat on AVC HD and have nothing else to offer. Canon has showed interest in AVC HD but only time will tell what they are going to do.

Personally, I think that the HVX is currently the best bet for shooting HD or SD (in small format prosumer cameras). For HD you're getting DVC Pro HD, which is better than both HDV AND AVC HD. For SD you get DVC Pro 50, which is better than standard DV. The HVX is good for the current SD market (still 80% or more) and the future HD market. If you can afford it, buy it. otherwise, buy the DVX and be as happy as the rest of us.

HDV is nothing more than a passing fancy.
Click to expand...
you can look at it like that. or you can look at it like this
I could buy a NEW DVX which shoots 500 lines resolution in 4:3 and only 3:30 in 16X9 ... or I could by the "DVXish" A1 which shoots 1080 lines of resolution ... which shoots HD to tape ... to TAPE ...

Try to get my HVX from my hands for an A1 and there will be a fight. But if you walked up to me and asked to trade for my DVX I would look at you funny while I handed it over.

My only poinyt was if you are going to spend $3500, there's a clear choice in that price range. Not in getting HDV vs. HD. If you think HDV has somekind of stigma, I would get the A1, and down rez to full resolution 16X9 (something the DVX 100, 100a, or 100b cannot give you) and not tell anyone it was HDV. You'll get a riduculous looking image.

So it's just a hierarchy
  1. HD (Hvx I would suggest to anyone)
  2. not all HDV but the CanonHDV a1 over the DVX
  3. DVX over any 3 chip SD camera.
Why would you not want the resolution if you are getting 24p?, "comparible" color (finally) which can be tweaked in post, and 1080 resolution?

As for HD the difference of $3500 vs. $6000 - $8000 is prohibitive for lots of us. And again, this is not about comparing HDV too HD. It's HDV vs. SD at the same price. DVX vs. A1. It's if you had $3500 and that's it for a NEW camera which way would you go.
 
I got my 100B in December with tons of extras, the anamorphic lens, (56 hrs on the heads) all under $2k used and I haven't looked back. I embraced HDTV years ago as a viewing medium and would love an HVX but the wallet didn't comply. I'm going to get an Canon HV20 as a 2nd cam in April because the price can't be beat for 1080p at 24fps. Who can resist that?

I just love the artifact free image I get from the DVX with detail turned down and Magic Bullet's Deartifactor (for areas of strong chroma/contrast). I use an old Panny MiniDV codec to decompress on my computer and it is very nice. Yes, I am envious of all of the gorgeous 720p and 1080p images on the forum but am I happy with the 100B? You bet.
 
You can look at it like that or you can look at it like this...

1) Why down convert if you don't have to? Adding extra steps to the workflow is undesireable at best.

2) Why deal with the HDV codec? Everyone knows its a low-end crappy HD wannabe solution. HDV is compressed MPEG-2 video that suffers from chromatic aberrations and artifacting. Let's be honest people, DV (when shot well) looks better.

3) 24p? Not with the Canon. Canon uses something called "24f". If Canon was able to figure out how to make a camera that actually captured 24 progressive frames per second then they would have called it "24p" and not "24f".

4) They might be the same price at $3400 but Panny gives you a bunch of rebates (like Barry's book, software, and $500) to make it more enticing. Canon gives you squat.

So, I agree with you're #1 and #3 recommendations. But that #2 is giving me problems.
 
Gauranga said:
You can look at it like that or you can look at it like this...

1) Why down convert if you don't have to? Adding extra steps to the workflow is undesireable at best.

2) Why deal with the HDV codec? Everyone knows its a low-end crappy HD wannabe solution. HDV is compressed MPEG-2 video that suffers from chromatic aberrations and artifacting. Let's be honest people, DV (when shot well) looks better.

3) 24p? Not with the Canon. Canon uses something called "24f". If Canon was able to figure out how to make a camera that actually captured 24 progressive frames per second then they would have called it "24p" and not "24f".

4) They might be the same price at $3400 but Panny gives you a bunch of rebates (like Barry's book, software, and $500) to make it more enticing. Canon gives you squat.

So, I agree with you're #1 and #3 recommendations. But that #2 is giving me problems.
Click to expand...

Wow, couldn't more strongly dissagree with every single point in this post. I too was very skeptical at first when looking at HDV, but too many people go by what they read on the internet and really havn't shot anything with any HD camera, and especially not the XL/XH series.

first, I challenge you to find artifacts in any of my footage.
second, I challenge you to figure out between HVX and A1 footage, which one looks better.

to get to your points you have posted

1. I have found that shooting in HD gives more flexibility for work than shooting SD, and I have found that A1 16x9 downconverted 24F footage looks much cleaner and sharper than 16x9 DVX footage. I have done plenty of shoots with my DVX as a B camera with the A1 and I really have to say there is a big difference in clarity here.

2. HDV codec has nothing to do with Chromatic abberation, that is a lens characteristic. Again I challenge you to watch footage from the A1 and find artifacts from the HDV codec. I personally have found more artifacts in HVX footage that I have shot than with my A1.

3. Come on, this has been discussed a billion times. 24F is 24P and at a much higher resolution than the DVX can shoot, equal to if not slightly surpassing the HVX in actual pixel resolution. The Canon's CCD is clocked at 48Hz just like the HVX or DVX, or XL2 it's just recorded differently to tape. You may want to check your facts before you go posting complete BS. Why don't you try shooting with the camera before you go actually dissing it.

4. Agreed the DVX has more rebates, and has also been on the market for almost 5 years.


I'm not a DVX hater one bit, I have had my DVX for almost 3 years, and it has paid for itself 50x over. The A1 paid for itself in 3 weeks.
There really are too many haters out there that have no experience with any of these cameras and just go by what they read off the internet. If you want to post your opinion on a camera make sure you have actually shot with the camera before you do so, or it's really just hear say.
 
I agree on the flexibility especially.
DV collapses when you push, pull, blow it up too much.
Look at bonehand on my website if anyone disagrees, or listen to the DP commentary on November by Nancy Schriber.
But HD even HDV gives you much more freedom to tweak, reframe, etc.

Artscroll said:
I got my 100B in December with tons of extras, the anamorphic lens, (56 hrs on the heads) all under $2k used and I haven't looked back. I embraced HDTV years ago as a viewing medium and would love an HVX but the wallet didn't comply. I'm going to get an Canon HV20 as a 2nd cam in April because the price can't be beat for 1080p at 24fps. Who can resist that?

I just love the artifact free image I get from the DVX with detail turned down and Magic Bullet's Deartifactor (for areas of strong chroma/contrast). I use an old Panny MiniDV codec to decompress on my computer and it is very nice. Yes, I am envious of all of the gorgeous 720p and 1080p images on the forum but am I happy with the 100B? You bet.
Click to expand...
do you have any footage, I would love to see it
mostly I am curious about the deartifactor filter ... I could never tell it was doing anything
 
So obviously differing opinions.

One thing that is important to me is low-light level resolution.
I've heard the DVX is better in low lighting situations then the A1. True?
And just how good is the DVX in low -light?

Thanks for all of the great replies

Greb
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top