The Choice Is Driving Me Crazy...

epsilonbass

epsilonbass

Active member
So I have been a member of the DVXuser forum for over a year, as i have gotten into this community trying to decide if this camera was right for me. I have learned so much about the DVX and what it has to offer, even without owning one. in these recent days i have finally reached the point of needing my own camcorder, and now my decision is difficult.

As so many other users i am very excited with the XH-A1, despite yet getting to hold one in my hand. The ability to shoot HDV is worth the extra 100 (yeah 600 after rebate). The footage i have seen here looks beautiful and even though it's not true HD it seems great enough to suit my needs.

The Conflict arises that neither of these are perfect, if i were to go with either, remorse would kick in and I would think about the pros of the other camera.

DVX pros:
manual focus (I'm hearing too much negative about the servos on the A1)
I can capture on another deck
still a wellknown camera for jobs
true 24p, (yeah i know A1 has 24f which amounts to the same, but i had to upgrade my FCP up to the latest version just to make sure i can get the A1. So if i wanted to work with another system and they didn't have 5.1.3 i would be S.O.L.)


A1 pros:
It's HDV! (even if my product is outputted to SD it would still look better)
true 16:9
Iris ring
Despite the servo, i understand that the lens is wider and longer
The longer shelf life
It's quickly developing a lot of street cred and a lot of great reviews
(a lot of my reasoning has to do with HD)


I know with this a lot of you are thinking the HVX200 route, and i hear you, but it's work flow still bugs the crap out of me. I need to pick up a camera very soon and budget wise, the HVX is a bit out of my league. And the time it would take to get the 8gig card, i would have shot and edited by then. I'm not sold on the P2 card system yet, because i think its a step backwards in recording. Sure you don't have to capture footage but you have to store it to a laptop and then convert it to a playable file. I have had to work on the post production side of an HVX and i did not enjoy it.

So, i guess this is mostly about me needing to vent this frustration before my purchase, which will most likely be tomorrow. The investors (parental units) don't understand the differences, and i'm a bit alarmed at the majority of my filmstudent classmates' ignorance of the different cameras now avalable. Its a bit frustrating when most of your classmates have a blank face when you mention the dvx100b, until you say, "it's the 24p camera", especially when they will be entering the 'real world' in 3 months.

So if anyone has any ways of pursuading me towards one or the other, feel free to add in your input. I feel that i would be very happy with either, and in both cases i would use the camera to its best ablities.

My leaning is still towards the A1, but the Iraq in peices trailer made a great case for the DVX.
 
There's really nothing that we can say that haven't been discussed to death already. Bottom line is that they're both fine cameras, and you're not going to go wrong either way. Keep in mind that it's not the camera, it's the operator.

BTW, not sure why you say that the A1 isn't "true HD." The F modes loses some resolution, but frankly with cameras it doesn't come down to the technical numbers, it comes down to what you see. If it looks like HD, it is HD.
 
Hey man, honestly they're both great cameras. I owned the DXVa for about 2yrs but sold it about 3 months ago. I still miss it but the A1 is like a new love, a sexy mama in my arms and makes it easy to forget the old.

If you're that torn then just wait another week or two.
 
jade8472 said:
BTW, not sure why you say that the A1 isn't "true HD." The F modes loses some resolution, but frankly with cameras it doesn't come down to the technical numbers, it comes down to what you see. If it looks like HD, it is HD.
Click to expand...


werd!:beer:
 
I've used both.

The Canon is super-sharp (as is its big-brother), and even in frame-mode it's going to resolve more lines of resolution than a DVX.

The pros to the DVX, as far as I'm concerned, are: a better LCD, better low-light sensitivity, and slightly better ergonomics. But if I were making the decision right now, unless I was doing run & gun stuff with natural light where that extra bit of sensitivity made a huge difference, I'd definitely go with the A1. It's a much much much sharper image, and has bonkers amounts of tweakable internal settings to get the sort of image you want. I think it's the best deal going in cameras right now.

-Kevin
 
Probably the number one thing you would miss from the DVX is the manual zoom. If you need to do snap zooms, then the servo controlled lens of the A1 will prove to be a bit frustrating. That said, I think you can do better slow creep zooms with the A1.

But if you were coming from the A1 to a DVX you would most certainly miss the reach of the A1's 20x lens, and the better shallow DOF that's possible with it. You would also miss all the extra image tweakability and the custom presets. The iris ring is also really nice once you get used to it.

So many things can be said one way or another between the two cams, but there is no mistaking the satisfaction of shooting great HD footage with the A1 and then plugging into an HDTV. Disjecta called it "heaviness" to the frame, which is an apt description. It's just a feeling of grandeur that the SD DV image just doesn't quite deliver anymore, IMHO.
 
Yes Elton--

Add that to my DVX pros: the mechanical zoom/snap zooms... the A1 zoom is crappy.

I'd still go with the A1 though. :)
 
:) What I would say is if the Canon A1 is out of your range, and you don't like the P2 on the HVX, then the DVX would be the smart get you started choose.

But because the dvx does not have a internal drive, nor p2 capabilities I would go with the HVX200.

If you hate p2 and your going to use tape with the DVX atleast invest in a product tat will step with you.

If you were considering a Canon you obviously has the change to invest in something a little more versital than the dvx.

Don't get me wrong. I am a dvx 100b user, but I stepped up from the 100, to the 100a, to the 100b and still use and have all of my cameras.

If I was coming on the scene today for my first camera with all the research that you obviously did.

I'd probably get a camera a little more versital.

Just my opinion.
 
despite my lengthy complaints about the XAH1's design, features, and ergonomics, it makes little sense to spend much money on a new non HD camera any longer.

The XHA1 is in most ways the best value of the HD choices. The Z1 would be my second choice. I would not recommend the HVX -- its p2 path is a dead end -- not something to aspire to.

A year from now I'd expect an improved XHA1 that fixes many of the things I've complained about (like the DVX100b was improved significantly the 100a).

If money is tight, buy a good used 3 chip mini-DV -- anything from a VX2000 on up. Lots of us are getting rid of our DV stuff after upgrading to HDV -- there's nothing wrong with telling good stories now, with decent working used gear.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the encouraging words, I pretty much know all of this info because i troll around these forums a lot.

The thing that doesn't really bother me about the servo zoom is i've been trained in a more traditional camera setting with fixed lense and what not (go bolex!) So zooming during a shot doesn't appeal to me, and in movies haven't been utilized too much since when the lens was developed in the late 50's early 60's. Beyond that the best way to get closer or farther, is to physically move the camera. Guess i just have more of the indie filmmaker in me than the run and gun doc'er.
I guess the same applies to low light conditions, i've always though, 'then why not throw some more light in'.

Thanks and keep them coming if you've got them.

Extra battery recommendations, bag recomendations. Is there any thing wrong with buying a used uv filter, bh sells for 19 instead of 31.

And maybe some more inspiring clips if anyone has some, i love the aquarium footage floating around here, and the nyc footage.
 
I do think that tapeless media will eventually be pretty great, when the transfer process gets easier, and its just made more stream lined. We can get a 80 gig ipod for under 400 dollars, so why an 8 gig card is over a grand is still pretty backwards. (i know 8 gigs in the size of a p2 card is hard to do...)

But right now i think that technology is a few years off. The HVX is a great jump off for whatever the next camera will be. I really hope that at some point the proprietary factor drops (yeah sure that will happen) and instead of doing p2 cards they will make cameras accessible to any firewire/usb harddrive.
 
When will AVC-HD be used though? It seems like Panasonic isn't committed to releasing another P2 camera?

You've brought up AVC-HD before, Barry. It sounds awesome...
 
It seems like Panasonic isn't committed to releasing another P2 camera?
Click to expand...
Huh? That's almost *all* that they are releasing! HPX500, HPX2000, HPC700, SPX800, HVX200, plus another "unnamed" camcorder supposed to debut at NAB. All Fox owned & operated stations are converting to P2-only. Australia's national broadcaster ABC is converting to 100% P2. India's major broadcaster NDTV is 100% P2. One of New Zealand's national channels, TV3, is 100% P2. That's why I said the statement above "its p2 path is a dead end" is ridiculous and borderline trolling. Panasonic's 100% committed to the format and they're releasing every possible camcorder in that format.

AVC-HD is a long-GOP format that I think is going to be a huge hit for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that Sony and Panasonic jointly developed it (and Canon and Sharp and Samsung have all joined it). It's primarily available in two flavors -- for those who want an XDCAM "lite", Sony and Panasonic are both offering spinning mini-DVD cameras. For those who want a "P2 lite", Panasonic's offering recording straight to off-the-shelf SD memory cards. Nobody's produced a camera head worthy of the format yet though; there are a few AVC-HD camcorders out but they're primarily aimed at consumers. Panasonic Broadcast released a tiny AVC-HD camera but it's only 1080/60i, no 24p so it didn't generate much buzz over here.
 
Barry_Green said:
For HDV, absolutely agreed.

This is a ridiculous statement, akin to trolling.
Click to expand...

You know much more about everything video than me. Nevertheless, that happens to be my opinion -- the same one I had after listening to one of her earliest talks about that camera.

I knew her in casual way from previous conversations during trades shows, and after her enthusiastic presentation she walked over to say hi and ask what I thought.

I told her it seemed like it was an excellent camera and a fantastic codec -- that she was right that it was better than Sony’s HDV that I had just seen earlier that same day.

But I asked her if she had seen and what she thought of the HDV images ?? I had fast panned the new Z1, seen HDV tapes of dancers -- and despite her saying that HDV would fall apart under the stress of fast motion, it looked very good to me.

I asked her why they hadn’t adopted HDV or a similar tape medium for storage. She told me that tape could not deal with the data demands of her much superior codec -- that P2 could, and that it would revolutionize the production work flow.

I said that I thought that it sounded like a great idea -- like a "perfect" idea -- but one that was at least 3-5 years away from being economically practical.

Why I asked -- if she didn’t want to compromise by using tape -- didn’t she adopt some form of a dockable hard drive that could affordably store hours of material at the high data rates that she needed.

No no no she said --- the HVX had the best of both mediums -- tape for SD acquisition, P2 for HD -- if people wanted to record to a hard drive they could get a Firestore as an after market device.

I told her she was making a mistake -- tape was cheap -- production had long ago become accustomed to shooting all day not worrying about how much they shot -- the days of shooting like film were long past. Yes maybe ENG news would adopt it, maybe commercial makers --- but I couldn’t see indie filmmakers, wedding shooters, or documentary producers using it.

That conversation was a few years ago -- I hope I recalled it accurately. (In fairness I’ve omitted her name, but I think you know who I’m talking about.)

How many other companies have since released P2 compatible cameras ?? What is the total number P2 cameras produced by Panasonic compared to the total number of HDV cameras produced by Sony, JVC, and Canon ?? How much has the P2's cost per hour fallen since its introduction??

Maybe you’re right, and maybe I’m wrong -- P2 is not a dead end ...
 
I will go with the A1 -and I did-
it is kinda funny, but I would also put the Z1 as my second choice as well. -shooting only 25 cineframe-
I also do not like the work flow of the P2, maybe when they get more afforable but by that time I think there will be better offerings

how about a HV20? just to pass the time?

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