Thinking About Purchasing an A1. Some Questions/Concerns

B

bmcc87

Member
I am a graduate student (recently graduated with a film degree). I am looking to buy a "prosumer" type of camera that is nice enough to get me a job filming live events (weddings, concerts etc.) and hopefully some low-end shoots as well. I know I won't get any calls from ABC with a camera like this and I don't expect to, but I would like to get some gigs in the middle ground production area. From everything I read, it seems that the Canon is the best buy for your money however, I have a couple concerns.

1. Is this camera perceived as being a professional camera and does its footage look professional grade? The reason I ask this is because from poking around on craigslist and other places, I see multiple requests for the HVX, Z1U etc. but I have yet to see anyone asking for the XH-A1. So I guess with that, my concern is that I will sink money into a camera that people are not using or will not use. What I don't want is a $4,000 toy. I want a camera that will provide a little income.

All things being equal, I would love to buy the HVX but I am very leary of the tapeless format; plus once you factor in the cost of the P2 cards it is going to cost a good $2000-$3000 more which I am not sure I have the budget for. I know and have read some of the discussions on here about the A1 v. HVX, so I don't intend to beat a dead horse with this statement.

2. This one is a little shorter; I read somewhere online that the 24f format can only be played back on a canon camera, not in tape decks or anything. I could see this being problematic if I was working on a project that I was not editing, meaning I might have to hand off the footage to someone who may or may not have a Canon camera at the end of the day. Has anyone else experienced this issue and has it created problems for you?

Any other thoughts or help would be appreciated. Thanks for any help you can offer!
 
Having used both the A1, HVX, and DVX, I can say that the A1 does produce professional results. I can see it as being great for broadcast because of its sharpness as well. However it really comes down to personal preference. I myself am a Panasonic fanboy because of how organic the footage comes out of it naturally, much more akin to film. My own film, linked below, was mistaken to be shot on film when using an HVX and a Brevis35.

So anyway, IMHO, it's really what jobs you're going to use it on and your preferred results. When considering the job at hand, the A1 is the top contender for long events such as weddings due to the trusted tape format, but now I'm looking to get an HMC because of the cheap media and long record times on the higher capacity cards. I wouldn't really consider the HVX for weddings and events unless I have thousands of dollars for P2 cards so I can avoid the offloading process during the event (not sure if I can trust the firestore either).

I've been more or less on the fence about the HMC and the A1 so probably will get an HMC first then an A1 down the line to work with the clients that demand it.

I've leave the last question to those more knowledgeable.
 
Hi,

I'm a big fan of the A1 - have been an owner for a couple of yrs, and will be upgrading to G1 soon. When I bought I was deciding between the A1 and the HVX200 - and it mainly came down to the fact that P2/tapeless workflow is too problematic for my work, and the A1 actually had better quality pics, with less compression artifacts, than the HVX (in my own experience - having tested them both and shot a corporate on the HVX)... One example - I shot in a palm oil plantation with the HVX abt 3 yrs ago and the camera couldn't deal with all the detail of the palm leaves - lots of horrid compression amongst the leaves! I did an identical shoot last yr with the A1 and it dealt with the detail beautifully - at 4 times the compression of the HVX!

The A1 has a much better CCD than either of these cameras (IMHO), and the extra detail of the A1 is obvious.

I am NOT a fan of HDV (the compression sucks and its slow to work with in Final Cut), but the A1 does a great job - producing lovely pics! And HDV tapes are so cheap and practical... working with P2 cards and external HDDs is worrisome...

I agree that people (clients) tend to be more biased towards the Z1 (and to a lesser extent in my experience the HVX), but that is most often down to naivety - they are just more used to Sony or Panasonic so ask for these by default. Once I have explained to clients that the A1 is as good/better than the others, they are sold. (Tho they will still refer to my camera as a Z1 - it seems 'Z1' is more of a generic term for an HDV camera in many people's minds)...

Oh, and the A1 lens is significantly longer telephoto than the Z1 and HVX (but still as wide - approx).

I have also shot news on my camera - agencies are switching to smaller DV/DVCAM cameras such as the Z1 for certain stories, and the A1 shoots superb footage in DV mode. I was on a news shoot a couple of wks ago where I was shooting for Channel 9 (Australia) on the A1, Reuters had a Z1 and Channel 7 (Australia) also had a Z1.

And as Canon have just updated the A1 (to the A1s), it sounds like they have addressed the only niggles I had with it...

Re. the 24f or 25f - I have not bothered with this as I personally don't see any point in it. If it was true progressive then that'd be great, but its not. So if I were you, if a client wanted to shoot in 'f' I'd recommend shooting 50/60i and tell them to de-interlace the footage in Final Cut - it's the same end result after all...

:)

So, I'd recommend the A1!

Cheers,

Chris D
 
The 24F mode does a better job in de-interlacing "in-camera" than de-interlace 60i in NLE. Technically speaking the end-result of 24F is the same as 24P (only the way it was created is different).
 
1. The A1 can do and is considered to be a professional camera. Sure you will always get some camera snobs who say no, you gotta use "x" camera and format to be a pro. I've come to the conclusion that there is no reasoning with these people. When I shot my first movie in mini DV, one of the people that was helping on the crew kept bugging me about not shooting on film. I said that I don't have the money for it, but it didn't matter. You will run into these people from time to time. Just ignore 'em and do your thing.

2. It is true that 24F will not play back on non-Canon HDV cams. I would just check with the client first and if it is going to be a problem work out something with them where they rent the cam or borrow it to capture, or if it is not a film just shoot 60i. I've personally not had a problem with it, although most of my freelance work is for DV shoots. I use the HD for my own stuff.

My personal opinion:
Well, if you want to use the camera to make some money, then it depends on what you are trying to make money doing. Higher end corporate stuff, music videos, slick commercials, and freelance broadcast or news shooting then the HVX would be the way to go. Weddings, long events like dance recitals or theatre, legal videos, then the A1 would be the obvious choice. Both can be used for filmmaking and can be linked up with a DOF adaptor.

While the HVX or HPX-170 are great cameras, personally for the money I think the A1 is a better buy unless you are strictly making films and can easily afford a more expensive camera and the P2 system. With all the P2 stuff and the cost of the camera you will be paying at least double or possibly triple what an A1 will cost. You can get the first gen A1 for about $3,000 and the A1s for about $3,500. The extra money you would've spent on the P2 cams and cards can then be used for other stuff that won't depreciate as quickly (tripod, dolly, jib, lighting, DOF adaptor and lenses, etc.).
 
The HVX doesn't quite have the resolution of the A1, but the colors are *slightly* better (nothing that would make or break a decision on purchase). The A1 can be used for professional work just fine, it just depends on whether you want to deal with panasonic, or canon. The A1 has a wonderful workflow when paired with the Firestore from Canon, either the 60gb or the 100gb version. With presets from online, footage straight out of the camera looks absolutely beautiful and professional.
 
I've owned an A1 for two years now and must say it is a workhorse of a camera.

From my initial cost for the camera, it has produced a great revenue for my company.

Regarding Canon vs the Sony, I find the Canon to capture better skin tones, and based on what you want to film, it is a great camera for that.

I love my A1 -
 
Nektonic said:
1. The A1 can do and is considered to be a professional camera. Sure you will always get some camera snobs who say no, you gotta use "x" camera and format to be a pro. I've come to the conclusion that there is no reasoning with these people. When I shot my first movie in mini DV, one of the people that was helping on the crew kept bugging me about not shooting on film. I said that I don't have the money for it, but it didn't matter. You will run into these people from time to time. Just ignore 'em and do your thing.

2. It is true that 24F will not play back on non-Canon HDV cams. I would just check with the client first and if it is going to be a problem work out something with them where they rent the cam or borrow it to capture, or if it is not a film just shoot 60i. I've personally not had a problem with it, although most of my freelance work is for DV shoots. I use the HD for my own stuff.

My personal opinion:
Well, if you want to use the camera to make some money, then it depends on what you are trying to make money doing. Higher end corporate stuff, music videos, slick commercials, and freelance broadcast or news shooting then the HVX would be the way to go. Weddings, long events like dance recitals or theatre, legal videos, then the A1 would be the obvious choice. Both can be used for filmmaking and can be linked up with a DOF adaptor.

While the HVX or HPX-170 are great cameras, personally for the money I think the A1 is a better buy unless you are strictly making films and can easily afford a more expensive camera and the P2 system. With all the P2 stuff and the cost of the camera you will be paying at least double or possibly triple what an A1 will cost. You can get the first gen A1 for about $3,000 and the A1s for about $3,500. The extra money you would've spent on the P2 cams and cards can then be used for other stuff that won't depreciate as quickly (tripod, dolly, jib, lighting, DOF adaptor and lenses, etc.).
Click to expand...

The XH-A1 will produce the same results for 'strictly making films' as the HVX will. :) Side by side, honestly, you aren't gonna notice much difference between the two except that a SLIGHTLY sharper picture on the XH-A1.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top