Thinking about the DVX

C

Criddle

New member
Hi everyone, this is my first post so go easy on me :)

Up until 5 min. ago, I was planning on buying the XL2 but after reading http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/shoot3/
I am quite convinced that the DVX is a much better camera that suit my needs. I am planning on using this cameria to make movies and would therefore need 24 p and a camera that can achieve a shallow depth of field... Both features that are avalable on the XL2 and the DVX...

My only concern is the quality of the footage... can the DVX really compete with the XL2 footage?

Are there any cameras that beat the DVX in terms of movie like footage?

Have any motion picture been shot using the DVX?

Thanks for any feedback...
 
You can achieve much more dynamic range and latitude with an XL2 than with a DVX. Which you can later alter in post to achieve looks you want. Not so much with the DVX. The XL2 is true 16X9 and has a higher pixel count than the DVX. However the DVX gives a nice color saturated picture right out of the box. Both are good cameras.

If you don't want to be bothered with tweaking settings and doing much alteration in post then go with the DVX. It will give you a nice filmic look without having to do much. The XL2 manual adjustable settings can't be beat.

If you're just starting out I'd say go with the DVX. It's cheaper and you'll get that "look" right out of the box. On the other hand, making movies isn't easy. Maybe the XL2 will help you to learn more about camera operations than the DVX would. Who knows.

I wouldn't expect many unbiased opinions regarding these cameras on a website called DVXuser.com. You might try asking around other forums before you make you're decision.
 
Last edited:
He already said that he did...

Truthfully from the moment I saw the new DVX100b, I knew I wanted it. Everything about it seemed to ooze professionalism and it shot in 24p. Once I found this site and learned about the cine-like colours and the colour saturation, I was thoroughly impressed. All of the colour work for the most part can be done in post, but as stated before the DVX comes like that, out of the box. I'd say go with the DVX, but yes I am biased and may not be of the most help to you, but I can say this: the camera has served me well in the short, few months that I have had it and when someone sees this camera, be it smaller than the XL2 they still go "wow, that's some professional gear."

Just a thought,

-Kegan
 
Up until 5 min. ago, I was planning on buying the XL2 but after reading http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/shoot3/ ....
Click to expand...

Janmansilver said:
Why don't you read this: http://dvxuser.com/articles/shoot3/
Click to expand...



Errr?


I wouldn't expect many unbiased opinions regarding these cameras on a website called DVXuser.com. You might try asking around other forums before you make you're decision.
Click to expand...

And while that statement may have some basis in truth and the second sentence is good advice, I think that can be better read as "I bought a Canon (or wish I had the money to buy a Canon) so you should too."

I'll give you my 2 cents. I walked into EVS in Burbank with every intention of dropping the cash on xl2. I'm a Canon still shooter - I have over $20,000 in Canon digital bodies and lenses - and I intended to stick with Canon when I went video. I read the shootout. I went to various "biased" sites and read the opinions for what they're worth. I still entered RVS to buy the XL2. I talked to the sales guys and EVERY ONE there that day, despite them making more money if I bought the XL2, suggested I buy the DVX. I did, and I'm thrilled.

Just my experience.

Any cameras that beat DVX footage? Dont know. I dont so much care what the absolute best is, just what will do the job well. It's all so subjective anyway.

As for "motion pictures that have been shot with DVX"... there was a thread on here (cant find it now, even with search) but it linked to the IMDB page with all the films made with the DVX. Go to IMDB.... "more searches" and under "word search" type in "DVX100" in "Technical" and you'll get a list of 337 films it was used in. This weekend I went and saw "Cavite" at the Nuart theater in L.A. and it was shot entirely with the DVX100, not even A or B.

If your primary concern is shooting a film, the camera isnt going to make or break you.

Go XL2 or go DVX. Most guys on this board went DVX and it's not because we're retarded or broke. It's because the DVX is a very good cam and does the job we need it to do. But honestly, from someone in the position to buy either one (and didnt want to shoot HD but could have bought an HD cam if I wanted to) I chose the DVX. And I REALLY like it.

-GageFX
 
GageFX said:
And while that statement may have some basis in truth and the second sentence is good advice, I think that can be better read as "I bought a Canon (or wish I had the money to buy a Canon) so you should too."
Click to expand...

Cute. It's always amusing to get an opinion on my opinion. I merely stated the differences in cameras. I even stated that the DVX is a good camera.

I actually do own an XL2...and a DVX...and a GS400. If you read my previous statement I said more than once that he should probably get a DVX.

The simple truth is that with a few tweaks to the settings an XL2 can shoot footage that is much more easily manipulated in post. It creates more flexibility. The DVX...not as much.

If the only argument for a DVX over an XL2 is something along the lines of "Ooooh...but the DVX has such purdy colors" . It's not really much of an argument at all. I even have a custom preset in my XL2 I use to match with DVX footage.

The DVX is a great camera, but if he's the type of guy that likes to tweak his footage in post the XL2 might be a better choice.
 
Cute. It's always amusing to get an opinion on my opinion.
Click to expand...

Likewise. And it was expected.

I dont intend to get into an arguement regarding XL2 footage vs. DVX. I've never seen XL2 and cant speak of it, but I would like to discuss what has been said.

If you read my previous statement I said more than once that he should probably get a DVX.
Click to expand...

If you don't want to be bothered with tweaking settings and doing much alteration in post then go with the DVX. It will give you a nice filmic look without having to do much. The XL2 manual adjustable settings can't be beat.

If you're just starting out I'd say go with the DVX. It's cheaper and you'll get that "look" right out of the box. On the other hand, making movies isn't easy. Maybe the XL2 will help you to learn more about camera operations than the DVX would. Who knows.
Click to expand...

You did say a couple of times that he should probably get a DVX, but only for it's simplicity over the XL2's universe of advanced settings - the inability for a newb to handle a full manual camera so go with the fully automatic DVX. Yes, oversimplification of the statements, but, read it again, that's essentially what was said.

Do you have examples of the XL2's miriad of manual adjustments that the DVX is lacking? The DVX certainly has plenty. Is it that right out of the box and setting the camera to F6 it accomplishes what is much more complicated on the XL2 so the DVX is deemed basic?

And what is it that you can do in post with the XL2 and not the DVX? Or is it that you must work the XL2 footage in post in order to get it to look like DVX footage.

I dont know. I only have the DVX.

-GageFX
 
this forum is like a broken record -- it keeps playing the same song over and over and it's hard to listen to.

i have absolutely no interest in starting a flame war, or dregding up what seems like a debate that should have died a long time ago (i thought it was dead til i came here). i own both an xl2 and dvx100a and came here to research hd cam options, specifically the hvx. after reviewing some of the threads initiated by prospective buyers looking for informed purchasing options, i can't think of a worse place to start asking which camera to buy. and just so you know, that review you read and everyone keeps linking to wreaks of bias, at least to everyone not on dvxuser.

if you want to see an overview of the xl2 in-camera settings, check out the video here: http://dvcreators.net/media/demos/xl2featuretour/xl2featuretour.html

as far as i'm concerned, the xl2 and dvx100a are different classes of camera on form factor alone. you want a handheld cam with a fixed lens? get a dvx. you want a shoulder mounted cam with interchangeable everything? get an xl2. what you get with the dvx that you don't with the xl2: pretty colors out of the box. what you get with the xl2 that you don't with the dvx? a 20x lens (far better for thin DOF than the panny 10x), native 16:9 chips, the highest rez chips on any 1/3" sd camera, and the option to buy the best lens ever made for a prosumer class dv camera, the 16x manual. that said, when you get an xl2 with the hi-res b&w viewfinder, 16x manual lens, and 3x wide lens, you approach hd camera prices. dvx is the less expensive option, no doubt.

people here are always complaining about the video-y look of the xl2. take the thing off auto mode, throw it into 24p manual mode, load one of ash greyson's presets at http://www.dvinfo.net/conf (the amelie preset is my personal fave), and there is absolutely nothing video-y about it. and check out the 'other cameras' section on this board. pana-user recently posted a link to a recent film out shot with the xl2. bad acting, beautiful look.

and don't buy the whole imdb thing. the dvx was the first 24p cam out. it has two years on the xl2. and it was already pointed out in another thread that the dvx has 6 times the entries on imdb as the varicam as well. dvx better than the varicam? please. the argument doesn't hold up.

it sounds like i favor the xl2 over the dvx. i do, but only slightly. dvx has strong merits. there are reasons why it's the most popular sd camera ever made, but everyone else can speak to that, lord knows. just wanted to give you something for a little balance.
 
Last edited:
wreaks of bias
Click to expand...

Lol.

Wish I had time to touch on more. Maybe later. For now, the easy one.

dvx has 6 times the entries on imdb as the varicam as well. dvx better than the varicam? please. the argument doesn't hold up.
Click to expand...

The IMDB reference was only to answer the question:
Have any motion picture been shot using the DVX?
Click to expand...
The answer? "Why yes. Over 337 of them." No one is saying that makes it better than anything else, it's just answering a question.

-GageFX
 
My point was you pull it out of the box and it's generally good to go. Am I wrong? Is that good for someone starting out? Yes. Would that be good enough for the beginner? Generally speaking...yes. Is the XL2 capable of more lattitude and dynamic range? IMHO I believe it is, and I'm sure quite a few would agree. I own both cameras. I've used both fairly extensively and I was offering an opinion that was trying to be balanced. If I came across different, then my apologies.

It seems to me that the he was on the fence. The problem here is he came to a site called DVXuser.com and read an article generally favorable to the DVX. I just don't think that's the most balanced information out there. I didn't think he would recieve an unbiased opinion. It seems as though I've been validated because the first person to respond to me was completely pro-dvx, and tried to paint me into a corner of anti-dvx bias with misinterpretations of what I wrote.

Heaven forbid I say anything about the DVX remotely resembling a negative comment here. I think I'll head on over to www.DVXmafia.com or www.DVXfundamentalist.com they're both much more laid back in my opinion.
 
im coming into this conversation a little late here, but i think this discussion is pretty much clashing of opinions and everyone has the right to do so. the fact of the matter is that everyone wants to make their movies/videos/whatever... the best visual presentation as possible. price range or what, everyone wants their pictures to be beautiful. why would there be a message board dedicated to the camera if it were not rightfully so a fantastic camera.

it is not some sort of cult in which we are admitted once we purchase a dvx. i am almost rest assured many of us have tried the xl2 and other options and still have come back to use the dvx. for many people on here, video is what puts food in their mouths. they know what they want and if something better comes along they will go that way.... its not something that you are forever connected with just because you bought it. we all want the best image, there is no bias.
 
I bought a DVX100b after exensive research. I just shot a short film for a total of 200 dollars. The people that see it are blown away and think it is film. One comment by a very "critical person" was that they thought I spent at least 100,000 on it. I played the night scenes on my 50inch LCD tv and had NO NOISE. I also blew it up onto a 20x20 screen and it looked fantastic. I know the XL2 is an awesome camera, but for my purposes the DVX is my Favorite. I have looked into both. I would reccomend the DVX100b to everyone. I believe that once you read Barry's book and see the DVD, then play with th camera and lighting for a day or two, you can go out and shoot a really amazing looking movie.
 
msconce said:
I have looked into both. I would reccomend the DVX100b to everyone. I believe that once you read Barry's book and see the DVD, then play with th camera and lighting for a day or two, you can go out and shoot a really amazing looking movie.
Click to expand...

Well, I've done more than look into both. I own both. I've used both. Both shoot amazing video with proper lighting and proper settings. What's your point?


Andy Films said:
im coming into this conversation a little late here, but i think this discussion is pretty much clashing of opinions and everyone has the right to do so. the fact of the matter is that everyone wants to make their movies/videos/whatever... the best visual presentation as possible. price range or what, everyone wants their pictures to be beautiful. why would there be a message board dedicated to the camera if it were not rightfully so a fantastic camera.

it is not some sort of cult in which we are admitted once we purchase a dvx. i am almost rest assured many of us have tried the xl2 and other options and still have come back to use the dvx. for many people on here, video is what puts food in their mouths. they know what they want and if something better comes along they will go that way.... its not something that you are forever connected with just because you bought it. we all want the best image, there is no bias.
Click to expand...

Right. No bias in those two paragraphs whatsoever. Did I happen to mention that "The Chronicles of Narnia" is a work of Non-Fiction.

Andy Films said:
why would there be a message board dedicated to the camera if it were not rightfully so a fantastic camera...
...they know what they want and if something better comes along they will go that way....
Click to expand...

LOL... Give me a break.
 
Criddle said:
Hi everyone, this is my first post so go easy on me :)

Up until 5 min. ago, I was planning on buying the XL2 but after reading http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/shoot3/
I am quite convinced that the DVX is a much better camera that suit my needs. I am planning on using this cameria to make movies and would therefore need 24 p and a camera that can achieve a shallow depth of field... Both features that are avalable on the XL2 and the DVX...

My only concern is the quality of the footage... can the DVX really compete with the XL2 footage?

Are there any cameras that beat the DVX in terms of movie like footage?

Have any motion picture been shot using the DVX?

Thanks for any feedback...
Click to expand...

Criddle-

I am beginning to think you were/are a drive-by poster.

Look, I don't want to get in the middle of this heated DVX vs. XL2 debate except to say both are great cameras capable of producing fantastic images. I have two DVX's and absolutely love the results. However, I have seen footage shot from an XL2 and have loved the crisp, clean look of that footage as well. I loved it!

At the end of the day, Criddle, it very well may come down to cost. If you think the XL2 is priced too high, then you can't afford to overlook the DVX. On the otherhand, if you are going to be in the back of a theater, shooting a lot of performances and need a great zoom, then you can't afford to overlook the XL2 option.

Like I've said, they are BOTH great cameras. Period. If money is not a determining factor, you need to decide what it will be used for, then go from there. Something to consider, the DVX, out of the box does NOT give you a very shallow depth of field. You'll get that by either picking up a mini-35 adapter (more $) or a Century Optics 1.6x adapter (more $).

Why don't you buy a blank mini dv tape and go to your local camera store and ask to pop the tape into your cameras of choice? You'll get all sorts of footage to look at when you get home to your computer.

I did this LONG before I was in the DVX market (at the time, I thought I was going to get the GL2). I was at B&H in the city and I got footage from about 6 different cams. Just for laughs I popped it into the DVX. Well, when I got home and had a look at all of it, I couldn't believe the DVX footage (they XL2 wasn't out yet.) My jaw dropped. I couldn't buy the GL2 after seeing the DVX footage. I just couldn't. I scraped all my pennies together, worked a LOT of OT and threw in an income tax refund 6 months later to buy it.

Either way, you'll be THRILLED with either camera, I'm sure!
Rick
 
there is a continuing theme on this forum...someone comes in asks a question and then gets an answer, but after that all other posts are arguments not even directed at or including the original poster.

now for the O.P. - criddle

Are there any cameras that beat the DVX in terms of movie like footage?
Click to expand...
yes film cameras, but if you want digital there are cameras above both the dvx and xl2 that shoot HD...but i'm going to presume you want a lower price range. so with that in mind and if you're basing it on the dvx and the xl2...you need to go to a store if possible and shoot with them and see which one you like. you're kind of asking which car should i get, which television, which computer (that right there is an argument that's probably a good percentage of the internet :) )

anyway the choice is yours to make...all you're going to get is differing opinions depending on which forum you visit. you need to make the choice for yourself.
 
I used to be in headed discussions like this a few years ago regarding Canon vs. Sony. I always liked the look of sony images because they had a brighter, crisper feel, but I owned a Sony, so I honestly don't know how biased I am.

My DVX will arrive tomorrow, and I bought it not because it's out-of-the-box kiddie accesability, but because of it's wide range of settings.

I don't know where anyone gets the idea that the DVX is an easy camera to use, nearly every review I've seen lists it's learning curve as very high...

As for Canon and the XL2. I think that its 16:9 chips are it's biggest advantage. DVX owners are always debating the different ways to create a widescreen image with the DVX. Do I use the letterboxing mode?, squeeze mode?, do I drop $300 on a anamorphic adapter?

The lack of 16:9 chips in a camera designed specifically for filmmaking could well be considered a high crime. The XL2 vs. DVX article on DVXuser completely shrugs off this clear discrepency, and spends a few paragraphs apologizing for it. So I see the bias there.

But I've seen the images, and IMO, the DVX has the best color, and it clearly has the best low-light performance. Plus, the DVX's audio is widely lauded as by far the best available in a prosumer cam. For people who don't have seperate audio recording systems (like, pretty much everyone), this is paramount for filmmaking.

And for people who are independent filmmakers, the other advantages for the Canon simply don't apply. Interchangable lenses? The DVX has adapters which are cheaper. DOF? Well, in order to achieve that, you have to get pretty far from your subject, not a situation often convenient to our class of filmmaker. Plus, you can make or buy a 35mm adapter if you really want it.

In the end, the Canon's listed advantages are not as useful for filmmakers as the DVX's are.

My opinion may well be colored by my formor preference to Sony over Canon, but I have worked with both a GL1 and a Sony TRV900 on a few projects (I owned one, my friend owned the other) so my opinion isn't totally unqualified. And I used to have a serious bias agaisnt Panasonic, for everything from VCRs to Camcorders. And I still wish I could get the look of "Sony color" on the DVX. Compared even to my TRV900, the DVX image looks a little duller, but that's just from years of using my Sony cam.

Tibby, you've mentioned repreatedly that you own both cams. Well, from reading your words, it looks like you'd be better off selling your DVX. When do you use the DVX? In what situations do you find the DVX the preferred camera? Calling the DVX "good enough for the beginner" is obvously a slam agaisnt the camera, so why do you own one? If you'll forgive my serious inpoliteness, I find your assertion that you've "used both fairly extensively" just a little suspect.
 
The Noble Robot said:
Tibby, you've mentioned repreatedly that you own both cams. Well, from reading your words, it looks like you'd be better off selling your DVX. When do you use the DVX? In what situations do you find the DVX the preferred camera? Calling the DVX "good enough for the beginner" is obvously a slam agaisnt the camera, so why do you own one? If you'll forgive my serious inpoliteness, I find your assertion that you've "used both fairly extensively" just a little suspect.
Click to expand...

I owned the DVX before I got the XL2. It's Low light capability is better, no argument there. It's much easier to mount a DVX on a car than the XL2. The same goes for my crane/jib set up. It makes for a good hand held "B" camera for making movies. It also comes in handy when taping live music. I lock the DVX down for a master set up and run the audio from the mixing board into that camera. Sometimes in live music settings I will switch it up depending how close I can or can't be to the main stage. So why would I be better off selling it? Well, who knows someday I might.

Personally, as far as audio goes, I haven't seen a marked difference in audio performance between both these cameras. My friend who is an audio engineer and mixes my films has never brought up a difference in quality (trust me, he would) so I'm fairly neutral on that debate.

Also, there's really no use getting into a debate on 16x9 and pixel count. Techinically speaking the GS400 has true 16x9 and a higher pixel count than the DVX does, and I'd much rather use the DVX in most situations as opposed to the GS400.

If you look at my original post I merely brought up something a lot of people overlook when considering these two cameras. Specifically the acheivable dynamic range and latitude of the XL2.

Maybe I'm just a little old school. When I went to film school they were still using film. The XL2 mimics that workflow slightly so that I can do more extensive color correction in post. I just prefer to have that option. The XL2 gives me that option so thats the main camera I use to shoot my movies.

I had a scene I was editing together for a friends movie. It shot strictly with the DVX and we had to do various reshoots for that scene later on. When I cut it together the scenes didn't match all that well. So I had to desaturate the entire sequence. Which makes you lose information and the quality degrades. Then I had to go in and color correct from the ground up essentially.

I wouldn't have had to do that with the XL2 because of the sharpness and dynamic range.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for that reply, that's exactly what I was hoping for :-)

I had a scene I was editing together for a friends movie. It shot strictly with the DVX and we had to do various reshoots for that scene later on. When I cut it together the scenes didn't match all that well.
Click to expand...

Looks like that was the result of someone not saving or writing down their in-cam settings. That could happen to any camera, including the XL2, no?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top