Which Camera to Get?

S

S7CK

Carbonite Member
Good day everyone, new member here. I'm having a tough time deciding which cameras to get. The features I want are to be able to shoot in 24 fps(best cinematic quality possible), HD, and overall usability.

The three cameras I've narrowed down are:

XH-A1

AG-HMC150(panasonic)

Sony HVR-V1U HDV

Of these three cameras, I'm leaning towards the sony and canon. In the beginning I will be doing alot of scenery shots and eventually transition to shooting live action (independent flick).

Let me know your thoughts guys, each one of these cameras floats around 4k so I know about the prices already.
 
S7CK said:
Good day everyone, new member here. I'm having a tough time deciding which cameras to get. The features I want are to be able to shoot in 24 fps(best cinematic quality possible), HD, and overall usability.

The three cameras I've narrowed down are:

XH-A1

AG-HMC150(panasonic)

Sony HVR-V1U HDV

Of these three cameras, I'm leaning towards the sony and canon. In the beginning I will be doing alot of scenery shots and eventually transition to shooting live action (independent flick).

Let me know your thoughts guys, each one of these cameras floats around 4k so I know about the prices already.
Click to expand...

I'd skip the V1U simply because it only has 1/4 inch sensors as opposed to the 1/3 inch sensors in the XHA1 and the HMC150.

I have an XHA1 and I love it, however I think I'd go for the HMC150 just because it has far superior low light ability, and 60p frame rate. The obvious downside to the panasonic is the more complex editing workflow, so if the better lowlight and 60p are worth it to you, I'd go for the 150, otherwise the XHA1. You really can't go wrong with either one.
 
S7CK said:
Let me know your thoughts guys, each one of these cameras floats around 4k so I know about the prices already.
Click to expand...

Remember to figure in purchasing tape as part of ownership cost for the A1 or V1. Unless you don't shoot anything, it will add up over time.
 
I have an XH-A1, and it's great. However, if I were buying now, I'd be very tempted by the Panasonic but for one drawback - the zoom ratio on the Panny is 13x, versus 20x on the Canon, and that keeps the Canon ahead for me.
 
I don't know why you'd talk about zoom capabilities in comparing the Panasonic lines to the Canon lines - so many other things differentiate the two. I own a Canon XH-A1 and I like it very much. There is something about its resolution that makes it capable of some quite stunning footage. However, I very much dislike the workflow of HDV tapes. I literally have hundreds of them all over my desk. They're hard to store, hard to archive, and hard to deal with in general. Panasonic's HVX and HPX lines give you the convenience of P2HD work flow which I've shot on before and is AMAZING. The only downside is that you don't have a hard copy if something goes wrong with the data - if it gets accidently erased or a card gets destroyed or lost, there's nothing, the footage is gone.

Canon XH-A1 is a good deal cheaper still than the Panasonic HPX170 or the Panasonic HVX200 so if price is a concern I'd go with the XH-A1, despite its weaknesses its still a great cam by all means.
 
I talk about zoom capabilities because *for me* that's the most significant difference when it comes to the buying decision.

Sure, the other issues you've listed are significant, but *for me* they're not as significant as the zoom. These are fixed-lens cameras - what the built-in lens does (for me) is way more important than the workflow. If the camera does the job, the workflow comes into play. But if the camera doesn't do the job (and the Panny zoom means it doesn't for me), then the workflow's irrelevant, because I have no footage to edit.

Only the OP can say how these things balance out for him, so it's good that he's getting 2 very different points of view.
 
Canon is renown for its glass, regarded as one of the best lens manufactureres in the world. But Leica is no slacker either, they have made/make some pretty quality products.
 
ThunderousProductions said:
But say what you want about a leica lens its not merged nearly as well, the heavy front end tells me the Xh-a1 has a better, stronger lens.
Click to expand...

I honestly don't think this is helping the OP. There's no doubt that the HMC produces very good quality video. Plenty of people have bought it, so presumably it's not junk.. And it's clearly not a no-brainer for the OP, otherwise he wouldn't have asked in the first place.

It's a fine balance between these two excellent camcorders, and I think we should acknowledge that.

To me, the major factors are:

1. Zoom ratio (said it before, it's a big one for me)

2. Tape v card workflow. Buying today, and other factord being equal, I'd go for card/AVCHD. Other factord aren't equal though (see 1. above)
3. Handling and controls. Impossible to assess without holding and using them. And probably very subjective too. I've learned my way round the A1, and I'd probably whinge incessantly if I changed to the Panasonic. Absolutely critical to handle them both if at all possible.

4. Image quality: there's no doubt that you can get great images from each of these. The question is whether they give the style of image quality you want. Subjective. People swear by the Canon over the Panny and other people swear the other way. Canon have a reputation for better lenses (yes, even than the Leicas on the Panny), but whether that translates into better images depends on your eye and your taste.

5. Low light. Panny fans say that the HMC has far superior low light capability. Canon fans say that Canon does low light very well, thank you. And poiint to the ability to use a million or so different presets to cater for any conditions you'll encounter. The truth is that both have something of a problem with low light *compared to full-blown pro cameras which have much bigger sensors*. And I've noticed a funny thing - when pros film in low light they use those things - aargh, you know - the big things on stands - what are they called again? Oh, I know - lights. So for me, ultimate low-light performance is a distraction. Great phrase - *for me*. Gets you out of all kinds of trouble around here.

6. Cost. Capital cost is comparable. Canon requires tapes (running cost). Panny may require archive media (depends on your workflow and habits). Of course, the Canon might require archive media too - not everyone depends on the tapes as the archive.

See - it's not a done deal. Go to the Panny areas of this board, and you''ll hear siren voices telling you that Canon sucks and Panny rules. And guess what - for those guys it's true.

So I come the long way round to where I started. The one dealbreaker for me is that the HMC doesn't have enough zoom. I like 20x. I need 20x. Canon for me for that reason alone.
 
A lens is only one part of the imaging system also. I wouldn't ever evaluate a camera based soley on one element of the entire system. On the whole, from what I've gathered, the HMC150 appears to be a superior camera to the XH-A1 in most regards. I have an A1, and love it, but if I bought another camera tomorrow (in that price range), I'd go for the HMC150.
 
For the OP, it depends on what you want to do:

If you have to avoid getting in someones way while shooting a 20x zoom is really handy. (football, soccar, weddings, etc.)

The 150 and the A1 both have 1/3" sensors, so the zoom between 13x and 20x gives you more DOF field control without using a 35mm adapter. That gives you clearer images but still having good bokeh.

I'll never understand the tape vs. card debate with regard to cost. They both cost, and are both reusable. In reality, if it's important enough to archive you won't reuse them. You don't need HDV tape and professional quality tapes are $3 each. http://lacolorshop.com/ I don't think cards are that cheap.

Capturing entire tapes is time consuming, but hasn't anyone heard of a shot log? You can fast forward to a particular 'take' or if it's the whole tape go make a cup of coffee.

Also, many computers take some time to handle the AVCHD codec. How powerful is your computer? This will improve even more with time, but if you have a less powerful computer the time advantage of AVCHD is lost.

If you still need to invest in a bunch of mics, lights, flags, etc you can get a deal on a used A1 for about $2,000 and buy the other stuff with what you pay for a 150 since there aren't many used 150s out there and certainly not at that price.

They both have presets though the A1 has more variables to control with the presets, but in the default mode the A1 looks washed out. This is done deliberately to allow color correcting and special effects with the best results. The 150 is more vibrant in default mode, but click in a good color preset like TrueColor, VividRGB, Panalook, etc in the A1 and it's just as vibrant (or more).

As far as the image quality they are pretty much the same. The 150 takes a low resolution sensor and interpolates it into a bigger image. It can't make up lost data. The A1 takes a higher resolution sensor and compresses it into the HDV format. The net result is a wash. They look the same. The rest is cheerleading.

The long and short of it is they are both good cameras capable of producing excellant images. The size and weight is very similar. It depends more on what you are used to using, or are willing to learn.

I chose the A1 to save my money to see what someone else eventually comes out with. If the 150 had a higher resolution sensor I might have bought it. I couldn't justify the extra cost for the same image.

In the meantime the extra money goes into production. :beer: My suggestion, try the controls of both and see how they feel.
 
Last edited:
There are indeed some advantages to the XH-A1, compared to the HMC150.

For some, the 20X zoom is important. For most folks, it probably isn't. My understanding is that the wide end is significantly wider with the HMC150, than with the A1, and for some folks that makes a big difference.

The cost of archiving video from the HMC150 can be quite a bit lower than with the A1. An hour of video from either camera (assuming maximum bitrate with the HMC150), is about 12GB. 2 hours of video (from either camera) can fit on a single layer BD-R. BD-R disks can now be purchased for as little as $3/ea (in bulk). You can't buy 2 MiniDV tapes for $3 (at least not new). Even less expensive, is storing video on single layer DVD disks. It takes three single layer DVD disks to store an hour of video. Verbatim (good quality disks) can be purchased for less than 20 cents each, from Newegg, when they have a rebate and free shipping deal (which is very often). That boils down to less than 60 cents to archive an hour of video on DVD disks! In the not all that far off future, SDHC cards themselves will probably be considerably less expensive than tape (per GB).

Indeed, editing AVCHD natively does take more CPU power, and software support for editing AVCHD is still not quite as mature as it is for editing HDV. For some people, this does make a difference. For others, it's just not an issue (like those who will use Cineform to edit footage from either camera anyway). Eventually, in the not to distant future, those issues will shrink into insignificance. The AVCHD codec, as implemented in the HMC150, does offer better compression (image quality wise), than HDV possibly can.

I've seen side by side comparisons of low light footage from both cameras. It does seem clear that the HMC150 produces a cleaner image in low light. Panasonic definitely improved on the CCDs that were in the original HVX200. As good as the CCDs are in the A1, imaging sensor technology (whether CCD or CMOS) has advanced significantly since it was introduced.

I suppose we could talk about other differences, but I'm firmly convinced that the A1, as much as I love it, will be obsolete before the HMC150 is. Frankly, I think a new prosumer HD camera from Canon is getting a little overdue.
 
Last edited:
All valid points, and as I said it depends on what he's going to do with it. Same with the wide angle. The A1 is 4.5-90 mm (32.5-650 mm; 35 mm photo equivalent), while the 150 is 3.9-51mm (35mm Equivalence 28-368mm).

If you're going to be shooting in tiny rooms, the 150 will do a little better job (28mm vs. 32.5mm). 32.5mm from the A1 is fine in average rooms.

If you're going to shoot on a sports field or from the back of a church the cannon (650mm) will do better than the Panny (368mm). But you could throw an 2x extender lens on the Panny.

The 150 does have bigger photo sites over the same size sensor which does make it more sensative in low lights. However, turn the AGC off, and manually control the gain and the A1 does quite well too. The A1 is about 10x better in low light than the HV20.

If you want the best of both worlds get an EX1 for about $6k. If you're going to shoot in dark small boxes pick the 150. LOL Just kidding, for most purposes you'd notice little difference other than DOF control.

The A1 should be obsolete before the 150 as it was introduced several years ago. Fortunately it was ahead of the times and still hangs in with anything in it's class. My goal is to use the A1 for about 3 years and then maybe see if the Scarlet is a real choice, or a used EX1 could be in the plans.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top