Would You Sell Your DVX100B for a Canon 60d?

A

ANGENOUX

Member
Hi Everyone, I am having a debate with a friend and I was wondering if you wouldn't mind sharing some of your expertise. He's a beginning filmmaker. He has a DVX100B right now and he uses it for short films, recording church services and things like that. He is thinking about selling his DVX and picking up the Canon 60d (he moonlights as a wannabe photographer) & he's asked for my opinion. I think it's a sucky idea, but then again, I don't have a ton of experience either, so I figured I'd check in with those of you who do.

So, what would you advise in this situation? I know the 60d records full HD and the DVX is just SD, but I still think the DVX makes a beautiful picture with the right settings and I'm with the crowd that believes you don't send an SLR to do a video cameras job. I am tempted to advise him to put his money towards better lighting (he's got the sound covered) but since I've never shot with an SLR, I don't want to be so quick to judge. Any pro's/cons of shooting DVX vs SLR would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!
 
Just tell him that if he does, make sure to set money aside for lenses, audio recorder, some kind of viewfinder and/or monitor, some kind of stabalizer, et. etc. While all these things aren't required to shoot with...they are the only way to make them handle/operate like the DVX does right out of the box. I know there's one guy on here who sold his DVX for a D7000 and he's loving it, so it CAN be a good move..just so long as your friend knows what he's in for. It's a different way to operate for sure.

PROS for 60D vs DVX100b -

1. Shallow dof
2. Great low light with fast lenses (the DVX is good in low light as well though)
3. HD....but ACTUAL resolution just around 720 not the advertised 1080
4. Interchangeable lenses to obtain more creative shots.
5. Native widescreen
6. Takes great photos
7. DLSRs really shine on shots of people
8. Tapeless workflow

CONS for 60D vs DVX100b

1. CMOS skew
2. Have to watch carefully for moire/aliasing
3. No cinema gammas or extensive picture adjustments that match the capability of what's onboard the DVX
4. Audio not nearly as good - has to be purchased
5. Certain controls and things like ND filters have to be purchased
6. OIS not in camera
7. Zooms and zoom outs are very odd with SLR lenses
8. No zebras or extensive exposure options
9. Non funtioning VF - has to be purchased
10. Editing is not as painless as DV

I tried to just state things that are facts or that most would agree upon.
 
Last edited:
A couple of posts have been deleted because the place to discuss the pros and cons of DSLRs against each other is the DSLR section.
 
NO! Man. I have both those cameras, and just got a corporate job that paid me what I could make for selling my dvx. The job required possible 1 hour takes and 2 lav xlr mics. I would like to see a dslr handle that. That is where the dvx is at home.
 
JONJON said:
dang Will. still rockin the dvx? Awesome!
Click to expand...

The dvx is an actual video camera. Just shoot widescreen, give em great audio and a solid upload and they think you are the best. These are the kind of people that you can't show up with a dslr, because they will not understand that you are not taking pictures.
 
Right now I wish I could just sell my 100b at all. I have been trying to sell it for months. I am in the process of developing a web series and want to shoot with the af100. I cant pull the trigger until I sell the 100b!
 
I have heard they are getting harder to sell unless you sell them dirt cheap. It's crazy because they are still around $2500 brand new from what I've seen.
 
For $760 I'd rather keep my DVX100b. Start adding up the cost to make a DSLR work like a video camera and you have invested a bundle. I guess whatever works for you.
 
Zim said:
For $760 I'd rather keep my DVX100b. Start adding up the cost to make a DSLR work like a video camera and you have invested a bundle. I guess whatever works for you.
Click to expand...

While I was very close to rigging out my 7D, I need the long record times, and many of the functionalities that the HPX170 offers, especially when it comes to broadcast standards.
 
I'm never getting rid of my DVX. I've made a lot of money with that thing and I still love the way the footage looks.
 
I agree (@HorseFilms) I still love the way DVX footage looks. @Andythefilmer, see, $760 is very cheap to me. DVX is worth more than that, at least in my opinion. I would have just kept it. Even if I just let it sit in the back of my closet or used it to film birthday parties or church services, I wouldn't let it go for $760.
 
To help a new member I was cheking out an old Dvx100 thread with in camera looks and was amazed at the quality of some of the screen grabs. I also thought the DVX came off really well in Lonesome Jim on my Panasonic HD TV. There were just a couple of shots where it was like....oh yeah this is shot with a video camera. The rest has a very 16mm look, to my eyes anyway.
For anyone interested and isn't familiar with it yet...the film was directed by Steve Buscemi and stars Casey Affleck, Liv Tyler, and Kevin Corrigan. It was shot mostly on a single DVX100a in 24p advanced, but sometimes a couple of cameras were used. The DP( Phil Parmet) chose the DVX100a (over the Sony PD150) for it's progressive scan and overall more film like look. They had planned to blow it up to 35mm, but ended up doing an HD uprezz for the final master. Parmet, Buscemi, and the entire crew were very pleased with the final look of the film. If you haven't seen it yet, it's worth it alone just to see what a DVX100 can do...and this wasn't even a B model. If you can, watch it in HD for the best result....even in upconvert DVD HD it looks great.
 
Last edited:
Wow, I love this film, saw it when it first came out and had no idea it was shot on the DVX. Are you sure that it was and where do I find this info?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top