XH A1 or DVX100B

[This Is Dave]

I've scanned through the forums and googled a lot and haven't found a satisfactory answer to this question. For someone who wants the most film-like look possible which of these cameras is better? I wont be filming in high def, so besides 16:9 are there any advantages to the A1. I also will probably be filming in a lot of low light situations, is one camera better than the other in this aspect?

Thanks all

 

[Huy Vu]

Well, there's no automatic filmlook buttons for either cam. You'll have to work at it. They're both excellent camera and they can do what you want if properly used.

I don't think anyone here would make a comparison between the A1 and the DVX; it's like comparing apples and oranges. The HD function sets the A1 in the whole different league; even if you have no need for it right now, it's generally agreed that downrezzed HD makes for superior SD anyway. And once you've seen HD footage, it's just hard going back. These two cam are roughly in the same price range, so for the money, it's definitely the A1, no questions about it.

 

[Noel Evans]

Agree with Jade, but wanted to add some. The DVX progressive modes are excellent. The A1 24f and 30f modes are also excellent.

I have to say the A1 is a marked improvement over the DVX in SD because of two simple reasons. First shooting the A1 in HD and downrezzing to SD is a superior image. The second is the lense. The A1 comes standard with a 20x lense, at zoom its has a beautiful bokeh that adds to the FILM LIKE quality.

 

[NGC]

Dave I also went through anguish trying to decide between the DVX and A1. My A1 is on its way. The number one reason for me is I will have the camera longer before obsolescence sets in. Only caveat. Before you purchase start reading the massive manual online. There will be a steep learning curve.

 

[Elton]

The manual is massive, but the actual ease of use is cake. You can tweak the A1's image to the nth degree, but for most uses with 24F and the intent of achieving a nice film look--you just need to pop it into a Cinegamma mode and maybe push the saturation a little and you've got a solid image in most situations that is very correctable in post.

It's not much harder to use than a DVX, but trust me, when you want to customize looks and settings for different shooting situations, the A1 definitely earns its keep.

 

[William_Robinette]

...the most film-like look possible ... I also will probably be filming in a lot of low light situations...
Thanks all

I don't understand when people say this! If you want a film-like look you need light. (lots of it) Movies are not shot in the dark with what's available.

 

[Elton]

I wont be filming in high def, so besides 16:9 are there any advantages to the A1.

Forgot to mention greenscreen; Even if you're not likely to use HDV often, the ability to use HDV for greenscreen and downrez to SD formats in 4:4:4 color would be a VERY strong reason to go with an A1. Much cleaner chroma keying due to more chroma info available.

As everyone knows, DV isn't the greatest format to work with when it comes to this task.

 

[filmmaker1977]

I don't understand when people say this! If you want a film-like look you need light. (lots of it) Movies are not shot in the dark with what's available.

because these guys don't have the hollywood machine behind.. if not why would they be here?..

 

[William_Robinette]

But you see... the film-look is more then just a 24p cadence and a few setting you can tweak in the camera. Lighting is (IMO) a DP's most important tool, and without it, you will never be anywhere near that ever elusive "film-look."

You don't need the "Hollywood machine" behind you. Go to home depot and get some work lights. Learn to sculpt the light in your frame. Or better yet, go spend some money at B&H on some small fresnels. Remember that the camera is only the beginning of expenses if you want a truly professional look to whatever you are shooting.

 

[This Is Dave]

Hey guys thanks for the responses so far.

I totally agree that there are other aspects (such as lighting) that are more imoprtant than the camera when it comes to capturing great images. I was just wondering what you would recommend as the best starting point.

I realize that this prolly a dumb question but how exactly does downrezzing work? Is it an in camera function that the A1 has or do you do it in post? Any special programs that need to be purchased to achieve this?

 

[David Jimerson]

because these guys don't have the hollywood machine behind.. if not why would they be here?..

Simple physics has nothing to do with the "Hollywood machine." They don't make movies with lots of light because the "machine" tells them they have to; they do it because PHOTOGRAPHY tells them they have to. You don't feed a camera light, you get crap. That's just the way it is.

 

[Jay Rodriguez]

you'll need to do your own DD to come up with the "right" answer to your question

The DVX rocks but so does the A1. There's tons of backing on the DVX as it proved itself, the A1 hasn't been out long enough to do so. Have you ever seen a short shot on the A1? I haven't.

The DVX is only SD, the A1 is SD & HD.

To shoot directly to disk on the DVX will run you at or more then $3,000. To do the same on the A1 will cost you about $700.

The DVX will be history soon, who knows when, but sooner or later. The A1 is on its way in to the game.

They both cost around the same price.

There's so many more differences between the two. Options, features, etc.

 

[Barry_Green]

To shoot directly to disk on the DVX will run you at or more then $3,000. To do the same on the A1 will cost you about $700.

Not sure what you're referring to. The same FireStore would work on both units, at the same price.

The DVX will be history soon, who knows when, but sooner or later. The A1 is on its way in to the game.

Yes, but keep in mind that HDV is rather tenuous at best, with Sony and Panasonic both introducing a new tapeless format (AVC-HD). If the A1 had been AVC-HD, man... that woulda been sweet.

They both cost around the same price.

Not once you factor rebates in; the DVX ends up being substantially less (which, frankly, it should be. It needs to be in order to be competitive in the marketplace).

There's so many more differences between the two. Options, features, etc.

That's the thing. Lots of differences, which may or may not matter to you. The A1 has still-camera emulation, the DVX doesn't. The DVX has true manual zoom and precise repeatable focus, the A1 doesn't. The A1 has high-def, the DVX doesn't. The DVX has Panasonic cinegamma and cinematrix and that distinctive, rich "panasonic" look, the A1 doesn't. The DVX gives you better audio and better control over the audio. The A1 has much more control over painting the image, and a 20x zoom, and high def.

Different tools. Depends on what your priorities are. If you're aiming for a DVD release, the DVX can do just fine and costs less. If you need high-def, the A1 is high-def and the DVX isn't.

 

[Kholi]

I think he meant it'd be 3k to get Hi-Def out of the DVX. Andromeda. Though, both can be tapeless; the A1 is inherent HD(v).

 

[Barry_Green]

Ah. Right. Well, there's another way to go, which is to use Red Giant's "InstantHD", which is free when you buy a US-authorized DVX. But that's not "real" high-def, of course.

 

[xray]

I wont be filming in high def, so besides 16:9 are there any advantages to the A1. I also will probably be filming in a lot of low light situations, is one camera better than the other in this aspect?
Thanks all

The DVX100B is a good SD 4:3 camcorder. If it had a 16:9 chip it was the best. But it isn't. Low light filming in SD is best done with the DVX, but if you want to stay in 16:9 and you like resolution with sharp or detailed images also in long shots, you better go with the Canon. Its noise is beautiful too.

The wide and long 20x lens gives you many possibilities and after editing the HD and downconverting to SD you resume with a very good image. You have all control to the image so you can create that beautiful XHA1 look, :kiss: thats already famous.

 

[Jay Rodriguez]

I think he meant it'd be 3k to get Hi-Def out of the DVX. Andromeda. Though, both can be tapeless; the A1 is inherent HD(v).

Bingo!


It really depends on what the filmmaker is looking for. They are two totally different cameras.

So Barry, where's that write up? You know we're all looking forward to it.

 

[Noel Evans]

Yes, but keep in mind that HDV is rather tenuous at best,

Barry thats a very subjective statement. Its still HD, the results are in the cameras themselves.

That's the thing. Lots of differences, which may or may not matter to you. The A1 has still-camera emulation, the DVX doesn't. The DVX has true manual zoom and precise repeatable focus, the A1 doesn't. T

The A1 does have repeatable focus in the form of a focus position preset. The DVX doesnt have this precise function, as well as no IAF option. If your referring to numbers on the screen, no the A1 doesnt, but you can easily pull the same focal point with the preset, and the A1 comes with a distance meter, much more useful in the field for my money.

The DVX has Panasonic cinegamma and cinematrix and that distinctive, rich "panasonic" look, the A1 doesn't.

Havent seen anything yet to suggest I cant pull a color rich image from the A1 as I could from my DVX.

The DVX gives you better audio and better control over the audio.

Also subjective, the compression factor in the real world only becomes an issue when using more than 2 channels of audio. The A1 sound output in my tests has been much cleaner than the DVX, talking mic straight to cam XLR. At 4 channels the DVX should be better, but I have never used more than 2 channels on a DVX. And to be honest I usually use a mic to mixer to cam set up.

The DVX has true manual zoom

Yes it does but once again something thats a small factor in real world, and I have acheived as snappy a zoom as MY REQUIREMENTS need with the A1. I rarely zoom though other than to frame a shot.

DVX can do just fine and costs less.

Nothing debatable on that point. Its a fine SD camera indeed and I still have mine.

But no mention of lense quality. The A1 lense for my money beats the HVX easily. Of course the rest of the camera is a different proposition altogether and I am a HVX fan and user. The lense choice on the HVX has always been my sore point.

 

[Barry_Green]

Barry thats a very subjective statement. Its still HD, the results are in the cameras themselves.

That's not what I meant. I meant the format is on its last legs, its successor has already been announced, Canon is all alone in its 24F HDV format and Sony and Panasonic are both moving on to AVC-HD. HDV as a *format* is tenuous at best. It'll cling on as long as people continue to buy it, but its future is already sealed, its gravestone has been written, it just hasn't been planted in the ground yet.

Now, that doesn't mean that as soon as AVC-HD is in full swing, that all the A1s out there will just stop working. It'll work as long as the mechanism holds up. But HDV has no future. It does have a present -- it's here, and it does work, and the XHA1 is the best HDV camcorder on the market. I'm just saying that the format itself is tenuous and has no future.

The A1 does have repeatable focus in the form of a focus position preset.

Well, yes, I guess it does have that -- but that's a gimmick. It's a patch, a workaround to compensate for the lack of actual precise manual control. The A1 is much, MUCH better than the XLH1 in that respect, but it isn't the same thing at all.

and the A1 comes with a distance meter, much more useful in the field for my money.

Distance meter is much more useful than the numbers, no argument there!

Havent seen anything yet to suggest I cant pull a color rich image from the A1 as I could from my DVX.

Try 'em side by side. Not only can the DVX far exceed what the A1 can deliver, color-wise, there's just a totally different feel to the color that it can deliver. You can boost the color in the A1, but even at max color gain it only about matches what a DVX delivers at midpoint, the DVX can then go to +7. But it's not just the amount of color, it's the type of color. It just looks different.

Also subjective, the compression factor in the real world only becomes an issue when using more than 2 channels of audio.

About saying "better audio", yes that could be subjective, but about having better audio control?
There's nothing subjective about that! The A1 is quite limited in how it lets you control audio. DVX lets you assign internal mic to one channel, external to another -- A1 can't, it's all-internal or all-external. DVX lets you assign MIC level to one channel and LINE level to the other -- A1 can't, it's all MIC or all LINE. And while both let you route the same XLR to both channels, the DVX lets you control the audio level of each channel individually, the A1 doesn't -- you get the same volume level to both tracks. DVX gives you a lot more control over your audio, plain & simple.

Yes it does but once again something thats a small factor in real world, and I have acheived as snappy a zoom as MY REQUIREMENTS need with the A1. I rarely zoom though other than to frame a shot.

Now that's subjective -- zoom as per your individual requirements. I'm not talking about subjective, because I am leaving that up to the individual to decide; I'm talking about actual differences between the cameras so that the potential purchaser can make an informed decision. You can't do a snap zoom on an XHA1, you can on the DVX. IF THAT'S IMPORTANT to someone, then now they know. One other thing -- you can't focus and zoom at the same time on an XHA1, and you can on the DVX. If you want to do the "Vertigo Shot" or "Jaws Shot" (aka "zoom/dolly") that's something that's just physically impossible on the A1, and it's completely possible on the DVX. You may say "but I'll never do that shot" and I'd say "fine, then you've made up your mind, but that doesn't speak for everyone." Reality TV shooters may find they want or need that snap-zoom, or the ability to zoom & focus simultaneously, and they might be distressed to find that both are impossible on the XHA1. Cinema shooters may not care at all. But it still needs to be pointed out.

But no mention of lense quality. The A1 lense for my money beats the HVX easily. Of course the rest of the camera is a different proposition altogether and I am a HVX fan and user. The lense choice on the HVX has always been my sore point.

As in, what about the lens? And where did the HVX enter the discussion? I spent a week with both; I definitely prefer the zoom range on the A1, but as far as resolvable image quality there ain't a dime's worth of difference between them, and the A1 exhibited perhaps less CA but much more prismatic error, which looks worse, so again it becomes six-of-one, half-dozen of the other. But as far as sharpness, cleanliness, breathing, resolving ability, etc -- I didn't see any advantage for the Canon. The Canon has much better range, the HVX has much better controls -- and by much, I mean MUCH. So, again, know what the differences are and pick which matches your preferences.

 

[magichristopher]

I agree with Barry that the Audio controls are significantly better, you have to go in the menu to switch to XLR, can'[t use the on-baord and XLR at same time or change both audio levels for a single mic channel. Silly if you ask me.


However, I disagree with Barry on the Color. Although the color out of the box is flat a pretty neutral, the color customization is rediculous. I seem to think that the color options are more advanced.

The focus hasn't been a problem for me yet and I like the feel of the controls. but there can be a slight lag in zooming from the ring barrel, and can be frustrating when timing needs to be right on.

The A1 has cinegamma, and cinematrix (maybe you were saying the A1 doesn't have "Panasonic's cinegamma") in that case you would be right, it does not.

I no longer have my DVX, and I missed it for sometime once it was gone, but the A1 has an edge in most things, and it is silly that Canon fumbled on some of the easy to implement things like better audio controls (which can be fixed in firmware) and an OIS button option.

All in all I am very satisfied.