XL2 image nicer than DVX?

[AgeZero]

I have owned both the DVX and the XL2. The higher resolution in the XL2 is noteable and XL2 focusing is easier than having the anamorphic lense on the DVX. However I like the controls and iris wheel, flip out screen on the dvx. A small bump in saturation in post fixes the small lack in color with the XL2. I tend to cc regardless. With the DVX I noticed that it was difficult to control the reds as compared with other colors. Reds on the XL2 are more tame. They are both great cameras however. Just my $.02

 

[shinya]

I did the first part of my dv thesis in XL1 using some P+S technik and zeiss prime lens package, and I'm somewhat annoyed because there were few parts of my film that looked a little "too video-ish" and a part where the focus on my subject blurred suddenly during a dolly out (i think the defocusing happened even when we were on manual). Those were probably the worst parts of my thesis. is it my dop or my equipment, i don't know...

i'm about to do the 2nd part of my thesis and i really want to do it better this time. I want to particularly fix that defocusing on the dolly. I saved enough money to choose between the XL2 and the DVX100A -- I want to know which is more worth it in the long run (I'm planning to rent it out after thesis, just to get my investment back :laugh: . also, it should be pretty useful for my video-editing and coverage business). i'm also quite attracted to the 24p thing...and I'm such a sucker for image quality.

I hope you could help me deliberate:
1) what are the significant improvements done on XL2 from XL1 and DVX100A from DVX100?
2) is focusing better this time on XL2 vs DVX100A? (as in no sudden crappy camera going in and out of focus during tracking and dolly shots, even on manual mode... or is this just a matter of dop and/or equipment?? or would this be fixed by sharper manual lens? i really want to fix THIS )
3) is this true: XL2 on true 16:9 but compromising 4:3; DVX100A not true 16:9 just compensating this with the adapter but very good(?) on 4:3?
4) is this true: XL2 better on low light situations (as in less noise?)
5) which has sharper manual lens -- XL2 or DVX100A?
6) can Magic Bullet help XL2 the same way as DVX100A? or is the Magic Bullet more friendly towards the panny?
7) is the 24p function better on the XL2 than on the DVX100A? at 4:3?

there are more questions at the back of my head... couldn't remember at this time though. My sights are more focused now on the XL2... but if you can, discourage me . it's a $1500+ difference after all, etc etc. I'll be shooting in two weeks time... hopefully by then i could get a very good camera.

 

[MovieSwede]

Well cant answer all of your questions but some are easy

1. Significant improvments over the Xl1 is alot. True progressive 24P, real 16:9. The difference between the 100 and the 100a is not that much. But it includes squeeze mode. better dynamic range, autofocus in progressive well and some more stuff.

2 cant answer if its better but Ive had no problem with the focusing on the DVX. But you cant autofocus with the 100 (you can with 100a) in progressive mode and you cant autofocus with the 16:9 adapter.

3. Yes the XL2 uses 4:3 chip then scale of top and bottom for 16:9 and then scale of again for 4:3. Resolution wise the XL2 has enough pixels in both 4:3 and 16:9. But it doesnt uses the entire surface of the 1/3 CCD.

4. cant answer


5. cant answer

6. magic bullet can help xl2. The only thing ive seen different between the two is that i like the colors and gamma of the DVX better. But the user can adjust that on both cams. both in cam and in post. of course im not sure if you can exactly replicate the DVX cinegamma with the cinegamma in xl2, but another user could confirm or deny that. But as answer to your question magic bullet works as good for both cams.

7. the 24p function should be the same in both cams.

as for what cam. there are alot of factors to take in mind. you must remember that cams in this pricerange are a lot of compromisses.

If you want the Xl2 buy it. you aint gonna be dissapointed. But you will not get dissapointed by the DVX either.

as i se it you have 3 options

1 buy the xl2
2 buy the dvx100a
3 buy the dvx100a + 16:9 adapter

 

[PANA-MAN]

Well cant answer all of your questions but some are easy

1. Significant improvments over the Xl1 is alot. True progressive 24P, real 16:9. The difference between the 100 and the 100a is not that much. But it includes squeeze mode. better dynamic range, autofocus in progressive well and some more stuff.

2 cant answer if its better but Ive had no problem with the focusing on the DVX. But you cant autofocus with the 100 (you can with 100a) in progressive mode and you cant autofocus with the 16:9 adapter.

3. Yes the XL2 uses 4:3 chip then scale of top and bottom for 16:9 and then scale of again for 4:3. Resolution wise the XL2 has enough pixels in both 4:3 and 16:9. But it doesnt uses the entire surface of the 1/3 CCD.

4. cant answer


5. cant answer

6. magic bullet can help xl2. The only thing ive seen different between the two is that i like the colors and gamma of the DVX better. But the user can adjust that on both cams. both in cam and in post. of course im not sure if you can exactly replicate the DVX cinegamma with the cinegamma in xl2, but another user could confirm or deny that. But as answer to your question magic bullet works as good for both cams.

7. the 24p function should be the same in both cams.

as for what cam. there are alot of factors to take in mind. you must remember that cams in this pricerange are a lot of compromisses.

If you want the Xl2 buy it. you aint gonna be dissapointed. But you will not get dissapointed by the DVX either.

as i se it you have 3 options

1 buy the xl2
2 buy the dvx100a
3 buy the dvx100a + 16:9 adapter

I'll answer 4 and 5

4) The DVX is better in low light by 1-2 stops. Both are actually quite good, though.
5) The DVX has a fixed lens and the XL2 has interchangeable lenses. Therefore, only the XL2 has an available bayonet mounted manual lens. And it is a beauty.


I use both cameras and can testify to their strengths and weaknesses. I agree with the previous post in saying, you can't go wrong with either camera. And don't judge the XL2 by the XL1. They are light years apart in terms of their capabilities.
For problems that you may encounter with the DVX, go to the "technical" section of this forum on the home page.
For problems with the XL2 go to "theXL2.COM"

Check out this link for a good video on all the features of the XL2.

http://www.dvcreators.net/

click on "watch XL2 feature tour"

 

[AshG]

I would like to point out that both cameras are GOOD in low light, you just have to know how to adjust the master pedestal and black levels while shooting and lower the contrast in post. Most people who say these cams are not good in low light are not using them properly. The only reason the DVX is slightly better is that the Canon has a longer lens. At 10X both cameras are fairly even but as the XL2 goes longer, the less light can come in...





ash =o)

 

[shinya]

thank you very much for answering the questions. it had been really helpful=).

i'm ordering the XL2.

final question: would there be any problems if I mix 30p video with 24p video at post (from the XL1 and the XL2, resoectively)? how do i go about this? (because I heard that some editing systems couldn't handle such? or maybe I just heard wrong.)

 

[Sedonafilmer]

rack focus

rack focus

I'm planning on buying an XL2 but I had a question.

I love rack focusing it gives really good depth of field. I used a dvx and got some decent rack focusing but not what I was really looking for. Does the XL2 have good range of focus settings on a regular wide angle lens? Or is a manual lens the only im gonna get alot of depth of field?

How do the DVX and XL2 compare overall with focus and depth of field?

 

[mmm]

A manual lens won't affect depth of field, however the focal lens of the lens does. A manual lens simply allows you to focus pull more accurately.

At higher focal lengths, you have a shallower depth of field. Due to the image sensor being very small (1/3") on the XL2 and the DVX (and all cameras in this price range), the cameras utilise quite short focal length lenses - around 5 mm to 60 mm or so. Therefore, you will normally achieve a deep depth of field.

The aperture to which the lens is set also effects the depth of field (DOF), the wider the aperature, the shallower the depth of field.

Therefore to maximise you DOF, you should keep the iris wide open and zoom in as much as possible. You may need to use ND filters to allow you to keep the iris wide enough BTW.

If you use a camera equiped with a larger sensor area - eg pro cameras with 2/3" CCDs, or 16mm or 35mm film - you can of course use longer focal length lenses and reduce the DOF. Another option is to use a DOF adapter on the cheaper cameras such as the Micro35 or Mini35. These use a second lens to project an image onto a piece of ground glass which sits in front of the existing lens. Because the image size on the ground glass is larger than the 1/3"CCD chips, longer focal length lenses are used and result in a reduced (sometimes very narrow) DOF.

I hope that helps!

 

[AshG]

The 20X lens can achieve a TINY DOF when the aperture is open and it is zoomed from 10x - 20x. The problem many people have is the quirky electronic focus ring. It take a great deal of practice and skill to rack focuses. Myself and others pull it off pretty easy but some have bailed altogether. There are some pre-set moves you can make but this is only good for set-up shots. The 16X lens allows full manual control of the zoom and focus and is a terrific lens. The only drawback is lack of OIS...



ash =o)

 

[KHendrix2]

"Therefore to maximize your DOF, you should keep the iris wide open and zoom in as much as possible. You may need to use ND filters to allow you to keep the iris wide enough BTW."

This should read "to minimize your DOF". For some reason everyone seems to get it backwards.

The electronic focus ring does take some getting used to, but the 20X lens has user settable zoom and focus points as well. This can go a long way towards doing some really nice rack focus shots. The 16X lens is nice but it tends to "breathe" a lot more than the 20X.

 

[thisiswells]

A post like this one is so refreshing for me. makes me want to help others.

I did the first part of my dv thesis in XL1 using some P+S technik and zeiss prime lens package, and I'm somewhat annoyed because ... a part where the focus on my subject blurred suddenly during a dolly out (i think the defocusing happened even when we were on manual). Those were probably the worst parts of my thesis. is it my dop or my equipment, i don't know...

Unfortunately, film lenses do not have "auto focus" as you may be familiar with on video lenses. Focusing a zeiss prime lens on a dolly shot requires an incredibly skilled assistant cameraman who would actually adjust the focus ring on the lens during the shot. It's a very tough job; probably the most difficult (and respected) technical position on the crew. On a dolly shot the best thing that could be done is to use wide lenses which don't require as much attention to focusing. If the focus is really important for the shot, checking playback on location would be a good idea before moving on.

I'll be shooting in two weeks time... hopefully by then i could get a very good camera.

looks like I missed ya, then (the original post is a month old). oh well.

 

[mmm]

"Therefore to maximize your DOF, you should keep the iris wide open and zoom in as much as possible. You may need to use ND filters to allow you to keep the iris wide enough BTW."

This should read "to minimize your DOF". For some reason everyone seems to get it backwards.

True, thanks for pointing that out.

I read that through really carefully to make sure I hadn't got it backwards anywhere - damn! Not careful enough! :thumbsup:

 

[geffy]

is this a practical joke?

is this a practical joke?

"And if you want interchangeable lenses, check out http://www.guerilla35.com You can use your Nikon still lenses with the DVX, XL2, Sony, and also the upcoming HVX. pretty sweet. "
looks like a wind up to me!