I would not consider buying a new SD camera. IMHO, HDV is here today, is clearly the future and anything SD that you buy is destined to lose both its value and usefulness very, very quickly (read: a waste of money). Just my opinion but I actually put my money behind it.

I just went through this. Do I buy a VX2100? or a XL-2? or...? and I bought a Sony Z1U. I shoot everything in HDV and downconvert to SD for delivery on SD DVD. The output is superior to what any SD camera in that price range can deliver (even at SD resolution). Hopefully this year I will start delivering HD. (now all I need is an HD TV to enjoy my own work) ;-)

PS: It was the biggest purchasing decision I’ve made so far as well and I’m glad I went HD.

~jr

Under $5k? Gee, you can get practically anything...

I just bought an FX1 and I love it. Handles just like my trusty old VX2000, only a little bit bigger and unfortunately a little bit heavier. But the images are a LOT sharper on an HD set.

For the moment I will shoot in HDV, edit in DV (via Gearshift) and output to DVD. PC requirements are about the same as before, because the only changes to the workflow are: (1) the initial rendering to dv by Gearshift, and, the final rendering from HDV to MPEG2 for the DVD authoring. This final rendering is a bit more complex because I use an external MPEG2 codec (CinemaCraft) and one can deliver via either the DV proxy or an intermediate such as HuffYUV in order to maximize the colorspace resolution. I haven't done any tests to see if there is an obvious difference in output for typical material.

The only real drawbacks for me are the added weight and the increased tenderness of the HDV tape format. There are new Sony HDV camcorders that are much smaller and lighter, though you give up some light sensitivity, which in the FX1 is about a stop down from the VX2000. Some reviews put the FX1 down about 2 stops, but in a side-by-side comparison with my two cameras, I note that, yes, the VX2000 is substantially brighter, but it's also substantially noiser. So I could probably boost the output of the FX1 in Vegas and get a brighter (and noisier) image too.

My VX2000 is for sale. It's a great camera, but now no longer needed.

Take your time in making a decision on which camera but I say that HDV is a given. The Canon is above your budget. Probably your budget says FX1 rather than Z1, but the compromises involved aren't severe and the matter of XLR inputs can be accommodated with a BeachTek or equivalent. Look at the entire range available, look at reports on DV.com and threads here and elsewhere. Be aware of biases inherent to various discussion groups. You can find some useful material on the CML HDV site, but you'll need to sift opinions carefully (some comments are starting to appear based on actual experience). Consider how options match your needs and budget for later bits and pieces (like BeachteK) that you might want.

FX1 here. Also allows you to Pan and Scan the video when you downscale to SD final, without having to upscale anything. Yet another tool in the arsenal.

I for one would argue againts HDV, but it's because of my lighting practice, heavy color grading in the post and heavy hand held involved in my shoots (even though usually it means steady handheld).

DVX100B or Canon XL2 would be my choice. Personaly i'm disapointed in HDV quality when i run it through my regular post chain. Still go to a local friendly rentla house and play with each camcorder to find the one that suits you best.

It looks like the Sony hdr-fx1 camera is the one I have been looking for. I It has everything that I really need in a camera as well as the 24p and 16x9. I will mainly be using this camera for documentary work and it looks to be about the right size and weight. I already have the equipment...i.e, Tripod, jib arm, etc. that will work with it and not to mention this camera is HD already which is obviously the way everything is going. I am still going to take my time over the next few weeks before I make my desicion but it looks as if this is the camera. Thanks so much for everyone's opinion, they are truly and gratefuly appreciated.

Back up the bus.....FX1 does NOT have 24p. It has CF24, which isn't the same. You can do very creative things with it, but it is not the same at all, as 24p. If you have CineForm's Connect HD and Vegas, you can get beautiful 24p from CF 24, but otherwise, it's a bit of a challenge unless you know exactly what you're doing. Then again, 24p is squirrely for new shooters (and some old shooters) anyway. Side note, just finished viewing a Court TV special that was shot 24p by someone who clearly didn't know what they were doing, judder all over the place.
The FX1 and Z1 are great camcorders, and I don't understand where some guys just don't get it for color grading or keying, especially when they comment that DV is better. It's not, and not by a LONG shot. 4:2:0 mpeg isn't the same as 4:2:0 PAL. Different sampling scheme. HDV is MUCH easier to key than PAL, and much easier to color process when converted properly. If you don't get that result, then you're not doing it right.

Another vote for the FX1 - great camera. I'm quite happy with mine. My only complaint is the audio input noise, but I don't know that it's any worse than any other similarly priced camera.

That's one of the hazards of the FX1. Noisy inputs. Z1 doesn't have those issues.

For docs HDV is really good!

For a lot of things HDV is really good. MTV music videos, docs, dramas, commercials, reality shows, lotsa uses for HDV. It has better color space than DV, is more robust than DV, composites/keys better than DV, and is overall significantly superior to DV, and is as good or nearly as good in most every instance as a high end SD camcorder.

I should clarify - that is to be expected of mini audio inputs - nothing surprising there I suppose - it's a consumer audio format. For $500 more the Z1 would have been a no-brainer for me just for XLRs and convenience, but at $1500 more, if you have better audio gear, it's a little harder to justify unless the pres on the Z1 are really stunning. For a $5000-$6000 budget, the convenience of not carrying outboard audio recording gear could justify the price difference though.

Either is a great choice, imho. If you have the budget, the Z1; if not, FX1. The difference between them will buy a Tascam HD P2 for audio, and a decent shotgun mic. I can't speak for the quality of the HD P2, but it's a thought, even if you didn't ask. :-)

The difference between the FX1 and Z1 is not just the audio inputs. There are more downsample possibilities, more framing guides, Black Stretch, more CineGama modes, NTSC and PAL (which, if you're interested in 24p, shooting CF25 and slowing down 4% becomes another option). So it’s not fair to justify the price difference by audio inputs alone.

~jr

Re-read JohnnyRoy's last post. He makes some VERY important about the Z1/FX1. I bought an FX1 recently and like it very much. I was considering the VX2100, but even with the (slight, I think) difference in light sensitivity, every other factor was in favor of he FX1. However, now that I understand the implications of all the things JohnnyRoy mentioned, if I get another prosumer HDV camera, it will be the Z1 rather than FX1. I don't really need the pro audio, but all the other things are really important.

As for getting more information, there are dozens of threads in this forum over the last six months. Do a search on "camera" and restrict it to the subject heading and to this forum. Or, do a search for "FX1" or Z1 or one of the other model numbers, and restrict it to the subject search. You'll get hundreds of additional ideas and things to think about.

I just recently purchased fx1 cams, being used to the canon xl1 and 2 i was horrified at how light it was,and how cheap (to me ) it looked, having played around for a month or so I still use the Canons on all shoots but have used the Sony as a second cam or lock down, Doing this simply cause I'm learning the cam and dont trust myself. The more I use them the more comfortable I am,still I find all the controls but the iris a pain, but that may change with use.The picture is great!
I made the purchase because I believe clients will demand some form of HD sooner than later and dont want to be a rookie with HDV on a paying gig. Still love those canons though, the 10 K for theCanon HDV just was too much for my cheap self. especially when I need 2,
20K bought me a a pretty fun old sports car,of course logic says the canons would have been a wiser choice of spending 20K I, dont make any money with the car, just spend it. What the hell.

No doubt my audio preferences exceed my video expertise or I would have pointed out the differences you mentioned jr - thanks for clarifying my comments. For sure it wouldn't be fair to advise a buyer on one feature alone.

I made the purchase because I believe clients will demand some form of HD sooner than later and dont want to be a rookie with HDV on a paying gig.

Hopefully, more people will realize this. Just moving to shooting in widescreen alone is a huge jump with a full third more picture to compose, and then toss in the extra resolution, different colorspace, and somewhat different treatement...it's not something you want to be jumping into overnight.

Having all 4 low-cost HD offerings, the Canon has some significant benefits for studio shooters, but not so much so for field shooters. The Z1 is still the best all-around cam, IMO, and the FX1 is still the best dollar value for getting started in HD. FWIW, there are more Z1's and FX1's in the hands of shooters than all other HDV cams combined, if Research Labs Independent is to be believed.
That's a LOT of cams.

I would be using the FX-1 for documentaries, shorts, etc.. I don't have the money right now to purchase an additional device to record sound so I would be using the camera. I see that this camera, as well as many others, don't have that great audio since using the small connection instead of the XL-R's. How much of a problem is this with this camera? Guys, I am a beginner at this so believe me when I say I need help...I need help. I really think the Z1 is out of my price range. I realize that I need HD becuase that is the way everything is going and it would be a complete waste of money to buy a camera now that is SD only.
Also with purchasing an HD camera I guess that means I will have to buy a HD monitor in order to watch playback during filming. I am a single owner, with not much overhead at the moment, just getting into the field really. All of my previous projects have been on cheap cameras around $1000.00 so getting a professional camera is a major step for me. It has come down to the FX-1, but some of the guys on here have scared me because of saying the audio isn't good. I would love to buy the Z1 but it is just too steep right now for my blood. Anything on the Sony A1-U? Thanks everyone for caring to respond to this thread.

No, the audio is fine on the FX1. Even the on-camera mike is surprisingly good for dialogue (which I didn't expect) but it does pick up camera noises (zoom motor etc). However if circumstances limit you to using that and you ensure good audio level, you can work with it. The thing about the mini-audio (3mm) connections is a certain lack of robustness and because they're single-ended there is no rejection of noise picked up on mike cables, so you have to keep them short (<5metres) and make sure you have good S/N. Also the FX doesn't have independant volume controls on each audio channel, so if you plug in 2 mikes there is no independant control of signals. But you can achieve that with an external box.
The extra video facilities of the Z1 are valuable but if you don't need alternative frame rates and if you can't afford the other extras you won't be disappointed with the FX -- you can do a lot in Vegas.

The A1 is a very capable camera for the money and the size, damn it though I just wish it'd do 50i/60i in the one version like the Z1. If it did that I'd have bought one yesterday.
Not as good as the Z1 in low light and the Z1 isn't that flash in low light as the bigger SD cameras but they're WAY more expensive. Still at times there's bargains to be had from Sony, they sold off their last 570s very cheaply down here.
Bob.

I apologize if I've overblown the audio issue. My opinion is based on being a longtime music/audio producer, so take it with a grain of salt. I needed my field audio to rival my studio recordings for my own reasons, so I went outboard, bypassing the camera audio issue altogether. I just needed a great picture - the FX1 fit that perfectly.

The audio issue with the FX1 is an audible noise floor, and a bit of phasiness in it. For exposed interviews or wanting to capture an environment where you want pristine audio, it can be less than optimal, but for most normal video work, and certainly if there is a music bed behind it, the noise will be covered up. In general the audio quality for the recorded source is pretty good, and not something to scare you off of the FX1 - it's just noisier than *I* want as an audio engineer

The FX1 is a fantastic camera and well worth a little audio noise tradeoff. If you use a separate mic, just get a converter box for XLR to 1/8" mini plug and I think you'll be quite happy with the results. I really don't think you'll regret not being able to get the Z1.

kdm, thanks. Actually I already have an XL-R convertor box so I am ready to go in that department. And thanks so much, I just want to know everything before I spend so much money.