OT: XH A1 vs. HVX200

farss wrote on 12/23/2007, 1:06 AM

a) What 24F vs 24P thing, I know what you're talking about but is it a real issue?
b) If you want to use a 35mm adaptor I really think the Z7 or even the HD100 would be a better choice. Using a simple relay lens to focus the GG screen onto the imager rather than another multielement lens should be better optically and give a you a lighter, more reliable setup.
c) Take a look at the EX1. More expensive than either of those but in practice the SxS cards are very cheap compared to P2 cards.

Just as an interesting aside. The whole 24p thing seems to be about to kind of go out the window. The new 120Hz HD TVs interpolate the frames giving very smooth motion i.e. the 24p look vanishes. I haven't seen one of these new HD TVs yet so I'm only going on hearsay. My only thought was great, finally got a couple of good cameras that'll shoot 24/25p and all for nought.

Patryk Rebisz wrote on 12/23/2007, 1:14 AM

NOTE: EVERYTHING BELOW i wrote assuming u r talking about Canon XL H1 not A1. Between A1 and HVX i'm sure i would go with Panasonic.

First of all if u r planing to use the adapter why do u assume that the lens' interchangeability isn't an issue? You loose about 2 f-stops if you shoot through HVX's lens. 2 f-stops is a difference between using 2k instead of 1k + 200w (or something of this kind) in other words it's a HUGE difference. Unless i know i'll be shooting outside i would never go with HVX + adapter + 35mm lenses. That said though Canon has it's weaknesses -- it's view finder is atrocious (we are not only talking about inability to focus, but the way it reproduces colors -- basically without an external monitor u can't do jack). I just DP'ed a 5 cam shoot with the Canons and told the cam ops to estimate whether they should go with daylight or interior preset and never to try to make the image look good in the viewfinder cause it simply can't be trusted.

I'll be hones with you the image from both cameras look spectacular for what it is, but if you ever see it on really big screen you will see that it's not the compressor (DVC Pro HD or HDV) that decides about the image's quality but the chip size -- and in both cases it's small. So no, don't expect to see the Hollywood quality out of those cams, but for sure you will be impressed.

I can't recomend either camera because i don't belive in owning the gear. I personaly think that renting is the way to go as different projects require different set-ups/quality. If you are a DP living in a big metropolish there are tons of people who rent their gear out at about %50 of the rental houses, so you can get pretty sweet deals if you are shooting something specific.

Patryk Rebisz wrote on 12/23/2007, 1:17 AM

farss, i saw one of those TVs at Circuit City and "wow, i'm watching a well shot evening news with a story!" was my thought. 24p is here to stay until HOllywood stops making movies.

Zelkien69 wrote on 12/23/2007, 2:44 AM

I own three XH-A1's and while they have their quarks and shortcomings, I love them to death. They 24f/p is not much of an issue. The look is so similar. It's like wanting a fullsize car and trying to make due with either the Camry is or the Accord. Neither one of them are fullsize, and it's personal preference on what you'll agree to settle with. The fact is it's emulation and representation that's close enough in most cases.

I happened to work with an online magazine (Microfilmmaker.com) when I first purchased my XH-A1 and Tom Stern, the gentleman who did the review, personally owned a DVX100B and a HVX200. The article is a great resource and opinion of the two. I won't tell you who won the shootout, but I am buying a fourth XH-A1 in March. Here's the link.

http://www.microfilmmaker.com/reviews/Issue21/CanonXH1.html

It's a very in-depth article and really does a great side by side comparison.

DJPadre wrote on 12/23/2007, 4:00 AM

couple of things.. for adapters, once you push the A1 @ full tele, you may feel that you dont even need it.. trust me on that one...

OK couple of things..

Camera - The A1 has about 1 stop higher sensitivity that the HVX.. this really isnt all taht much, BUT compared to a SD camcorder, it makes a whopping huge difference.
The lense on teh A1, aside from being great in the tele and WA ranges, has afew nuances you NEED to know... firstly, it cant focus and zoom at the same time. Secondly, the rings can be rather sluggish compared to the full manual rig of a HVX
I do like teh iris control on the A1, but sometimes i like teh convenience of the dial on the HVX. Also, stepping is non exisant on tha Panas, and quick adjsutments can be made withzero fuss, where as with the A1, you HAVE TO be extremely careful. I have noticed however that the A1 only goes up to from f1.6 to f9.5 where teh HVX cruises at f16.
Lense control is very good, and being al ldigital the A1 has an advantage (to a point) as the rocker can be a fixed speed or switch between analogeous variable (which can get flaky when your on the move and accidently push a lil too hard)

Codec.. DVCProHD is a kick ass codec. The camera itself is let down by low resolution, however this is made up tenfold with the colour and compression used.
Straight out of the box, teh HVX/DVX win hands down. Skin tone, irrespecive of the luminance, will remina a contstant, whereas with teh A1, colour tones vary immensely according to the luminance. Sadly this leads the image to shift towards to the reds, which i personally despise. it DOES have a canon colour look, no matter how you tweak it...

The Panas however have a natural rich vibrant image straight out of the box. The A1 doesnt come close.. not by a long shot

I like both, but IMO for good light, the A1 is a great unit. Incredibly sharp images, great colour of you have the patience to tweak and again popping in post. once light starts to diminash, as with most HDV cameras, youll really start to notice the limitations..

essami wrote on 12/23/2007, 5:12 AM

I just got a Letus35 Extreme and its amazing! I wish I would have realised earlier how huge difference a 35mm adapter can make. The colors are amazing and the depth of field is... well, like on a real film.

If you're on a budget and planning to do work that ends up on tv, dvd or web. And you dont plan to blow up to big screen. I would recommend more then anything to get a 35mm adapter. Letus35 Extereme has only 0.5 stop loss of light. But even the home made ones make the images look awesome. Just look in youtube and you will see.

Sami

essami wrote on 12/23/2007, 5:22 AM

>couple of things.. for adapters, once you push the A1 @ full tele, you may feel that you dont even need it.. trust me on that one...

Using full tele is as convinient as using a fast moving train as your dolly. 90% of situations I shoot in dont allow for full tele. There's not enough room if you're indoors, you have to use a tripod to keep it steady and if the subject moves he/she is immeadiately out of the frame.

Sami

Cheno wrote on 12/23/2007, 6:03 AM

I own an XHA! + Letus Extreme, love them both. I think both the Panny cam and the Canon have their pros and cons - I've never used the viewfinder on the Canon. I use the LCD or an external monitor.

As for the choice in cam, personally the Canon resolved more detail then the HVX200. I think it looks as good or better and when all is said and done, the cost is about half of the HVX when you consider adding P2 cards to the equation. There isn't enough of a difference in anything to justify the difference in cost. Die hard Panny guys will tell it differently but I'm speaking from someone who has used both cameras extensively.

Rent vs. Buying - I own this camera. I own an HV20 as a deck. If I need bigger / better cams for the job, I rent. Keeps my overhead low but also gives me a cam for quick run and gun jobs where renting will just be a PITA in having to line something up. I'm also producing some stuff out of my pocket right now and we have 3 HDV cams we're using, all borrowed / owned by myself and business associate. Renting would kill me on that. So it really is a measure of how much you are going to use the camera, what your budgets, etc.

I've never been a huge Canon fan. Had one of the first 3 XL-1's shippped to Utah in the late 90's and it was so problematic I returned it. Had a bad taste in my mouth with Canon until I saw the footage from their new HDV cams. I'm very excited to see what the EX1 has to offer now as well.

Essami said ">couple of things.. for adapters, once you push the A1 @ full tele, you may feel that you dont even need it.. trust me on that one..."

After using the Extreme (and it's low light is amazing...), the Canon or Panny's built in tele is nothing in comparison. If you're shooting outside and have 30 feet to back up, maybe. Not the case for most of what I need to shoot. 35mm lense adapters are a bit to get used to but once you've used one, you'll have a hard time going back to native lens, especially on the smaller chip cams.

cheno

DJPadre wrote on 12/23/2007, 6:14 AM

theres always a place for the adapters, dont get me wrong, but to get teh most out of them, need good fast lense with a wide aperture... maybe a canon 50mm prime @ 1.2

As for pana vs canon, i had no choice but to jump ship to canon for HD simply becuase of P2 cost.. hopefully AVC Intra and cheap SDcards will change that with the new Pana offering..

In any case, i found the canon to be sharper, but requires much more colour work in post, irrespective if the settings. The pana, although tweakable, its not as tweakable as the canons by a long shot. And the funny thing is, it really doesnt need to be tweaked as muhc as the A1.. Persoanlly i prefer the colour out of the DVX/HVX much moreso than the A1. Its richer, more vibrant and requires less Post work

As for the camera of choice, look to ur budget and see what fits

essami wrote on 12/23/2007, 6:43 AM

>Essami said ">couple of things.. for adapters, once you push the A1 @ full tele, you may feel that you dont even need it.. trust me on that one..."

cheno: I didnt say that, that was a quote from DJPadre.

Sami

Jessariah67 wrote on 12/23/2007, 11:17 AM

Thanks for the input thus far.

"Sharp" picture actually wards me off, as I prefer a softer look.

As for renting vs. owning - I'm not in a big city, so renting is not an option. And I will use the camera enough to warrant paying.

I agree about going full tele to get the shallow DOF. It's sheer physics, and there's no way you're ever gonna get close on a 1/3" sensor vs. a 35mm adapter GG. Again, what I'm looking for is almost the opposite of what a lot of people love about hi-def. I want a very filmic, "movie" look out of my new rig. It sounds like, based on the feedback thus far, the HVX is the better choice - for what I want.

Thanks again.

K

Coursedesign wrote on 12/24/2007, 2:35 PM

Just to add one more thing in favor of owning a camera (if you're the DP):

using the heck out of it so you truly know it allows you to know how it will "see" all kinds of scenes without major guess work or testing or OMG!!!'s in post.

It's easy to make a sharp picture less sharp with say a Black Pro Mist filter, or just doing it in post.

Making a low resolution picture more sharp is another problem altogether, and what is doable depends on the contrast of what you shoot.

The HVX is quite a bit lower res, but it is certainly no worse than shooting 16mm, and as far as the "filmic" bit it has that nailed when it comes to color rendition.

However, don't forget that you can get a Factory Refurb Canon XH A1 for half of the cost of the best deal on a Panny HVX200 ($2,450 vs. $4,900).

The $2,450 difference would buy you a full 35mm GG adapter and some lenses...

Jessariah67 wrote on 12/24/2007, 9:10 PM

After the DOF is taken care of - yes, you can do a lot to fix the picture in post - but the audio is also a concern of mine. Not a whole lot in a "no-budget" scenario for extensive ADR ( for one who wants the audio attached to the video).

I operate my own gear - not cuz I want to be a DP. but because I HAVE to be my own DP in low-budget land...

The price diffrence is a factor, too. Part of my problem is weighing my familiarity (and love) for Canon vs. the history the film industry has with Panasonic.

Maybe I'm just thinking about al fo this too much (that motion you see is my wife's hand launching into the air...)

K

Goji wrote on 12/26/2007, 9:54 AM

Course,

Can you give a source for factory refurb xh-a1

Thanks!

overyonder wrote on 12/26/2007, 10:48 AM

What does anybody think about the current problem Vegas 8 has in handling HD from the XH-A1? See nearby thread on these issues. Is this all of you or just a few people?

Coursedesign wrote on 12/26/2007, 3:44 PM

Can you give a source for factory refurb xh-a1

It was either Bel Air Camera or Samy's Camera, and they even paid the 8.25% sales tax...

daryl wrote on 12/26/2007, 8:49 PM

The HD problem from the XH-A1 to v8 is real, but I have been assured that Sony is aware of the problem and will get it worked out. I have used the 3rd party capture for HD out of the A1 and it works fine, but naturally it will be better when V8 can handle it. The XH-A1 has been superb in my first couple of shoots with it, I am VERY happy with the camera.