24P and HDV

I'm fully aware of the capabilities of both the AG-DVX100A and the HDR-FX1, but I've never had the pleasure of shooting with the DVX100A before. And when I shot with the FX1, the time was limited and I didn't really get to play with many of the features. I, like many others, am trying to get the ever elusive "film look" from video, and to that end I've narrowed my selection down to these two cameras. I don't plan on going to film for any of my stuff at this point, but I might consider it down the line. They're both in my price range, and the only real setback for the FX1 for me, is the lack of XLR ins. But I'm not against getting an adapter either. So we'll see.

What I'm wondering now is if anyone out there has had the chance to work with both of these cameras. I've read that the FX1's 1080i combined with the CineFrame24 mode is a better looking option than the DVX100A's true 24p shooting mode. I guess I'm kind of looking to see if anyone can support/disprove that. Anyway, if you have any info on the subject I'd appreciate it if you could share.
 
That FX1 is a beautiful camera. I love the look of it. But its a first Gen. Sony is already coming out with other models. And there is now 3 or 4 single CCD HD camcorders out there. But the FX1 is the first true 3CCD with brilliant colors. I've seen it come down in price, too. Its already 3100 bucks at Frys (If I remember correctly) which is down 500 bucks from its first release. And Im sure you can get 1 for around 1500 bucks online, though Im sure its a refurb.
 
Never worked with either camera, but we've had tremendous success with the XL-2 in 24p advanced. "Film look" is not something that is accomplished by a camera. It helps having an incredible DP. The most expensive HDV camera in the world can't make up for poor lighting and composition. The XL-2 comes with 2 XLR inputs. Here's the short we entered in the Horror short contest this week. It was shot on the XL-2 and had a lot of very careful thought and planning into how it was lit and shot:

http://www.fulvew.com/talkingdead/talkingdead2.mp4
 
I've seen footage shot on all of the cameras mentioned and even have done side by side tests with the same subjects and lighting and hands down the XL2 I thought had the best filmlook. It's hard with so many options out there but I really did my homework and I love the results. The FX1 has a great picture but it looks like video even with the cine look. It has an annoying lag or stuttered look to the cine mode and is really distracting. The only other camera that comes close to the XL2 is the DVX100a. It has a great film mode and has XLR inputs on it as well. The down side for me was that the lenses are not interchangeable. I like using the PS mini 35 mount on my XL2 so I can use "real" lenses. I find it just gives you more creative options and a more professional look. However when the budget is tight the 20X zoom lens that comes with the XL2 is pretty stunning. You do get some interesting flares when shooting into bright sources and it is intensified when the image stabilizer is in use so use flags whe you can. So I hope that helps.
And happy shooting.
 
Believe me, I'm all for the XL2. It's just a little much for what I have in mind. I have no need at all for interchangable lenses or the bulky size. Not to mention the extra $2000 involved to own one. I would just go out to a camera shop and compare the two, but I don't live anywhere near one. So, anybody else who's played with both want to take a shot?
 
I have a DVX. Great little camera.

These are the benefits and downsides as I see it:

NOTE: I consider progressive scan to be a plus. Some may disagree with that assessment. Interlaced video is slightly better for shooting in dark conditions due to "row pair summation" though.

NOTE2: I try to be objective but do note that I own a DVX not an FX1. FWIW.

DVX

+ True 24p
+ Progressive scan
+ Very nice gamma settings
+ 7 stops of latitude (!)
+ XLR
- Not HD
- 4:3 aspect ratio

FX1

+ HD
+ Takes up no more room on a hard drive than standard definition video
+ 16:9 aspect ratio
- Interlaced
- MPEG2 at 25mb/s*
- Takes a faster processor to edit due to it's MPEG encoding
- No XLR
- Approx 5 stops (roughly) latitude

Your choice really depends on whether you want or need HD. Everything else, IMO, is in favor of the DVX (save perhaps the 16:9 issue). If you want cheap HD though the FX1 is the best deal around.

If anyone else sees something I left out feel free to comment!

My opinion is that the FX1 is great at what it's designed for but due to the necessary compromises of putting HD onto a DV tape the image quality suffers. There are those who say going from HD to SD provides a sharper image. I've pondered the topic myself and have run personal tests. As far as I'm concerned that claim is bogus. These are the benefits and draw backs as I see it:

Downsampling:

+ Helps hide compression artifacts
- Very high chance of being softer than native SD footage. Any time you have to take several points of data and merge them into one via estimation you run the risk of softening the image.

SD

+ No need to resample the image. You get pixel for pixel accuracy.
- Compression artifacts are as they come. It should be noted that HDV generally has more artifacts than DV though.

If at all possible get your hands on both of these cameras. I strongly recommend it. I can offer my opinion but when it comes down to it, you need to judge quality with your own eyes. Things I consider issues may not bother you.
 
Last edited:
Ok. I wasn't trying to sound miffed or anything. But you said you've seen the cameras in question side by side. And now that you know that I don't want the XL2, which of the other two had the better film look? And which of those two would you recommend?

I mean, it looks like I'm either going to have to get the FX1 with an adapter for XLR, or I'm going to have to get the DVX100A with an adapter for true 16:9. There's no getting around that either way. And I'm ok with that. What I'm stuck on past that is the long term value of each. I plan on sticking with whatever I get for at least the next five years. As such, I'm wondering if the FX1 might be the better choice. Keep in mind that I don't own an HDTV, and of all the people I know, I only have one friend that does. But how soon will it be before we all have them? If they're a few years away from becoming the norm wouldn't getting the FX1 now give me a heads up on HD widescreen TVs?
 
Well I guess If you choose between the two and Want the "film" look that looks the best I would choose the DVX100a. The FX1 has a really great Video look and that's it. As far as your audio is concerned. Every professional audio guy I have ever worked with prefers to go line-in on the cameras and don't like using the XLR inputs. They say that they can hear a difference and I have to believe them because I'm not a professional sound man so I have no grounds to believe differently. As far as having this camera for the next five years and looking to the future your out of luck. The technology now is changing so rapidly that by next year at this time you could have your dream camera come out on the market in your price range. You can't purchase a camera and expect it to be a work horse for more than two years. There are so many new products this year alone, especially with panasonic's new P2 camera that shoots true HD and 24p as well as vari-cam modes that offer true in camera slow-motion as well as several other fun features.

You can't wait around forever either for the next great thing. I know it's a tough decession but ultimately you will have to choose what you feel is the best product for all your needs.


I would also suggest checking out deals on Ebay. You may be surprised at what you may find as far as cameras go.
 
There are another couple of factors that I thought of last night. First, assuming I got the FX1, could I not just shoot in HDV and then deinterlace or use software to make it into some hi-res 24fps footage? If I can, then why pay the same amount of money for a strictly SD camera?

Also, in order to edit HDV, what kind of upgrading would I have to do to my computer? And would I have to get an HD monitor as well?

I currently run Adobe Premiere on a 2.6Ghz Athlon-based PC with 1.5GB RAM, (motherboard came with on-board FireWire), a 480w power supply, and a GeForce 6800GT video card.

Oh, and speaking of dream cameras, when is this new HD24p Panasonic camera (AG-HVX-200) going to be available? And will it cost around $3000 by next summer? Do you think I should hold out for that one? Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Yes you can convert interlaced to 24p. The real difference is image quality IMO. Is HD worth a sacrifice in dynamic range and artifacts? Only you can decide that (which you can really only do by trying each camera out). What one persons considers unacceptable is just fine for another or a different use.

The HVX will not be anywhere near 3K. :) We're looking at 6K for the camera body and 10K for a package which includes the P2 recording media.
 
Well, I've been digging for clips taken with the FX1 and I'm really blown away by the quality. When I watched them, I wasn't even thinking "Film or video?". I was just saying "wow". I'm still going to have to play with them together and make up my mind, but at this point, the FX1 is looking mighty sweet.
 
DammitJanet said:
Thanks, but that doesn't really answer my question. Anybody else?

Umm... Basically I was saying you might want to wait for the second Generation of HD camcorders to come out before thinking of which one to buy.

The AG is a bit dated. there is a new AG100B coming out which I believe is HD. Clearly it will be better then the FX1. Again, a first Generation HD camcorder in the prosumer range.

Newer HD cams are coming out with 1080p at 24fps.

I was tired when I answered.

And as Shaw mentioned. AG100 not a true anamorphic camcorder.
 
DJ: Sounds like the FX1 might be the camera for you then.

Mr. Goldfish: The DVX100B is still a SD camera. It just adds a few enhancements to the current 100A model. Panasonic plans on selling them for some time still to come so the camera isn't dead quite yet.

Panasonic does have a first gen HD camera called the HVX200 coming out by the end of the year though. It'll be expensive but it will have quite a few nice features.
 
DammitJanet said:
Well, I've been digging for clips taken with the FX1 and I'm really blown away by the quality. When I watched them, I wasn't even thinking "Film or video?". I was just saying "wow". I'm still going to have to play with them together and make up my mind, but at this point, the FX1 is looking mighty sweet.


Buy it then. if you have 3700 bucks to blow on it. its a beautiful camcorder. its huge and isnt easy to hold for long periods of time.

The picture doesnt look filmish. alot of people acquire that look in post production.
 
Back
Top