You may want to check this out. This guy wrote a better article than I could ever hope to...
http://dvxuser.com/articles/shoot3/
The review was written in June, prior to Canon announcing their HDV camera.
I am considering buying a nice camera. Shooting actual film is simply not an option financially, so I'm gonna stick with video.
The supposed best video camera for independent film making is the Canon GL, or Canon XL. I looked into it and can't understand why.
The Sony HDR-HC1 HDV 1080i Handycam? Camcorder has better specs all around in comparison to the Canon XL2, and costs less than half! Plus it's high def!!
Am I overlooking something?
Here's the Canon Specs:
<a href=http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=165&mode lid=10350>Canon</a>
<p>
Here's the Sony Specs:
<a href=http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/eCS/Store/en/-/USD/SY_DisplayProductInformation-Start?CategoryName=dcc_DICamcorders_HighDefinition Video&ProductSKU=HDRHC1VGSKIT1&TabName=specs&DCMP= CNET_DF>sony</a>
Possible reasons that the XL2 costs more could be:
The XL looks cooler
The XL has a bigger better viewfinder
The XL has cinema options
What I'm wondering is, if I buy the Sony for half the price of the Canon, will I actually be getting better quality video? O r is there some catch like the Sony is somehow a one chip camera?
I don't care about cinema controls, or stuff like that, because I can do that in post. Am I right about this or is there something I'm missing.
You may want to check this out. This guy wrote a better article than I could ever hope to...
http://dvxuser.com/articles/shoot3/
The review was written in June, prior to Canon announcing their HDV camera.
Im quite curious how the HDV Canon XL H1 will fare. I like canon but everything I've seen of HDV looks really naff.
So basically I should get a Panasonic DVX100...
I don't know if the camera I was talking about is interlaced, but I definitely want something that records progressive. If the DVX [seems like it] is better, I might as well go with that. The video examples on that review do make me want high def though. I just hate interlaced video. I dunno, whaddya think?
Is progressive video worth sacrificing quality, or should I just deinterlace in Vegas and hope for the best?
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Not necessarily. You should get the camera that's right for you. If you really want the resolution of HDV, get the Sony. Personally, I like how the greens come through on the outdoor daylight shots with the Canon, but the author makes a good point about the dynamic range on the Panasonic. Something else to consider is your final delivery format. I've read in a few other forums that when HDV is dumbed-down to SD, the sharpness of the resulting images is VERY close to high-end miniDV camcorders like the DVX-100 and the XL2. If that's true, then there really isn't an advantage to shooting HDV unless you're delivering a HiDef product.Originally posted by The Imaginable Sean Moss:
So basically I should get a Panasonic DVX100...
Also, the comparison I posted above uses Sony's flagship HDV camera, not the HDR-HC1. Here's a review of the camera you referenced in your original post.
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content...HC1-Review.htm
The camera you were talking about in your original post looks like its interlaced only, and lacks a lot of the manual in-camera tweaks you can perform on the XL2 and the DVX-100. If progressive video is important to you, consider the Canon or the Panasonic.
Of course having said that, we shot a short thriller on a Sony PD-150 last year and deinterlaced the footage to create a frame-based MPEG for the DVD. Even though resolution was lost when we deinterlaced the footage, I thought it still looked good on a standard definition TV and on the "big screen" when it was projected at a local film fest.
Spend a bit more money and go for the Panasonic AG-HVX200. True HD for around ?5K (my estimate).
http://panasonic-broadcast.com/index...D=69&PID=11481
HDV is not HD....
If you want HD in a camcorder then you need to go to Panasonic.
Good Luck
To be honest, the only reason the HDV interested me was because the still on that review looked sharper> I'm guessing though, that if I were to deinterlace footage from the HDV I would lose clarity. Especially during movement, and considering how opposed I am to steady cam or tripods, it would be bad. I think I'm going to look into the Panasonic DVX 100, it just seems like a better fit for me. All of the in-camera options don't interest me too much, I can do almost anything in post...
So, if I may ask another question, I had seen the $2000 price tag on the Sony HDR, and figured that the effective pixel range blows the XL2 away! However, I now realize that I need something different.
What I am looking for is anything that is 3CCD, records progressive, and has a higher resolution than a normal consumer camera.
Is there anything more affordable than the Panasonic DVX? Or is it the bottom line as far as what I'm looking for?
Thanks again, I know I'm like a little kid with the questions, but I do appreciate it.
As someone who is also confused regarding HDV these are some of the questions I would want answered before investing in an HDV camera:
</font><ul type="square">[*]<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Will I be able to edit it? I ask this because there was some discussion on various sites about a low cost HDV camera whose footage you could not edit.</font>[*]<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">If I can edit will I have to upgrade my computer? I currently have Final Cut Express. I think there is a Final Cut Express HD but it requires a G4. An upgrade to G4 would cost me another $1,000 to $2,000.</font>[*]<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Can I view it on my NTSC TV or will I need to invest in a HDTV monitor at a cost of $500 to $5,000.</font>[*]<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Can I distribute it on VHS or DVD in standard definition? According to the FCC less than 10% of households in the U.S. have HDTV, and I think the FCC is being optimistic.</font>[/list]<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
HDV can be edited now using various editing software. Premiere Pro 1.5.1, Canopus Edius, Liquid Edition, Vegas (although I'm not sure) and Final Cut Pro 5 all will edit HDV. This isn't in real-time though, so it may be a slightly slower process than you're used to.
You'll also need a powerful computer. I think generally the minimum on a PC is something like a 3.2GHz P4 and a gig of ram.
If you want to look at what you editing on a monitor it will need to be HD ready, like many of the plasma TVs available now. In some configurations you can downconvert the output to SD to view on a normal monitor or TV, but this involves requiring extra computer hardware. Although, I believe you can use an Apple Cinema display connected to the second monitor output on an apple to view the video output.
You can down-convert the video to SD for VHS or DVD.
Because there is no way to give you client or customer a HD DVD yet is there really much point toing for HDV yet? Unless you're desperate for a camera I'd wait a year or so yet.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks