Can somebody with actual experience recommend a DV camera?

[JDex]

I have had nothing but love for the Canons... they are great. Aim for that XL1... it's great to have interchangeable lenses.

[visualboo]

Oh and wheres the best place to buy these?

[alphatron]

Hey visualboo. I've used all three and more in various productions. Right off the bat I'd scratch the GL2. Image quality is not as good as the GL1, and the camera is less sturdy (there's a reason why its cheaper).

I own a VX2K and it's done me right through thick and thin, incredibly durable and great image quality. Same can be said for the XL1, with the added boon of interchangeable lenses. But don't let its progressive scan mode sway your decision. It's a fake progressive scan, that actually results in considerable resolution loss on the green CCD.

My personal recommendation is the Panasonic DVX100. I shot my last short film with it and i think its a real beauty. Amazing lens, and lens controls (all zoom and focus settings have an exact numerical figure in the LCD, allowing for amazing control when doing focus pulls). XLR inputs, really wonderful CCDs, and of course, the ability to shoot in 24p (standard and advanced) and true 30p as well. It's also one of the only prosumer DV camera that actually lets you have some control over the gamma curve, so for instance, instead of the standard DV look (clipped blacks and harshly clipped highlights) you can change it to Cinelook and Cinegamma mode, having a more gradual curve, giving more detail throughout your shadows and highlights. You get an unsurpassed amount of control over the image quality via the menus. The camera body is admittedly not quite as sturdy as the VX2k, but it's by no means flimsy, such as the GL2.

So the DVX100 gets my vote, and has actually just received a price cut across North America, now selling for just under $3000 in some stores.

[Hugh]

It may be slightly above your price bracket, but if you can afford it, I'd definately recommend the Sony PD-150 to anyone - it's the step up from the VX2000 (I think it's just one step up - may be more, though) and is a great camera.

The XL1S is also a great camera, apart from one small problem with the lens that comes with it....: It doesn't hold focus properly. What I mean is that if you (as many people do) zoom in to focus and then zoom back out again, you'll find it's gone very slightly soft. Now, if you were to get a different lens, then this wouldn't be a problem for you at all, but I do feel I have to point it out.

I have experienced this myself (with an XL1, but the lenses are the same I believe) and a guy I used to work for bought an XL1S and actually ended up taking it back (and getting a PD-150) for exactly this reason.....

Edit: Didn't read all of alphatron's post before posting mine - I've never used the Panasonic camera that he's recommending (the only Panasonic camera I've had experience with is the NVGS70B, which is the lowest-end 3-CCD camera that they do...), but it does look like a pretty stunning camera (check out this page (http://www.panasonic.com/PBDS/subcat/Products/cams_ccorders/f_ag-dvx100.html)) and if I were looking for a camera, then I'd definately look at it.


However, if I really had my pick of the cameras, I'd probably go for this one (http://bssc.sel.sony.com/Professional/webapp/ModelInfo?m=0&sm=0&p=2&sp=19&id=62139) (unfortunately, the $100,000 price tag might just deter some people.....)

[alphatron]

Hey Hugh,

While I agree the PD-150 would make an overall better choice. I think if price is an issue than the extra features such as XLR inputs, timecode control, and independant gain control are not really worth the price premium, especially if visualboo is more beginner to intermediate.

One of the other reasons I suggested the DVX100 is the true progressive scan support. I'm assuming visualboo will be bringing some of his footage into post, and the plus of having non-interlaced footage for effects, keying, and roto really make a big difference.

Btw, I almost rented the Cinealta for my film .. but backed out at the last minute because of the price.. I went with the DVX100 instead.

[Hugh]

Originally posted by alphatron
While I agree the PD-150 would make an overall better choice. I think if price is an issue than the extra features such as XLR inputs, timecode control, and independant gain control are not really worth the price premium, especially if visualboo is more beginner to intermediate.

Fair enough - being in UK, I sometimes forget about the price conversion, and I saw $3000 for the DVX100 and mentally made the connection that that was around the same price as £3000 for the PD-150 (£3000 is actually approx $4800)

One of the other reasons I suggested the DVX100 is the true progressive scan support. I'm assuming visualboo will be bringing some of his footage into post, and the plus of having non-interlaced footage for effects, keying, and roto really make a big difference.

I do understand - I'm not sure what the PD-150 offers in terms of progressive scan - we shot our film in interlaced mode (not entirely sure why, though....) and all I can say is thank god for Digital Fusion's fields tool! Okay, so you have to roto twice as many fields, but it's better than trying to get good results with interlaced frames!

Btw, I almost rented the Cinealta for my film .. but backed out at the last minute because of the price.. I went with the DVX100 instead.

Mmmm... nice - I'd love to get my hands on a Cinealta - at work I've seen bits of the online for an HD project (don't know what cameras they used, though) and the detail is so sharp... The project is a huge gig that happened over here a few months back (Robbie Williams @ Knebworth) and there are some shots of the audience where you could still recognise people's faces (the whole shot looked like one of those 'baked beans' pictures!)

I'm hoping to do my next film (or the one after) on HD - I'm really looking forward to seeing how that all comes out!

[visualboo]

Nice, thank you guys so much for the help.

I'll deffinitely look into the panasonic, but I'm confused... the GL2 is less than the GL1 and not as good? I thought they worked some bugs out of the 1 and that's the reason for 2.

Can someone recommend a good/cheap place to buy these?

Hey what do you guys think about the JVC JY-HD10U?

[Hugh]

I don't know about the GL1 and GL2, but I did look into the XM1 and XM2 (the step down from the XL1) a while back...

When the XM2 came out, the XM1 was taken off the market. The XM2 was also marked as cheaper than the XM1, as it was still using a slightly older design.

I'm not sure why the GL2 is worse than the GL1 - although I hope this explains (in my mind anyway) why it might be cheaper...

Can't help with the JVC, I'm afraid - my experience with prosumer camcorders has mainly been with Canon/Sony ones, with a little bit of (lower-end) Panasonic thrown in for good measure...

[alphatron]

Hey Boo, They did work out some bugs, but the actual image quality and amount of features is LESS than the GL1, which is why it's cheaper. It is also not as sturdy as the GL1, and is manufactured out of cheaper parts, and the GL1 wasn't so resilient to begin with.

Regarding the JVC. Main thing to note is that it is a single CCD camcorder. When going up against 3-chip cameras, there is a noticable difference in terms of color clarity and definition. I've read about tests with the HD10U beside the VX1000, 2000, and XL1, and the JVC wasn't even up there in terms of color compared to the VX1000. It also severely lacks the more professional controls of the Panasonic, Sony, and Canon prosumer models. You really don't get much control, and cannot fully manually operate the camera. Another big minus is that you are basically paying $500USD extra for the HD10U (pro model) over the HD1 (the consumer model), solely for the fact that they turn off edge sharpening in the software pro model. The amount of sharpening in the HD1 makes successful post processing very difficult. This is something that should be accessable by menu, not added on aas a $500 premium. However, this only really applies in terms of shooting in NTSC. If you are going to be doing HD productions, the JVC is really your only affordable choice. Beware, there are very very few viable and efficient editing options with the HD footage from the HD10U.

[visualboo]

Yeah I figured there would be some snags with the JVC. I haven't really read anything about it yet except the ad in millimeter.

[JCGA]

We're shooting a short film with my XM-1 at the moment and it has never let us down. Great images and easy operating in a small package which makes it perfect for shooting in crowded places since it doesn't attract attention all that much. Also, the frame (progressive) mode makes post processing so much easier.

I highly recommend it. :thumbsup:

I can mail you some footage stills if you're interested.

[Amyd]

Originally posted by alphatron
Another big minus is that you are basically paying $500USD extra for the HD10U (pro model) over the HD1 (the consumer model), solely for the fact that they turn off edge sharpening in the software pro model.

Hmmm, when I demoed the unit, JVC mentioned that HD1 (which I didn't get to see) doesn't have XLR inputs, it has a smaller-res viewfinder, a couple of missing pro features like the color bar generator and the audio level display and yes, the sharpening issue.

Did they change their plans in between? Cause otherwise the $500 USD don't seem all that much, especially for the XLR inputs, imho.

Cheers,
Andrei

[Cathy]

I've been using the Sony VX 1000 (The VX-2000's Daddy) for a few years now and I'm very happy with it. I'm an indie filmmaker and also have taught nonlinear editing and motion graphics for the University of California. All my editing and FX are done with Adobe products in a cross platform studio. The Sony's never given me a problem.

[Hugh]

As a point of interest, I heard last week that Avid systems (everything from Xpress DV upwards) can have a problem with footage shot on Sony DV cameras... in that if you need to re-conform something, the timecode can be slightly out...

This was mentioned by two people at work, and I was wondering if anyone else had come across this?

[alphatron]

Amyd,

The XLR inputs on the HD10 aren't shielded, so you're basically just going through an XLR to mini converter. The viewfinder is higher res yes, but the other features such as color bars and IRE setup, and audio meters should all be accessible through menus, not as a premium, especially when similarly and lower priced prosumer cameras have them.

Hugh, I've been using Sony DV cams for years with avid Xpress DV and have not once encountered a problem, in fact, the only problems I've had with XDV are with Canon cameras.

[dg]

I would recomend Canon XL-1s or Sony PD-150, they are both great, but Sony have some advantages like the capability of working with DVCam and DV tapes, and a more robust body then the XL-1 which is kinda fragil, and some other points, at least is what I think.

See ya! 8)

[Amyd]

Originally posted by alphatron
The XLR inputs on the HD10 aren't shielded, so you're basically just going through an XLR to mini converter. The viewfinder is higher res yes, but the other features such as color bars and IRE setup, and audio meters should all be accessible through menus, not as a premium, especially when similarly and lower priced prosumer cameras have them.

True, but it is included in price, and the Pro Pad is quite convenient in the way it mounts. It also doesn't supply phantom power, btw. so it is very clear JVC isn't prepared to go all the way with the HD10U.

The other prosumer lower priced cameras don't do HD, so I guess JVC feels pretty safe in their decisions, for the moment. Anyway, I am sure once HD1 gets more widely available and used, you'll see the usual firmware hacks to enable the software features of HD10U (if they are not already available as we speak).

The bottom line is that the quality of HD10U, even in HD, is so bad that I fail to see why anyone would buy it, even for HD shooting, given the price and the quality of the other SD DV camcorders. But...

Cheers,
Andrei

[Hugh]

Originally posted by alphatron
Hugh, I've been using Sony DV cams for years with avid Xpress DV and have not once encountered a problem, in fact, the only problems I've had with XDV are with Canon cameras.

That's good to hear - I've never had a problem myself (but I've never had to re-conform a project) - that said, I do trust both the people who told me that it could cause problems, so I'll make sure I'm careful when I do have to do it......

[xzevlin]

If you want to see clips from the HD1 and HD10U, check out this thread over at Dvinfo.net

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14422

I was really skeptical of the camera when I heard it was a one chip, but I'm considering buying it now. A few of the other manufacturers are supposed to support the HDV format in the future, so maybe by NAB we'll see some new affordable HD cams.

[alphatron]

Hey Elvis,

I'd hold off on buying this model. I'd wait for JVC's second gen one, or Sony/Pana/Canon's try at it. My little test with it left me with a lot of negative feelings, much the same with a lot of the rental shops I've talked with who were considering renting it. It's not really the format that's the problem, it's the camera. Let me know if you need any specifics.

Editing is another story. Firstly, you are not going to want to edit in the supplied app from JVC, it's useless. You also aren't going to want to edit in mpeg format, it's an awful format to cut with and unusable for post production. Great acquisition format, bad for everythign else.

So basically, you'll first need to capture all your footage as m2t files, then using the only available app for conversion, convert it to Lossless YUV format. You then - using a plugin by the same company - need to edit the YUV video files with Premiere 6.5 (only supported app). You also need a P4 to use this plugin, as it is SSE2 dependant.

Lots of trouble.

[Amyd]

Yes, I agree completely with alphatron regarding the problems with the camera. In fact, I would say they are pretty obvious even from the examples posted on the web, especially regarding the compression artefacts (they were visible even on the HD monitor I had the JVC hooked up to when demoing), but also the low-light behaviour (I disliked the way JVC implemented the chroma reduction), dynamic range (heavy clipping even with careful exposure) & so on and so forth (including complaints about the lens, btw.).

Regarding editing you can convert the M2T files to the format of your choice, not necesarilly lossless YUV - they are pretty standard MPEG2 streams, any decent decoder should be able to handle them. But that is an extra step, granted, and time consuming.

Cheers,
Andrei

[xzevlin]

It's editable right now in Vegas Video with no extra plugins. I've played around with stringing some of the m2t clips I downloaded and it's a bit slower than realtime on my system, but it works.

By the time I have the money saved up, the next generation will probably be out anyway :p I'll wait until NAB to see what happens with the other companies, but I want to shoot something relatively soon, and shooting at 720x480 just seems pointless when everything is going HD.

Where did you try the camera, Alpha?

[alphatron]

Hey Elvis,

Another reason not to edit in native M2t format is the whole I Frame issue. If Vegas can open them, I'd immediately convert them all to a lossless YUV codec (keeping it YUV is a big plus). Something like Camstudio, Huff YUV or Avid's codec.

This will interest you:

http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/200307/03-0704E/

This being the case.. just wait a few more months and you'll start seeing similar (and probably much better) products from Canon and Sony. Also remember the HD1 only has a 90 day warranty, and is extremely fragile. Sony cams however are usually very sturdy. I'm personally a little upset that 24p is not in the spec.

I'm betting Panasonic has something of their own up their sleeve, as is always the case.

Edit: I was also very unimpressed with the video clips you linked to. Ignoring the lighting conditions and the way they were shot, the artifacting was very strong. Colour detail was also lacking. And considering these are the native m2t files, it can't get any better. Definitely wait for Sony and Panasonic's offerings.

[alphatron]

This is the link to the company that makes the m2t conversion and realtime playback codec plugin for premiere 6.5.

http://www.cineform.com/products.html

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.