Now that Canon has $3999.00 XH-A1 which camera to buy

[Tim O'Connor]

First off, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa for me committing the sin of cross-posting (I asked this in "video

only" first) but I realized that this is really the place for this question. Thanks.

 

I'm thinking about buying a camera and although I like the HVX-200, I've been leaning towards

the XL-H1. Now Canon is coming out with the XH-G1 ($6999.00) and the XH-A1 for three grand

less (No jackpack.) I'd like the HD-SDI out but for the money I think that I could do well with the

XH-A1 as I get hired to shoot shorts and it looks like a nice camera (and I would want the HD-SDI

out for projects with more money where we could record to an HD XDCAM deck but that won't be

common enough so I figure for those when I rent the deck I'll rent a camera.)

 

I'm sure this has been discussed a lot but I missed those discussions and haven't found everything

in my research although I will continue to search but in the meantime does anyone have any thoughts

on shooting HDV vs. the HD of the HVX-200. How do you weigh the pros and cons of the optics, the

imagers, the different numbers Canon's 1440x1080 vs. the HVX-200 which is less I understand, the 24F

of Canon vs. the seemingly more desirable 24 options of the HVX-200, the GOP of the HDV format vs.

the HD - and thus tape vs. flash cards( or maybe Firestores have diminshed that issue in favor of the

HVX-200) and finally (although I know that this is not a post-production forum) how your projects have

made out in post due to the differences of these two formats?

 

If I need to say it, I'm most interested in using the camera for making great-looking "films" like

everyone else.

 

"The number one question on the internet: 'How do i make video look like film'?"

 

The top three answers: 1. "If you want it to look like film, just shoot film."

 

2. "Never ask this question again. There are a billion pages of archived notes

on this."

 

3. "Hire me."

 

Thanks!

[David W Scott]

I like the look of the A1 very much. The presence of the HD-SDI output on the G1 seems of questionable value to me... if you have to rent a deck, and then be tethered, I'd rather just rent a unified package (say, XDCAM HD camera or Varicam).

 

I think the A1 has the chance to swoop in under the HVX200 and take away alot of business from Panasonic. The HVX200 abandons the price point set by the DVX100, especially when you add up the "system" costs (i.e. P2 cards, Firestore).

 

The real question is: how good is 24F on the Canon? Can it compete with true 24P? Or is it too much of a compromise?

 

Any XL-H1 users with experience on this? Is 24F useable for a film-out? Progressive DVD?

[Thomas James]

I think the Panasonic HVX 200 is the better camera for film making. For action movies the Panasonic has a variable frame rate. For example you can shoot at 48 frames per secound and you can playback at 24 frames per secound for some incredible slow motion action photography. If you try to do this with the Cannon you will have to shoot 1080i at 60 frames per second and go through the hassle of doctoring the footage by deinterlacing in order to convert the footage to progressive.

 

To me interlace cameras are obsolete and the only reason why people buy 1080i cameras is because people think that only 1080i is real high definition because 1080 is a bigger number than 720.

[Tim O'Connor]

I like the look of the A1 very much. The presence of the HD-SDI output on the G1 seems of questionable value to me... if you have to rent a deck, and then be tethered, I'd rather just rent a unified package (say, XDCAM HD camera or Varicam).

 

I think the A1 has the chance to swoop in under the HVX200 and take away alot of business from Panasonic. The HVX200 abandons the price point set by the DVX100, especially when you add up the "system" costs (i.e. P2 cards, Firestore).

 

The real question is: how good is 24F on the Canon? Can it compete with true 24P? Or is it too much of a compromise?

 

Any XL-H1 users with experience on this? Is 24F useable for a film-out? Progressive DVD?

 

GOOD point on the HD-SDI output. I think I could easily use that three grand elsewhere. Yes. I too

would love to hear from you XL-H1 users.

 

 

I think the Panasonic HVX 200 is the better camera for film making. For action movies the Panasonic has a variable frame rate. For example you can shoot at 48 frames per secound and you can playback at 24 frames per secound for some incredible slow motion action photography. If you try to do this with the Cannon you will have to shoot 1080i at 60 frames per second and go through the hassle of doctoring the footage by deinterlacing in order to convert the footage to progressive.

 

To me interlace cameras are obsolete and the only reason why people buy 1080i cameras is because people think that only 1080i is real high definition because 1080 is a bigger number than 720.

 

Interesting because if you would agree that the Canon has a better lens (I don't know, would you?) then

how often are you shooting for a slow motion effect? Yes, maybe overcranking produces superior slow

motion vs. modifying the speed in post BUT you use the lens ALL the time and usually overcrank not

often.

I agree it's great to have but if you use it only 3% of the time, is it worth it, particularly when it goes up

to only 60 f.p.s. which is not bad but if it went up to say 96 f.p.s. then I'd find it offered a lot more.

 

Other than the work involved, how much do you think people will see a difference in slow motion shot at

48 f.p.s. vs. footage modified to a speed of 50%? It's kind of like yeah, I want the jackpack but for

$3000.00 more is it really worth it?

 

Have you shot any HDV 1080 and if so how do you feel it compares to 720/24p with a P2 card?

For that matter how do you feel 1080/24P with a P2 card cpmpares to 720/24P with a P2 card?