Premium Member drew_town Posted March 11, 2005 Premium Member Share Posted March 11, 2005 Hi everyone, As a camera operator which camera (XL2 or HVR-Z1U) would you guys rather shoot on? We'll be purchasing some new cameras soon with a budget of about 10,000 for each camera and its needed accessories (tripods, shoulder mounts and all). I know all about the hd vs. dv thing and the progressive issue, but what I'm more interested in is how these cameras feel when you're out there shooting with them. We'll be doing a mix of documentaries and television-oriented programing (no blown up film stuff, although I much prefer the progressive look). What are these cameras quirks? Also which accessories would you suggest? I know a good bit about the XL2 and will recommend the standard lens and the 16x manual lens. I don't know much about the sony version so any info would be appreciated. I'll post the same topic in the appropriate hd section too to get an even response. Thanks, AT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Landon D. Parks Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 (edited) From what I here using the "Built In" 24p mode in the camera, you will experiance a sort of "Shuttering" effect. Since at 24p you have no control over the shutter at all. Also, it may be HD camera, but it still records to MiniDV tape @ MiniDV 25mbps. Compression will be more detectable also, since your stuffing more onto the DV tape than what it was designed for. Personally, for the ease of use and best features, get an XL2. It may not be "HD", but with the less compression and REAL 24p mode where you can set a 1/48 second shutter speed (Equal to film). Plus the XL2 has all kinds of "Cine" features in it. I Don't know about the Z1. It just depends on what you want, as fare as ease of use, the Canon looks easier to me, plus it has more features right there for you, including the ability to change lenses in the XL series, or with an adapter use Canon Ef Photography lenses. Plus in my opinion, an XL2 looks more professional than the Z1. I can't stand those small "Consumer" looking camera's, It would be like shooting with a consumer camera. :( Just depends on what you want! If you have no plans to blow up to Film, than XL2 will produce a very acceptable image. Edited March 11, 2005 by Landon D. Parks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rik Andino Posted March 12, 2005 Share Posted March 12, 2005 Well you said you like progressive-->than the XL2 is the camera for it THe HVR-Z1u still can't do progressive for some reason SONY is against it But actually Sony is not marketing the camera to filmmakers but videographers... Both cameras provide their differences Obviously the Z1u's footage is superior to the XL2. But like all Sony cameras the Z1u has a complicated menu And the buttons functions are distributed in all the wrong places. They did however find a convient spot to place the exposure knob. The LCD screen is in an interesting position but you can get used to it And if you always shoot with a monitor this is not a problem. The viewfinder sucks but that's not new it always suck on Sony's prosumer cams Overall it takes some time getting used to it--but it ain't astro-physics. If you like the other Sony cams (PD 150, VX 2100, PD 170) you'll like this one. The XL2 is almost identical to the XL1s If you know you're way around the XL1s you'll have no problems It's a pretty straightfoward camera...I like it because of that Both cameras are made for different purposes The XL2 is more of an indie filmmaking or EFP video camera It shoots 24P and 16X9 and has cine features to achieve a more dramatic look The HVR-Z1u is made for broadcasters & videographers It's PAL/NTSC switchable, it shoots HDV & works with all of Sony broadcasting gear However if I were you I'd wait till after the NAB To make any big decisons on camera purchases I hear JVC is coming out with something big And Panasonic might be coming out with something too... The thing about video is: Every six month some friggin company comes out with something new! Makes it so damn difficult to make a decision on what to friggin buy! :angry: Anyways Good Luck :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member drew_town Posted March 13, 2005 Author Premium Member Share Posted March 13, 2005 Thanks for the info guys. Rick that's exactly the info I needed. I don't like sony cameras but our programming is intended for broadcast. We're planning on making a purchase after NAB. I'm trying to compile a list of cameras the engineers need to look at while they're there. Keep the responses coming. I appreciate it. AT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Mark Sasahara Posted March 15, 2005 Premium Member Share Posted March 15, 2005 I don't have any expreience with the Sony. I really like my XL2, 24P, native 16x9, cine gamma. Like Rik said, wait 'til after NAB. I personally hate HDV and think it's a bastard format, faux HD, but that's my opinion. If you want HD, shot with a real HD camera. The other thing is most of the world doesn't have HD yet. The majority of tv's are still SD. Also, you have to down rez the HDV to fit onto a DVD. Look around on some of the forums here and on DVInfo. A friend Produces Town Haul, on A&E and shot with Panasonic SD-X900's. It looks really good and it's 24P. Course, that's a 2/3", 3 chip cam. Check out dvxuser.com, they have a shootout between the DVX100A, XL2 and the Z1U. Did I mention I hate HDV? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member drew_town Posted March 16, 2005 Author Premium Member Share Posted March 16, 2005 Doesn't HDV use Mpeg2 encoding? If so that seems like an aweful high amount of compression for source material. I know it's used on DVD's but I have such a problem with the DV codec I can't image going to a format with higher compression. Is this a reliable format? Would artifacts creep in everynow and then? If you want HD, shot with a real HD camera. It's just not in the budget. We have 10,000 for each camera. We'd be down converting the HD to SD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Mark Sasahara Posted March 16, 2005 Premium Member Share Posted March 16, 2005 From what I here using the "Built In" 24p mode in the camera, you will experiance a sort of "Shuttering" effect. Since at 24p you have no control over the shutter at all. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Don't know about the Sony, but the XL2 and DVX do have a selection of shutter speeds to choose from. When I am in a low light situation and need more light, I'll switch the shutter from 1/48 down to 1/24 on the XL2. It doesn't go any slower, but it does have faster shutter speeds. I think the DVX has slower shutter speeds down to a 15th if memory serves, plus faster speeds as well. The problem with faster shutter speeds is that the image starts to get a more pronounced strobing effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rik Andino Posted March 16, 2005 Share Posted March 16, 2005 Don't know about the Sony, but the XL2 and DVX do have a selection of shutter speeds to choose from. When I am in a low light situation and need more light, I'll switch the shutter from 1/48 down to 1/24 on the XL2. It doesn't go any slower, but it does have faster shutter speeds. I think the DVX has slower shutter speeds down to a 15th if memory serves, plus faster speeds as well. The problem with faster shutter speeds is that the image starts to get a more pronounced strobing effect. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Actually the DVX100 slowest shutter speed is 1/24 of a sec. Just like the XL2. It seems that there's no 1/15th of a sec shutter speed in 24P At least in the prosumer market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aidin Aren Posted April 2, 2005 Share Posted April 2, 2005 Hi, It might be of benefit to also ask people who have used both cameras rather then used one and read about the other. Regardles of what I own my rule of thumb is generally hesitate to make disparaging remarks about a camera unless I have first hand experience. In the small DV camera class and the price points involved I think it's more a decision of what you're willing to compromise. To me, every camera I've used in this category has one or more problems, so what problems matter less to me than others is the question I ask. " including the ability to change lenses in the XL series, " If you have the budget, PS Technik makes a 35mm adapter for the Z1. "THe HVR-Z1u still can't do progressive for some reason SONY is against it" Sony is "against" progressive because with 1080i 1MP CCDS progressive scan would burn up the chips. You're trading off actual 24P for more resolution. In practical visual terms, 6 times the resolution of regular DV. We took 1/6th of a Z1 HDV still and magnified it full screen. It was equivelant to a full screen DV image. And you have an LSI chip version of 24, 25 and 30"fps" look available instead of nothing. "The XL2 is more of an indie filmmaking or EFP video cameraIt shoots 24P and 16X9 and has cine hfeatures to achieve a more dramatic look" The Z1 has 16:9 chips and cine gamma controls (3 presets), if that does the job for you. "It may not be "HD", but with the less compression and REAL 24p mode where you can set a 1/48 second shutter speed (Equal to film)." Less compression on less resolution is not necessarily better than more compression on higher resolution. Z1 lays MPEG2 on tape, it doesn't capture MPEG2. A newly designed Sony HDV codec does that. It is not the DV codec. "Don't know about the Sony, but the XL2 and DVX do have a selection of shutter speeds to choose from." Since Cineframe is DSP you're not dealing with shutter speeds, which allows you to go 1/15, 1/8 and 1/4. Good luck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alvin Pingol Posted April 2, 2005 Share Posted April 2, 2005 We took 1/6th of a Z1 HDV still and magnified it full screen. It was equivelant to a full screen DV image.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> The only real equivalence I can think of here would be in terms of pixel count. What camera did you use for the SD image? It makes a world of difference; I'm pretty sure one-sixth of a frame from a Z1 won't be as sharp as a full frame from an SD camera such as the SDX900, or even your common professional ENG camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith Posted April 2, 2005 Share Posted April 2, 2005 (edited) The Z1e comes with a cine-frame mode, which basically de-interlaces the footage on camera. Halves the vertical resolution, creates strobe effect. You could crush the 1080i footage down to 540 lines and only use the 1st field, but then you would also need to cut the video in half horizontally to turn it back into its original aspect ratio. You would then have a *perfect* progressive scan (no strobe effect or anything like that), although you are losing half the resolution and it takes a lot of messing about. Personally I'd get the XL2. Progressive mode and interlaced at the push of a button, and no messing about. And of course you can swap lenses. With the Z1e you might be able to get wide-angle or telephoto extensions but then quality is lost because you're shooting through two lenses. Personally I'd only recommend the Z1e for interlaced stuff only, and basic stuff at that, since as using other lenses could be trouble. (I don't know if they even DO lenses that fit onto the existing lens) Plus from using similar cameras to the Z1e, it?s not the greatest thing to hold in your hands. XL2 has the size; you can feel comfortable with it, rests nicely agains't your shoulder. I'm not sure if this is the same with the Z1e but one thing I did like was that the controls are so easy to access and use. Edited April 2, 2005 by Daniel J. Ashley-Smith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aidin Aren Posted April 3, 2005 Share Posted April 3, 2005 (edited) The only real equivalence I can think of here would be in terms of pixel count. What camera did you use for the SD image? It makes a world of difference; I'm pretty sure one-sixth of a frame from a Z1 won't be as sharp as a full frame from an SD camera such as the SDX900, or even your common professional ENG camera. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I don't think it'd make much sense to A/B 3, 1/2" CCDs from a Sony 600 or even a Panasonic DVCPRO (25) to 1/6 of an HDV still, it might be fun if nothing else. The camera used was a Sony PD150. The test was performed by techs from Adobe from their Premier Pro division earlier this month. Any such test, I would say, should be done with competitive units in the same class as the Z1 rather than full sized SD cameras. You're right, it was a pixel count issue as far as the amount of pixelation detectable by the naked eye and how close to the border of acceptability the images came. There's always hype spin that goes around when a new camera breaks the mold and one of the main shaky "rumors" with the Z1 is comparing it with the F900. This just doesn't make sense to me but that's a whole other topic which I'm sure anyone interested can find info on. Edited April 3, 2005 by Aidin Aren Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Landelle Posted April 10, 2005 Share Posted April 10, 2005 The Z1e comes with a cine-frame mode, which ...creates strobe effect. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yes, There was a SONY presentation of HDV in Paris last week. The "progressive" mode is not a true progressive scan, you are right. Keeping half of the vertical resolution is theoretically possible, but should require filtering (like any subsampling). You may try this in VirtualDub, but this is not straightforward. I agree with you that Z1 should be used only for interlaced shooting. This is only my opinion :ph34r: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rik Andino Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 Hi, Sony is "against" progressive because with 1080i 1MP CCDS progressive scan would burn up the chips. You're trading off actual 24P for more resolution. In practical visual terms, 6 times the resolution of regular DV. We took 1/6th of a Z1 HDV still and magnified it full screen. It was equivelant to a full screen DV image. And you have an LSI chip version of 24, 25 and 30"fps" look available instead of nothing. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Pardon me but I'm confused... So if 1080i 1MP CCDs can't do progressive scan... How is it that JVC is bringing out an HDV camera That can do progressive scan at 1080i as well as 720p? And Panasonic is coming out with HDV camera That can do 24p too (although that might be 720p). Do they know something Sony doesn't? How about the F900? Although I know that's 2MP...but...? I'm not the most technical saavy person out there... But something just doesn't seem right here? Please explain it to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aidin Aren Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Pardon me but I'm confused... So if 1080i 1MP CCDs can't do progressive scan... How is it that JVC is bringing out an HDV camera That can do progressive scan at 1080i as well as 720p? And Panasonic is coming out with HDV camera That can do 24p too (although that might be 720p). Do they know something Sony doesn't? How about the F900? Although I know that's 2MP...but...? I'm not the most technical saavy person out there... But something just doesn't seem right here? Please explain it to me. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The JVC camera records 720p native. The 1080i is DSP processing, just like the Z1's "24P" is DSP. When the form factor is multiplied to the level of an F900, I think heat is not as relevant an issue, on a comparative scale to a small DV camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now