Looking at them both I see that a HVX with 2 16gig cards and a 60gig backup for the cards would run about 5200+900+900+1600= 8600 and an XLH1 is just about 8000 so the price is comparable and thats with 32gigs of p2 that can be backed up to a 60gig drive in the field allowing for a theoretical 90 gigs of shooting before needing to back up, which could be done to a laptop and external if needed.

So price out of the way, are there reasons to favor one over the other? Is the panasonic a real 1920x1080 it does not say anywhere I saw so far. I know you can get uncompressed hd out of the XLH1, doubt I ever would, but can you also get it from the HVX through the composite out or is that already a compressed signal?

Is the 24 mode better on the hvx than canons 24F ?

How much better is the P2 standard over hdv?

Can vegas handle the P2 format?

Thanks for any help in deciding.

This is such a loaded question and the answer really depends on what you want to do with the camera.

Is 24p on the HVX better than 24f of the Canon? - Not necessarily.

How much better is the P2 standard over HDV? P2 is a storage medium while HDV is a standard. You can choose to record different formats to P2 while to tape on the Canon you get HDV or DV. DVCPRO HD which the HVX can record to P2 has arguably better specs than HDV but will you see a difference in the real world - depends what you're doing.

Can't help you on the Vegas question but I'd bet the specs can be Googled.

If you don't need uncompressed HD, you could buy 2 XHA1s plus a tripod, mics, lighting, etc. for the same money and potential get a more versatile system than with just one cam.

With this equipment, it's all about the operator.

Is the panasonic a real 1920x1080 it does not say anywhere I saw so far. I know you can get uncompressed hd out of the XLH1, doubt I ever would, but can you also get it from the HVX through the composite out or is that already a compressed signal?

DVCproHD records 1280x1080 in 1080p and 960x720 in 720p. Canon captures HDV to 1440x1080. These are format resolutions and are not indications of true TVLines captured resolution.
HVX has uncompressed analog component out., XLH1 has Digital out.

XL H1 also has uncompressed analog component out.

So the panasonic is interpolating up to get the resolution? But saving a less compressed format. What about the 24 frame mode is it progressive and is there a noticable difference over 24F

I am mainly going to work in 1080 as its the highest output so 720 or sd does not really factor in to my decisions on this.

Thanks.

Chris -- everything mentioned here is really old news that has been discussed countless times before -- nevermind what's interpolated or scaled or downconverted or upconverted. None of that makes a shred of difference. Here's the short version of what you need to know: it's DVCPRO HD recorded on flash memory vs. HDV recorded to tape. It's workflow, ergonomics, form factor, feature set. That's all that really counts.

If you don't need interchangeable lenses, consider the Canon XH G1 instead of the XL H1 because it's $2000 less than the H1 and better in several respects than the H1.

DVCPRO HD recorded to P2 flash memory or HDV recorded to tape. Both are 1080i60, 1080p30 and 1080p24.

Forget 24F vs. 24P, because 24F becomes 24P when it goes into the computer.

Forget about tech specs, resolution, pixels, etc. and get your hands on both camcorders. The one which *feels best* in your hands, is the right camera for you. The one whose image most appeals to you when properly viewed on an HDTV display (not a computer monitor), is the right camera for you. Don't buy anything without holding it in your hands and viewing its video output on an HDTV.

How does the image look on an HDTV? And: workflow, ergonomics / form factor, feature set.

Hope this helps,

I agreed with Chris Hurd in this matter. You have to try out whats best for you. I bought my Canon XLH1 one year ago, but I nearly bought me a HVX because I had some experiance with the DVX camera. The reason I chose Canon was changable lenses as I mostly film wildlife. I think both cameras are great, so after a "hearing" on a norwegian videoforum I went to the store and tried out for myself.

If you don't need interchangeable lenses, consider the Canon XH G1 instead of the XL H1 because it's $2000 less than the H1 and better in several respects than the H1.
True. The H1 should not be compared to the HVX. Apples and oranges.
Form factor and lenses makes more sense to compare the G1/A1.

The thing about the HVX that the other cameras don't have is variable frame rates, so you can shoot slomo. This is nice if you're doing sports. The P2 workflow would be a serious tradeoff for that, however. Also, Chris K mentioned transferring the cards' contents to a hard drive in the field. This would work but only if you have time to do it. It takes quite awhile to transfer all that data.

I usually disdain Ford vs Chevy discussions, but let me put in my 2 cents, since I own both cameras, as well as an A1 and an HPX500.

I trundled along happily with my H1 until a funder specifically requested DVCPRO HD for a long term project I'm making, so I bought the Panasonics.

Personally I very much dislike the "P2 workflow".. I find tape as fast, maybe faster (I make documentaries and I've already shot over 40 hours with the HPX500, which I've only owned for 2 months, so I do have some experience with it). And I miss the tape as backup - I'm already getting tired of filling redundant hard drives...

I do like the HVX/HPX slo-mo capabilities (although there was an article recently on pulling 60fps from Canon 60i HDV footgage). I much prefer the layout of controls etc of the HVX over the A1.. notice I said A1.. because it's true, the form factors are different, and since I handhold, shoulder mount is essential - so back to the H1...

As for image, my impression, which is confirmed elsewhere, is that the Canon at 1080i blows the doors off of everything in it's field, including the HPX, which is twice as much dough..

BUT, the HPX and HVX DO simulate the elusive Holy Grail of "film-look" better than the Canons, if that's important to you - it is occasionally to me - Although the HVX is noisier than it should be (again, confirmed elsewhere by many forums).

And, for your information, in order to save card space, I am shooting DVCPRO HD at 720/24pn, so my resolution opinions are truly apples and oranges - - BUT those are the settings you must use to take advantage of 60fps and keep your file sizes below 1g per minute...

It's convoluted and extremely subjective.. personally I'm amazed by the stunning image that comes from the XL H1, and I love the external swithes to set shooting modes... BUT I like the creamy, albiet lower rez film-like image and the external scene file wheels on the Panasonics, so you don't change settings by accidentally bumping a button (I do that all the time on the H1)...

Oh yeah, and on the Pannys I really miss my favorite of all H1 features, the abilty to manually dial in white balance numbers.. that is extremely useful...

And I've edited HDV on a G5 Quad with a DeckLink card for over a year and was just like editing DV - and not a single drop-out... so dispel that HVX-lover myth forever...

But, unfortunately, I am forced by circumstances to sell my Canons - I wish it made sense to keep them...

I've probably just confused the issue, but it's a confusing issue..

Wow! Great review. so thrilled to see something like that.

Tell me do you have a preference between the XHA1/G1 or XLH1? I hear from several sources that the XHA1 is better in several aspects than the XLH1, would you agree or disagree? I realize that the camera layout on the XLH1 is better in several ways, but the size/weight and fact that I do not like the aperture on a little dial rather than the XHA1 aperture ring style. But I am also looking at another camera and the XLH1 or HVX were the main considerations so while the canon would stay all canon, I am not afraid to have multi systems if there is a benefit in some aspect even at the possible expense of extra work in matching if ever needed.

Stephen Eastwood
http://www.StephenEastwood.com

I hear from several sources that the XHA1 is better in several aspects than the XLH1...Sorry, but the proper comparison to the XL H1 is the XH G1, and not the XH A1.

See my post detailing the advantages of the XL H1 over the XH G1:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showpost.php?p=733562&postcount=5

And my other post detailing the advantages of the XH G1 over the XL H1:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showpost.php?p=733581&postcount=6

Hope this helps,

Thanks Chris, but I am more interested in the HVX vs XLH1 and used as a secondary example the XHA1 since that is what the previous poster had used and has reference to compare it to. I am fairly certain that the XHA1 and G1 have the same quality/features with the genlock, timecode and hd-sdi as the only variable.

But knowing from someone who has worked with and spent some time with all three cameras would be great to hear. Especially when considering that price wise a XLH1 and HVX with P2 cards is roughly equivalent in pricepoint.

I am fairly certain that the XHA1 and G1 have the same quality/features with the genlock, timecode and hd-sdi as the only variable.Yes, and that's exactly my point. The A1 and G1 differ only in those three features: SDI, GenLock and TimeCode. That's why the G1, which has these things, is the proper one to compare with the XL H1, which also has these three things. The A1 does *not* have SDI, GenLock or TimeCode therefore it is not the one to compare with the XL H1.

Especially when considering that price wise a XLH1 and HVX with P2 cards is roughly equivalent in pricepoint.Once again, as has been pointed out above, the proper comparison to the Panasonic HVX200 is the Canon XH G1. Not the XL H1. If you're considering how they equate *only* by price point, then you're turning a blind eye to several other considerations that are just as important if not more so: form factor, ergonomics, workflow etc., and doing a serious injustice to yourself in the process.

Once again: it's still very much an apples to oranges comparison, but it's the HVX200 vs. the XH G1. Not the XL H1. But ultimately what you need to do is get your hands on whichever ones you're considering and try before you buy. That's far more crucial than reading test reports on an internet web site.

The one which feels best in your hands, is the right one for you. Nothing else matters nearly as much -- except perhaps the workflow and the appeal of the image when properly viewed on an HDTV display.

What else is in the same 8000.00 pricepoint and HD that should be considered? It seems there may be some advantages to the HVX not only workflow but quality, or disadvatages to it, just as I see there must be some disadvantages to the XHG1 over the XLH1 which keep them both in the lineup. I have used an XLH1 and XHA1 and dvx100b and on a boom, tripod, jib, crane they are all basically the same, handheld the differ a lot. But assuming no handholding the main differences will be in settings, customization, post workflow, file quality, noise, characteristics of each. Many of these things cannot be fully explored in a brief tryout and I am not a huge fan of buying each and accessories and returning them just because its not easy to find them all in rental, so some real world experience of what people who use them for some time would be great in pointing out, if nothing else little things to try or look for when doing a brief tryout.

its not easy to find them all in rental, so some real world experience of what people who use them for some time would be great in pointing out, if nothing else little things to try or look for when doing a brief tryout. Unfortunately taking the word of a bunch of folks on the internet (like myself) is no substitution for putting these cameras through your own testing.
It sure is easier, but not nearly as good as having them in your hands to see what they can really do.

Many of these things cannot be fully explored in a brief tryout... its not easy to find them all in rental...Actually yes, if you plan carefully and maximize your time, many of those things can indeed be fully explored in a brief tryout. Plus, you're listing one of the biggest cities in the world as your location. All of those camcorders are in fact easy to find in rental. And two of DV Info Net's trusted site sponsors in NYC are B&H and Abel Cine Tech; both of these outfits feature all of these camcorders in a hands-on, try-it-yourself demo area and are staffed by knowledgeable salespersons, so in your particular case it is a relatively simple thing to do.

The more you just read on the internet, the more you'll sink into Analysis Paralysis. That's true even for this site, considering how long it'll take you to read through our database for each camera, because we're so huge. Go downtown and get your hands on this gear. Try before you buy. That's the *only* way you're going to make an intelligent purchase decision.

"Analysis paralysis"--love it. That's almost as good as "measurebators." But it's very true.

I had some hands on time with the HVX200 but ended up with the XH A1. I like the HVX camera but can't make the tapeless workflow work for me.There are lots of things to consider with a camera other than image quality. In fact, I think it's safe to say that all of the 1/3" chip HD cameras are pretty much equal in the images they produce. They're a lot more similar than they are different. So for me it gets down to other factors.

"Analysis paralysis"--love it. That's almost as good as "measurebators." Both terms come from Ken Rockwell, I think. I found them via Robert Lane.

What else is in the same 8000.00 pricepoint and HD that should be considered?

At that price your only other option today is the JVC HD200U, which has a shoulder-mounted form factor with an interchangeable manual-focus lens and records HDV at full 720p resolution to tape. Sometime soon Sony is expected to release their 'XDCAM EX' camera, which will record in the XDCAM HD format to a new type of solid-state memory called 'SxS'. This will be the most direct competitor to the HVX200 and will have some advantages and disadvantages which can't be fully evaluated until shipping cameras and pricing are announced.

As Chris H. said, the best thing you can do is get your hands on the cameras you're interested and test them in person - even if that's only for a few minutes. When I've done this with various HD cameras over the past couple of years I've been quickly able to tell what I do and don't like about each model, most of which are significantly different from each other. If you like shoulder-mounted cameras take a close look at the JVC I mentioned above; if you like 'film look' consider the HVX200; if you want a camera you can use for hours of 'run and gun' shooting I'd recommend either the Canons discussed above or the Sony Z1U.

In regards to the technical question about the resolution of the HVX200, it uses a 960x540 sensor to generate either 960x720 or 1280x1080 pixels of recorded data in the HD modes, and the real-world measured resolution is ~540 TV lines. So the resolution isn't particularly good but the overall 'look' of the images it produces can be quite nice.

Someone up there asked my opinion of the A1.. I'm afraid that, other than some comments posted elsewhere about the fantastic menu options it has (better even than the H1), I don't have much of an opinion because I bought it to use exclusely with the M2 adapter, and have only used it twice on it's own..

I like the HVX control layout better in that regard, and it seems to balance better when handheld, and the LCD is bigger and the info is displayed around the edges and doesn't block the screen as much - And I like the blocky build of the HVX - it reminds me of the old 16mm Mitchell cameras we used in film school back in the late 60's...

But for use with the M2, the A1 is better because you can set focus and zoom into memory so you don't have to dick around with them every time you put the rig together...

As for the A1's image - same as H1 - virtually indistinguishable...

I actually just sold my A1 to my soundman, and he loves it...

Well I guess I need to chime in.

I originally wemt with the HVX because of my previous experience with the DVX100. While I generally liked the features of the XL2, the DVX100 just had that elusive "mojo" that everyone at the time was in love with.

However the HVX disapointed me on several fronts. The one area, that it absolutely rules is the variable speed formats. You just cannot get this with any other camera in it's class....period. If this is important to you....then the HVX is king.

However, I felt very disapointed in the image quality of it. The colors were great but it seemed noisy, and not very sensitive to low light shooting. The DVX100 had stomped the XL2 in sensitivity so I was anticipating this with the HVX, especially with Panny really pushing the whole pixel shift thing as a way to increase sensitivity and latitude over Canon's more dense CCD. The general rule at the time was more pixels packed on a 1/3" CCD meant poor latitude and less sensitivity. That is why the HVX seemed so inviting.

After owning the HVX for 4 months and struggling with the P2 work flow ( I had 2 4gb cards so only 20 minutes at a pop in 720P) I began to feel frustrated with the results. The image, when viewed on my 32" CRT HDTV was just not "wow" HD material. Did it look better than SD? Certainly. Did it look as good Discovery HD theatre? Of course not. But....it wasn;t even in the ballpark to me. I had friends (non measurebators) watch stuff and think it was in SD and ask me if it was HD or not? That was upsetting since I was jumping though virtual hoops to deal with this awkward workflow and not really finding a good payoff in the visuals.

I was able to get a loaner XL-h1 for 3 weeks. I know someone in the industry who hooked me up. Canon was trying to increase awareness of the H1 and put many loaners into dealers hands for customers to sample.

Quite frankly....I was blown away. The difference in the HD image between the 2 cameras was staggering to me (your opinion may vary). It just felt like "wow" HD. Granted the cameras colors were not as filmic as the HVX but the actually clarity if image was stunning. HOw was a camera with this many pixels packed onto a 1/3 CDD able to be so sensitive in low light? Canon had pulled a rabbit out of there hat and broken the general rules regarding CCDs and sensitivity.

Needless to say, I had originally come into this hoping the H1 would not impress me, as I was not financially equipped to make that investment. Despite my "not wanting to like it", it stole my heart! I sold the HVX to a great guy here on DVinfo and made the addittional investment....never regretted it (except the credit card statement!).

Anyway, once you get past all that "image quality" nonsense, the form factor also won me over. I find shooting with the H1 and OIS turned off get's me shots that are equally stable as the HVX with OIS on. The ergonomics and weight just make the camera more stable. Add to this I use the 16x manual lens at least 60% of the time for it's superioir focusing capabilities. Althought this is going to sound lame, you also need to consider how the camera looks. I know, and you know, size doesn't really mean anything to the image quality, but I deal with a lot of clients that pay me the big bucks because I bring in professional looking equipment. Lame....I know....but you have to consider this because it might actually matter to some clients.

Still....all of that being said, I'd love to add an HVX to my arsenal for the times that I need slow mo.....especially for music videos where I can shoot at 26 or 28 frame per second and get that subtle effect that is just not achieveable with the H1.

Peace!

Marty: That's pretty much exactly my opinion and, as a matter of fact, even though I have my H1 for sale, I'm considering not selling it..

One thing of interest... my current project funder, a guy connected with the industry, required 24p for this feature length documentary... and, as I've already mentioned, he requested DVCPRO HD because he had heard many negative reports about HDV (undoubtedly from reading comments by internet gurus and lab techs who haven't actually worked extensively with it)..

My personal working experience with HDV is that it is freaking amazing that you can get so much image quality into a file size that's actually smaller than DV.. Sure, if you look at it frame by frame, you see artifacts - but, come on!!! it continually blows my mind - AND, the long GOP is a non-issue if you handle it correctly (ie, good quality tapes and a card like the DeckLink)...

But here's the other thing. On my current film I have intercut footage from the HPX500 (shot at 720/24pn) and footage from the H1 (shot at 24f) and no one has noticed the difference (I can see it, mainly in color variation - 4.2.2 does mean something - and gamma differences)... I'm working in FCP6, which is amazing in itself - all real time (I do have 6gb of memory)...

Bottom line - I should have lied to my funder, shot with the H1, edited in a 720/24 timeline in FCP6 and never copped to the fact that it originated on HDV.. Then I wouldn't have all these damned harddrives piling up in my office...

I do like the HPX500 though - it's good to have a "real" camera on my shoulder again - even if it is as heavy as a Volkswagon...

Steve,
Did you ever consider shooting and taking the SDI out to some type of DVC-Pro device? I am not an expert at this but I know it is an option. Then you get the better resolution of the H1 CCD block and the superior codec that is DVCpro HD. Right?

..to add to all that I must say that we are really using the timecode and genlock these days. It makes syncing a multicam shoot SOOOO easy.

And if you shoot to a DVCPRO deck you aren't lying!

...SDI out to some type of DVC-Pro device? That device would be a Pansonic DVCPRO HD deck. Or any other VTR equipped with SDI input, including Sony HDCAM decks and other VTRs in a variety of standard definition and high definition formats.

That device would be a Pansonic DVCPRO HD deck. Or any other VTR equipped with SDI input, including Sony HDCAM decks and other VTRs in a variety of standard definition and high definition formats.

Sorry Chris! What I meant to say was SDI out to some kinda of "wavelet" device recording to Cineform or another quality HD codec. Are we getting close to something portable or are we still talking about hauling around a workstation caliber PC/MAC with giant RAID arrays? Personally I helped justify my H1 purchase by knowing that eventually when I outgrow HDV, there should be some other better acquisition device to capture higher quality than HDV....thus adding to the lifespan of my H1. Theoretically.

Marty

I shoot documentaries and just getting the camera and audio gear handled 10 hours a day is enough for me... If I had the time and energy I'd explore other options with the H1, but it would only be for exercise...

I image that there will be many after-market options appearing in the next few years.. I'll wait for the dust to settle though..

Steve,

I hear you. I have no interest in complicating the shooting process either at this point. I guess I was assuming you are shooting a narrative where you can control everything, thus allowing for a different process of ingesting HD without too much additional hassle. I guess if you could shoot on a higher end DVCpro HD camera that would be superior anyway.....but the HVX leaves me a little flat It just doesn't the res and clarity that I look for and that the H1 delivers in spades, especially when compared with higher end cams.

Marty

In my case. shooting with the HPX500 as my "A" camera, I thought I should keep everything in the same stable and got the HVX for shooting in cars and for use with the M2 adapter... And when I need to travel light, I can just take the HVX, matte box, a few filters and my four 16gb P2 cards and get on an airplane - in fact that's exactly what I will be doing in a few weeks, heading to NY and DC...

But, relative to the point of this thread, after a year and a half of shooting with the H1, I wish I was more impressed with the HVX.

To make an increasingly long story short.. if I was told I could have one, and only one, camera, it would be an XL H1 - with the 20x, 16x and 6x lenses - which is, coincidentally, exactly what I have sitting in my locker.

To make an increasingly long story short.. if I was told I could have one, and only one, camera, it would be an XL H1 - with the 20x, 16x and 6x lenses - which is, coincidentally, exactly what I have sitting in my locker.

I have the exact same combination. Exact! By the way, by having these different lenses you aren't really stuck with "1" camera in the traditional sense. Changing lenses drastically changes the feel of the camera IMHO. It is hard to beat as every lens has its positives.

20x-Good overall range. Can zoom and get far shots and with OIS it is very usable. Possibly suffers from some CA or a slight magenta cast in certain situations. Servo focus is sluggish but doable.

6x- The best WA you can get in this class of cameras. 6x still has a decent usable zoom range unlike the previous 3x. Despite the obvious great wide end, this lens is so sharp and pristine it really makes the 20x look bad. In the same focal range the 6x is just superior to the 20x.

16x- while not technically being HD lens, this bad boy also tends to produce better images than the 20x. The focusing control is unbeatable and the lens has an overall more "contrasty" image than the 20x which seems to increase the sharpness some. The lack of OIS is the only real drawback I find when I need to zoom. also this lens is very light in comparison to the 20x and 6x.

My least favorite is the 20x. But I find I use it the most as it seems to fit the scenarios I shoot in the most. A lot of handheld stuff that I have to zoom is saved by the OIS.

Peace!

Yeah, all true - unfortunately I gotta sell mine... but I'm not in a hurry...

Good luck. I wouldn't regret shooting on the HPX500 instead of the H1 in the least. However when it comes to bang for your buck and actually owning the camera the H1 is a bargain for what it delivers.

Peace!

Here are a couple of sample with Canons and the HVX.
Even tho they are in youtube you can see how they look.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQwU3ggEojQ

Here is a Sony, Canon & Panasonic
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeNFuYhEmJg

Sony & Canon
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FimirGcSN_c

What in the world does this tell us about the differences between the two cameras?