Hey John,

Thanks for taking the time to explain the differences in DOF.

That's quite a lot between the 35mm and 1/2" chips.

I am considering postponing my shoot till I receive my Reds. It will be difficult to wait, but I am hesitant to spend so much in rental or purchasing a lower cost camera pkg that I will not use after receiving the Reds.

I am really torn if I can wait five months more before continuing preproduction...

I wanted a more intimate feel with a lot of handheld shots like Lost in Translation so if HDV does not handle movement well I might have to scrap the idea altogether.

As far as editing is concerned, yes I agree with what you are saying. Editing, sound mix and music goes a long way in covering up other inadequacies of a piece, like bad story, poor acting and shoddy images. I was a professional editor for five years in my mid twenties when I was making short films, so I learned a few tricks of the trade. Actually, one of the reasons I favor a lot of camera movement is because on a low budget I might come up short on coverage so well executed handheld shots give a lot of leeway in places to cut.

Anyway, thanks for providing more info on the pros and cons of utilizing HDV for a feature shoot...
There are a number of good features done with HDV.

From everything you've said, I'd look closely at the XH-A1. The camera is only part of the expense of getting the camera setup to use.

You could buy the XH-A1, a reasonable price matte box, the Steadicam Pilot and a few little accessories and stilll be under $10,000.

The XH-A1, with its excellent native wide 20x lens is perfect for intimate shooting with the camera moving, either on a Steadicam Pilot or Merlin, on a bean bag on the top of a bar, on a small jib, etc.

The XH-A1 will let you do all kinds of shots not available with a bigger more limited lens.

Used judiciously the auto features of the XH-A1 will come in handy in certain situations. Also, this camera lets you do a lot to setup the picture the way you want.

You'll probably want to spend $500-1000 for a separate sound recording system, so this might figure into your camera budget.

The XH-A1 will also give you an excellent 24 frame progressive.

From what you've said your not looking for a glossy, perfect static Hollywood style that you would need a top-end $100,000 digital camera for.

I believe the XH-A1 is what your looking for.

I have an HD110, with all the accoutrements, and an XH-A1 I am using for a documentary. The XH-A1 solves a lot of problems just being the way it is, and it is the most versatile camera I've every used.

I have an HD110, with all the accoutrements, and an XH-A1 I am using for a documentary. The XH-A1 solves a lot of problems just being the way it is, and it is the most versatile camera I've every used.

You mean you prefer the Canon instead of the JVC?

You mean you prefer the Canon instead of the JVC?
Yes, for the documentary.

The picture quality is equivalent.

However, the Canon is small, has automatic controls, has a wider lens, a longer telephoto, is easier to use in many different ways, will go where the JVC won't, and so forth.

The JVC is great on the shoulder and when you have a big setup.

The Canon is less than half the weight. For example the Canon works on the Steadicam Pilot. The JVC camera needs a much more expensive Steadicam, plus wireless focus, etc.

The JVC is not an intimate camera, the Canon is, with an equivalent picture.

Also, you can steal scenes much easier than you can with the JVC camera.

The Canon is not a shoulder mount camera, though, like the JVC is. But for a feature, you don't need a shoulder mount camera, to my mind, you need a versatile camera that can be rigged professionally for the lowest possible cost.

The JVC camera is over 2 feet long. The wide angle lens is $9000. It's a great lens, but you can get equivalent results with the Canon camera -- for the type of shooting you described -- with the Canon built-on lens.

I went to Europe with the Canon XH-A1, two wide angle adapters, a 35mm SLR with 3 lenses and some other expensive pieces in a Samsonite carry-onn that weighed 15 pounds. This is just one way the Canon is versatile.

You can hang the XH-A1 out the window on a Varizoom flowpod and get fantastic results. Not possible with the JVC camera.

You can go into a working bar, set the Canon camera on the table, and your wired actor can do a little monolog and it will look like he's just talking to you and the camera is resting on the table. Not possible with the JVC camera.

As I said, the pictures are equivalent and they both do great 24 progressive (there are many detailed threads on this) but the Canon camera gives one possibilities the JVC camera doesn't, and I believe the Canon is the opening salvo in a new class of camera -- for the kind of shooting I'm doing with the documentary and what you described.

Choosing camera for any project is strictly related to budget. It may sound trivial, but people often make simple mistakes before they even start shooting. They aim too high, then get seriously limited by technology they choose and at the end of the day they realize some of the scenes on the shotlist have to be skipped.

If budget allows, go ahead and rent top shelf CineAlta, but make sure you have enough for necessary crew, heavy duty accessories (including Steadicam) and for post-production. If budget is in question, choose HDV (XH-A1 and XL-H1 are the best choices imo) with 35mm adapter and work with peace of mind. Sometimes advantages listed in camera specifications actually become obstacles. Choosing between technical excellence on tight budget and HDV with peace of mind, I will go for the latter with no hesitation because artistic value is much more important than technical specs.

--- duplicate message ---