I've talked to several people recently who are confident that this will be "the" camera to get when it ships, and are excited to finally see something like this coming. Until it ships there isn't a comparable "the" camera because everything else in this price range has too many drawbacks.

People say that about every new camera that comes out.

The point of my post is that there is no, and likely never will be a single "the camera" to get. Yes, I love the specs of the XDCAM EX, and will probably buy one for cinematic use, if it turns out a more pleasing picture than the HD200 or HVX200. Especially with the Sony 40% off card, that Greg Boston gave me.

However....
The XLH1 will still be a better tool for sports and nature (lens options)
The JVC PROHD cams may retain their ENG title (pro ergonomics)
The XHA1 is still the best bang for the buck.

Without the long format of recording to tape, it may not be a good tool for weddings, certain documentaries, ENG, etc... until the chips come down in price or go up in size. Yes, big chips are better, but recording time is everything to some people. That's one of the main reasons I ditched my HVX200.

There is a different "the" camera for each category. There likely always will be.
So when people ask, "what is the camera to get?"
The only answer is "what do you want to shoot with it?"

Realisticaly, the XHA1 is probably more camera than almost everyone on here needs. So maybe, it is "the" camera to get...
(XHA1 owners can quote me on that)

omigosh, who knew it was so easy??? thanks for unveiling the Secrets of Pro Video! there oughta be a DVD version...maybe with a bathtub scene for two!

Sarcasm....? On the internet...? :O

Ok now I know you might have taken it personaly, but to be fair, I did not say the XHA1 was an amateur camera. I said that it owns the "serious amateur" category. This just means that if an amateur was looking to buy a serious video camera, it would be "the" camera to get. The XHA1 gives you all the features most people need for a fantastic price. The camera in your hands is no way a reflection of your professional status.... Unless you are an indie filmmaker, then you need to get an HVX200 and a Mac so you can fit in and be cool.
Just to make XHA1 owners happy, I've changed my category to read "Best bang for the buck."



PS. re: bathtub scene for two... Your place or mine? ;)

Especially with the Sony 40% off card, that Greg Boston gave me.

A-ha! I got you again. Turn the card over and look closely. That offer expired in late 2003. Too bad the XDCAM EX took this long to get here. ;-)

Say Dylan, were you still interested in that seahorse ranch I have for sale off the coast of Nova Scotia?

-gb-

The only thing holding me back from going all out with the Canon HV20 is the fact it uses tapes. Yeah I understand the quality is better than AVCHD but if there were a hard drive camera... that had 24P or comparable video quality to the HV20 I'd be sold.

Is there really no Hard Drive camcorder out that can compete with the HV20 (quality/price) ??

-thanks

The simple answer is no. However, if you have 5k to invest, the Sony V1U with the DR60 hard drive option gives you the best of both worlds, hard drive and tape recording. Plus, you get your 24P.

Is there really no Hard Drive camcorder out that can compete with the HV20 (quality/price) ??

-thanks

Well... JVC has a hard drive based HD camera the same size as the HV20, it's about $400 more, and reviewers have said that the HV20 has a much better picture quality. So maybe it competes, but doesn't win.

Well... JVC has a hard drive based HD camera the same size as the HV20, it's about $400 more, and reviewers have said that the HV20 has a much better picture quality. So maybe it competes, but doesn't win.

Actually, it doesn't even compete. It's video quality is rated lower than any of the top consumer HDV camcorders. Its low light performance has also been criticized.

just to clarify, i wasn't taking your "serious amateur" comment too personally, dylan. i was just being flippant (what? moi? shocking!). but i did think that it was slightly misleading--at this price point, we read here daily about the multitudes of serious amateurs who can afford a camera this powerful, buy it, then blame the camera for not producing good footage on auto. or feel overwhelmed by its feature set, etc. and i think we're reading about this with such frequency, exactly *because* of the perception that it's the right camera for the serious amateur, when it is the right camera for the serious amateur who enjoys being challenged. not for the serious amateur who thinks that paying more $$ for better technology somehow equates with better footage.

you'd like my tub. it has adorable little claw feet.

Without the long format of recording to tape, it may not be a good tool for weddings, certain documentaries, ENG, etc... until the chips come down in price or go up in size.

This chips should be at least 16 GB each and possibly 32 GB when the camera ships, which is enough for 2-4 hours of continuous recording at full quality with two cards in the camera at a cost of ~$500 or so. It's high-end event videographers who are interested in this camera, because it offers something better than standard HDV without the time limitations and extraordinary memory costs of the HVX200. (Plus bigger sensors, etc.)

Agreed that there's never going to be one right camera for every need, and that there will always be something newer and better coming at some point.

This chips should be at least 16 GB each and possibly 32 GB when the camera ships,

Not sure if it's changed since NAB when I spoke to the responsible Sony rep (thanks to Greg) he said they had no information as to what chips, if any, it would ship with, and no price. So, if it DOES ship with 2 32GB cars, you and me are going down to the local pub and drinking for joy, cause that will thrill me just as much. In the meantime what it ships with is just speculation, as is the price. I'll be happy if it's less than $500 for a single 16GB card.

People say that about every new camera that comes out.


However....
The XLH1 will still be a better tool for sports and nature (lens options)
The JVC PROHD cams may retain their ENG title (pro ergonomics)
The XHA1 is still the best bang for the buck.
(XHA1 owners can quote me on that)

The 720p60 would make the JVC 200/250 series a much better option for sports. As well if shooting "nature" I would prefer using a progressive mode (still shots in post) that gives best resolution in class. And of course the JVC's give you lens options as well.
I agree with the A1 being best bang-for the buck. Great value.

The XLH1 will still be a better tool for sports and nature (lens options)
.....
So when people ask, "what is the camera to get?"
The only answer is "what do you want to shoot with it?"

Well, this is so true. And in a way I might argue with your categories.
Why would a HDV cam be the choice for sports, where fast movements are pretty frequent? The format is just not good for fast movements...

Why would a HDV cam be the choice for wildlife or nature, when the biggest buyers of such stuff simply reject HDV?

Canon users have a trade off here - lower quality (or HVX kind of hassle with hard disk recording) vs interchangeable lenses.

I would love to have PQ of HVX, variable speed, interframe codec for post and fast rendering, hassle free shooting on the move. Easy and affordable solid state recording.
I also have a couple of good Canon still lenses in the drawer....

So my ideal cam would be a mix of these. I have posted a question recently in one of the threads wondering what will be cooking in Canon's kitchen once the XDCAM EX comes out... I have got no responses. Its too silent around Canon these days...:) They may prepare something big (I wish)

If Canon wants to remain in game within this segment, a solid state XLH would be a killer cam. Maybe with some improved ergonomics and smaller form factor...
This cam could be the choice for sports and nature, indie film, and with a bigger sensor why not ideal for low light situations? Canon is such a pioneer in developing large sensors in their still imaging. I wonder why would they not do the same for video?

Apparently Pana is busy now, the EX is a serious challenger for HVX - this is obvious.
What could be a very interesting product is the one Canon might launch in response to EX.

Wait and see. If nothing, I will get an XDCAM EX.

So my ideal cam would be a mix of these. I have posted a question recently in one of the threads wondering what will be cooking in Canon's kitchen once the XDCAM EX comes out... I have got no responses. Its too silent around Canon these days...:) They may prepare something big (I wish)

If Canon wants to remain in game within this segment, a solid state XLH would be a killer cam. Maybe with some improved ergonomics and smaller form factor...
This cam could be the choice for sports and nature, indie film, and with a bigger sensor why not ideal for low light situations? Canon is such a pioneer in developing large sensors in their still imaging. I wonder why would they not do the same for video?

Apparently Pana is busy now, the EX is a serious challenger for HVX - this is obvious.
What could be a very interesting product is the one Canon might launch in response to EX.

Wait and see. If nothing, I will get an XDCAM EX.

Unfortunately, Canon is at a dissadvantage here. Sony, Panasonic and JVC also make broadcast camcorders, so they have the resources that Canon does not have, so to move beyond HDV, they have to partner with another company for a better codec. Yes, they can produce larger sensors, but this dream camera or something close to the XD Cam EX would probably be a few thousand more expensive. If anything, I look for Canon to replace the XLH1 with larger sensors and a better codec, something like XD Cam EX. I believe they will keep the interchangeable lens to justify a $10k+ price tag.

I've mentioned this before. I don't think Panasonic is going to sit quietly and let Sony steal the thunder. I feel they will have a camera similar to the XDCam based on their AVC-Intra Codec. Nothing has been announced... just a feeling I have.

Anyway, we'll see what happens in the next 7 to 9 months.

Why would a HDV cam be the choice for wildlife or nature, when the biggest buyers of such stuff simply reject HDV?

I suspect you are refering to Discovery HD or some such "buyer". Fact is they also reject HVX200 or any prosumer cam. It isn't as clear cut a codec issue as you would like it to be.
There are a lot of different HDV cams each with their strenghts. Low light/interlaced resolution/progressive resolution/ interchangable lens/ HD to tape/ size weight/ ENG styling. Each of which bests a HVX200 except multiple frame rate and P2 recording if that is your thing. The low rez DVCproHD codec coupled with the low rez sensors of the HVX does not equal HDV world beater.
DVCproHD at 720p24 is 40 Mbs, 720p24 HDV is 20Mbs and how many times more efficient (I've read 4-5 times), hmmm. That why Pana is on the cusp of updating their codec. They want to compete.

I own a pair of Sony HDR-FX1's that I bought back in November of last year. They are HDV, they only shoot 1080i and frankly, they are great. Looking at the HDV video either in raw .m2t or Cineform .avi and it looks absolutely fantastic!

I'll side with the guy who previously ranted about delivery formats being the issue right now. There really isn't a way for anybody to view this beautifull HDV footage unless they have a Blue-Ray/HD-DVD drive. And yes, I'm sure there are a lot of formats and Codec's and cameras for that matter that blow the HDV and the HDR-FX1 away but in this price range, this camera is plenty good enough and while I'd probably buy a Canon A1 today, they are very similiar and frankly, it's more important to edit well and take good footage. This will have a FAR greater impact on your viewing audience rather than

"Oh my, this poor shlep shot this movie with a FX1, what a shame..."

Bottom line, find your budget and hopefully it can be at least a cam in the FX1, A1, V1 class and then just go for it with whatever you end up with...

Jon

I suspect you are refering to Discovery HD or some such "buyer". Fact is they also reject HVX200 or any prosumer cam. It isn't as clear cut a codec issue as you would like it to be.
There are a lot of different HDV cams each with their strenghts. Low light/interlaced resolution/progressive resolution/ interchangable lens/ HD to tape/ size weight/ ENG styling. Each of which bests a HVX200 except multiple frame rate and P2 recording if that is your thing. The low rez DVCproHD codec coupled with the low rez sensors of the HVX does not equal HDV world beater.
DVCproHD at 720p24 is 40 Mbs, 720p24 HDV is 20Mbs and how many times more efficient (I've read 4-5 times), hmmm. That why Pana is on the cusp of updating their codec. They want to compete.

Actually, Discovery HD disses the HVX 200 about 50% of the time, whereas, it rejects HDV 98% of the time. You're also missing better handling of fast motion and better audio. I also wouldn't call P2 recording an advantage. While I'm at it. 720P in any flavor of HDV is 19mb/s not 20.

Panasonic doesn't fear HDV; it fears the upcoming XD Cam EX. That's the only reason why it would develop a camera with larger sensors and a better codec. I'm thinking Panasonic will develop an under $10K camera using its AVC-Intra codec. Nothing released by Panasonic... just a feeling on my part.

While I'm at it. 720P in any flavor of HDV is 19mb/s not 20.

Seems we're picking bones it is actually 19.7Mbs to be exact.

If we are gonna pick, it's Mb not mb or MB or mB. Each one means something different -- and far as I know nothing uses millibits as a data rate measurement or milliBytes and anything double digit in MegaBytes would be huge!

I'm done.

Cheers,
GB

Not a comment on HDV, but on the camera.

For surfing you'll want a long lens and great image stabilization if you are shooting from the shore. So Canon.

If you are shooting from the water, I'd look for something that has an affordable waterproof case with a wide angle adapter, and overcrank abilities. So HVX200.

For cars, do you mean car shows or racing? If racing, then long lens and IS, so Canon. If car shows, pretty much anything goes.

Thank you for taking the time to respond to my question. Right now I'm aiming at the A1 since its a great value for its price.

No problem Mike. On rare occasion we break from our endless arguing over decimal points of bit rates and actually help a person...

;)

What makes a camera "the camera" to get.
a rant by Dylan Couper


What some people here fail to understand... and it boggles my mind sometime since it's so obvious... is that if you can't get the shot you need, then it doesn't matter what codec you shoot on. If the picture that comes into your camera isn't what you want because you've picked the wrong camera for the job, then it doesn't matter whether it's a Varicam or an HV20. Cameras are tools built to do certain jobs better than others.
Think of a hammer. Not all hammers are created equal. There are ball peen hammers, framing hammers, roofing hammers, sledgehammers, etc... Ferrari may one day make a roofing hammer. No matter how sweet it is, it's going to make a mess of a job that requires a ball peen hammer.

The same applies with cameras. We like to think they are all good, and that the picture is everything... BUT IT ISN'T! We need to be able to get the shot that we want, and if we can't it doesn't matter how good the picture is.

Let's take wildlife, since it came up. Say you shoot birds. You need a long lens with great image stabilization, as you will be shaky at full telephoto. It doesn't matter if the HVX200 has a codec forged by God, it lacks the long lens of the XLH1 to actually reach out and get that close shot that will make viewers ooh and ahh, and buyers go "wow, I can't believe you got that shot".
This is why the XLH1 is the camera to get for wildlife. It will get the shots that other cameras won't.

Hope this helps reframe your views of what makes a camera the right tool for the job.

The 720p60 would make the JVC 200/250 series a much better option for sports.

That's a good point, I was thinking a certain type of sports when I said the XLH1 so I've gone back and added the HD200 to the list I wrote.

Hello to all. While you all are speculating and discussing camcorders that are in the $4000 and up category, I have a different question (same frustration, just a different size and flavor).
And my question is: Why doesn't Sony or Canon or whoever, produce a great HDV camcorder that would fit somewhere between the Canon HV20 and the Sony FX7? It seems that the current trends are either to produce a smaller and smaller consumer cam, or to produce a semi-pro (prosumer) cam that costs more than what an amature hobbiest like me can readily afford. There exists a large gap in the consumer/prosumer camcorder market between the small $1000 Canon HV20 and the much larger $2800 Sony FX7 (I don't consider the JVC HD7 worthy of mention due to poor PQ and very bad OIS). How about a $2000 "prosumer" camcorder with large enough multiple sensor chips (3 third inch CCDs or 3 third inch CMOS), 20X zoom, minimum 60 degree wide angle, decent mics with XLR, capable of matching the PQ of the HV20, FX7, etc., with the more common manual controls without getting overboard and overwhelming simpletons like me. I am (perhaps the only one) the kind of person who wants something more sophisticated than the 10X zoom too small HV20, but less expensive and less complicated than the Canon A1. Yes, yes, yes, I know, you get what you pay for. But why can't someone produce something with the PQ of the HV20, the size and manual controls of the FX7, add the XLR, and bingo, a $2000 well balanced, middle of the road compromise for those of us who want more than the consumer midgets, and less than the feature ladened prosumer heavyweights.

OK, I am out of breath, so I'll step down from my soapbox. Am I the only one who would like a HD camcorder a little bigger than the JVC HD7, with the performance of the HV20, the features of the FX7 (plus the XLR), and the cost somewhere in between?

Thanks.
Mike

My guess is that Sony will be bringing out other solid state cams after the XHDCAM EX proves to be a winner...

After that I'm sure they'll be bringing out other cams (cheaper than the EX)
that will be solid state.... thats the direction for most manufacturers will be
moving towards in the near future....

To me the FX7 should have cost around $2000 and the EX would have been the replacement for the PD170 at around $4500....
but that would have messed up the Z1 folks.....

most of the cost for the EX is in that lens......

I'm with you Mike I would also like a modern TRV900 to go with my FX1. I would be happy with a single chip cam but with independent picture controls like the FX1. Doesn't need to have the Picture profiles etc just independent iris, gain, shutters speed and white balance and manual audio. Actually a SR7 with these extra controls would be fine. Sony seem to have left out this mid section of cams they used to have between the simple 1 chip cams and the FX7, FX1, just where I would like a cam to partner my FX1!!!! I should just save up and wait for a lower cost XDCAm EX and relegate my FX1 to second cam!!!!

Ron Evans

All I need is an HV20 with a non AVCHD Hard Drive or wireless transfer, but something that compresses better. Oh and for under $1500

I was playing around with the HV20 and Sony HDR-SR5 in Best Buy and I actually didn't mind the feel of the HV20 but the buttons were hard to reach. I kept hearing about how the Sony cameras "feel" better, but they just feel heavier and boxier than the HV20 to me.

Let's take wildlife, since it came up. Say you shoot birds. You need a long lens with great image stabilization, as you will be shaky at full telephoto. It doesn't matter if the HVX200 has a codec forged by God, it lacks the long lens of the XLH1 to actually reach out and get that close shot that will make viewers ooh and ahh, and buyers go "wow, I can't believe you got that shot".
This is why the XLH1 is the camera to get for wildlife. It will get the shots that other cameras won't.

Hope this helps reframe your views of what makes a camera the right tool for the job.[/QUOTE]

Why the XLH1 for nature? Why not the Sony V1? It has less wide angle, so it has even more telephoto for those extreme closeups and also a very nice OIS. It's also cheaper and less bulky. I see what you are getting at, and you made some good points until you specified "...the XLH1 is the camera to get for wildlife." The XLH1 might be one camera that will work for nature but maybe not the best one out there for nature for everyone. The interchangeable lens might give it an advantage as far as adding an even longer lens, but what about JVC's ProHD? It has an interchangeable lens as well, and some might actually prefer its form factor. I believe you can make decisions on a camera based on difficult shooting environments, like getting a shot in a very small confined space probably will be best accomplished with an HV20 or HC7, but deciding on a camera for a specific genre is basically what the operator is going to be most comfortable with. Heck, with the right adapter and lens, the HVX 200 might be a better option for nature for some.

I know I've been very vocal on this "which camera is better than the other" rant. I will try to stay away from that as we all should.

I see what you are getting at, and you made some good points until you specified "...the XLH1 is the camera to get for wildlife." The XLH1 might be one camera that will work for nature but maybe not the best one out there for nature for everyone. The interchangeable lens might give it an advantage as far as adding an even longer lens, but what about JVC's ProHD? It has an interchangeable lens as well, and some might actually prefer its form factor. Heck, with the right adapter and lens, the HVX 200 might be a better option for nature for some.

I know I've been very vocal on this "which camera is better than the other" rant. I will try to stay away from that as we all should.

Why do you feel the need to defend the HVX in every thread? It's just a camera, not a lifestyle.

So, here's why the JVC PROHD cameras are not as good as the XLH1 or XHA1for wildlife:
The JVC, with a fully manual lens does not have image stabilization.
It's 14x is considerably shorter than the Canon's 20x.
If you want a killer wildlife rig, then get a Canon XL with an EF adapter (ok, it only works in SD mode I think) but no other camera can match the zoom of an EOS lense with a 7.2x magnification for getting right close to wildlife.
If you don't need that much zoom, than an XHA1 will do fine. The 60p mode of the JVC HD200 would be nice though if you were shooting fast moving wildlife.

The best camera is always the one in your hand, any tool can be made to work for the job... but this thread isn't about that. It's about what camera works the best for a specific task.

All I need is an HV20 with a non AVCHD Hard Drive or wireless transfer, but something that compresses better. Oh and for under $1500 ....


One major reason I shy away from the HV20 is the 10X zoom. It is not enough. Other than that and the small size (too small and light for me with my big hands), the HV20 is a very nice camcorder.

Still, something more like the JVC HD7 size, but with the Canon PQ and a 20X zoom would be nice.

Mike

One major reason I shy away from the HV20 is the 10X zoom. It is not enough. Other than that and the small size (too small and light for me with my big hands), the HV20 is a very nice camcorder.

Still, something more like the JVC HD7 size, but with the Canon PQ and a 20X zoom would be nice.

Mike


So I then ask, what if you added lenses to enhance the zoom... added a stabilizer so you would not be phsyically holding the camera? I suppose I'm just very disappointed that there is not a hard drive camera with a decent PQ under $2000.

Well Steve, many times when an aftermarket zoom lens is added to a cam, you can lose a part of its function due to the fact that as you zoom back, your field of view becomes a circle with a fair share of your shot (picture) being blocked by the lens housing. This would necessitate removing the lens every time you wanted to zoom out of a shot. Unacceptable. Adding a stabilizer like a monopod might be OK as long as you didn't mind carrying around the extra equipment. As for the PQ improvement, how would you do that?

No. The only solution I can see is to settle for something less than what you really want and can afford, or buy nothing and wait for better. Niether is a very attractive choice in my book. So here I sit with a nine year old DV camcorder that is still working fine, but for how much longer I cannot say. AND I WANT BETTER RESOLUTION. Hence my desire for an HD camcorder that meets my demands and expectations, and is within my means.

Maybe if I save for another year, I can get the FX7. Please Sony and Canon, don't make me wait that long.

Mike

How about a $2000 "prosumer" camcorder with large enough multiple sensor chips (3 third inch CCDs or 3 third inch CMOS), 20X zoom, minimum 60 degree wide angle, decent mics with XLR, capable of matching the PQ of the HV20, FX7, etc., with the more common manual controls without getting overboard and overwhelming simpletons like me.


so you basically want an XH A1 or V1U...since that's exactly the camera you are describing. but think they're what? overpriced?

we're getting unprecedented feature sets at unprecedented prices. at the risk of repeating myself, we're getting unbelievable $1000 cameras that require a $3000 editing system and a $4000 TV upgrade to watch. oh, yeah and add in a $500 hi-def DVD player...most of us can afford more camera than we can actually afford to view.

i just don't get complaining about the prices of cameras these days. the options are outstanding. if you want value added, buy used from one of our reputable frequent sellers in the DVinfo classifieds. i've bought and sold some great, barely used cameras and gear here at excellent discounts. we're awash in an abundance of riches.

i think the current "it" camera as of right now is the HPX500. if i didn't have a RED reservation lined up, i'd be clutching one right now....oh, but then there's that XDCAM EX looming on the horizon. that's a category killer, for sure.

Thanks for your response. Didn't think I was really complaining, just wishful thinking out loud. No, I don't need all the manual controls and presets and options of an A1 or a V1u. I am not that patient to try and learn it all nor technically gifted enough to understand it all. Nor would I expect a camcorder manufacturer to produce an A1 or V1u type cam for $2000. What I am wishing for is something between the FX7 and the HV20, feature-wise and size-wise, with the fantastic PQ of the forementioned cams, with an XLR included.

To be honest, never gave a thought about purchasing nearly new, used, equipment. Perhaps it is my reluctance to get anything electronic used. Would make me nervous wondering if anything were wrong with the product and what would happen if there was. But thats' just me.

AS for the $4000 TV, my $1600 new Toshiba 42" plasma does just fine. Haven't gotten far enough in my thought process concerning my computer and editing software, not to mention the player. One thing at a time. Right now I am just concerned with capturing material now in HD, before it is gone, and archiving it for future development.

Mike

Right now I am just concerned with capturing material now in HD, before it is gone, and archiving it for future development.In HD before it's gone? It's not even completely here yet.

Then again, with the rate of obsolescence in our field, I wouldn't be surprised if they're making us all buy new TV's, cameras, computers, and optical disc players again in another six months for the arrival of UHD (or something).

In HD before it's gone? It's not even completely here yet.

Then again, with the rate of obsolescence in our field, I wouldn't be surprised if they're making us all buy new TV's, cameras, computers, and optical disc players again in another six months for the arrival of UHD (or something).


It looks as if I wasn't clear. It is not that I wish to capture material before HD is gone, but rather capture material before the material is gone. Sorry for the confusion.

Mike

Sorry, Mike. That makes a lot more sense. :)

What makes a camera "the camera" to get.
a rant by Dylan Couper


What some people here fail to understand... and it boggles my mind sometime since it's so obvious... is that if you can't get the shot you need, then it doesn't matter what codec you shoot on. If the picture that comes into your camera isn't what you want because you've picked the wrong camera for the job, then it doesn't matter whether it's a Varicam or an HV20. Cameras are tools built to do certain jobs better than others.
Think of a hammer. Not all hammers are created equal. There are ball peen hammers, framing hammers, roofing hammers, sledgehammers, etc... Ferrari may one day make a roofing hammer. No matter how sweet it is, it's going to make a mess of a job that requires a ball peen hammer.

The same applies with cameras. We like to think they are all good, and that the picture is everything... BUT IT ISN'T! We need to be able to get the shot that we want, and if we can't it doesn't matter how good the picture is.

Let's take wildlife, since it came up. Say you shoot birds. You need a long lens with great image stabilization, as you will be shaky at full telephoto. It doesn't matter if the HVX200 has a codec forged by God, it lacks the long lens of the XLH1 to actually reach out and get that close shot that will make viewers ooh and ahh, and buyers go "wow, I can't believe you got that shot".
This is why the XLH1 is the camera to get for wildlife. It will get the shots that other cameras won't.

Hope this helps reframe your views of what makes a camera the right tool for the job.

It's a good point Dylan but I think you have to realize that 98% of all people in the market for purchasing a camera can't go out and buy a wide aray of camera's suitable for all the various shots they want to take. When most go looking for a camera, the question isn't "I'm shooting X,Y,&Z, can you guys tell me the 3-4 camera's I should get to cover this?"

Typically speaking, people are asking the question "I have $X which camera should I buy" and then it becomes something of a debate as to which camera will fit the job *most* of the time.

But I hear your point and I'll go one more further by saying people take the camera way too seriously and should really be spending more time thinking about their shots, angles, actors, scene's, edit points, etc, etc...

Jon

Typically speaking, people are asking the question "I have $X which camera should I buy" and then it becomes something of a debate as to which camera will fit the job *most* of the time.

Ah, truth is any of these cameras will do the job 90% of the time or more. Everyone spends way too much time worrying about what camera to get. Many of them fall into the trap of "I need this camera to..." The answer is usualy tied in with visions of grandeur and Academy Awards.

Most of the people here (probably including me, no wait... especially me!) would produce exactly the same results with a 10 year old Canon XL1, or an HV20, or a Varicam. We are gear junkies and pixel peepers by gender.

Oh, and the answer to "I have $x, which camera should I buy?" is...
Buy the cheapest camera you can get away with, and spend the rest of the money on stuff that will actually make a difference... like a tripod, mic, lights, filters, etc...

But if one camera had to cover more bases than anything, under $10k? The Canon XLH1 probably offers the most versitility in one camera. It does everything well. Some cameras do some things better, but other things poorly.
Of course the Canon XHA1 does 95% of what the XLH1 but for less than half the price. That kind of makes it "the camera to get" for a lot of people, unless you have one specific need that demands another tool.

From now on, I'm just going to take a girl with me to the camera store and get her to pick out whatever looks the sexiest. ;)

From now on, I'm just going to take a girl with me to the camera store and get her to pick out whatever looks the sexiest. ;)

So what do you do if she picks out the guy behind the counter? You'll go home alone and without a camera. (hehe)

-gb-

So what do you do if she picks out the guy behind the counter? You'll go home alone and without a camera. (hehe)

-gb-

On the other hand, it pretty much guarantees me a discount! In fact...
Wait, this might not be a response suitable to the general public... I'll tell ya later.

But will someone, anyone, please put a dignified end to this thread............pretty please!

I have seen people arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, but this really takes the Oscar for a "go nowwhere conversation".

Just my PO, of course.

Cheers,


Chris

Oh come on, dignity?? Who needs THAT!

On the plus side if you take your girl and she runs off with the guy behind the camera counter, your camera budget just increased <wink>! And don't forget you've eliminated the competition for "edit time"....

Any cam will get a shot in the hands of someone that knows their camera - it may not be perfect, but it's the shooter, NOT the camera - to steal and mangle a cliche - "cameras don't shoot people..." oh never mind...

It's like the Beatles recording on a 4 track - did they "get it right"? Now we have unlimited tracks and mostly unlistenable crap... tell me where the technology "improved" the situation. Technology does NOT = TALENT.

The "camera to get" is the camera you can afford - if it's a second hand, once top of the line cam, now forlorn on Ebay for $100, then so be it, shoot with your heart until everyone including yourself decides you stink at video or you get more budget and more knowledge.

As you get more knowledge, and more budget, keep getting the best you can afford, learn how it works and how to work around any shortcomings (those are ALWAYS going to be present, sorry technology is never PERFECT...)

The "best" camera is the one you are comfortable with and have with you when "the shot" comes at you - it might even be one of those nasty little cell phone cams... but if you GOT THE SHOT, who cares if it isn't perfect? If your fancy "perfect" camera is in the equipment locker when the shot of a lifetime comes along...

Sure, if you have a specific use, and time to plan and research, you can probably optimize the technology to the purpose (hammers people... hammers), but it will never be the same for EVERYONE... and TALENT will beat technology EVERY TIME...

No doubt it's good to discuss what's out there, and it can help one decide where to blow their budget, but "best" is OPINION, cameras are just tools or toys, get what you can afford and enjoy playing/working!

OK, now for the vote... was THAT dignified enough??

DB>)

Excellent Post Dave B...

With all that said......... Just to try and answer with my opinion on the original question asked....

My recomendation for "the" overall best camera for the $$ and "the" one to get would be the Canon XH-A1. At about $3300 for reputable authorized dealers I just don't think there's really anything that this camera can't at least do competently and I think it's a "small" step above others in the price range.

If money were an object though and I had to pick "the" camera to get in the lower price range, I'd go with a Canon HV20. For $1000 you get a solid camera with HDMI output which is an interesting new technology for getting video into the PC.

It's not that I'm a huge Canon fan over the others because I own a Sony and like Panasonic & JVC as well. I just happen to think that right now, for the money spent, those are your best two bets in that mid-tier entry level semi professional world...

Jon

I'm starting to lose interest in the 24P, or I should say I'm less impressed by HV20's 24P mode... so I'm really curious about which camera in the $1500 price range will handle motion the best. We've all seen the "trails" and "blur" from consumer cameras and I was hoping to find the best one for movement and panning.

thanks.

The "best" for movement and panning would be the cam with the highest frame rate. Considering your price point that leaves you with 60i based cams. As far as blurring and trails go, that is strictly a result of shutter speed and nothing to do with "consumer" cam. If you want low motion blur, shoot with a high shutter speed.