dvx vs a1 footage? at DVinfo.net

Brock Greenberg · August 14th, 2007, 03:45 PM

does anyone know where i can find some comparison shots between a dvx100(a or b) and an xh a1, or could someone post some as i know many of you own both.

im trying to decide on whether or not hd is worth it to me.i want to see how much of a difference it makes. im basically deciding between the two cameras

any input will be much appreciated

thanks in advance
brock

Herman Van Deventer · August 14th, 2007, 03:53 PM

Brock /

The following link could maybe help

http://www.dv.com/features/features_...leId=192501232

Brock Greenberg · August 14th, 2007, 05:09 PM

thanks for the reply that was an interesting article but i wanted to see a hd/sd comparison and all those cameras were hd

Bill Pryor · August 14th, 2007, 07:09 PM

HD is significantly better, but you can't really deliver in HD at this time, so for the next couple of years, SD is where it's at, I think. Although, that seems to be changing rapidly.

I'm shooting HD, editing in a 24p timeline, and then exporting to QT for DVD or web. If I were going to submit a film to a festival, I would make the master onto the HD camera. I've read that a number of festivals are getting HDV playback decks. That new little Sony walkman HD type deck might increase the popularity of it at festivals. Of course with 24p you open other problems--it it's a Sony deck you need to make an HDV master at 60i, but that's not a big deal really.

What you get with these small HD cameras is very nice resolution and good quality images for a small price. Also, they all have 16:9 chips. The HVX100b does not, so your quality will suffer in that regard too. Last year I shot some segments of a documentary for a friend mostly with his XL2, which has 16:9 chips, and with the DVX100 (b, I think). The Canon SD images looked quite a bit better. But, it's not a day and night difference.

I think what makes a camera like the PD170 or DVX100b closer to obsolete is the 16:9 chips in other cameras. That's more significant than HD, I think.

Petri Kaipiainen · August 15th, 2007, 12:26 AM

I have no samples to show, but after shooting with DVX100a for some years and switching to XH-A1 I must say that XH-A1 is sharper even in SD mode, especially shooting 16:9.

I do miss some (audio) details on DVX100, but for picture quality the Canon is the winner. Why get a SD camera anymore without a full quality 16:9 sensor when you can get a HDV capable camera shooting better SD for almost the same price?

Ian Holb · August 15th, 2007, 01:08 AM

The A1 can shoot SD, so it really is a no-brainer.

Brock Greenberg · August 15th, 2007, 01:32 AM

yeah. im pretty much set on the a1. i just have a voice in the back of my head telling me to just save money and go sd. but i think my mind is seton the a1...for now haha

thanks again guys

David Warren · August 15th, 2007, 07:40 AM

i use both cameras all the time..
some friends of mine were going to use my a1 to shoot their 25min short but ended up using 2 dvx's because they didnt have the budget to rent a 2nd a1.. my roomie was the DOP on that project and now months later is still kicking himself for not using the A1.. its just such a better camera.. but its also almost twice the price so you'd expect that wouldnt you?
the dvx is still a great camera but im really glad i got the A1 over the dvx.. i was originally looking at that as well.

Bill Pryor · August 15th, 2007, 05:07 PM

I think the DVX is probably the best of the 1/3" chip SD 4:3 cameras, but the world is rapidly becoming 16:9 and HD.

August 14th, 2007, 03:45 PM	#1
Brock Greenberg New Boot Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Walnut CA Posts: 5	dvx vs a1 footage? does anyone know where i can find some comparison shots between a dvx100(a or b) and an xh a1, or could someone post some as i know many of you own both. im trying to decide on whether or not hd is worth it to me.i want to see how much of a difference it makes. im basically deciding between the two cameras any input will be much appreciated thanks in advance brock

August 14th, 2007, 03:53 PM	#2
Herman Van Deventer Major Player Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: cape town South-Africa Posts: 251	Brock / The following link could maybe help http://www.dv.com/features/features_...leId=192501232

August 14th, 2007, 05:09 PM	#3
Brock Greenberg New Boot Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Walnut CA Posts: 5	thanks for the reply that was an interesting article but i wanted to see a hd/sd comparison and all those cameras were hd

August 14th, 2007, 07:09 PM	#4
Bill Pryor Contributor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 4,449	HD is significantly better, but you can't really deliver in HD at this time, so for the next couple of years, SD is where it's at, I think. Although, that seems to be changing rapidly. I'm shooting HD, editing in a 24p timeline, and then exporting to QT for DVD or web. If I were going to submit a film to a festival, I would make the master onto the HD camera. I've read that a number of festivals are getting HDV playback decks. That new little Sony walkman HD type deck might increase the popularity of it at festivals. Of course with 24p you open other problems--it it's a Sony deck you need to make an HDV master at 60i, but that's not a big deal really. What you get with these small HD cameras is very nice resolution and good quality images for a small price. Also, they all have 16:9 chips. The HVX100b does not, so your quality will suffer in that regard too. Last year I shot some segments of a documentary for a friend mostly with his XL2, which has 16:9 chips, and with the DVX100 (b, I think). The Canon SD images looked quite a bit better. But, it's not a day and night difference. I think what makes a camera like the PD170 or DVX100b closer to obsolete is the 16:9 chips in other cameras. That's more significant than HD, I think.

August 15th, 2007, 12:26 AM	#5
Petri Kaipiainen Major Player Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Espoo Finland Posts: 380	I have no samples to show, but after shooting with DVX100a for some years and switching to XH-A1 I must say that XH-A1 is sharper even in SD mode, especially shooting 16:9. I do miss some (audio) details on DVX100, but for picture quality the Canon is the winner. Why get a SD camera anymore without a full quality 16:9 sensor when you can get a HDV capable camera shooting better SD for almost the same price?

August 15th, 2007, 01:08 AM	#6
Ian Holb Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Canada Posts: 127	The A1 can shoot SD, so it really is a no-brainer.

August 15th, 2007, 01:32 AM	#7
Brock Greenberg New Boot Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Walnut CA Posts: 5	yeah. im pretty much set on the a1. i just have a voice in the back of my head telling me to just save money and go sd. but i think my mind is seton the a1...for now haha thanks again guys

August 15th, 2007, 07:40 AM	#8
David Warren Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada Posts: 61	i use both cameras all the time.. some friends of mine were going to use my a1 to shoot their 25min short but ended up using 2 dvx's because they didnt have the budget to rent a 2nd a1.. my roomie was the DOP on that project and now months later is still kicking himself for not using the A1.. its just such a better camera.. but its also almost twice the price so you'd expect that wouldnt you? the dvx is still a great camera but im really glad i got the A1 over the dvx.. i was originally looking at that as well.

August 15th, 2007, 05:07 PM	#9
Bill Pryor Contributor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 4,449	I think the DVX is probably the best of the 1/3" chip SD 4:3 cameras, but the world is rapidly becoming 16:9 and HD.