XL2 Low Light issue - indoors?

David Lach · December 13th, 2004, 04:35 PM

Having looked at both the DVX100 and the XL2, I find that even though the sensitivity is better on the Panasonic, the image is cleaner with the XL2, which is ultimately all that counts for me. That, and sharp images since this is meant for projection.

Again, I can understand why you might be hesitant going with the XL2 if you want to shoot under household lighting, but the perfect all-round camera isn't out there yet.

Barry Green · December 13th, 2004, 05:20 PM

David's observation is the same thing I observed: the DVX is more sensitive and needs less light to register exposure, but the XL2 signal is "cleaner" -- less noisy. The DVX can exhibit noise in the dark areas of the picture where the XL2, while still showing some noise, shows a lot less of it than the DVX does. That's under normal settings (all settings set to middle, or zero)... I didn't try cranking up the detail coring on the DVX to compare them side-by-side that way... detail coring helps smooth out/minimize noise on the DVX.

The DVX is usually at least 1 stop faster than the XL2 under similar circumstances. With the XL2's cleaner signal you could apply 3db of gain without much worry to "close the gap", maybe even 6db and have a somewhat comparable signal, although the DVX still has more latitude. But then the XL2 has 16:9 chips... but then the DVX is $1500 less... but the XL2 has interchangeable lenses...

In the end, they're both fantastic cameras, and the image quality differences are the *least* of the differences between them. They're far more different in form factor, usability, price, extendability, etc. than they are in image quality, which should actually make the choice easier rather than harder: pick which camera you like based on it's form factor, lens and price, because the image quality is pretty darn close otherwise.

Bruce S. Yarock · December 13th, 2004, 07:34 PM

Barry,
Iwent on your web page and found your book/tutorial very interesting. Since I'm just learning how to use my camera in manual mode, I'd really like to find something like your tutorial, for the xl2. is there anything you know of for the xl2? It sounds like a lot of the info you provude is the kind of stuff i need to learn.
Thanks
Bruce Yarock

Chris Hurd · December 13th, 2004, 09:14 PM

Barry, it sounds like Bruce is inviting you to write another book!

Barry Green · December 13th, 2004, 09:57 PM

I'd love to... just working out the schedule and the logistics! :)

Nico van Tonder · December 14th, 2004, 11:37 AM

Barry,

Please put me on the waiting list for the XL2 book!

Bruce S. Yarock · December 14th, 2004, 04:17 PM

Me too.
Bruce yarock

Rob Lohman · December 15th, 2004, 05:01 AM

I actually think the DVX is a very poor perfomer in low-light, not
because it doesn't sees enough (it does as everyone points out),
but the noise is just completely unacceptable to me. There is like
tons of noise in the image (even properly exposed images seem
to have noise in them). Even my XL1S was a lot cleaner in the
noise department (I was shocked with the DVX's noise levels!)
and from what I've seen of the XL2 low-light footage posted on
this board earlier this year it is a world of difference (ie, virtually
NO noise!).

I'd have that any day over better low-light performance.

December 13th, 2004, 09:14 PM	#19
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	Barry, it sounds like Bruce is inviting you to write another book! __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

December 14th, 2004, 11:37 AM	#21
Nico van Tonder Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Pretoria, South Africa Posts: 33	Barry, Please put me on the waiting list for the XL2 book! __________________ Nico

December 15th, 2004, 05:01 AM	#23
Rob Lohman RED Code Chef Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Holland Posts: 12,514	I actually think the DVX is a very poor perfomer in low-light, not because it doesn't sees enough (it does as everyone points out), but the noise is just completely unacceptable to me. There is like tons of noise in the image (even properly exposed images seem to have noise in them). Even my XL1S was a lot cleaner in the noise department (I was shocked with the DVX's noise levels!) and from what I've seen of the XL2 low-light footage posted on this board earlier this year it is a world of difference (ie, virtually NO noise!). I'd have that any day over better low-light performance. __________________ Rob Lohman, visuar@iname.com DV Info Wrangler & RED Code Chef Join the DV Challenge \| Lady X Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Buy from the best: DVinfo.net sponsors

December 13th, 2004, 04:35 PM	#16
David Lach Major Player Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Montreal, QC, Canada Posts: 570	Having looked at both the DVX100 and the XL2, I find that even though the sensitivity is better on the Panasonic, the image is cleaner with the XL2, which is ultimately all that counts for me. That, and sharp images since this is meant for projection. Again, I can understand why you might be hesitant going with the XL2 if you want to shoot under household lighting, but the perfect all-round camera isn't out there yet.

December 13th, 2004, 05:20 PM	#17
Barry Green Barry Wan Kenobi Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Carolina Posts: 3,863	David's observation is the same thing I observed: the DVX is more sensitive and needs less light to register exposure, but the XL2 signal is "cleaner" -- less noisy. The DVX can exhibit noise in the dark areas of the picture where the XL2, while still showing some noise, shows a lot less of it than the DVX does. That's under normal settings (all settings set to middle, or zero)... I didn't try cranking up the detail coring on the DVX to compare them side-by-side that way... detail coring helps smooth out/minimize noise on the DVX. The DVX is usually at least 1 stop faster than the XL2 under similar circumstances. With the XL2's cleaner signal you could apply 3db of gain without much worry to "close the gap", maybe even 6db and have a somewhat comparable signal, although the DVX still has more latitude. But then the XL2 has 16:9 chips... but then the DVX is $1500 less... but the XL2 has interchangeable lenses... In the end, they're both fantastic cameras, and the image quality differences are the least of the differences between them. They're far more different in form factor, usability, price, extendability, etc. than they are in image quality, which should actually make the choice easier rather than harder: pick which camera you like based on it's form factor, lens and price, because the image quality is pretty darn close otherwise.

December 13th, 2004, 07:34 PM	#18
Bruce S. Yarock Trustee Join Date: May 2004 Location: Pembroke Pines, Fl. Posts: 1,842	Barry, Iwent on your web page and found your book/tutorial very interesting. Since I'm just learning how to use my camera in manual mode, I'd really like to find something like your tutorial, for the xl2. is there anything you know of for the xl2? It sounds like a lot of the info you provude is the kind of stuff i need to learn. Thanks Bruce Yarock

December 13th, 2004, 09:57 PM	#20
Barry Green Barry Wan Kenobi Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Carolina Posts: 3,863	I'd love to... just working out the schedule and the logistics! :)

December 14th, 2004, 04:17 PM	#22
Bruce S. Yarock Trustee Join Date: May 2004 Location: Pembroke Pines, Fl. Posts: 1,842	Me too. Bruce yarock