XL2 Purchase or...

[Bill Schoaf]

Work finally got sick of me renting higher end cam's and wants me now to buy one. Main shooting is golf professionals giving tips, board meetings, member meetings, corporate videos. I have used the XL2 for many of these projects and considering the price has dropped significantly, such a good deal now.

However with the budget I have, I could go with a HD cam, such as the Sony HVR-Z1, which I have been looking at, but have never shot with. I have many years editing experience (Avid, Premiere, FCP) but have never edited HD or shot HD. Considering that is way the industry is headed towards, just looking for thoughts on the issue. The XL2 or Z1.

I know they are 2 different Cams SD-HD, but shooting HD on the Z1, I could always downsize if work doesn't want HD.

I am so torn :)

[Cal Johnson]

Bill, its a huge can of worms that gets opened when people debate wether to go with a current high SD camera, or adopt one of the newer HDV/SD models... there are reasons for going with either. I think it really comes down to a few key points in your case:
-do you have a demand for HDV content right now?
-do you think you'll have a demand, or increased demand for it later?
-are you going to be able to intergrate HDV into your work flow smoothly?

I shoot corporate videos as well, and I own an XL2, and love it. While HD is coming, and HDV is a part of that movement, I just don't have the demand for higher resolution right now. It simply isn't something clients are asking for. Unless I'm mistaken, you could buy two XL2's for the price of the Canon HDV. So my 2 cents is unless you are getting complaints about picture quality, go with the XL2.

Make no mistake, I know some people have gone with the Z1 because they have clients that have said, either give us HD or we're going with someone else. That's a good reason to make the move to HDV. However, in my experience coporate videos are often not concerned with wether something is HD or SD, so the upgrade isn't justified. It really depends on your present and future clients.

[Andrew Jack]

Hey thought I'd jump in and say hi finally and ask about the xl2 as well.
I'm looking to purchase and XL2 here in Australia this week for $6000
Just thought I'd see if you guys knew of anything else in that price range that I should be also considering.

Reasons for getting XL2
Low light performace (compared to current HD cameras, eg in churches)
native 16:9
20x zoom (use at least 16x at wedding all the time)

Currently have XM2 : )

[Bill Schoaf]

Thanks Cal. Still debating but heavily leaning towards the XL2 for many reasons. Most importantly because I have shot with it many times and feel comfortable using it. Your right about the demand for HD at the present moment. At some point however, going to have to learn HD, shooting and editing. That's what makes this board so great!!!!

[Bob Safay]

Well I guess there is about a thousand of us out there with the same question. I used to have the Canon XL-1, and now have the XL-1s. I have had it a number of years and love it. I do a lot of video work for the Agency I work for. It is NOT my full time job, just something extra I do. I recently completed a video on uranium releases at Oak Ridge, TN. We sent out 250 dvd's to community members and organizations, not one request for HD. Not one of them has a HD dvd player and, are not likely to get one for a long time. I just finished a dvd on the EPA first response to the Mississippi coast after hurricane Katrina. I sent out about 55 copies to EPA, OSHA, FEMA and CDC. Only the CDC headquarters in Atlanta is using HD, all the others are SD. The audiance that I am currently shooting for still uses SD, and will be using SD for a long time. As of today I am going with the XL-2 as a replacement. Yes the HD is pretty to look at and all that, but for me to upgrade camcorder, deck, computer, burner and monitor, to produce HD dvd's that no one can watch as HD because 99.999999% of my customers have SD would be a terrible waste on money (lets be honest, National Geographic and the Discovery channels arn't knocking on my door..yet). I think that by the time HD is more popular and more available to the general public, well, by then the prices will have dropped conciderably. The CD player I first got cost $600.00, I can now get a better one for $100.00. Same goes for my first VCR deck, I paid $800.00 for my first one, and $150.00 for the one I have now. And don't forget, they don't even have the 3x out yet. What will that cost in HD? Bob

[Bill Schoaf]

Bob, well said! As great as HD looks, most clients, including my employer, still want SD. No need for HD as it requires $$$$. Not only from my end of purchasing new deck, monitor, etc... but also from clients end of showing that great footage. I am going to get the XL2 sometime next week. It's a great cam for the price these days. All the extra money I would be spending on the Z1 or even the XL H1 (HA), I get get new mics, lighting, etc...

It still would be nice to start "playing" with HD from a shooting and editing standpoint, but I'm sure that time will come. And when it does, the Z1 and XL H1 should be more afforable...and maybe even, dare I say, OLD ;)

[Andrew Wills]

I had this situation recently:

A new client recently called up wanting a video production, and they were insisting that the product be delivered in HD. I asked very simply, why?

Their response was because they'd seen it in Dixons on the big wide screen TV's and they wanted their production to look like that.

I explained that firstly that the Dixons demo reels were likely shot on extremely expensive camera's way out of their budget range (by thousands and thousands of pounds!). Secondly did they have a HD-TV to showcase the video on? Nope. Did they have a deck in which to play it on? Nope. etc. etc. The questions went on.

Eventually they decided they were going to ask elsewhere, and a few days later came back to me.

They'd found a company willing to produce their video in HD format at a fraction of the cost I'd quoted, and would I be able to requote them with this in mind. I said no, and told them to ask this other company, firstly which camera they were going to shoot on, secondly how they intended to display and deliver the final product, and finally which editing package they were going to edit the production on.

Two days later, the client got back to me again, this time saying that the other company could/would not provide the answers to the questions, and understandably this made them jittery!

The result, they've decided to go with SD, after seeing our showreel and seem very happy!

My point is, that although HD is available, and pretty amazing, I don't think some (certainly not all) clients are aware of the extra expense, and I discovered (as I suspected) that not all video production companies have really thought the whole HD thing through to the end product/customer.

As someone who runs a video production company, I'm sticking with SD for now, and probably the next year, as I can see (especially with the competition in my area) that we're going to benefit from picking up the slack caused by competeting companies jumping on the bandwagon without thinking ahead, and fully understanding both the hardware, software and the market.

[Bill Schoaf]

Originally Posted by Andrew Wills

...told them to ask this other company, firstly which camera they were going to shoot on, secondly how they intended to display and deliver the final product, and finally which editing package they were going to edit the production on.

Andrew, those "the" three great questions that I had to ask myself when deciding on SD or HD. Obviously, the first question was the debate with the Z1 but the other two I could not answer definitively at the present moment. Hopefully in the near future I will have a definitive answer!