If you had around 5k to buy a 24p camera, which one?

[Matt Buys]

Assuming you had everything else: brevis, tripods, mics. etc., and you already had a canon HV20 but you didn't want the convoluted workflow of it's 24p setting which camera would you buy? I'm going for a film look. Primary use would be for a documentary following a doctor in Tanzania who would be fighting Aids. I would need the camera by March. I realize most of selecting a camera is personal preference but I would appreciate knowing what you would choose and why.

[Barry Gribble]

I would go with the Canon XH-A1. Actually I did, I own two. There are no problems with the 24F, and overall I have found the camera to be both great to use and to put out a great photo, especially outdoors (like any cam). This would also give you the benefit of capturing on the HV-20 to not wear down the heads, and in a pinch you could cut footage between the two cams much better than if you get a Sony or Panny.

Good luck.

[Matt Buys]

Barry, I liked watching the Buddy Jackson episodes. Did you shoot those with your canons?

[Barry Gribble]

Matt -

Thanks so much, I'm glad you liked it. Yeah, episode 14 on were shot with the Canons, before that was a bit of a mish-mash.

The pilot episodes (1 & 2) were shot on a rented Panny SDX-900 with a 2/3" camera... man I love that cam, but it is in a different league all together.

[Eric Darling]

I would recommend the JVC HD-110. Having bought the HD-100, I can say this camera is the closest to a typical professional form factor of all the sub-$10,000 HD cams. The lens is detachable, and is laid out like a normal pro video lens. You can easily shoot with this camera off the shoulder... A camera's form factor is a major consideration for me.

It's the only truly progressive frame camera with a detachable lens in this market space.

There are lots of other reasons for choosing the right camera for you. Since you know you want to shoot your project in 24p, this camera also fits the bill in a way that the Canon models don't. It's true 24p, whereas Canon's models (other than the HV20) are 24f. The Sony V1U is 1080p, but I am not a big fan of its form factor. You just get a more robust and more thoughtfully laid out camera with the JVC.

[Barry Gribble]

I would not at all get hung up on the 24p vs. 24F debate. I have seen the footage, I have seen the individual 24 frames and I can say that there is nothing un-progressive about them. I thought about it a lot before getting the camera, because I had heard that argument also, but with a little research I ignored it and I'm glad I did. It is a semantic debate that has nothing to do with the quality of the frames.

The detachable lens is nice, but only if you are going to spend the $8000 to put another lens in it's place every once in a while.

The form factor of the JVC is nice.

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Eric Darling

It's true 24p, whereas Canon's models (other than the HV20) are 24f.

Sorry, that's incorrect. There's no significant difference between 24P and 24F. See Barry's post above.

[Matt Buys]

Barry, now that you pointed it out, I think I see the camera difference between episode 1 and 15. But I think that isn't as important as having the good screenplay. There's some good dialogue in there. "My cellphone's 500 numbers are already full but you can call me." That cracked me up. Anyway, I've thought about the canons but I'm worried I won't be able to export 24f footage to tape with premiere. Have you ever heard of any workarounds? I did a search and didn't see any.

[Barry Gribble]

Matt,

Thanks again... yeah I totally agree that script is king.

I have not worked in premiere since I got the camera, so I didn't even know there was a problem. Have you tried asking in the World Premiere forum here?

[Dylan Couper]

Normally I'd say a JVC HD100 or HD110

Except that you are going to be travelling all over the place, where small and portable wins the day.

Go with the XHA1 as Barry suggested. It'll let you run and gun without getting looked at twice, which is great for documentary work in less safe environments.

[Eric Darling]

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

Sorry, that's incorrect. There's no significant difference between 24P and 24F. See Barry's post above.

I had been operating under the assumption that 24F was somehow not true progressive, and hence the reason for Canon naming it differently. I understand now that it's a semantic argument, by and large, and not a particularly important point of consideration after all. But, I stand by my original statement, which, technically speaking was hardly incorrect.

[Chris Hurd]

So called "true" progressive is merely a marketing term. Canon Frame modes are indeed progressive. With any major NLE, the same capture settings for 24P will also capture 24F. The reason why the computer can't detect the difference is because there isn't any. And that's all that matters. Hope this helps,

[David Tamés]

I'm a big fan of the Panasonic HVX200, I love P2, and from that perspective I have to say, the Canon XH-A1 is an excellent value for the money and produces amazing images for the price. I've spent the past two years shooting here and there with the Sony HVR-A1U, HVR-Z1U, JVC H100, Panasonic HVX200, Sony XDCAM HD, and after having worked with all these cameras, and experimenting with various Canons, if I had to buy an HDV camera right now, the Canon XH-A1 might probably be it. It's a solid performer.

[Robert McGee]

If it where me, I would let the films budget dictate what camera I would buy if I already didn't have one. Because you don't just want a film look so it can be printed to film but you also want full 1920x1080 HD so the picture will look the best it can.

I believe the Canon HV20 could be used for a standerd dramatic picture for both theatrical and home video distribution. But you also need to consiter the cost of a 2K scan if you want to go to theaters with both film and digital prints.

[Alex Humphrey]

Well I got the HD110 and am fairly happy with it. I borrowed a Canon A1 last week and shot with it. Here are my thoughts to anyone still looking. Biggest thing is to declare what you are intending it to be used for.

For myself a full sized manual camera on a shoe string budget. Coming from 16mm and 35mm film cameras, and having had Sony DV, DVPro, I hoped to never work on a narrative project again with a handy-cam type of camera. I would have prefered a Panasonic HPX-500, but at $10,000 for the body (lens not included) it just wasn't in my price range.

1. JVC wins hands down for 90% of what I shoot, (narrative and sports from tripod. fully manual control)
2. Canon's form factor (ie handycam) I've never liked from the early Sony days
3. Canon would make a great back up or B camera for the JVC if it were smaller and cheaper.
4. Dynamic range and fstop is not as wide as the JVC.
5. Canon's lens (optically) is a step above the JVC stock 16x lens, but I would bet the optional $2,800 17x is better, and certainly the 13x ($6,500) lens smacks them all down in the mud (I've used the 13x before, the 17x I've just seen some footage and I don't know the aperture that was used)
6. The Canon's manual settings I never got a very wide aperture range, if memory serves... (2.8-8) as if there was some limitation built in so that the wider and narrower apertures were excluded to keep people from getting at either end of the range. For instance if you take the JVC's 16x lens, zoom to max tele (88+) and have the aperture at 22f, well it's pretty mushy on the edges, but the exposure is good. The Canon I didn't have the choice, it just over exposed at 1/48th at ND2. Maybe the owner of the Canon had it locked out somehow, but I was on full manual.
7. Controls and layout of the JVC I prefer no question. This can not be understated. Though the Canon has many manual controls, it's still cumbersom, less obvious and the entire unit seemd cheap and plastic while the JVC is mostly metal and has a more solid feel. A real manual lens vs a servo auto lens with manual over rides is huge to me.. and a replaceable lens for purchase or rent sealed the deal with me. The stock 16x if shot at 4f- 5.6 is very good, and of course the 17x and 13x and if you can afford it the 18x are king. There are now several adapters to mount Nikor 35mm prime and zoom lenses directly on the film plane of the JVC. Agaoin a winner for me.
8. Smaller size of Canon would be fun to use more casually, but it's still large and not invisible as say a canon HV30 or similar sony would be... so for me it's too small or too large... but other people obviously love it. For a B-Camera I would want something in between the Canon HV30 and the A1. But they don't make one.

9. Color. Pretty good on both. I know the JVC color menu selection pretty well to get what I want. The Canon was pretty close to how I like it to begin with, so I'm sure anyone could choose their pallet in camer with minimal effort.

10. 24p/24f. Both looked good. JVC's 24p movment looked better to me...but it's staring at the HD screen and deciding.. it' snot night and day like converting interlaced to progressive. Biggest difference here is computer time. 720p 24fps HDV has HALF the GOP of the 1080i 24f (60i). It also has much less band width. Don't be fooled by the higher resolution statement. I'm fairly sure the Canon is similar to the Sony in that it's 1080 24f is an interlaced field that is field doubled to fill in the lines.. so it's actually equal to or lower resolution than the 720p. HOWEVER, the lens on the Canon is a little better than the stock JVC 16x lens. So I haven't decided which one is better. Also on the JVC I have turned my edge enhancement to Low or OFF 95% of the time. The canon was on auto an d presumably means that some sort of edge enhancment was on. So no clear winner here... though I tend to TRUST the sharpness of the Canon A1 lens more than the stock JVC 16 lens. Both looked good.. and I think the Canon looked snappier.. perhaps due to edge enhancement was on, and a better lens. The lower dynamic range also snapped the image... (which I DON'T like) but it was still very good.

11. 1080i 60i? Uh... means nothing to me. I couldn't care less. If 1080i is important to you, then look at the Canon or the JVC HD200 series. Again my interest is narrative to DVD or eventual BluRay or theather projection. I have yet to be impressed with any interlaced video produced on DVD and shown on a modern HDTV. Obvsiously a 1080i source for DVD is going to look better than 480i (NTSC) source does, but it does nothing for me. DVD doesn't handle 30p source well at all, so I can't say 30p is a viable choice for anything.. either....though I do LIKE 30p in it's HD form. Downconverting to DVD, it fails in my book. So for narrative work, 24p or 24f is the way to go. The Canon does have the option for 1080i that the JVC HD110 does not. The JVC's 30p can be interlaced fairly well though JVC's 200 series shooting 60p would be a better choice.

12. General working with software: The JVC was a HUGE issue with Apple's Final Cut Pro! I'm not sure it's resolved yet! Apple's capture system would randomly cut up the capturing footage resulting in inconsistant dropped frames. Work around? It forced me to get a Focus Enhancement's DTE drive. (made for the JVC). I recommend the pro versions for either the Canon or the JVC or Panasonic. IT gives the editor all the advantages markeded by AVCHD/P2 and other formats that fail to deliver. I can shoot 3 hours of HD footage, get home.. transfer 3 hours of footage in under 20 minutes to my Apple tower, and start editing.. no capture, no reincoding. The Canon 24f iwth FCS 1 with the update... NO issues... works as advertised. (Nice) Render time and downconversion? JVC's 24p renders and downconverts in LESS THAN HALF THE TIME of the Canon's 24f. So if you are editing on a time schedule (time = money) I tend to go with the JVC.

Is either camera perfect? nope. Would I recomend one over the other? Still depends upon your needs.

1. Narrative work and sports, JVC. Can't beat manual focus and think about a lens upgrade. If you use Apple's FCP plan on a DTE drive, but Canon users should as well. It's nice.
2. 1080i/24f option with an emphasis on realty shows/sports and some narrative work, it's a great choice.
3. Fun videos and high school/college starting film interest. and cheap B-Camera I would probably go with a Canon HV30. Cheap and has 24f, though I hear it's a different flavor of 24f than the larger Canon 24f, though I have not confirmed that. I expect any current NLE to edit it fine. If it falls off boom and falls into the lake your out $700, not $5,000.

Any buyer's remorse? Well sometimes. With the Canon you get a good 24f setting, coupled with say a Varizoom controller to give you decent control over the lousy lens control of the Canon/Sony handy cam controls. Best thing with the Canon, there is nothing to second guess about lenses. It is what is is.. if you are unhappy, buy a better camera. The JVC gives you the option of replaceable lenses and if you edit with FCP, unless Apple has fixed THEIR ISSUE, (PC and even Premier Pro for Apple have no issues) then you will need a PRO-DTE drive by Focus Enhancements that you SHOULD get anyway. If I had gotten a Canon, my next camera would be a HPX500 or similar camera. With my JVC my next camera might be a JVC HD200 or a Pansonic HPX-500, no telling.

Both are solid choices.... at the end of the day I could have spent less with the Canon, but I still get more dynamic range and easy manual control on the JVC and shorter (half) render time and down conversion. Any one of those reasons makes the case for me. I just need to get a 17x or 13x Fujinon lens, then I'll be happy... till I think about a HPX-500 $8,000 with a $8,000 lens... and maybe $4,000 in P2 cards, and another $2,000 in extra hard drives.....but I'll have to sell a movie to Sony Pictures first. Well there is a chance right?

Hmmm Some follow up research indicates that the Canon 24f in the 3 chip cameras reportedly is fully scanned then repeated instead of Sony's 60i field doubled technique for achieving 24f. Hence why no one complains how 24f looks on a Canon. Hmmm... So maybe it's a better choice than say a Sony.... but I still prefer my JVC, with the statement that the Canon is a nice less expensive way to go.