Just ordered an HD1000!

[Bryan Daugherty]

Robert, I have indeed gotten professional quality results out of my HD1000U. It does not have the flexibility of some of the more expensive cams out there but under the right conditions and in the right hands it does get great results. I would say it is squarely prosumer and could be considered a low-end professional model, but is a far cry from consumer. And while the body is a nice touch for event work, we all know it is the results that matter.

[Jeff Emery]

Originally Posted by Robert M Wright

I don't care if the cameras look like toys and say "Mattel" on them, so long as they indeed shoot premium quality video.

Robert,
What quality do you consider the HD1000 video to be?. I have one HD1000. I consider it to be very capable of shooting very high quality video. It can't be fairly compared to a 2/3" chip studio camera but it does a great job despite 50% of its volume being made up of air.

Would I buy another? Probably not. But would I recommend it to someone that wants the professional looking form-factor at an affordable price? Yes. I've noticed here and at other sites, the HD1000 gets snubbed. That doesn't faze me though. Virtually every job I do with it enables me to buy another new one if I wanted to. My clients are happy with the results. And despite being 50% air, it impresses the client.

It may be lipstick on a pig to some (although the HC7 isn't really a pig), but the client is willing to pay me extra because I put the lipstick on the pig. And that works for me. It ain't about reality. It's all about perception.

Jeff

[Kren Barnes]

Its the person and not the camera...i've seen some better videos shot on a $300 (walmart) video camera compared to someone with Fx1000 or XL2

[Bryan Daugherty]

I find that when one goes to extremes in any direction, that reality is closer to center. Yes the person behind the camera is the biggest piece in the puzzle but the equipment does make a difference. If it didn't matter, why would you upgrade at all?

I have gotten great results out of my HD1000U. Recently, I got a job that the former vendor used a JVC GY-DV5100 . One might argue that this is because I am comparing an HDV camera to an SD camera but the delivery was DVD so the final output was the same resolution. Was the only difference me? I don't think so. It was a combination of my style, commitment to quality workmanship, and my equipment. So we have a $1600 HDV camera going toe to toe with a JVC $6000 camera ( JVC | GY-DV5100L17 at B&H online ). Does the client care about the price of my equipment or the quality of my work?

[Robert M Wright]

Back to my (incredibly) hypothetical wedding (to a woman without virtue or otherwise)...

I wouldn't hire somebody to shoot my wedding (unless it was outdoors perhaps) and (especially) the reception with an HD1000. The low-light performance just isn't there. Skill can't change the laws of physics. (I'd also want progressive video.)

Originally Posted by Jeff Emery

It may be lipstick on a pig to some (although the HC7 isn't really a pig)...

An HC7 isn't a bad consumer camera at all, but I wouldn't hire someone to shoot my wedding and reception with it either.

[Don Bloom]

Originally Posted by Robert M Wright

Back to my (incredibly) hypothetical wedding (to a woman without virtue or otherwise)...

I wouldn't hire somebody to shoot my wedding (unless it was outdoors perhaps) and (especially) the reception with an HD1000. The low-light performance just isn't there. Skill can't change the laws of physics. (I'd also want progressive video.)



An HC7 isn't a bad consumer camera at all, but I wouldn't hire someone to shoot my wedding and reception with it either.

yeah but do couples REALLY ask you about your equipment? In the last 15 years I've had very few and in the last 8 years I've had 1 ask about my gear. It's been my experience that they don't seem to care - they've seen my work and expect their wedding to be of the same quality as the other work of mine they've seen.
Corporate clients on the other hand DO ask, far more often than not and they really aren't asking. They're telling me they want SD or HD, 16:9 or 4:3 tape or not, most are pretty specific but brides and grooms, no.

[Jacob Malotavinksy]

I watched a horrible wedding dvd with a friend the other day. It opened with a photo montage with the worst powerpoint type transitions you can imagine, twice per photo: photo1, transition A to photo1, transition B to photo2, transition C to photo2 again and so on with a different transition every time.

The ceremony was shot with one camera on a tripod with constant, uncoordinated zooms and pans, hunting for shots like a drunken sailor. No editing, no cuts, just one long dizzying take.

The entire time though, my friend was excitedly pointing out who each person was, telling me stories about the family and events from the wedding day that weren't caught on tape. She didn't care about the terrible videography, video noise, long boring shots of obviously bored people waiting in the church, etc. She was just happy to have her family on DVD.

It seems to me like there are plenty of couples with truly limited budgets who would be thrilled to have an attentive amateur videographer with an HD1000 deliver the best service they can within the limits of the hardware they have.

[Bryan Daugherty]

Recently I hired a 2nd op to shot a (professionally lit mind you) musical with me. He is very good and shoots with a SONY EX1. Here are 2 comparison images. One is from my HD1000U and the other is from the EX1. These are raw captures from my timeline which I have not altered. Do you see the difference here? Does it justify the price point difference? Which is which?

[Adam Gold]

Wow, very nice shots, and they make your point nicely. My *guess* is it's the EX1 on the right simply because it looks a little less noisy, but frankly I'd be proud to have either shot in one of my videos. I doubt you'd notice any difference unless you were watching it on BD on a huge screen.

[Jacob Malotavinksy]

my guess is hd1000 on the right because there are some halos around the whites when you magnify it and the colors look a little more neutral on the left.

so which one is which?

[Robert M Wright]

The EX1 looks to be on the left. They're reasonably close in the good lighting (and focus appears slightly soft to me, which tends to equalize image quality). Drop the lighting down to what you'd have available in a typical older church or at a wedding reception though, and the difference in image quality would be unmistakable.

[Robert M Wright]

I'm really not trying to knock the HD1000. I'm sure you can get great images, just like my HV20 can shoot stunning images ...under the right conditions. I wouldn't consider an HV20, transplanted into a shoulder mount casing, a professional grade camera either though. I have some low cost wrenches from Walmart in my toolbox, that I indeed fix my car with, but I'd only be using Snap-on wrenches if I worked as a professional mechanic 40 hours a week.

[Noel Lising]

I have survived for 2 years shooting with a Panasonic DVC 7, single CCD camera before moving to a 3 chip camera. Not 1 complaint from the Bride & Groom, a Groom once asked me if I shoot with a 3CCD, I said yes but he never saw difference. My point is I have to 2nd Brad, with the right person an HD1000U could do wonders.

Okay I am justifying the HD1000U vs. FX7 purchase I am planning for next year. With almost $900 PRICE difference I am leaning towards the HD1000U, with $ 900 extra I can buy MicroPanel Light & a Glide Cam.

[Robert M Wright]

Originally Posted by Don Bloom

yeah but do couples REALLY ask you about your equipment? In the last 15 years I've had very few and in the last 8 years I've had 1 ask about my gear. It's been my experience that they don't seem to care - they've seen my work and expect their wedding to be of the same quality as the other work of mine they've seen.
Corporate clients on the other hand DO ask, far more often than not and they really aren't asking. They're telling me they want SD or HD, 16:9 or 4:3 tape or not, most are pretty specific but brides and grooms, no.

That's a point well taken, and really a sad commentary. I was once considering doing weddings, but it appears that there just isn't much demand for quality wedding video, nor much willingness to pay for it. It amazes me that many couples put a high value on stills, but don't seem to care hardly at all about the video.

[Robert M Wright]

Originally Posted by Noel Lising

I have survived for 2 years shooting with a Panasonic DVC 7, single CCD camera before moving to a 3 chip camera. Not 1 complaint from the Bride & Groom, a Groom once asked me if I shoot with a 3CCD, I said yes but he never saw difference. My point is I have to 2nd Brad, with the right person an HD1000U could do wonders.

Okay I am justifying the HD1000U vs. FX7 purchase I am planning for next year. With almost $900 PRICE difference I am leaning towards the HD1000U, with $ 900 extra I can buy MicroPanel Light & a Glide Cam.

Can you get an HD1000 for $1100 nowadays? (FX7s list for $2000 now.) You might consider a used FX1. They're getting dang cheap on the used market nowadays.