HDR-FX1 vs. Panasonic DVX100B at DVinfo.net

Chris Ruona · June 25th, 2006, 12:04 AM

currently have a VX2100, considering upgrading, dont know which to choose, both seem like solid candidates, any help looking from the FX1 side?

Chris Barcellos · June 25th, 2006, 12:35 AM

I stepped up from the VX2000 to the FX1. If you like the Sony no non-sense style, FX1 continues that tradition. It is HDV and it is SD, and true 16:9 in both (not like the psuedo 16:9 in VX and PDs). It will also shoot 4:3 DV.

You will have trouble not shooting in HDV, once you see it, and do some work with it. It just such a great image !! It has a lot of manual adjustment capability, and some other nice features (scene transition for one.)

I haven't seen or worked with the Panasonic DVX100B, but I understand it is not HDV or 16:9. That makes the choice easy in my eyes.

Randy Chisolm · June 25th, 2006, 04:14 PM

I see what yer sayin' Chris, but I'm not sure its all that simple for someone looking to upgrade, because they may be looking for a small upgrade rather than a huge leap into a format that'll soon be changing (mpeg2 hdv to avc hdv).

If the person doesn't care about native progressive or 24p then yea the FX1. If the person has the hardware and software capable of processing hdv either for 60i or converting to 24p - then sure the FX1. If the person isn't going to be shooting in low light situations that don't allow for use of add-on light sources...then again the FX1.

But, if any of these are going to be issues, or if the person isn't particularly concerned with hdv or hd in general, then it's not always a clear cut thing. I myself personally had to think long and hard between the two, because while they are two completely different animals being progressive, 24p, sd versus interlaced, hdv (and while the fx1 has sd, because of its less sensitive low light shooting, its not necessarily better in everyone's eyes) - they have their plusses and shortcomings which really depends on what the individual needs.

Still in the end, I too opted for the FX1. Something about paying the same (if not more) for a slightly dated camera + FX1 ability to capture dvcpro hd, sorta fell more into my needs.

Bob Zimmerman · June 26th, 2006, 03:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randy Chisolm

I see what yer sayin' Chris, but I'm not sure its all that simple for someone looking to upgrade, because they may be looking for a small upgrade rather than a huge leap into a format that'll soon be changing (mpeg2 hdv to avc hdv).

If the person doesn't care about native progressive or 24p then yea the FX1. If the person has the hardware and software capable of processing hdv either for 60i or converting to 24p - then sure the FX1. If the person isn't going to be shooting in low light situations that don't allow for use of add-on light sources...then again the FX1.

But, if any of these are going to be issues, or if the person isn't particularly concerned with hdv or hd in general, then it's not always a clear cut thing. I myself personally had to think long and hard between the two, because while they are two completely different animals being progressive, 24p, sd versus interlaced, hdv (and while the fx1 has sd, because of its less sensitive low light shooting, its not necessarily better in everyone's eyes) - they have their plusses and shortcomings which really depends on what the individual needs.

Still in the end, I too opted for the FX1. Something about paying the same (if not more) for a slightly dated camera + FX1 ability to capture dvcpro hd, sorta fell more into my needs.

it can capture dvcpro?

Brian Carrell · June 26th, 2006, 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randy Chisolm

FX1 ability to capture dvcpro hd,

???? - Tell me more, how is this done?

Pieter Saayman · June 26th, 2006, 01:04 PM

Hi Chris Ruona,

I recently bought 2 FX1's.

I would go for HDV no matter which make. So, if the choice is FX1 vs. DVX100B, then defenately the FX1.

Why pay more or less the same for old technolegy if you could have the newer technolegy?

It might be a bit more work to edit, but the results are worth it!

Noah Hayes · June 26th, 2006, 04:21 PM

I've actually shot some stuff that I'm sorry to say I had to use two DVX100's and my FX1... it wasn't fun trying to get them to mesh, but thats all I had access to. For me, it was more of a FX1/Z1U/HVX200 thing, as I definately did not want to be stuck with 4:3 SD. I really wanted the 24p capabilities and XLR connections of the HVX200 and DVX100, but my budget restricted me to the FX1 or DVX100. And my FX1 with a Beachtek DXA-6 gives me two XLR inputs with phantom power, and the 24p isn't critical for me, but I'm not gonna get into a "filmlook" debate. Sorry I tend to ramble on...

Simple version of the above:
Decide if you want/need built-in XLR connections and need 24p
Decide if you can stand 4:3 SD
I the answer is no to either/boh of the above...get an FX1

If I had the extra grand to spend on the Z1U at the time I would've done it. Can you tell us a little more about what you're interested in doing with the cam? By the way I'm yet another person who LOVES his FX1.

Mack Fisher · June 26th, 2006, 10:42 PM

in my opinion fx1 all the way, 24p is overated, hell progressive is overated. Unless its super slow mo, or and effect etc...

Heath McKnight · July 9th, 2006, 07:22 AM

As far as I can tell, the FX1/Z1 cannot capture DVCPro HD, only Sony's DVCam.

heath

Kevin Shaw · July 10th, 2006, 01:34 AM

I wouldn't call the DVX100 a step up from the VX2100 for most purposes, and if you're interested in what the DVX has to offer then consider getting the HVX200 instead.

SD-only video cameras are heading for obsolescence for professional purposes, and are arguably not a good investment. I'd say get the FX1, with the caveat that it's not as sensitive in low light as your VX2100.

John Rofrano · July 10th, 2006, 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin Shaw

SD-only video cameras are heading for obsolescence for professional purposes, and are arguably not a good investment.

Ditto. I went through the same decision recently and purchased a Z1U. It makes no sense to buy an SD camera today when you can have HDV for the same price. Buy the FX1 and get a Beachtek adapter if you need XLR inputs. You will never regret it.

~jr

Tom Hardwick · July 11th, 2006, 01:47 AM

I'd say go the FGX1 route too. The DVX is no VX2100 upgrade, especially with its slower lens that's only a 10x zoom as well. If you can stretch to the Z1 (rather than the FX1 + Beachtek) then do so. I've got both anf the Z1 is so much nicer to use. Focus assist, for starters.

tom.

June 25th, 2006, 12:04 AM	#1
Chris Ruona Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 31	HDR-FX1 vs. Panasonic DVX100B currently have a VX2100, considering upgrading, dont know which to choose, both seem like solid candidates, any help looking from the FX1 side?

June 25th, 2006, 12:35 AM	#2
Chris Barcellos Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Elk Grove CA Posts: 6,838	I stepped up from the VX2000 to the FX1. If you like the Sony no non-sense style, FX1 continues that tradition. It is HDV and it is SD, and true 16:9 in both (not like the psuedo 16:9 in VX and PDs). It will also shoot 4:3 DV. You will have trouble not shooting in HDV, once you see it, and do some work with it. It just such a great image !! It has a lot of manual adjustment capability, and some other nice features (scene transition for one.) I haven't seen or worked with the Panasonic DVX100B, but I understand it is not HDV or 16:9. That makes the choice easy in my eyes. __________________ Chris J. Barcellos

June 26th, 2006, 10:42 PM	#8
Mack Fisher Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 158	in my opinion fx1 all the way, 24p is overated, hell progressive is overated. Unless its super slow mo, or and effect etc... Last edited by Mack Fisher; June 27th, 2006 at 09:26 AM.

July 9th, 2006, 07:22 AM	#9
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	As far as I can tell, the FX1/Z1 cannot capture DVCPro HD, only Sony's DVCam. heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

June 25th, 2006, 04:14 PM	#3
Randy Chisolm New Boot Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Atlanta Posts: 7	I see what yer sayin' Chris, but I'm not sure its all that simple for someone looking to upgrade, because they may be looking for a small upgrade rather than a huge leap into a format that'll soon be changing (mpeg2 hdv to avc hdv). If the person doesn't care about native progressive or 24p then yea the FX1. If the person has the hardware and software capable of processing hdv either for 60i or converting to 24p - then sure the FX1. If the person isn't going to be shooting in low light situations that don't allow for use of add-on light sources...then again the FX1. But, if any of these are going to be issues, or if the person isn't particularly concerned with hdv or hd in general, then it's not always a clear cut thing. I myself personally had to think long and hard between the two, because while they are two completely different animals being progressive, 24p, sd versus interlaced, hdv (and while the fx1 has sd, because of its less sensitive low light shooting, its not necessarily better in everyone's eyes) - they have their plusses and shortcomings which really depends on what the individual needs. Still in the end, I too opted for the FX1. Something about paying the same (if not more) for a slightly dated camera + FX1 ability to capture dvcpro hd, sorta fell more into my needs.

June 26th, 2006, 01:04 PM	#6
Pieter Saayman New Boot Join Date: May 2006 Location: South Africa Posts: 10	Hi Chris Ruona, I recently bought 2 FX1's. I would go for HDV no matter which make. So, if the choice is FX1 vs. DVX100B, then defenately the FX1. Why pay more or less the same for old technolegy if you could have the newer technolegy? It might be a bit more work to edit, but the results are worth it!

June 26th, 2006, 04:21 PM	#7
Noah Hayes Major Player Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Sterling, Virginia Posts: 226	I've actually shot some stuff that I'm sorry to say I had to use two DVX100's and my FX1... it wasn't fun trying to get them to mesh, but thats all I had access to. For me, it was more of a FX1/Z1U/HVX200 thing, as I definately did not want to be stuck with 4:3 SD. I really wanted the 24p capabilities and XLR connections of the HVX200 and DVX100, but my budget restricted me to the FX1 or DVX100. And my FX1 with a Beachtek DXA-6 gives me two XLR inputs with phantom power, and the 24p isn't critical for me, but I'm not gonna get into a "filmlook" debate. Sorry I tend to ramble on... Simple version of the above: Decide if you want/need built-in XLR connections and need 24p Decide if you can stand 4:3 SD I the answer is no to either/boh of the above...get an FX1 If I had the extra grand to spend on the Z1U at the time I would've done it. Can you tell us a little more about what you're interested in doing with the cam? By the way I'm yet another person who LOVES his FX1.

July 10th, 2006, 01:34 AM	#10
Kevin Shaw Inner Circle Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Sacramento, CA Posts: 2,488	I wouldn't call the DVX100 a step up from the VX2100 for most purposes, and if you're interested in what the DVX has to offer then consider getting the HVX200 instead. SD-only video cameras are heading for obsolescence for professional purposes, and are arguably not a good investment. I'd say get the FX1, with the caveat that it's not as sensitive in low light as your VX2100.

July 11th, 2006, 01:47 AM	#12
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	I'd say go the FGX1 route too. The DVX is no VX2100 upgrade, especially with its slower lens that's only a 10x zoom as well. If you can stretch to the Z1 (rather than the FX1 + Beachtek) then do so. I've got both anf the Z1 is so much nicer to use. Focus assist, for starters. tom.