XhA1 or GL2 for weddings? at DVinfo.net

Saul Moreno · June 18th, 2007, 01:08 PM

Hello everyone,
I am new to the forums here and I am just amazed at how much support there is for pretty much any questions. In any case I am trying to decide what camera to purchase for recording weddings. I am currently only going to be putting it to DVD for customers and not sure when I would start going to HD-DVD or Blue-Ray. I will be working with other cameramen that have a XL2 and GL2, I am also concerned with the quality of video between the cameras and the how the export of the HD video would work between SD and HD.
Do you guys think that investing the extra money for the HD would be a smart decision when most of my work will be for weddings? I will be using PP2.0, AE, and Encore.

Many Thanks,

Saul

Alastair Brown · June 18th, 2007, 01:35 PM

The XH-A1 gets my vote. OK...so the other guys have XL2's etc but...why restrict yourself? The footage from my XH-A1 is just Night and Day when I look back at my old XL1 stuff.

Patrick Moreau · June 18th, 2007, 03:01 PM

I would go for the A1 for sure. IT is many time bette than the Gl2, and that is before you even look at the SD/HD difference. The cam itself, the picture quality, and all the options are much much better, plus it is newer technology so the extra investment upfront will come back to you when you upgrade.

Patrick

Eric Manacsa · June 18th, 2007, 03:37 PM

I was in your shoes a couple of months ago. I went with the A1.

1) all the great features
2) to be prepared for when clients commonly ask for HD
3) to avoid the possibility that the GL2 value will sink as more HD cams become available
4) the current Canon $250 rebate (hurry up)

You can output HD to SD (downconvert) from the camera although some prefer to downconvert via software.

Mark Holland · June 19th, 2007, 06:24 AM

I'm currently shooting weddings with a GL-1 and a GL-2 with very acceptable results. (ie; happy customers) However, if I were starting over today, based on my current experience, and if my budget allowed, I'd go with the A1 over the GL-2.

Mark

Buba Kastorski · June 20th, 2007, 07:19 AM

I would suggest you before going with any camera, take a sample footage with A1 and GL, with A1 shoot in HD and SD mode then put all footage on the same track with the footage from the other guys you'll be working with,
also combining HD and SD footage is not as straight forward as dealing with just one format in your project;
recently I got myself FX1 as a second cam for DSR390, and I've made a mistake, no FX1 is a wonderful cam., but not in SD mode, and downconverting takes time and effects the PQ. HD cam for SD video is not a good idea (IMHO)
HD is a next step in video production, but so far none of my clients asked for it.
Cheers.

Josh Chesarek · June 20th, 2007, 07:53 AM

I just shot a wedding with a GL2 and XH-A1 for a friend. I was moving around with the A1 and GL2 was left in the back. It was mainly for filler when I was moving around witht he main camera (A1). You can certainly tell the difference between the two cameras. Especially when filming areas of the church that were dark. In generall the GL2 footage was good but the A1 was just better overall. The A1 is were things are headed so I would recomend going with that if your budget can take it.

Saul Moreno · June 20th, 2007, 04:24 PM

This is what I was pretty much expecting but always good to see what everyone is thinking and doing. I will be ordering mine hopefully this week.

Ger Griffin · June 21st, 2007, 03:26 PM

Saul im currently trying to decide the same thing.
my reasons for this however are not in relation to hd or sd.
sd is the only way i would work even with this A1.
ideally id film in hd and down convert while capturing. this way ill have my footage on tape in hd for the future.

but my main issue is in relation to widescreen. you said your buddies shot with an Xl2 (widescreen capable) and Gl2(not)

without fully opening this can of worms this should probably be your main consideration for purshasing the a1 over the gl2.
in any case i reckon the a1 wins out even over a new xl2 due to the HD option.

Saul Moreno · June 21st, 2007, 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ger Griffin

but my main issue is in relation to widescreen. you said your buddies shot with an Xl2 (widescreen capable) and Gl2(not)

without fully opening this can of worms this should probably be your main consideration for purshasing the a1 over the gl2.
in any case i reckon the a1 wins out even over a new xl2 due to the HD option.

This is a very good point, I did not think too much about that. Well I think it films in a 4:3 widescreen correct, but not in a widescreen resolution. Still anyways that is going to be diffucult to work it seems. It would be nice to hear if anyone else has had this problem which I am pretty sure someone here is doing it this way.

Gregg Havens · June 21st, 2007, 09:14 PM

Saul,
I have only done one wedding (for the daughter of a friend). I used my A1 and Vegas on my P4 3.2GHz PC. I found the editing process from the native .m2t files to DV very easy and only the rendering took much time. I used one of the normal setting to use the 16:9 with black bars top and bottom on a 4:3 display. I really did like the results. The quality of the SD from HD is outstanding. I did have a consumer camera as a 2nd but I found it to be so different from my A1 that I ended up only using the A1 footage.
I bought the A1 for the HD future but it produces an outstanding SD result. My newboot opinion. A1

gregg

Ger Griffin · June 22nd, 2007, 07:41 AM

if you do a search in this forum using "gl2 widescreen" you'll find an abundance of info from very knowledgeable people on this subject.

i've concluded that widescreen on gl2 is less than ideal, especially if your trying to cut it together with something with native widescreen (xl2). the quality loss will become apparent.

also something else possibly worth considering is that a new or second hand xl2 will shoot good sd widescreen with timecode. possibly a massive timesaving feature for editing two sources together. as far as i know the a1 doesent have that ability. speak to the guys youll be shooting with and ask them if they use timecode.

at the end of the day, for me, the priority is good quality work done as quickly as possible, and there is always a compromise.

June 18th, 2007, 01:08 PM	#1
Saul Moreno Regular Crew Join Date: May 2007 Location: Laguna Niguel, CA Posts: 25	XhA1 or GL2 for weddings? Hello everyone, I am new to the forums here and I am just amazed at how much support there is for pretty much any questions. In any case I am trying to decide what camera to purchase for recording weddings. I am currently only going to be putting it to DVD for customers and not sure when I would start going to HD-DVD or Blue-Ray. I will be working with other cameramen that have a XL2 and GL2, I am also concerned with the quality of video between the cameras and the how the export of the HD video would work between SD and HD. Do you guys think that investing the extra money for the HD would be a smart decision when most of my work will be for weddings? I will be using PP2.0, AE, and Encore. Many Thanks, Saul

June 18th, 2007, 03:37 PM	#4
Eric Manacsa Regular Crew Join Date: May 2007 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 36	I was in your shoes a couple of months ago. I went with the A1. 1) all the great features 2) to be prepared for when clients commonly ask for HD 3) to avoid the possibility that the GL2 value will sink as more HD cams become available 4) the current Canon $250 rebate (hurry up) You can output HD to SD (downconvert) from the camera although some prefer to downconvert via software. __________________ 3 Canon Cameras and Sony Vegas

June 19th, 2007, 06:24 AM	#5
Mark Holland Major Player Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Central North Carolina (Raleigh, Durham, & surrounding areas) Posts: 301	I'm currently shooting weddings with a GL-1 and a GL-2 with very acceptable results. (ie; happy customers) However, if I were starting over today, based on my current experience, and if my budget allowed, I'd go with the A1 over the GL-2. Mark __________________ These are my own opinions, based on my own mistakes...

June 20th, 2007, 07:53 AM	#7
Josh Chesarek Major Player Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Winter Park, FL Posts: 978	I just shot a wedding with a GL2 and XH-A1 for a friend. I was moving around with the A1 and GL2 was left in the back. It was mainly for filler when I was moving around witht he main camera (A1). You can certainly tell the difference between the two cameras. Especially when filming areas of the church that were dark. In generall the GL2 footage was good but the A1 was just better overall. The A1 is were things are headed so I would recomend going with that if your budget can take it. __________________ Simple Thought Productions - Life @ 30,000 Words per second

June 20th, 2007, 04:24 PM	#8
Saul Moreno Regular Crew Join Date: May 2007 Location: Laguna Niguel, CA Posts: 25	Thanks This is what I was pretty much expecting but always good to see what everyone is thinking and doing. I will be ordering mine hopefully this week.

June 18th, 2007, 01:35 PM	#2
Alastair Brown Major Player Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Glasgow/Scotland Posts: 626	The XH-A1 gets my vote. OK...so the other guys have XL2's etc but...why restrict yourself? The footage from my XH-A1 is just Night and Day when I look back at my old XL1 stuff.

June 18th, 2007, 03:01 PM	#3
Patrick Moreau Still Motion Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 1,186	I would go for the A1 for sure. IT is many time bette than the Gl2, and that is before you even look at the SD/HD difference. The cam itself, the picture quality, and all the options are much much better, plus it is newer technology so the extra investment upfront will come back to you when you upgrade. Patrick

June 20th, 2007, 07:19 AM	#6
Buba Kastorski Trustee Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Toronto Posts: 1,414	I would suggest you before going with any camera, take a sample footage with A1 and GL, with A1 shoot in HD and SD mode then put all footage on the same track with the footage from the other guys you'll be working with, also combining HD and SD footage is not as straight forward as dealing with just one format in your project; recently I got myself FX1 as a second cam for DSR390, and I've made a mistake, no FX1 is a wonderful cam., but not in SD mode, and downconverting takes time and effects the PQ. HD cam for SD video is not a good idea (IMHO) HD is a next step in video production, but so far none of my clients asked for it. Cheers.

June 21st, 2007, 03:26 PM	#9
Ger Griffin Major Player Join Date: May 2007 Location: Ireland Posts: 579	Saul im currently trying to decide the same thing. my reasons for this however are not in relation to hd or sd. sd is the only way i would work even with this A1. ideally id film in hd and down convert while capturing. this way ill have my footage on tape in hd for the future. but my main issue is in relation to widescreen. you said your buddies shot with an Xl2 (widescreen capable) and Gl2(not) without fully opening this can of worms this should probably be your main consideration for purshasing the a1 over the gl2. in any case i reckon the a1 wins out even over a new xl2 due to the HD option.

June 21st, 2007, 09:14 PM	#11
Gregg Havens Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: caledonia MS Posts: 26	from a novice at this stuff Saul, I have only done one wedding (for the daughter of a friend). I used my A1 and Vegas on my P4 3.2GHz PC. I found the editing process from the native .m2t files to DV very easy and only the rendering took much time. I used one of the normal setting to use the 16:9 with black bars top and bottom on a 4:3 display. I really did like the results. The quality of the SD from HD is outstanding. I did have a consumer camera as a 2nd but I found it to be so different from my A1 that I ended up only using the A1 footage. I bought the A1 for the HD future but it produces an outstanding SD result. My newboot opinion. A1 gregg __________________ Gregg Havens DundeeYank Video

June 22nd, 2007, 07:41 AM	#12
Ger Griffin Major Player Join Date: May 2007 Location: Ireland Posts: 579	if you do a search in this forum using "gl2 widescreen" you'll find an abundance of info from very knowledgeable people on this subject. i've concluded that widescreen on gl2 is less than ideal, especially if your trying to cut it together with something with native widescreen (xl2). the quality loss will become apparent. also something else possibly worth considering is that a new or second hand xl2 will shoot good sd widescreen with timecode. possibly a massive timesaving feature for editing two sources together. as far as i know the a1 doesent have that ability. speak to the guys youll be shooting with and ask them if they use timecode. at the end of the day, for me, the priority is good quality work done as quickly as possible, and there is always a compromise.