XL1s or dvx100 ? best film look ? - 'Q' for real film heads

[Lex colby]

Hi,

I know this might seem a redundant 'Q' on an s8 forum but, I figure this probably the best place since - I can get a pov from the "real" film heads out there - hopefully.. .

I am looking for a decent DV cam - maybe xl1s or dvx100 (hd is to new & exspensive for now)

I am looking for one that has the best film look or movie mode or 24 p or whatever they call it. I know that some people here must of used one of these models (xl1s or dvx100) & I figure you could give me the best advice or feedback on these cams as you deal with real film as well.
I know that these cams would not even comare to "film" but we all know that - so just your take on the closest to the film look or just a nice look overall , would be much apprecated

I have been to alot of dv forums with very confusing views but, I like the vibe here & although I have a canon 1014xls & a mini dv pc105 - I need to get a good dv cam if want to take my music promos more seriously.
One day a budget for 35mm - I live in hope :roll:

[nonkjo]

well, this is the small guage film forum...not DV but anyway...

If it's 24p you want then the only choice (liferally) is the Panasonic AG-DVX100. The only other 24p options are very high priced. I used the DVX100 on a shoot for a show we did on FX and the footage looked very good...but it was still only an approximation of film...and anyone who knows better, can tell the difference.
The XL1s shoots frame mode also but only at 30 fps. I've used it too but have never really been impressed with the camera despite everyone going ga-ga over it. I never liked how it had it's own way of labelling things that was non-standard and it took me forever to figure out how to white balance the thing whereas i could do the same thing on a GY-DV500 in about 2 seconds...more preference i guess....anyway..
Make sure you get an NLE that will do a reverse pulldown so you actually work with the 24p if you choose to go with the Panny...

James Green

[jhoneycutt]

Hi,

I know this might seem a redundant 'Q' on an s8 forum but, I figure this probably the best place since - I can get a pov from the "real" film heads out there - hopefully.. .

Here in the USA, we have a computer magazine which does very critical reviews of computer hardware, software and related equipment. It is called PC Magazine. In the Oct 1, 2003 issue they reviewed 1 CCD chip DV camcorders (which, as you know, are not as good as modern 3 CCD chip DV cameras, but modern 1 CCD chip cameras do beat out old model 3 CCD chip cameras).

The Editors Choice award went to the Canon Optura 20 (beating out the Sony and others). It retails for about $1,000.00, but I find it mail order for about $550 and lower. It will also do 16 X 9, and works just great with Rogers Work Printer (which is a must have).

They published test frame grabes so *YOU* can judge for your self if you like the color or not, plus they showed footage to a group of folks, plus they posted test results like Dynamic Range, Resolution, color, Video Noice, audio, low light ability, etc.

So you have a great deal of data to look at.

Good luck on your choice.

jack in Portland Oregon
jhoneycutt@qwest.net

[gkaplan57]

Hello: I would go with the Panasonic DVX 100. I own one my self and you could not do better in trying to achieve the film look - other than shooting film. But wait untill the new DVX 100 A is released early next year - in the USA that is. Try posting here:

http://www.dvxuser.com/cgi-bin/DVX/DVX.cgi

http://www.uemedia.com/CPC/2-pop/

The XL1S and the GL2 cannot compare (for film look) to the DVX 100 due to the 24P fuction of the Panasonic DVX100.

The above websites are really the best place to go for info on DV cameras.

[Cranium]

A PAL GL-1 or 2. XM1, I think?

That's what I would get. That's what I still think often of getting. Write a program to preform a 3:2 pulldown on the PAL footage into NTSC.

[FILM-THURSO]

Hey, I got an idea, why not buy a Super 8 camera and some Kodachrome 40, that'll give you a real film look! 8O

[mattias]

modern 1 CCD chip cameras do beat out old model 3 CCD chip cameras

i seriously doubt it. source please.

/matt

[Scotness]

Yeah DVX100 - it has a better gamma setting than the XL1 so the colour distribution will more closely resemble that of film too.

I wouldn't discount HD too - if you can wait a bit I think some more pro-sumer level cameras will come out next year after the JVC GR-HD1 proved it could be done. I think the XL2 is rumoured to be HD as well.

Scot

[Lex colby]

Film thurso

Hey, I got an idea, why not buy a Super 8 camera and some Kodachrome 40, that'll give you a real film look!

Well - duh :roll:

I have a 1014xls & quite a few rolls k40 already (read the 1st post) - just want some feedback on a decent dv cam from the nice folks around here - who - are obviously creative enough to use other mediums alongside film. :evil:

Also before I throw money down the drain - I would like to try my shots out first with a simulated film look - to get a rough idea - if it would suit real film.

Scotness: wow! the xl2 - any links to this info ?

I was tempted by what people said about the dvx & 24p but I am torn, because of the use of the xl1s in danny boyle 's "28 days" movie (which I really liked) & the the interview I read about david soderberg using it on "full frontal" I have'nt seen many other features - directors - indie filmakers metioning the dvx yet - unless you know of any clips around ?

I thought the xl1 s had a movie mode that mimics film - right?

[mattias]

sony imx mpeg is the shit. progressive scan and film style gamma at various frame rates in standard definition 16:9 and compressed onto beta style tape (backwards compatible decks). these will be a better option for most of us than hd for quite a while, because you can use existing sd post workflows and equipment.

/matt

[mattias]

I thought the xls had a movie mode that mimics film - right?

*lol* call freud. did you mean the 814 or 1014xls? ;-)

/matt

[Lex colby]

freud indeed - I think an edit - before the cops come :oops: :oops:

[sheepscab]

I've used the XL1s and before that the XL1 for over three years now.
There is a movie mode that gives a kind of progressive scan which does make the xl1 image look quite different from other dv cameras.
I personally like this look a lot but it is not really a film look. It's just a different look from regular video. With good lighting and someone experienced behind the camera you can get great results.

The camera itself is at it's best when you are using one of canons manual lenses rather than the one that comes with the kit (you can buy the camera body and lens seperate from B+H). Although this pushes the price up considerably it is worth it as the standard lens is pretty crap.
There are two manual lenses:
the old 14x with no servo zoom function but a proper focus ring and aperture control - and the newer 16x with servo zoom option but no aperture control except for the shittly little dial on the camera body which opens and closes in steps!!! - nice going canon, with one hand they give and with the other....

the big drawbacks to this camera is it's low light ability, or inability
the xl1 is TERRIBLE in even mildly dim situations
the xl1s is better but at a cost - it seems canon added some kind of gain boost to their ccds to increase light sensitivity on the newer model and
because of it the camera tends to create a nasty ugly yellowish smear when anything overexposes in the shot - the old xl1 didn't have this and actually looked kind of good when overexposed

I haven't used the panasonic 24p but have read and heard a lot about it.
It sounds like a great camera, flexible, with various shooting modes and balanced xlr inputs. The only drawback being the lens has poor handling or so I am told.

So that's my two cents worth. The canon is a good camera but not great.
The only real advantage it has over the panasonic is the availability of a half decent lens - but at a high cost - if that's out of your budget anyway I'd go for the Panasonic.

[FilmsUP]

I think I would wait till you can get a native 16:9 in HD at a good price.

I'm not totaly shure, but I think if you get the AG-DVX1 -- You would not be able to print to film from a 24p shoot.

It is probably the right camera for you now, but you could grow out of it,
in short oder.

[nonkjo]

modern 1 CCD chip cameras do beat out old model 3 CCD chip cameras

Who are you kidding. Gimme 3 ccd's 8 days a week...even old ones.

I wouldn't discount HD too - if you can wait a bit I think some more pro-sumer level cameras will come out next year after the JVC GR-HD1 proved it could be done.

This is a 1 CCD consumer cam that writes high definition mpeg to a standard DV tape. It's a novelty more than anything because right now no serious producer worth his salt is going to use mpeg anything as a source format...at least not right now. There are just too many issues associated with capture and editing of mpeg files. Don't let the "high definition" usage here fool you. What's being referred to is the lines of resolution but remember, it's still mpeg. There's no way footage from this camera will compare to good standard definition video whether you are shooting HD mpeg or using the DV setting.

I think the XL2 is rumoured to be HD as well.

One word..."vaporware"...i follow this stuff pretty close and have heard many of the rumors but until there's actually a camera...don't start holding your breath.

I was tempted by what people said about the dvx & 24p but I am torn, because of the use of the xl1s in danny boyle 's "28 days" movie (which I really liked) & the the interview I read about david soderberg using it on "full frontal" I have'nt seen many other features - directors - indie filmakers metioning the dvx yet - unless you know of any clips around ?

I think if the DVX100 had been around when they were making 28 days and Full Frontal it might have been seriously considered just from the technical aspect of being able to shoot 24p...it would have saved a lot of problems in the production pipeline. Of course that's just speculation...the advantage of the XL1 is being able to use interchangeable lenses..so i guess there's a trade off...Like i said before, we used the DVX as our primary camera when shooting the pilot series for FX (Fox).

I think I would wait till you can get a native 16:9 in HD at a good price.

And you'll be waiting a very long time. HD is great and it's on its way but it's not something that's gonna arive for the consumer like next year or anything. There's a lot more to shooting HD than a camera. You've got to be able to get it into a computer for editing and you can forget firewire since it's only just now getting to where you can handle 4:2:2 DV50...a very far cry from HD. You'll need a capture card and the cheapest is the Blackmagic Decklink HD for right at $2k. You'll need at least a terrabyte of storage...no less than U160 SCSI...and forget about SATA..it's just not there yet. The list goes on and on...point is, HD is a ways down the road and it is very expensive...

I not totaly shure, but I think if you get the AG-DVX1 -- You would not be able to print to film from a 24p shoot.

Why not? If Soderberg can do it shooting with a Canon that doesn't shoot 24fps...I'm sure it can be done with one that does...

James Green