Can't make a decision

[MelonDome]

:roll:

Hey guys.

I have a few questions for you experienced members.

1. I can't decide between a Canon XL2 or an XH-A1? I intend to shoot independent short films and submit it to film festivals. I want the camera to have the 24p film look, and still be able to shoot well, not only in the daylight, but also in the NIGHT. However, I hear that HD is not good at night.

2. Why is HD the new camera to get? Not only do you need a really good computer to edit, but im assuming atleast 50% of consumers don't even have HD television sets.... So whats the point?

3. Is the XL2 Canon really outdated? And would I have any chance picture wise if I got accepted into film festivals? Is an XL3 coming ? hehe

4. Would you say the XL2 has a more of a "film/theatre" picture look than a HD camera?

5. Now I here the XH-A1 and DVX100 is the best for the film/theatre look, true?

Long Story short, its between XL2, XH-A1 , DVX100B. Which one?
Thanks guys.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

The XHA1 does 24F, not 24P, but it's somewhat of a moot point, it ends up looking like the same effect. There is loss of vertical resolution with 24F but you're already starting out with much more resolution with the XHA1 than tha XL2. The "cinematic effect" is the same on both cameras.

I think the main thing is to ask yourself if you need HD. It's becoming more common than you think, though you're right that it has yet to penetrate a lot of households. But creating an HD project may help its resellability in the future in some markets. However, if your goal is an immediate DVD release, it's probably not necessary.

The XL2 allows interchangeable lenses and supposedly does 16x9 better than the DVX100B, if those two things are important to you.

 

[Lazlo]

The DVX100b just puts black bars in letterbox. The XL2 from what I understand either shoot native 16:9, or squeezes the 16:9 image onto the 4:3 CCD. Either way, it looks better than the black bars.

I have no knowledge of the difference between 24f and 24p. P is supposed to be better... The XH-A1 looks like a great camera. For one, it shoots native 16:9, and has the great optics of canon (not that leica's aren't nice...) and as David mentioned a much higher resolution than either the DVX or the XL. Having not used the XH-A1, I can't speak to much more. I love the DVX100b. Its a really great camera.

 

[CCF]

The DVX100b just puts black bars in letterbox. The XL2 from what I understand either shoot native 16:9, or squeezes the 16:9 image onto the 4:3 CCD. Either way, it looks better than the black bars.

Actually, I've used a Panasonic DVX-100B and it can shoot in either standard 4:3, letterbox (the 4:3 aspect ratio with black bars), or "true" widescreen 16:9. So when you play the DVX widescreen (16:9) footage on a standard 4:3 TV it will have black bars, but if you play it on a widescrren TV it will look fine. Just thought I'd clear that up.

If you're willing to spend that kind of money for a DVX I highly recommend it! It's a great camera with a lot of options (in addition to the different aspect ratios, it can also shoot 24p- the frame rate of film- which looks beautiful if you can tell the difference between movies shot on film and those shot on video).