|
|
Posted by PTravel on 10/23/07 15:53
"Frank" <frank@nojunkmail.humanvalues.net> wrote in message
news:cj6rh35b8b5ccpba9ej2sumu8ru3eah2m9@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 09:40:53 -0700, in 'rec.video.production',
> in article <Re: Starting to think about HD>,
> "nappy" <n@n.n> wrote:
>
>>
>>"PTravel" <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote in message
>>news:5o41g6Fjk5qfU1@mid.individual.net...
>>> I'm starting to plan my move to HD, which will probably be sometime in
>>> February. A tape-based system is a must, as I'll be archiving projects
>>> on
>>> tape until feasible BluRay or HD burners are released.
>
> Not sure what you mean by "feasible". Burners are available now,
> although the discs certainly aren't cheaply priced.
I wasn't aware of any BluRay burners that could do video roms. Are they out
now? At any rate, I'd rather wait for the next iteration of burners, which
are sure to cost less, be faster, etc. Besides, _after_ buying my BluRay
DVD player, I learned that it won't play BluRay DVD-R video (what is Sony
thinking, anyway?), so there's no real hurry. There's also the very real
possibility that BluRay will lose to HDV. I've still got my Betamax. I
don't need to invest in the digital equivalent.
>
>>> Yesterday, I did a quick hands-on comparison between the Canon XH-A1 and
>>> a
>>> Sony FX1. For low-light, the Canon slaughtered the Sony, which was very
>>> noisy and was far less sensitive. The Canon image reminded me of the
>>> VX2000/2100 in low-light. I didn't get a chance to try the FX7.
>>>
>>> They're both big cameras, bigger than my VX2000, but I'm more or less
>>> resigned to the form factor (I'll be using the camera for amateur travel
>>> videography).
>>>
>>> Is there anything else I should look be looking at?
>
> In my opinion, you should not be looking at the HDR-FX1. It's quite
> old at this point, being Sony's first-ever consumer-grade HDV
> camcorder, announced back on September 7, 2004. It doesn't even have
> an HDMI output jack, it's so old. In my opinion, you should not buy
> *any* HD camcorder that isn't equipped with either an HDMI or an
> HD-SDI output jack.
As long as I have a digital capture solution, e.g. 1394, I'd be okay with
the camera. The BlackMagic Intensity looks like a nice HDMI capture
solution, but it adds $300 to the cost of this upgrade project. If not
either the FX7 or the FX1, it looks like my only serious alternative is
Canon's XH-A1. I have, however, been looking at Canon's HV-20. I have to
say, I can't find any serious downsides to this machine -- it has great
low-light performance and a beautiful picture, with a usable 24 fps mode
(though I understand it will take some gymnastics to edit it). It's hard to
imagine a consumer machine that can approach prosumer machines in video
quality, but this seems to be it. I certainly wouldn't mind the smaller
form factor, and B&H has it for only $899 with free shipping. The $3,000
that I'd save over the A1 would certainly pay for a wide angle lens (which,
evidently, it needs), a rain cape and, probably, a nice exotic trip
somewhere to use it. I'm still looking for some 1080i/60 demo footage,
though, as I'm probably one of the few people out there who doesn't want
"film look" -- I like the super-real-you-are-there-in-real-time look of HDV
and I think it will work best for my travel video.
>
> Just my opinion, but the problem with the Canon XH A1 ($3499.95 at
> B&H) is that it lacks HDMI or HD-SDI output. The Canon XH G1 has
> HD-SDI, but it's a few dollars more at $6299.95.
That's way, way over my budget. This is strictly for amateur use. It has
to pass the "wife justification test." I could probably make a case for the
A1 ("It's my birthday, and you know how much I like to do video, and this
camera will make such nice videos of our travels . . ."). Over 6 grand?
Not a chance.
>
> In terms of current Sony HDV consumer-grade HDV offerings, you would
> want to consider not the HDR-FX1 but the HDR-FX7, currently $2495 at
> B&H.
Low light peformance on the FX7 is just too poor. I do a lot of shooting at
night, indoors, at dawn, etc., and in situations where adding light either
isn't possible or practical. I really, really want to like the FX7, but its
low-light performance was so bad (reminded my of my old TRV20 miniDV
machine) that I can't see using it.
>
> On the other hand, if you want good-looking high definition video at
> under U.S. $10,000, you would want to give up HDV and tape and look at
> something like the upcoming Sony PMW-EX1 XDCAM EX format camcorder
> ($6999 at B&H).
Unfortunately, still out of my price range. I top out at the lower-end
prosumer gear.
>
> Or just save a bunch a money and get a Canon HV20. In fact, at just
> $899.95 each, you could get two, one for you and one for your lovely
> wife.
I'm thinking about that more and more. If worse comes to worse, I could use
it for a year or two until something better comes out, and then just use it
as a capture deck, just like my TRV20 is now, and save the wear and tear on
the better machine. Still, after the VX2000, it just doesn't feel right to
step down to a consumer machine -- there goes my fantasy that the Travel
Channel will hire me (yeah -- like THAT would ever happen). ;)
Still, how much can I get for a used VX2000 with a fried 1394 port? ;)
>
>>You're welcome to borrow my HVX anytime.
>
> Personally, nappy, I wouldn't recommend an undersampled camcorder to
> an attorney. He might sue when he found out. :)
Sue? Sue? Did someone say sue?
Ooops, sorry . . . it's a reflex. ;)
>
> --
> Frank, Independent Consultant, New York, NY
> [Please remove 'nojunkmail.' from address to reply via e-mail.]
> Read Frank's thoughts on HDV at http://www.humanvalues.net/hdv/
> (also covers AVCHD and XDCAM EX).
[Back to original message]
|