Canon vs. Sony

[Noah Hayes]

I have just returned from my first trip to B&H, and wow...words cannot express...i was like a kid in a candy store, but anyway, I have been wrestling with myself for a while whether to buy an XL2 now or wait for Canon to get off their haunches and go HD, i was not even considering the FX1 or Z1U because I (up until i tried the sony's out) i was a die hard canon fan. Now i dont know whether to wait for canon to get a move on or to get an FX1 (the Z1U appears to me to be a waste of an extra 1500 for the ability to use the LCD and viewfinder simultaneously, please tell me if i am wrong)

For those of you who own any of these your input would be incredibly helpful, I dont need to buy anytime soon but i will be filming some events(weddings stuff like that) to help pay it off and film some independant films and documentaries on my own to let you know what i need out of it

PS...does anyone know where i could get some test footage from the FX1?

[Jacques Star]

Canon makes good lenses, but their cameras are far inferior to Sony's.

Also, you can only shoot on Mini-DV, not DVCAM or HDV.

The audio on the XL2 is sub-par. Even if you switch to line-level input on the back, your audio will still be too hot. I always have to use an in-line attenuator whenever mixing to an XL2.

Also, I wouldn't get an FX1, but a Z1U. It can shoot on DV, DVCAM, or HDV. It has a good lens and a better audio section. Plus, you can offer to shoot weddings in HD. You're more marketable that way. I would just shoot everything in HDV, then downconvert. Your picture will look sharper, even in SD.

The XL2 is too prosumer for my tastes, but it's your choice.

[Greg Boston]

Noah,

As far as the Sony FX1/Z1U differences go, there are plenty. Around 46 if my memory serves correctly. The Z1 can switch between NTSC or PAL, can output to firewire without delay as the FX1 does, and many other things.

The XL-2 produces some beautiful SD images in 16:9 format, can run at 24p, 30p or 60i. Many were disappointed with Sony's 'cineframe 24' mode because it isn't true 24fps motion capture like the Canon XL-2 and Panasonic DVX100 cameras. It all depends on what you intend to shoot, how soon you need it, and what your delivery format will be/must be.

The Canon XL-2 is not 'far inferior' to Sony but of course it doesn't do HDV which is a format with its own inherent drawbacks. You should also ask yourself if you are ready to shoot and edit HDV format material.

There are some other new cameras just on the horizon so you might want to wait a few months if you can in order to see the new Panasonic and JVC cameras.

Happy shopping!

-gb-

[Jacques Star]

Yes, that's true.

The Panasonic DVX100A is a good choice. It's also quite popular for some television and corporate shoots.

I have used the XL2, and it's okay, but in my opinion, doesn't perform quite as well as Sony or Panasonic. Also, I would get a better, fully manual lens. It has better glass and more control.

But, in the end, buy what your clients ask for. Why do I shoot BetaSP? That's what the producers want. Why would you shoot Mini-DV? That's what a corporate client asks for, or, you're going to DVD for a wedding video, so you want to keep a digital workflow, etc.

Buy what's best for you. All three of the aforementioned cameras will do the job, some just do it better than others.

[Greg Boston]

Yes Jacques,

You may recall that I had my then brand new XL-2 at the Majestic Theater shoot back in Nov '04. I do run it now with a 16x manual and FU-1000 b/w v/f and am very pleased with the stuff it produces. No doubt about it, the Sony's have a good looking picture, especially wrt skin tones. In fact, a couple of us discussed the Sony look at a local eatery after that shoot you were at. I actually have 2 XL-2 cams now and run the stock 20x lens on lockdown shots while I grab handheld stuff with the 16x manual and b/w vf. But the picture tweak options on the XL-2 are numerous and you can get many looks out of this camera, including skin detail.

Sure was nice though with the 20x being able to do an ECU of the drummer from all the way back at center mezzanine level. That's an awesome theater!

-gb-

[Dylan Couper]

Originally Posted by Jacques Star

Canon makes good lenses, but their cameras are far inferior to Sony's.

Compared to the CineAlta? Sure.

The XL2 is too prosumer for my tastes, but it's your choice.

Any of Sony's HDV offerings are to consummer for my tastes. I'd take a prosumer XL2 before I took anything short of a DSR570, unless I was going for a sharp video look.

[Radek Svoboda]

Canon's XL2 is their top camera, records 25 Mbps. Sony top camera costs 1/4 million USD, with lens, recorder, processor, etc., records 880 Mbps. Top Panasonic camera records 100 Mbps. Canon makes SLRs, lenses, Panasonic makes vacuum cleaners, rice cookers. Sony makes neither. Each company is totally different.

Top broadcast company is Sony, followed by Ikegami, Panasonic, Thomson, Hitachi, last comes JVC. Canon not make broadcast cameras but supplies lenses, togethwer with Fujinon, for all broadcast makers. There are other lens makers but Canon and Fujinon have largest share of market.

Radek

[Bruce Linden]

[QUOTE=Jacques Star]Canon makes good lenses, but their cameras are far inferior to Sony's.

Its been my opinion that the electronics is the easy part. Just look at all the camcorder manufacturers. But the lens, now that's diferent. Lens making is an art and I feel that the glass in front of the electronics makes a big difference. The other stuff can be tweaked, but the image that reaches the CCDs is what it is and I like it to be the best that I can afford.

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Radek Svoboda

Panasonic makes vacuum cleaners, rice cookers. Sony makes neither.

Sorry but that's incorrect. Radek, once again, please get your facts straight before posting. One of Sony's very first products was in fact an electric rice cooker. For more information about the Sony electric rice cooker and some early Sony history, see this excellent link:

http://www.sony.net/Fun/SH/1-1/h1.html

A better photo of Sony's rice cooker:

http://news.sel.sony.com/digitalimag...hoto_id=131344

But of course, who makes (or made) rice cookers (Sony) and who makes (or made) vacuum cleaners (Panasonic) is entirely irrelevant to this discussion -- if you ask me, it's utterly ridiculous, but we do have a sense of humor here at DV Info Net so it's okay -- as long as it's accurate.

I've never owned a Sony rice cooker; they were made in 1945 shortly after the war, which was before my time, heh. But I have actually owned a Panasonic vacuum cleaner before I was married, which was noisy but ran great. It's still in the garage. I should probably upload a picture of it.

Remember, now: Sony = rice cookers, Panasonic = vacuum cleaners. Hope this helps,

[John Jay]

Chris,

thats so funny, in fact LMAO~

Panasonic still make em (rice cookers that is)

Panasonic (National) 5 Cup Fuzzy Logic Rice Cooker
http://store.imperialsales.net/srla10nw.html


I guess they have the market cornered :) , waiting for the P2 version - billions of recipes , no doubt

[Clint Comer]

GO CANON!! I love my XL-2. And until canon comes out with a camera that does not do something I need it to, or it just does not suit my needs I will be with them for life.

[Adam Rench]

If you take the cameras and compare them dollar for dollar, Canon all the way baby.

I've tried sony digital cameras as well as the FX1. I sold them all for the Canon Digital Rebel and the Canon XL2. I love the XL2 and my Rebel. I also use the Canon S500 for my pocket camera.

My dad is a professional photographer and when he goes to digital camera seminars and such the people all consistantly say one thing... "Canon is one of the best, if not the best".

In my opinion, if I could afford a cinealta, then I'd just skip digital completely and go right to film. You just can't beat film yet.

In summary, take your budget, and take whatever money you have and figure out what you need. If it's a tossup between Canon and Sony, I have to say, go with the Canon.

[Ash Greyson]

This is my 10th year to shoot DV and I have literally used every camera at one time or another. The problem with the XL series is not quality, picture or sound, it is the learning curve. It is a quantum step up from many consumer cameras but lacks the intuitive control present in broadcast cameras.

I would say in 90% of the cases people downplaying the XL2 are operating it improperly or not using it to its full potential. The XL2 audio is very good, never ever had a single issue with it. Too call it too consumer is really silly, especially in the 1/3" CCD category.

However, we are talking pro-sumer here, not SDX900, CineAlta, etc. I currently own an XL1, XL1s, XL2 and a DVX-100a. I sometimes use the FX1 and Z1 and I find the picture VERY clear but VERY video like. It is best IMHO for nature stuff. I shot a concert with lots of crazy lighting and the Z1 was a disaster.

I will agree that every job is different and you should use the best camera for the job. I say it over and over, but a camera is an instrument, like a guitar. Some songs require a different sounding guitar but not every person who picks up that guitar, can play that song...




ash =o)

[Adam Rench]

well said. :)

[Radek Svoboda]

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

Sorry but that's incorrect. Radek, once again, please get your facts straight before posting. Remember, now: Sony = rice cookers, Panasonic = vacuum cleaners. Hope this helps,

I said Sony does not make rice cookers, Panasonic does. That is correct. Fact that one of first Sony products, before became world's foremost electronic company was rice cooker is irrelevant. 1/2 century ago does not count.

Sony makes world's best broadcast products, is best selling broadcast brand. Panasonic makes great rice cookers.

Radek