In your opinion, which is the way to go? Basically, I'll just be doing street interviews and the occasional wedding or event. I'm not very knowledgable with either of these, I did own a DVX 100a for a while but had to sell for personal reasons before I could work with it much. With the FX1, is the regular DV quality good enough for what I need or should I just stick with the DVX? Thanks

You can shoot in HDV and downconvert to DV. Once you see HDV quality, you probably won't want to work with DV much longer.

Ok, but if I was to use the FX1 and I'm shooting in SD, not HD, is it going to be decent compared to the DVX?

How is the SD footage on the FX1 and the DVX100b? I'm basically trying to figure out if the FX1, in SD mode, is comparable to the 100b. I'm not going to be making any films, just street interviews and various outdoor events like weddings etc. I like the fact that the FX1 shoots either or but if I'm not shooting HD on the FX1, is the quality decent still? If not, why? thanks, I'm a newbie still.

Since it looks as if you’re on a tight budget, did you ever consider the Canon XH-A1? You can get it for 3,250 at B&H. You get a picture that’s a bit better than the FX1 plus the added bonus of having XLR inputs. It’s essential for you interviews.

Since it looks as if you’re on a tight budget, did you ever consider the Canon XH-A1? You can get it for 3,250 at B&H. You get a picture that’s a bit better than the FX1 plus the added bonus of having XLR inputs. It’s essential for you interviews.

Yeah, I do need the XLR inputs as I already have the mics. And yes, my budget is not too high. This is for a street ministry, I've raised the money myself and only have about $2400 max.

Do you know of a link to a site or a message board that compares the two camcorders? I found an older comparison but that was before HD became so popular.

This is a good read, a better comparisation can't be found is my opinion:
http://dvxuser.com/articles/shoot3/

In a nutshell:
- FX1 and DVX100 are different machines for different kind of tasks
- DVX100 is more professional when it comes to options, audio and quality, unless you want sharp interlaced HDV video

Hi Bart. Please don't start another thread on the same topic in a different forum. Cross-posting is against DVinfo policy because it just creates confusion and duplication. I've merged your other thread with this one since it looks like you're getting some good responses here.

It seems an odd comparison, the FX1 and the DVX. The Panasomnic is old school, 4:3 SD and a much older design than the Sony. You're shooting weddings? How many couples that can afford your services come home from honeymoon and switch on a 4:3 TV? Answer: very few.

So go for the Sony. It's HDV or SD, it's 16:9 or 4:3, it has a longer zoom, a much nicer top screen that doesn't need a Hoodman ... but, no XLR inputs. So the DVX wins that side of the argument, and if your street interviews involve proper microphones this might well be the clincher. And the Panasonic gives startlingly good SD pictures, better in my view than the FX1 used in its SD mode.

What you really need is the Z1, but the price is climbing. It sounds as if Sony might have discontinued the FX1 in favour of the FX7, but the Z1 is a good distance apart from the V1 for a variety of reasons.

tom.

Simple soulution for the xlr inputs on the FX1. I have an FX1 and use a Beechtek box, which allows you to plug two xlr cable into the FX1.Around $200.
Bruce S. yarock
www.yarock.com

This is why I never had any interest in the FX1. I just think it’s a hassle carrying something extra just to have XLR inputs plus it takes extra time setting everything up. Spending the extra money for a camcorder such as the Z1u, V1u and the XH-A1 is well worth it just for the XLR inputs alone. Besides, the XLR inputs there are extra picture adjustments.

Bart McCurdy,

I’ve used the Panasonic 100a a lot and it’s a remarkable camcorder and the 100b is obviously better but I believe you should stick with HD because their will be times where you’ll wish you had an HD camcorder and its better built for the future. For the reasons I’ve mentioned in the above paragraph, I really can’t recommend the FX1 either.

The 3,250 dollar price for the XH-A1 is an extremely good value. Just keep in mind that you would have to pay around 3,500. You would need to mail in the rebate to get 250 dollars off.

Its fully understandable if can’t afford it but if you can somehow come up with the extra funds to get this camcorder, I guarantee you that you wont regret it.

" I just think it’s a hassle carrying something extra just to have XLR inputs plus it takes extra time setting everything up."

There's nothing extra to "carry" with the FX1 and the Beechtek xlr adaptor. The Beechtek box stays bolted underneath, and the FX1 is still tripod ready. As far as "setting everything up", you just plug in the xlrs...nothing more.
Bruce S. yarock
www.yarock.com

I highly recommend the Sony FX1 with a beachtek XLR audio adaptor. I have used this camera setup many times and I think it is still the best bang for the buck. The Canon XH-A1 has a much smaller LCD screen and I prefer the sony "look" better. I recently spoke to a sony rep and the FX1 HAS NOT been discontinued.

Joel Brooks
Moments in Time Video Productions

...but I have to side with Paulo on this one. For just a little more money, The Canon A1 is a much better camera. It will do everything the FX1 will and more. It is much newer technology than the Sony. It's lens is just as wide as the FX1, but goes much further on the tele end. It has built-in XLR. It is much more customizable and professional.

I, too, was once nervous about the smaller LCD, but not after using it. The A1's screen is very sharp, the peaking function seems much better than the FX1's, and the autofocus works much better.

About the only thing I miss from the Sony is the nifty little lens cover thingy!

I have never used the DVX100's so I can't comment on them other than to say that SD's days are numbered.

About the only thing I miss from the Sony is the nifty little lens cover thingy!

Absolutely agree on that one.

So, I guess my question is this: How is the SD footage on the FX-1? Is it decent? Or is it so bad that I should just use this camcorder for HDV only?

Even if it’s attached to the camcorder it’s still extra stuff that you have to carry with you.
I mean do you really want to add around an extra pound to the camcorder that you could have saved if you’ve gotten the XH-A1? To a lot of people these camcorders are heavy enough as is. Not to mention that using a beachtek rather than hooking up the XLR microphones straight to the camcorder won't sound as good. Also would you really want 2 microphones going into the same channel? You wouldn’t be able to fix the audio of one of the microphones in post if it was too high or low.

The FX1 cost 3,000 at B&H. The Beachtek DXA-FX is made specifically for the FX1 and it cost 310 dollars for a total of around 3,310 dollars all together. The XH-A1 is 3,250. You save 60 bucks for a camcorder that’s a whole lot better. There are cheaper Beachtek boxes but they aren’t as good as the DXA-FX.

Sorry that I had to mention the XH-A1 in this thread but I really believe you’ll be better off with the XH-A1 even if you can find an FX1 for a lot cheaper.

So, I guess my question is this: How is the SD footage on the FX-1? Is it decent? Or is it so bad that I should just use this camcorder for HDV only?
I didn’t see this post when I wrote my previous post.


Even though I have used a Z1u, I can’t really answer this because the FX1’s imagers are worse. It’s very subjective, some people may like the look of the FX1 compared to the 100b and vise-versa.

By the way, how much did you find the FX1 for?

I actually don't own one yet, but I do have one cornered for $2300 with only 10 hours or so.

"Even though I have used a Z1u, I can’t really answer this because the FX1’s imagers are worse."

They are the same chips. The Z1 and FX1 are sisters with the Z1 having more options and XLR inputs, but the lens, chips, LCD monitor, and deck are the same.

The FX1 is fine in DV mode, but there is almost no reason to ever shoot DV. The camera can down-convert HDV on-the-fly to SD. Shoot in HDV and downconvert. The downconverted footage looks better than most SD footage and the option for HD remains. The best SD footage comes from editing HDV and downconverting for the web of DVD as the very last step. It really looks quite good. Some footage I shot, but did not edit, almost fooled me when I watched it on the computer. I had to double-check the file to make sure it was an SD file.

I actually don't own one yet, but I do have one cornered for $2300 with only 10 hours or so.
OK, that’s a pretty good price for the FX1 even though it’s been used for several hours.

If you’re really trying to get an FX1 then you could have also considered the FX7. It has a much greater zoom, much better picture with good lighting and to my knowledge; it has much more features than the FX1 including an HDMI output. The only drawback is that if you’re shooting in a place with very little lighting, the FX1 would be a bit better because of the bigger imagers. The price is 2,600 at B&H. It’s also about 25% lighter than the FX1.
If it was me choosing between the FX1 and the FX7, it would definitely be the FX7.
Still, you couldn’t go wrong with the 2,300 dollar price of the FX1 that you’re offered. Hopefully that camcorder is still under the warranty.

"Even though I have used a Z1u, I can’t really answer this because the FX1’s imagers are worse."

They are the same chips. The Z1 and FX1 are sisters with the Z1 having more options and XLR inputs, but the lens, chips, LCD monitor, and deck are the same.

I earnestly don’t know why I wrote that.