First wedding with XA20
 

I gave the XA20 a pretty good workout this past weekend at an outdoor wedding. It was a pretty tough challenge because the ceremony was in a shady spot with a bright sun shining on a lake in the background. There were also spots of sun peaking through the trees on faces.

I put the camera in TV mode so it could control exposure most of the day. That seemed to have worked really well until I thought the B&G were way underexposed because of the bright lake and trees in the background. So I hit the back light button and according to the monitor all looked well. I had turned the zebra to 100 because of all the bright areas.....it was driving me crazy. Turned out to be a big mistake. After reviewing the footage yesterday, whenever I turned on the backlight the footage is way overexposed.....looks good otherwise. Turns out the cam new what was best.

The AC90 footage turned out good except for some focus problems. My wife was on the 90 with it mounted high on a tripod so seeing the screen was difficult. We have a 7" SD monitor mounted lower on the tripod but pulling focus is almost impossible on it. The 90 seemed to want to focus on the trees behind the B&G and pastor. I wish it had face detection like the XA, which seems to work well.

Some footage from the 90 looks better and some looks better with the XA, it all depends on the exposure and white balance, if you nail that with either camera you get stunning footage that will mix together well I think.


EDIT: After working on this project last night I find the XA footage to have more of a filmic look compared to the 90. I do have the 90 set kinda flat so I'm sure the scene files could be played with to get more of a cinema look. The XA's exposure has to be right on or it can look pretty ugly. I think the 90 is more forgiving in this respect.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Tim,
how did you find the ergonomics of the XA20 when dealing with all that goes on at a wedding? Dis you use it with a LED light inside or did it cope well enough alone. Which coped better in low light, the XA20 or the AG90?

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

It handled really well, I prefer the size of the 90 but like the weight of the XA. I kept the XA on the Merlin up until the wedding then it went on a tripod. Handheld at the reception with LED on. The XA and the AC90 are almost identical in low light which is very good if you add just a little light. No grain or if any it is very fine and can't be seen easily. If I get time in the next few days I'll post some screen shoots comparing the two.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Appreciate your post, Tim. I agree that the wrong exposure with the XA20 can produce some very poor looking shots. It's a strange camera.

I still like the XA20, but the more I work with it the less I like it. For the price, a 20X zoom and XLR, it's OK, but the image quality is inconsistent. It can be very tricky to adjust settings in certain situations and get anything decent out of the camera. I'm referring to indoor lighting, not outdoor. I very much do like the face detection feature. Once it locks on I will usually hit the MF button to stop the drift, which it does a lot.

This camera is a classic case of getting what we pay for. Very usable, but limited in it's abilities by a lack of features that would take it to the next level. It does seem like a lot of camera for the money at times, and at other times I am scratching my head at a poor image and my seeming inability to squeeze a decent shot from it.

The majority of the time, it's fine, but it's those less frequent situations indoors where I can't seem to get it right that have caused me to not trust the camera. The XA10 seems more consistent to me.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Jeff,
what problems have you had? It'd be interesting to know if others have had the same problems.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Do you have the camera Andrew or are you planning to buy one?

Same as Tim outlined re: wrong exposure produces ugly images. I add that for me white balance is hard to achieve correctly in certain types of indoor light, harder than with the XA10, at least that has been my experience. Images are either just fine, or on relatively rare occasions, they are very bad.

It's not a problem with the camera, the camera is what it is.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Is it not possible then to just expose using the zebra's? I do that all the time with my Sony cx730 and that works equally well as with any other camera I have or had.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Jeff,
I'm thinking about buying the camera. I had a canon G25 which I sold as it was just to get me through this season as really would like a more pro camera. I always found it hard to match the colours with my Canon dslrs. The WB always seemed very different. I hope the XA20 doesn't have the same WB as it looks like a very interesting camera.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

If you need more manual adjustment capability than the XA20/25 provides consider moving up to the the XF100. The XA10/20 are essentially very high end consumer cameras (think G20/30) that include a few selected features normally found only on pro gear. They are designed for use where the shooter does not have the time (or inclination) to deal with camera setup such as gamma, knee, coring, and so on and is content to rely on standard program modes for most image parameters.

They are small, not enough real estate on the case to incldue many manual controls. The zebra set for 100 IRE is spot on and it does super white highlights to beyond 105 IRE. The color holds up well in shadows too (see the thread on dynamic range).

The only features i miss from the XA10 is the component output jack, but a HDMI-to-component converter solves that for when I need it, and having the internal memory (a relatively minor issue).

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Noa, I do not use zebra, normally. I go by sight. One of the issues I have with the cam is the flatness of the images on the LCD. Normally when exposure is off the image is simply too dark or bright, but with this camera those occasional situations have occurred for me wherre I have found I cannot set the white balance and exposure correctly with the XA20, at least not for a decent image. The image will just look ugly, as Tim puts it.

I do not have the issue with the XA10. The XA10 has it's limitations, of course, but to make matters worse the XA20 will on occasion not match up with the XA10 at all. Most the time it's perfectly fine, but in some rooms (for wedding receptions especially) it's just very hard to match that camera up with my XA10s.

Don, that was a very succinct summary of the cam you gave. Indeed, it is a high end consumer model with a couple of pro features. Some of us, me included, have tried to view it as a pro camera with missing features, which is one way to look at it, but a view that will lead to disappointment and discontentment.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Noa, I usually try to expose using zebras. The XA20 has two settings 70 IRE and 100. This wedding was a bad one to try out a new camera. It was in a shaded area with the sun peaking through the trees and the B&G were standing 10' from the lake which was reflecting the bright sun. In the distance were trees on the other side of the lake that were also bright from the sun. I had the XA set to 70 IRE but had to switch to 100 after getting discouraged with what I was seeing on the screen. Thought I had it right but sadly I didn't.

Like Jeff I also had trouble with the white balance but not inside, outside strangely enough. Nothing I tried seemed to look correct. Even tried manually setting WB. But indoors at the reception I got good results, odd.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Strong saturated colors (green grass, blue sky, etc.) with a wide brightness range from direct sun to deep shadow can cause fits trying to find the right white balance and exposure. That is why producton shoots have lighting teams, reflectors, etc. At that point the best bet is try shoot for a mid range, flat image that can be corrected in post. In some ways too bad it does not record a "raw" image.

The main lesson here is NEVER use a new camera (or any othe gear) for the first time on a money shoot. Always spend a bit of time ring it out and learn its limits first. And of course make sure the client understands up front if they are planning an event with problematic conditions.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Good points Don. I was able to correct most of it in post. The worst being overexposure. I don't think any non professional will notice.

Here's a trailer for it, ya'll can tell me if it looks bad.

Tiffany+Matthew - Trailer on Vimeo

Edit: Well I just watched the trailer to make sure the linked worked and realized there's not many ceremony shots in there. The only overexposed shot is the B&W shot at the end of him saying vows. Her vows is the AC90 which is focused on the trees behind them :(

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

I like it Tim! Very nice trailer, great work.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Well done, Tim.
It certainly looks like the XA20 will produce great images over a wide range of shooting conditions.
Next week I'll be starting a fairly big project using a new XA20.
Your trailer is a vote of confidence for the camera.
I had used the XA 10 quite a bit in the past- WB, exposure, LCD image fidelity, etc. was all very straightforward.
Hopefully it's going to be the same experience with the XA20...

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Thanks Jeff and Robert. Robert I'm sure the XA will perform well for you. I was amazed at how well it did at the reception for this wedding. The venue was very dark and drab but the XA handled the light on the brides dress and dark venue very well I thought.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Nice work Tim. Soft focus on the bride gives it that nostalgic Hollywood leading lady look. ;-)

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Thanks Craig. haha yep, we fine tuned that focus to get that look :)

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Here's a frame grab from the timeline comparing the XA and the 90. The XA is on the left and is hand held with an LED lamp mounted on it. The AC90 is on a tripod with an LED mounted on a stand a few feet away. Edit: just remembered I set shutter speed to 30 on the XA when I went in the room where the cake was and never turned it back to 60. Just checked the media in camera to make sure, it was 1/30th. So not really a fair comparison since the AC90 shutter was 1/60. I'll leave the pics up anyway.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Wow
The XA image looks decisively better in this example.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Yes it does but take into account it is several feet closer to the subjects than the 90. Also, looks like I might have chosen a frame grab that was either out of focus or not on frame well for the 90. When I went back and looked at it on the timeline it doesn't look so out of focus like it does in this pic.

I had the XA's gain limit set to 18db and I don't think it ever went above 13db or so. The AC90 does not have a gain limiter so I'm not sure where the gain was on it.

Here's a couple more.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

I've been thinking and wondering about why the XA looked brighter than the AC and just remembered I set shutter speed to 30 on the XA when I went in the room where the cake was and never turned it back to 60. Just checked the media in camera to make sure, it was 1/30th. So not really a fair comparison since the AC90 shutter was 1/60.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Manual or auto (program) exposure?
In any case the brightness difference should be readily correctable.

On my PC the XA image looks warmer, a bit richer, and the people healthier
At 1/30 the dancing movement could introduce some motion blur.
With the AC on a tripod, something should be in sharp focus unless we are seeing noise reduction image softening artifacts.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Both camera's are in manual mode with auto exposure.

In most scenes the XA does look more pleasing right out of the cam but the AC can be made to look like the XA with color correction in post.

I didn't notice any motion blur at all, very surprising.

The AC footage doesn't look out of focus in the video or on the timeline, it's just the frame grab that looks that way for some reason.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Yes, great work Tim, wouldn't mind an XA20 myself.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Hey Tim- I'm considering my cam options as I want to think about moving away from dSLR as a B-cam (use it for more like a C-cam) for a lot of shots, and it's too hard to match to my Canon XF100. I'm watching your trailer- how far away were you from the subject on the detail shots such as the hair preparation, in order to get the depth of field you desired? Was that done on the Canon, or the Panasonic?

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Most of the prep shots were shot with a GH2, some with the XA. If the shot has blurred background then I'm sure it was GH2.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Thanks Anthony! I have shot another wedding with the XA know, this one was indoor and the XA performed well and out performed the AC in most same situation scenes.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Reading through Jeff's post regarding the XA20 and comparing it to other posts in the same thread, you wouldn't think its the same camera that everyone is talking about :)

Just, that I'm thinking of buying the XA20 and Jeff's posts are not very encourageing.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

What type of shooting are you planning to use the XA 20 for? And, do you need the XLR jacks or can you get by with the less expensive HF G30?

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

You need to buy one and try it for yourself. See what you think.

If you re-read the thread, Anthony, the issue with white balance at times was mentioned by Tim originally.

I have found for me that if I did not get the white balance right with this camera it can be very difficult to correct in post. I have found that for certain indoor lighting situations white balance can be hard to achieve with it. This is my experience. Try it out for yourself.

Outdoors it's fine most the time.

Last wedding I worked with two people trying to set white balance on the camera and we never got it right. With the XA10 I just didn't have as much trouble. The issue with the white balance for me has been that the image can seem lifeless and dull or overly warm. It's just weird at times.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Hi Maurice, wedding videos and to use it as a B camera to my pmw320.
I think I would prefer the XLR inputs, you never know when you might need them.

Thanks.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

:)

Thanks Jeff for you thoughts....its good to know this all the same.

You said the outside shots were fine..most of the time, Its more inside clips that I was interested in.
I have an X900 and use it for inside shots at my weddings and no bother with white balance with it.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Discharge and energy saving types of lighting can often make white balance a problem (with just about any camcorder) because they have a unnatural color spectrum.

Are there any video gear rental places near you? That is one way to give one a spin.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Your right about those types of lighting Dan, that can make white balancing a problem and no, nothing near me to rent out and try :)

Thanks Dan.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Is it then not just a matter of using a fixed tungsten whitebalance preset if you shoot indoor (if you have issues setting the right WB) and correct in post when needed?

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Hi Jeff,

I'm about to purchase my first HD camera. I only shoot a couple of weddings a year. Would you recommend that I purchase the XA10, or should I pay the extra $500 for the XA20? I'm also considering the Panasonic AC90.

Thanks!

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Jim, as you may know, things change so rapidly in this field. Right now I would recommend the Sony RX10 over both. But it does depend on your needs and only you can make the choice.

If you need a "proper" conventional videocamera with XLR inputs, I personally prefer the XA10. For long zooms I use a Panasonic LZ200 from the back of a church, etc., but that camera is not worth much for anything except long zooms, but for that it is exceptional. It's worth the $500 since an equivalent lens alone would cost thousands.

Others here are happy with the XA20. It is a more modern camera. It has wi-fi and other great features. But it also lacks an internal HD which I missed. Other, better videographers than me might recommend the XA20 over the XA10, and I won't argue that. I can only give you my perspective. I did not care for the way the XA20 rendered colors. Initially when I bought the camera I was impressed but the longer I worked with it the less I liked it.

It's tough to make a purchase like this. If you order from somewhere like B&H you will have no issues returning the camer if you don't like it.

AC90 I would not consider simply because of some focus issues I've read about. Some say it's great but the publicity it's recieved has been not so favorable, so I would not look at it, but that is not to say it's not a decent camera.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Tm,

While your questions wasn't asked to me directly, I wanted to offer my opinion if that;s okay. In direct response to your question, if you need the XLR's and the 20x zoom, I would go with the XA20. If not, I would go with the XA10. With that being said, if it were me, I would wait until after NAB 2014. I'm hearing that there are 20 new 4K cameras that are coming out and surprisingly, there will be some on both the high end consumer and entry level professional side. If this is true, the XA series should go down in price.

Re: First wedding with XA20
 

Thanks Jeff and Maurice!

The Sony RX10 would be in my budget, but I would need some training with digital cameras. I shoot weddings solo and need a run and gun type of camcorder.

I like the idea of the internal drive as well, but guess I need to consider the 20x zoom.

I'm purchasing for March 1st wedding, so unfortunately need to pull trigger shortly.

Thanks again for the feedback!