Eng cam?
 

Hi,

Anyone use the A1 as an ENG cam? I would especially like to hear from those who file news daily with it.

If you do use it for that, any complaints, or things you wish were different about the cam?

Thanks

Jay

I use it for daily ENG. It's been a good camera, going two years without a dropout until finally needing service for impact damage, which was quick through Canon.

The biggest issues (separate line/mic audio channel controls, six pin firewire jack, and ois control) have been fixed in the new XHA1s.

The viewfinder sucks, though.

Oh, also, if you need to shoot in standard def and hand off DV tapes, find another cam. Although it will happily shoot standard 4:3 DV, it does some weird smearing thing that makes the images look out of focus and awful. I was at a TV workshop where we were forced to shoot DV and everyone with an XHA1 had the same problem. Don't know if it's been fixed in XHA1s.

And I assume the lack of proper manual focus control would be a pain? Those silly servo, continuously rotating lens rings are the worst invention in camera history I think!
Steve

After a time, you get used to using the push-to-focus button while it's set to manual focus. The viewfinder isn't good enough to manual focus, anyway.

It's no substitute for a broadcast camera. But compared to similar cameras - a Z1U, for instance - it works fine for ENG.

Hey Chuck,

In what situatoins have you experienced problems with the seperate line/mic controls?

Steve,

Yep, I agree that a focus ring should stop...iris too! I use a beta-sx at work with a canon lens, the rings are smooth, risp and they you know when you've hit infinite and you've opened it up all the way.

Would it have been better to shoot in HDV and then down convert to SD when you captured the video?

Ouch, I don't like to hear about the out of focus, 4:3 SD. That is what I would need to shoot in.

Should test it out on my cam first before I make any career moves.

Oh, one other HUGE positive thing about the XHA1 -- you can record a pool feed or dub into the camera, as long as it's 4:3 standard DV.

Yes, downconverted SD is fine if you shoot in HDV. It's when you shoot DV to begin with that's a problem.

The problem is like some over-agressive skin detail processing that you can't turn off -- it affects different parts of the image in different ways, but is very obvious on faces.

If you need to take a line level feed off a board or mult box, you can't use your on-camera mic too. On the original XHA1, both channels are either line level or mic level, you can't split them. It's supposed to be fixed in the new XHA1s. Also, you can't feed one mic into both channels at different levels. I deal with it with a y-splitter cable and for the line level feeds, an xlr pad adapter.

The lens, except for the servo focus, is excellent. If you're on sticks at full telephoto and don't have time to switch off the ois, you'll have problems, though. Again, supposed to be fixed in the new model.

Hi again chuck,

Do you shoot 4:3 SD?

And do you use the cam as a deck?

I shoot alot of 4:3 SD and never really had a problem until late fall. I do local sports and a local music show, and lately, I have been getting complaints from them about "out of focus" footage. I think my low sharpness preset may be partially to blame. Interesting thread.
Bill

I almost never shoot SD - I downconvert if I need standard def. (I shoot for the web, not broadcast, though I've had pieces air on PBS and GMA as well as our local CBS affiliate/news partner.)

I'm not afraid to use my camera as a deck -- it's not going to wear your heads out before you wear the rest of the camera out!

Just to be clear about what happens when you shoot 4:3 SD - it's not actually out of focus, but it does some sort of electronic processing to the image that's weird. In some situations, you don't see it at all, but in others - typically head and shoulders interview settings - it's really obvious. I haven't messed with the custom presets while shooting 4:3DV to see if it makes a difference, but when it happens it looks like "skin detail" set to the witness protection setting, even though it's off!

If you've already got the camera, you'll be fine shooting news with it - nobody will care if a fire or wreck isn't ticky tack sharp. If it's not spot news, you can probably shoot HDV and downconvert or dub DV out of the camera and everyone will be amazed at how wonderful your pictures are!

XH A1 Eng Camera
 

I shoot SD 4:3 and I am very disappointed with this camera the XH A1! Even with manual focus there seem to be times when I think all is well but back in the studio I find the focus is just not good. Not all the time but enough to make me set this camera aside. I've gone back to my JVC DV500 where everything is fine again. I also have a JVC GYX2B which I use hooked up to a laptop using Serious Magic capture. These larger chip camera's easily compete with the A1 for quality. Not HDV but absolutely great SD video. This Canon camera is just to sensitive for me to control.

this 4:3 thing is terrible news. The station I am considering switching to hasn't yet jumped up to 16:9. If that was the case I would shoot HD and then downconvert. I can't imagine selling the camera but I may have to if I switch broadcasters. I recently shot a documentary in my spare time for a canadian university and I used the dvx200 they owned...man oh man that thing was nice. I certainly can't sell myself as a fully equipped VJ if my camera can't handle their format.

I did some tests yesterday and played it back on my 4:3 SD TV, everything looked great...but I am sure once in a pro environment the camera will turn on me.

I am so glad you have all responded, this is opening my eyes...if only HD came in 4:3.

It depends what you mean by ENG. Do you mean "e news gathering" or do you mean newspaper video stories? Big big diff.

For me ENG means a cam that supports run and gun, hand-held shooting. That favors to my style a shoulder mount cam with all the buttons on the body of the cam, not buried in sub-menues. The XH is not the worst but certainly not the best. For news shoulder mount is a big deal as you are are shooting from behind other people. Likewise buttons under your fingertips.

Chuck your only referring to when you shoot 4:3 SD not 16:9 SD is this correct.

Rob

ENG... I mean news gathering.

My current employer uses beta-sx. those cameras are the grand champs of news gathering, no contest. I file stories every day with that thing and I agree the shoulder mounted camera can't be beat. But alas, I don't have 50,000 dollars to buy my own. I am thinking of changing employers and I would like to sell myself as a fully equipped VJ. I primarily use the xh-a1 for corporate gigs in my spare time, and I have never used 4:3. I know it won't compare to the SX, but the news world is a funny place these days, times are changing and when operating out of small bureaus, thousands of miles away from producers, the smaller set-up, including the smaller camera is the way to go.

I think I am currently convincing myself to sell the a1 and jump on over to the dvx200...having to navigate through the menu would certainly be a pain. Impulse is a funny thing when it comes to technology.

There is a fix, shoot in HDV using 4:3 markers. Get or rent a Sony HDV deck (HD700?) and down convert to 4:3 size, in "squeeze" mode.
There was a thread a while back that made the point that most HD cams when pressed into service shooting SD, come out looking "soft". I have noticed this too, when shooting people. It can be very annoying. I have not noticed the issue as much when shooting landscapes etc--but with faces, yes it can be an issue.
However I must say that I shot an SD project with my A1 and a friends borrowed VX2100, and I thought the A1's footage was better. Not sharper, although here they were not much different--but better overall.

Well, I just created a new preset and cranked the sharpness to +9...see if it looks worse than a soft picure. I'd rather not do somehting like that but it may help.

Jay if it really is ENG then I would recommend XL H1 or better. But if it is just shooting filler video then the A1 will be fine

I would certainly entertain the idea of upgrading to the xl-h1, however, I would fear it would have no better SD picture in the end.

But yeah you are right, the bigger canon is the way to go for better news gathering.

The controls on the XHA1 are much better for run-n-gun than the XLH1, and they're about equal in the "uncomfortable to hand hold" equation - in different ways, of course. The image is the same and they both have sharp 20x zooms. If you want a shoulder mount camera, get a real one... the XLH1 is not really an improvement in the ergonomics department.

Any small camera needs to be on sticks anyway - you can't handhold any of 'em they way you can a betacam. Of course, the small camera AND the sticks together weigh half what a broadcast camera alone weighs!

This is a great suggestion - I do this sometimes with a M15 deck. The Canon footage shot in 1080i60 is completely compatible with Sony HDV decks and cameras. (Unlike 24F or 30F) It also works using a Sony A1U as a deck, which does the cropped downconvert, as well. I think the $900 GV-HD700 clamshell player does this, too.

The Sonys let you downconvert to "squeeze", "letterbox" or "edge crop." I think you need the edge crop one to get standard 4:3.

Chuck, in what sense are the controls on the XHA1 better than the XLH1?

[QUOTE=Steve Wolla;988416]There is a fix, shoot in HDV using 4:3 markers. Get or rent a Sony HDV deck (HD700?) and down convert to 4:3 size, in "squeeze" mode.


Made a mistake, Chuck is correct, you should not downconvert in squeeze mode, it should be in "crop" mode, as you are using 4:3 guidelines when you shoot.
My apollogies for that glaring error--
SW

On the XHA1, the shooting controls are all on switches lined up on the side like a broadcast camera, and the iris is on the lens where it belongs, even if it doesn't have an end stop. You don't need menus for anything during shooting (except turning ois on and off.) Most importantly, you can operate it by touch without hitting something that will screw you up. It even has bars on a switch and tc user bits on a button.

Chuck, the XLH1 is the shoulder cam at the top end of the canon prosumer range. I think you maybe have it confused with something else.

No, I've shot quite a bit with the XLH1. Even though it rests on your shoulder, your right arm still has to support all the weight. It's not a real shoulder mount, like my DSR. And the layout of the controls, even though they're all there, is not nearly as easy to use as the XHA1.

To each his own. The G1 hides the exposure adjustment, and additional gain settings as well as the OIS. But the big issue for me is that the H1 lens is faster and has better stabilization, even without the additional weight and shoulder mount. With a firestore and battery on the bracket it shoulder balances fairly well.

For an ENG-type shoot we fight over the XLH1.

I am a VJ and can only talk about the PAL version. I've been using the XH A1 for tv production since two years now. Mostly for a culture and lifestyle show, that desires quite a good image quality. I've been operating it in 4:3 SD as in 16:9 SD, since the network has changed format. No problems at all. True is: Using the factory setting, the cam produces a kind of blurred image, especially in skin tones. But if you tweak the settings in a reasonable manner, that problem is solved. The biggest 'downer' for me is a certain lack of light sensitivity. Newer cams like the Sony Z7 are better regarding that. Regarding the 'shoulder cam' comparisons: Sure, a decent -say 10.000€- shoulder cam is 'better'. But I certainly woudn't like to carry it around as a vj, together with all the rest, unless I looked like Dolph Lundgren. Also, it woud be quite difficult to amortize it, considering veejay salaries.

Thanks for the response Jan.

I have made some adjustments with custom settings and 4:3 looks pretty good thus far. I have not processed any viz through my edit suite yet and then dumped to tape or burned to dvd. But when tested on my regular 'ole 4:3 sd tv the output looks nice and crisp.

I could be wrong but is 4:3 fast becoming an outdated format. I walk into a tv shop and I do not see any 4:3 format TV's they are all 16:9. I do not think that there are many film makers using a 4:3 format if any, are they not all using widescreen or 16:9 I don't think it will be long before everyone will own a flat screen digital 16:9 format tv.

Alan

Sooo--Jay and Jan, I have the same blurry sd problem, care to share your tweaks??? Please?? / Battle Vaughan /miamiherald.com video team