Jon,
I only have a second but let me say this. There are a lot of very professional videos out there that look amazing and were shot with "home depot" style lighting. I'm not saying this is the best method but anyone will agree that it's how you use them. Before I knew what I was doing we had access to a few pro light kits and the results were bad anyway, if you know what I mean.

Basically your technique for lighting is probably more important than the lights themselves. IF you can have both then even better. If you aren't familiar with 3 point lighting techniques then google it and do some reading. IT will help you more in 2 weeks than buying an expensive light rig!

Good Luck!

I appreciate all the responses on this. I'm beginning to believe the at the XL2 is NOT the right choice for me and my work load.

I do have another question though.... the discussion that spawned from this on using "Home Depot" halogen lighting intrigues me. My question is this-- is there a difference in color temperature with halogens in comparison to studio lighting??
I realize if all your lighting is "Home Depot" style, then white balance will do the correction, but can you mix studio and "HD" halogens.


Joe

Joe,

I would echo the comments made by Marty. Remember, part of what you pay for in dedicated video lighting is the ability to 'control' that light. With the HD lights, you get an on/off switch and that's about it. Any other method of contolling those lights will be up to your ingenuity. A light designed for video work will likely have a definite Kelvin temp output, perhaps barndoors for controlling spill, softbox attachments, gel attachments, scrims for reducing the light w/o using a dimmer which will alter the color temp, quick change bulb housings to get to the required light output without over/under doing it, etc.

Don't feel too bad about using HD lights and making your own lighting. After all, the entrepeneural spirit is alive and well here at DV-INFO. Just look at the Alternative Imaging Methods post count! Just be prepared to make your own lighting control accessories to go with those HD lights.

-gb-

Greg-
Thanks for the input. Yeah, I would probably put an inline dimmer to get some sort of control on output and wing the rest for softness, etc.
The reality is, this would get me by for a few months until I catch my breath on buying this new camera (DVX100A) and accessories.

Thanks,
Joe

<<<-- Originally posted by Joe Hicks : Greg-
Thanks for the input. Yeah, I would probably put an inline dimmer to get some sort of control on output and wing the rest for softness, etc.
The reality is, this would get me by for a few months until I catch my breath on buying this new camera (DVX100A) and accessories.

Thanks,
Joe -->>>

Joe,

Rather than use a dimmer, I would suggest going to the replacement bulb area at HD. There are different wattage lamps available. This would keep your color temp close to tungsten so the HD lights will blend with other interior lights. Bulb change is fairly easy. My HD light stand actually has a place to hold spare bulbs safely. Using the highest wattage available with some daylight correction gels could get you some 'extra' sunlight mailnly to fill shadows.

Also Joe, if you haven't already done so, take a look at This page for an excellent way to get started with lighting on a budget.

regards,

-gb-

Greg-
Excellent points! As well, I'll take a look at the link you recommended.

Thanks!
Joe

Low light performance question...
 

Hello everyone!
I've seen some beautiful videos done with the XL2 on this post, I'm a wedding videographer and I been doing some research for a new camera, my candidates? sony PD170 for the low light performance and the beautiful XL2 for almost everything but Low light performance I haven't heard about it and almost no one comments about it, is it that bad?
Most of a wedding is done indoors so I need good light capabilities and audio, is the XL2 good for this kind of jobs?
Would I need a stronger light for indoors, if I use the XL2?
Believe me what stops me from buying the sony 170 it's that doesn't convience costumers, they go; this little camera?
Please guys say some thing about the XL2, convince me.
Thank you.

PS. there is no better website than this!

like i say to all my clients, its not what u use but how u use it.. ive seen footage shot on a dsr570 which looks like garbage, then i see stuff shot with a vx2000 that puts it to shame..
Hell i use 2 DVX100's which have been used in numerous "high end" productions, like Blade, Oprah, MTV... if poeple have their doubts about "small cameras" i jsut show them footage taken with it.. that usually shuts them up..

Personally, at this point in time, i wouldnt go for either.. the Sonys are ok, but they have that particular look that doesnt hide the fact that its a Sony.. i dont know what it is.. call it a flavour..

the XL2.. well for the investment and as "look" seems to be a concern for you.. id say hang back fo the JVC hdv unit..
it wil be more expensive, but the option of running ENG lenses, HDV 720p @ 24fps will futureproof the investment for at least another 5 yrs..

oops ..
to answer ur question.. id say wait.. but if you HAD to buy an SD camera, id say go the XL2 simply becuase it offers a native 16:9 and progressive scan.. on top of that it offers a complete configuration which covers most aspects and elements for any particularly look.

Hi Gerry. I have a VX2000 and an XL2. Yes the low light performance of the XL2 is quite poor compared to the Sony. If you are prepared to spend a lot of time in post you can still get good results with the XL2 in low light (up to a point) but if you are doing wedding videos as a business I doubt you will have the time to do that (but of course it's your call).

Peter's point about waiting for a better camera with the new formats coming out is very true. If you are not really in a hurry you should consider waiting for a while. But if you need good low light performance right now, I would recommend that you at least try out the Sony. A bit of scepticism initially from your customers is better than a lot of disappointment when they see the results!

Richard

Richard, Peter thank you for your suggestions they are excellent your words lead to choosing the XL2 since I usually spent a lot of time on post ( it must be perfect), as you said results must be the ones that impress not the apparence of the camera but in this case the XL2 it's good looking one.

What would you guys suggest, I do or get to compensate for the low light capability of the XL2?
Thank you once againg.

in all honesty, i woul dwait for the new JVC HD 1.3 ccd unit as i too will offer removable lenses, this time however, your looking at full size 1/2' bayonet ENG lenses, which in my opinion, is far more flexible than the canon range, as u can also get a 2/3 adapter for this new unit as well..

this is the cam i been waiting for... i was going to go for the Pana with eh P2 system, but to tell u the truth i dont think the wedding market is ready for dvcprohd50...

Gerry,
I have an xl2, and need to shoot some stuff in low light ( following a local politician-changing light situations). I went with the Frezzi 50 watt "mini fill"( with dimmer) on camera light, and the softbox 11 for the minifill. The whole business with the mounting stud is around $500. This way you get the best of both worlds-XL2 image and low light capability.
Then you need battery power. The cheapest is the battery belt, but I didn't like having my pants dragged down "hip-hop" style,
so I went with the Anton bauer dionic 90. You also need the "power tap" plate, which attaches to the XL2 back plate).
I'm reallt satisfied ith the set-up ( although it was expensive).
Bruce yarock

Gerry, you might consider renting the camera on a project by project basis, thus you can try the XL2, the PD170 and large sensor cams until the new JVC comes along, and then make the choice. No one knows yet about the JVC's sensitivity. Being "HD", it might end up being less sensitive that the XL2, in leage with the FX1/Z1... similar questions can be raised about the upcoming prosumer HD pannys...

Of course owning a camera gives you the possibility of fine-tuning it to your needs... still, we are so close to NAB. If I were you I'd wait.

hey gerry, just noticed your strange family name? From what country are you from?

HD is very very interesting and I only wish I had more time and wait for the NAB, but do I need to buy additional stuff to go HD? doesn't the client must have HD equipment too and I believe FC doesn't support HD yet.
Anyway, my name might sound familiar to you, Arlie but not I'm not from the philipines, Nava it's a very common name in Mexico and Central America as well.
Thank you.

New to video and lots of q's
 

We currently do event photography and i am planning on adding video to it as well. We do all kinds of events (mostly sporting events) and especially lots of indoor low light events such as ice skating.

So far my video skills have been to use consumer camcorders pretty much on auto everything but from the still photography side i obviously understand shutterspeeds, aperture, gain and all the good and bad things about cameras and capturing light in general.

I am thinking about getting a Canon XL2 but this may change to some other camera. The XL2 marks pretty much the top of the price range though

One of the first things i am trying to find out is how the low light capabilities compare to what i am used to dealing with.

When we shoot stills we shoot generally at 1/400, ISO 1600 at F2.8 or therabouts. Sometimes at F1.8 and if we are lucky at ISO 1250.

Now in still photography obviously you need these shutterspeeds to stop action which is different with video.

Now my questions

What settings would you use to shoot for example ice skating in terms of aperture and shutter speed.

Anyone have any idea what the 0 gain on the XL2 compares to in terms of ISO of a still camera ?

Thanks in advance

Although an XL2 will give you much better picture quality (more resolution, widescreen, cinegamma,....) and is (maybe, this is very subjective offcourse) a better cam as a whole, if low light is your greatest concern, get a Sony VX2100 or a Sony PD170 (or is it 150?).

They are the cams that have the best low light capability (well, that's what I always read here, so I'm pretty sure)

Good luck.

I second the Sony PD170. Although the Canon is a great cam the PD is better in a low light situation, this coming from someone that uses Sonys but has many friends in the business that use the Canons.

As for shutter speed and aperture, I can only suggest that whatever camera you decide on, use the fastest shutter speed with the smallest aperture you can. Of course depending on where you are shooting from in the arena AND the amount of lighting you might want to forego aperture for shutter.

Perhaps the best way to go at first would be to set the shutter to say 1/250 or 1/500 and let the auto aperture handle that aspect until you are comfortable. With the Sony, you can set the auto aperture punch the IRIIS button to see wht the setting is and then go back to auto. Don't forget to WHITE BALANCE. As for gain, I prefer ZERO myself but will go as high as 12db if the situation calls for it. Picks up about 1 stop in my VERY unscientific tests but certainly does pick up the grain. I use that very sparingly.
HTH
Don B

Low light question
 

Hi there

i am thinking about getting an XL2 but have a few questions regarding low light shooting. I posted this in the general board but am not sure if i get it answered there as it is XL2 specific

I am wondering how the XL2 compares to the light levels i would need to shoot in

With a still camera that would be about 1/320 at ISO 1600 and F2.8

First my question is what shutter speed would be used on a video camera to shoot sports (in this case ice skating) and second what would the 0 gain level on an XL2 compare to in terms of ISO on a still camera. And then what gain level would i need to shoot in the setting mentioned above

Thanks

<< I posted this in the general board but am not sure if i get it answered there as it is XL2 specific >>

Folks, please do not cross-post!

<<<-- Originally posted by Chris Hurd : Cross-posted here: please direct all responses to this thread.

Folks, please do not cross-post! -->>>

Actually the reason for this post is because part of the original post was specific to the XL2 (belongs here) but the other part was not (does not belong here) so really part of it belongs here which i corrected with this post.

You've had some good responses to your first thread, so now the two have been merged together for consolidation.

24p low light
 

Hi everyone. First and foremost, I would like for you to forgive me if there is already a thread concerning a similar topic, and if so, would you please direct me to it? Anyway, I recently purchased a new XL2 and am working on a 24p project that requires some low light scenes, specifically, being outdoors at night time. I was wondering if any of you had some settings and/or lighting suggestions to keep a good picture. And by good picture, i mean a "filmic look." If there are no reasonable solutions, is switching to 30p or 60i a worthy consideration? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Switching to 60i will help. Uping the gain will also help. If you want the film look, you will want to stay in 24P. If you want to get the best quality, don't boost the gain too much. It all depends where you will be shooting. If you're shooting under a street light, it might not be that bad. If you're shooting where there isn't much ambient light, it will be difficult to get a good image without lighting the set. The best thing to do is get a set of battery pack operated lights to illuminate the subject if it's a run and gun shoot. Trust me, it's better than nothing. Good luck.

I have to disagree with this. I find that there is not a significant increase in light sensitivity in 60i over 24P mode....maybe non at all. I had the DVX100 for 2 years prior to the XL2 and it did improve majorly in the 601 mode. Someone said once that was because it averaged interlace lines together which made it brighter and more sensitive. I don't know about all of the technical mumbo jumbo there but I can tell you that I have never had to switch to 601 to increase light on the XL2. So far it get the same exposure in 24P. FWIW.

Rent the proper gear and light for night. You'll never get a solid picture without the right lighting. Just b/c you use lights doesn't mean it can't look like night.

I would think that 60i would actually lower the exposure because of the faster shudder speeds as opposed to 24p, but im only speaking from conjecture, since i havnt had the opportunity to shoot in extremely low light situations with my XL2 yet.

So it looks like my best option would be to rent out some decent lighting equipment. Thanks for the help guys.

Yes Jon, my experience with my XL2 is that going from 60i to 30p and then to 24p will actually help in low light because of the slower scan rate of the ccds allowing for more light along with the slower shutter speeds. This is visible on the exposure bar in the v/f when in full manual mode. In fact, the 'magic pix' mode of my Pana 953 does the same thing. It drops the frame rate and shutter speed down below what's accesible from the menus to give a 'usable' picture in very low light. Usable is a subjective term in that previous sentence.

-gb-

Yes, shudder is always a problem in low light. :)

Richard

shoot just before sunrise if you can, the last hour-45 minutes before the sun rises it is just beneath the horizon and shining up towards the sky, there's usually enough moisture and dust etc in the air to give the sky a nice deep blue glow, and mountains or buildings in the distance will appear in silhouettes

-Jon

Need to see low light comparisons!
 

Is there anywhere on the net that compares the low light performance of the XL2 with other cams in its class, such as the Sony Z1/FX1, PD150, or Panasonic VX100?

Low light suggestions?
 

Hello all,

I'm beginning work on a Short film this weekend that has a lot of exterior night shots. Any suggestions or advice? Our cinematographer has a pretty descent light kit, but he's new to the XL2. Are there any settings which will help maximize our image?

More importantly I suppose, if anybody has any offerings on what not to do, that would be appreciated as well.

Thanks for any help,

Steve

Do not let the gain get over +3dB if possible and do NOT use auto gain. You might want to adjust your knee setting to High (you will lose details in highlights) and if it start to lose some color, bump the color gain up a notch or two. If you HAVE to use gain, make sure you adjust the NR accordingly and turn down the sharpness a notch or 2. You can also try bumping the set-up level and master pedestal, start with the master pedestal. If you go too high, things may look a little flat...

Just play around with those settings, you should be good to go. The XL2 is much better in low light than many people think, it just takes some tinkering.



ash =o)

XL2 footage stills in low light
 

I know a lot of people are interested in how the XL2 handles low light. You can see some stills from a recent shoot I had in low light at www.snd.toobookoo.com. I think they show the XL2 does a great job.

Some of you may know that I've never owned a camera or shot anything before I purchased the XL2 recently and the M2 adpater (from Redrockmicro.com). On the webpage above are some stills from my first shoot ever. This was with the XL2 at 24pA and the M2 adapter with a Nikon 50mm lens. I edited with FCP, but the images are compressed because I haven't learned all the ins and outs of editing and changing formats for still images.

We still have some more shooting to do and I should have some video in about a week or so.

The actors are Luke Renn (2 pics) and Timothy Tyler from Indianapolis, Indiana.

Thanks,

Kelly

Wow ... nice results.
Care to share your custom settings with regard to black level etc.?

Thanks Jimmy. Believe it or not, I didn't use any custom settings at all. The basic settings were 24pA (2:3:3:2), gain at -3, shutter speed 1/48, auto white balance (there was a reason for that I can go over later), 16:9. I have the 20X lens and it was at F1.8 because I had to zoom in on the M2 element (or else I would have had it at F1.6). I used a Nikkon 50mm lens at F1.4 on the M2.

Other than that, I left all the settings at the default.

The camera did pretty good at the default settings. If I had more experience, I might have tried some things.

Thanks,

Kelly

I think that setting was quite enough since you stated that you are using an adapter.
How much did you purchase the adapter????????? because I am still considering which one to by, G35 or Micro35.

xl2 low light
 

I can not figure out how to get that crisp look under low lighting. I tried the low lighting settings and it still comes out snowy looking. If anyone can help with my problem I would very much appreciate it. O and I am new to the canon xl2

24p
 

Im directing a music video and I have footage in 24p I captured it in premiere pro cs4. And my question is how to get that choppiness out in playback?