Strange question : old XL1 vs Sony HC-1 in SD at DVinfo.net

Luc Saint-Elie · March 5th, 2006, 03:47 AM

Hello,

I know the question can sound strange even not completely dumb.

The little Sony HC1 (consummer HDV camera) is sold around the same price tag of a old used XL1 in correct shape.

On a pure image quality point of view and only in SD (I don't care about HDV), does someone know of the result of both compare ?

Second question, is it possible to do macro shots (very close with a with small depth of field..) with a XL1 using the adaptater and a EOS macro lens (I know about the x7.5 factor) ?

Thanks in advance

Mathieu Ghekiere · March 8th, 2006, 01:50 PM

Maybe the XL1 will be nicer in terms of colour, warmth, 'character' if you know what I mean...

Andrew Khalil · March 8th, 2006, 04:43 PM

interesting question. I have never used the HC1 much, but I've seen some clips and tried it out for a couple of minutes and I'd say in terms of resolution and sharpness, the HC1 will definitly win - the XL1 is quite soft and almost unusable in 16:9. However, the amount of control and the accessibility of the controls on the XL1 is a lot better. Colour is another issue. While the XL1 has 3CCDs which usually would produce better colour than a single one, the HC1 has a CMOS sensor which also produce really good colour (They're used in still cameras) so I think they may be very similar in terms of colour with the XL1 being warmer, but I don't think either would be better.
I believe you can mount a macro lens to the XL1 using the adapter and use it and it will give great results.

Luc Saint-Elie · March 8th, 2006, 07:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Khalil

interesting question. I have never used the HC1 much, but I've seen some clips and tried it out for a couple of minutes and I'd say in terms of resolution and sharpness, the HC1 will definitly win - the XL1 is quite soft and almost unusable in 16:9. However, the amount of control and the accessibility of the controls on the XL1 is a lot better. Colour is another issue. While the XL1 has 3CCDs which usually would produce better colour than a single one, the HC1 has a CMOS sensor which also produce really good colour (They're used in still cameras) so I think they may be very similar in terms of colour with the XL1 being warmer, but I don't think either would be better.
I believe you can mount a macro lens to the XL1 using the adapter and use it and it will give great results.

Thanks a lot Andrew

I asked this question because my background is in photography (I was photo reporter when I was younger), I would like to make some little videos for a little TV show I have on a small channel. I asked technicians , DV, as long it's good DV, is ok for short clips (5 secondes, 10 secondes at the very maximum in my case).

I used a Canon XM2 a friend let me for some days and the lesson I got was I really am a "old school-manual" guy. Automatic is probably more efficient, but I feel far more at ease when I have to set myself shutter, aperture, focus and so on. I did that for years with my Nikons and for me it's some kind of second nature, more natural.

As It's a personal project the money is mine (not the channel's one alas) and I don't have a lot.

Modern machines are very "plastic-automatic" (or very expensives, if I had the money for ot I would love to have a DVX100B, I've used one a few hours and it's a wonderfull stuff).

So for around 1500/2000$ I have the choice between modern machines like the HC-1 probably more efficient (but perhaps not more efficient for me) and old horses like the XL1.

It was why I asked that because if the XL1 is still in the same league that the HC1 family of machine, I would by far prefer it, in the opposite case, I will go the modern route...

Important point I'm not a filmmaker, I'm journalist (but I don't have to shoot very speed events, mostly very calm features).

Andrew Khalil · March 8th, 2006, 07:59 PM

I also shoot a lot of journalistic style stuff (mostly summer camps in the summer) so I sort of know what you're aiming for. If you don't need HD, have you considered the Canon GL2, Sony PDX10 or Panasonic DVC-30 (all are within your budget and are great versions of their larger siblings)?

You say you used a GL2 (XM2) but you prefer manual control which the GL2 does have. I know it doesn't have a dedicated button for each, but it does offer great control.

Like I said, I have never used the HC1 for more than a few minutes, but from what I'm seeing, it has very few buttons along with the infamous touch screen to control most settings.

Also, are you looking at getting a used XL1, or XL1s? The XL1s is much better in low light and other minor things and if you can find it, it'll be better than the original XL1 for a little more.

hope this helps

Luc Saint-Elie · March 8th, 2006, 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Khalil

I also shoot a lot of journalistic style stuff (mostly summer camps in the summer) so I sort of know what you're aiming for. If you don't need HD, have you considered the Canon GL2, Sony PDX10 or Panasonic DVC-30 (all are within your budget and are great versions of their larger siblings)?

You say you used a GL2 (XM2) but you prefer manual control which the GL2 does have. I know it doesn't have a dedicated button for each, but it does offer great control.

Like I said, I have never used the HC1 for more than a few minutes, but from what I'm seeing, it has very few buttons along with the infamous touch screen to control most settings.

Also, are you looking at getting a used XL1, or XL1s? The XL1s is much better in low light and other minor things and if you can find it, it'll be better than the original XL1 for a little more.

hope this helps

yes this is a GL2 (I'm in Europe and here it is called XM2 but it's the same beast). But it a very cheaply build camera, very plastic feeling and if I was to carry one often I doubt it will have a very long life (I just read that the DVC30 is more rugged).

No I don't need HD at all

Andrew Khalil · March 8th, 2006, 09:27 PM

I agree - the GL2 isn't as rugged as other cameras and it is something Canon should improve in the next model. That said, unless you're smashing/banging/whacking it against things on a regular basis or you're in an environment where it's likely to happen, it shouldn't be a big deal.
The DVC-30 is made of magensium alloy, so I would say it is a bit more durable and it has some great features, perhaps that camera is better suited for your needs?

Brendan Bhagan · March 9th, 2006, 03:07 PM

The DVC30 is a good alternative, prices are about the same as the GL2/XM2 and it is very well made with similar image quality ( although better in low light ). You can customize the DVC30 to look like the GL2 video if needed as well. Another camera to look at is the Sony vx2100 which has better image quality than either the DVC30 or gl2 but does add a few hundred more to the price. The older XL1 is a great camera, far better than the hc1, gl2 or dvc30 but finding them at the same price point, even used will prove difficult ( for one in good shape at the same price ). Go to a store and try them out and see.

March 5th, 2006, 03:47 AM	#1
Luc Saint-Elie New Boot Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Paris-France Posts: 20	Strange question : old XL1 vs Sony HC-1 in SD Hello, I know the question can sound strange even not completely dumb. The little Sony HC1 (consummer HDV camera) is sold around the same price tag of a old used XL1 in correct shape. On a pure image quality point of view and only in SD (I don't care about HDV), does someone know of the result of both compare ? Second question, is it possible to do macro shots (very close with a with small depth of field..) with a XL1 using the adaptater and a EOS macro lens (I know about the x7.5 factor) ? Thanks in advance

March 8th, 2006, 01:50 PM	#2
Mathieu Ghekiere Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Belgium Posts: 2,195	Maybe the XL1 will be nicer in terms of colour, warmth, 'character' if you know what I mean... __________________ http://productionsofthe3rdkind.com http://pr3k.com

March 8th, 2006, 04:43 PM	#3
Andrew Khalil Major Player Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 424	interesting question. I have never used the HC1 much, but I've seen some clips and tried it out for a couple of minutes and I'd say in terms of resolution and sharpness, the HC1 will definitly win - the XL1 is quite soft and almost unusable in 16:9. However, the amount of control and the accessibility of the controls on the XL1 is a lot better. Colour is another issue. While the XL1 has 3CCDs which usually would produce better colour than a single one, the HC1 has a CMOS sensor which also produce really good colour (They're used in still cameras) so I think they may be very similar in terms of colour with the XL1 being warmer, but I don't think either would be better. I believe you can mount a macro lens to the XL1 using the adapter and use it and it will give great results.

March 8th, 2006, 07:59 PM	#5
Andrew Khalil Major Player Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 424	I also shoot a lot of journalistic style stuff (mostly summer camps in the summer) so I sort of know what you're aiming for. If you don't need HD, have you considered the Canon GL2, Sony PDX10 or Panasonic DVC-30 (all are within your budget and are great versions of their larger siblings)? You say you used a GL2 (XM2) but you prefer manual control which the GL2 does have. I know it doesn't have a dedicated button for each, but it does offer great control. Like I said, I have never used the HC1 for more than a few minutes, but from what I'm seeing, it has very few buttons along with the infamous touch screen to control most settings. Also, are you looking at getting a used XL1, or XL1s? The XL1s is much better in low light and other minor things and if you can find it, it'll be better than the original XL1 for a little more. hope this helps

March 8th, 2006, 09:27 PM	#7
Andrew Khalil Major Player Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 424	I agree - the GL2 isn't as rugged as other cameras and it is something Canon should improve in the next model. That said, unless you're smashing/banging/whacking it against things on a regular basis or you're in an environment where it's likely to happen, it shouldn't be a big deal. The DVC-30 is made of magensium alloy, so I would say it is a bit more durable and it has some great features, perhaps that camera is better suited for your needs?

March 9th, 2006, 03:07 PM	#8
Brendan Bhagan New Boot Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Trinidad WI Posts: 22	The DVC30 is a good alternative, prices are about the same as the GL2/XM2 and it is very well made with similar image quality ( although better in low light ). You can customize the DVC30 to look like the GL2 video if needed as well. Another camera to look at is the Sony vx2100 which has better image quality than either the DVC30 or gl2 but does add a few hundred more to the price. The older XL1 is a great camera, far better than the hc1, gl2 or dvc30 but finding them at the same price point, even used will prove difficult ( for one in good shape at the same price ). Go to a store and try them out and see.