what pair to get
 

Hello everyone, i have a question that has been bugging me for a while. I plan on buying 2 HDV cameras, any brand, (i'm opting for a z1 and xlh1). The reason i'm not buying both of the same model, (2 xlh1s) is because of the lowlight possibility on a lot of the shooting areas. I know for a fact that the xlh1 shoots in 1080i at a res of 1920, but the z1 shoots at 1080i 1440 res.. Is it goingt o be difficult mixing and matching the cameras in post production with various resolutions, or is it not going to matter? Would it be better to just get two XlH1s in the long run? Any ideas? I'm new to the HDV workflow, i have an idea of how to accomodate post prod, but i'm wondering which pair of cameras I should opt for.Thanks

If possible, always get two cameras with a matching "look". It'll make your life much easier in post-production.

i completely understand that, i've dealt with dv cameras mostly when it comes to matching the output. What i'm worried about in HDV, is, if we get a Z1 and a XLH1, in 1080i mode, wouldn't both cameras still have diff resolutions? Also, any xlh1 users, how is the lowlight capability? does it rival the z1?

This doesn't sound right unless Canon is using a non-standard version of HDV - otherwise the resulting file from both cameras should be the same 1440x1080 resolution and should cut together reasonably well. Of course each camera is going to have a different 'look' as far as color and gamma is concerned, so making footage from the two look similar may be a bigger concern - but that doesn't really have anything to do with resolution.

Edit: Canon's literature on the camera specifies the standard 1440x1080 resolution to tape, so your information is likely wrong:

http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/con...2152&pageno=16

yeah, i checked up on that, and looks like I was wrong. Thats good though, that means I dont' have to worry about mixing and matching pairs, except for the color/gamma detail. Now my question is: which HDV camera performs the best under low-light scenarios?

For what its worth:

Rating from Canon: 60i, 1/60 shutter speed = 7 lux; 30F, 1/30 shutter speed = 4 lux; 24F, 1/48 shutter speed = 6 lux

Rating from Sony: 3 lux @ 18db, F1.6, normal shutter

Even if cost hadn't been a factor, I think I would still have chosen the FX1/Z1 over the H1, for the low light capability.

well I haven't bought the cameras yet, i'm still debating. I'm thinking the perfect scenario would be a z1 and a h1..

From the HDV/P2 shoot-out, I thought that the Canon was the clear low light winner? And yes they both capture 1440 to tape (Canon does full 1980 from SDI) but the Canon holds far more detail then the Sony.

Working with both, I'd have to dispute the "far more." Does it offer greater detail? Yes. Far more? I guess it depends which is further, to New York or by bus.

Just going off the HDV/P2 shoot-out Douglas. Sony was lowest detail of the bunch. Canon was the highest. Both at 1080i. JVC at 720p was second. As a note the tests were done with artificial detail settings turned to "off", and in doing so the Sony went extreemly soft.

I'm not sure which camera is actually the better performer in low light. I've read conflicting accounts, so it is unclear to me which camera handles low light best (FX1/Z1 or H1), but from what I understand, the FX1/Z1 does pretty well, especially at holding down noise when gain is boosted (sounded like the safe choice in that regard).

Robert -"but from what I understand, the FX1/Z1 does pretty well, especially at holding down noise when gain is boosted (sounded like the safe choice in that regard)."

Your quite right Robert. The Sony holds up very well in that regard. In that same (and only comparative) test I'm aware of, it clearly showed that the Canon held a large advantage in the low light catagory. I would be very interested in hearing of any referance to the contrary, if you have one.

I'm pretty sure I've seen at least a couple posts here that allude to better low light performance from the FX1/Z1, but I'm not sure where I saw them. I'll keep my eyes open and if I see one again, I'll try to point it out for you. I haven't seeing anything akin to "I put them side by side and one clearly blows the other out of the water" or anything like that.

thanks for the info guys, right now the z1 is only a candidate because of its possible superior low light, thats the only reason i'm opting for a z1 and h1 rather than simply 2 xlh1s..

If the costs of the two cameras had been closer, I'd have looked quite a bit harder at the XL-H1 before making a purchase decision, but for my purposes, to shoot weddings, I pretty much reached a conclusion that spending twice as much for the Canon just wouldn't be nearly as cost effective for me. I really don't have the luxury of a budget, at this point, that would give me the room to spend that much more on cameras without having a VERY compelling reason. I need those dollars for a second camera (probably A1U at this point), mics, more software tools, faster processors, hard drives, batteries, you name it. A pretty sweet deal came my way on an FX1, so I scouped it up.

Where do you get that info Spike? As I just posted to Robert, the only shootout done with all HDV cams +P2 cam, showed that the Canon clearly had superior low light performance. Buy what works for you. Just curious as to why you think Sony has better low light performace, or as you put it "possible" low light performance?

This note from Chris was posted earlier in this thread. I'm not sure where he got those numbers, but if they are accurate, it would seem to indicate better low light performance from the Sony. Again, I don't know the original source of the info, and there's no mention of what gain (if any) was used on the Canon to arrive at these ratings, so it's not hardly what I would call conclusive.

Based on my experiences with both, Sony is lesser in low light than the Canon, but more clean at identical settings. With the gain added, the Sony stays clean whereas the Canon does not. With the substantially better lens, I'd expect the Canon to do better in low light as it does, but wish the gained-up image was as clean as that of the Sony.

Ditto what DSE said. I recently tested all four brands of affordable HD video cameras, and while the Canon was more sensitive in low light it also produced the grainiest images. (So much so that my brother was very concerned about the resulting image quality.) And absolutely it's better to get similar cameras for matching in post, so if you can afford a Z1 and an XLH1, why not buy three Z1s instead? (Or a Z1 and two FX1s and have a few thousand left over for accessories.)

By the way, both the Canon and the Sony record HDV at 1440x1080 resolution using a non-square pixel size, which is then stretched to the equivalent of 1920x1080 during playback. The Canon also offers full 1920x1080 resolution via the HD-SDI output, but that's basically just interpreting the sensor data which is 1440x1080 native. Both cameras produce fine 1080i video.

Okay, my question to Douglas and Kevin is, if you had to choose one camera or the other to shoot a wedding reception in poor lighting, which camera would you use?

Well.....the Canon can produce better images in some conditions, but low light isn't one of them. I'd go with the Sony. We bought one of all the HDV cams, and yet we own several Z1's. (and an A1u as well)
I'd go with the Z1 if you're working in low light. many, many wedding folks have not regretted that decision.
The SDI of the Canon is outstanding, but not really useful for field work, IMO.

How do you like working with the A1 Douglas? From what I gather, it's a bit unconventional for controlling image acquisition (shutter/iris).

I have two FX1s and get by with them in poor lighting using ~10-40 watts of diffused on-camera light. After seeing the graininess of the XLH1 images in low light, I would be reluctant to buy that camera without investigating further, especially given the high price tag. Plus the XLH1 is very difficult to hand hold for more than a minute or two, and doesn't have a proper LCD screen (other than the little one you can see by flipping up the viewfinder).

If you already own an SD camera which is good in low light situations, consider getting an anamorphic lens adapter for that and using it as your 'B roll' camera when lighting gets too tough for the HDV cameras.

i think a fleet of z1s would be better, now that I think about it, as the stuff we intend to shoot will be very "on the go", and also glidecam candidates. I think the h1 will be a hassle, for portability, etc. Thanks for all the info!

Why not get one camera first, and see how well it suits your needs, before making a decision on the second camera? (unless you're just plain downright wealthy, and it does sound like you might be I guess)

hello, no i am not wealthy in any way shape or form (at the moment), its just that my company might be signing a deal with the Travel Channel for a brand new series, and we proposed to shoot in HDV, so i'm taking care of all logistical challenges and attempting to figure out our workflow.. We are also cramped for time, so I'm trying to come up with a foolproof method..

The thing that I'd be afraid of most, would be potential difficulties matching the footage between the two cameras coming back to bite you. I would think you could take a quick trip to SF and find a dealer that has both cams in stock, to get a hands-on with both of them. One thing that really sucks about being as far out in the boonies as I am, is getting a hands-on with any of these cams is pretty difficult (other than that, I love living here in Small Town, MN USA). My FX1 arrived today! (I live so far out in rural Minnesota, it wouldn't surprise me all that much to find out that I have the nicest cameras in a 20 mile radius!)

i've had the nightmare of matching footage from a vx2000 and a Canon GL1 so I know a bit about getting the settings/right cameras for a dual camera job. The Z1 certainly seems to fit the bill, and since theres a dedicated deck out from Sony for the footage acquired from the z1, I think we're set...

What kind of series are you trying to land for the Travel Channel? (obviously something about travel)

The show's premise is to explore the world one city at a time through it's cuisine. We are reworking our project website at the moment, but soon as its up I will post a link here.

On another note, what seems to be a good price for a new z1? I know BH has a pretty nice deal for the Z1 + the HDV deck with a rebate, but whats a good price for a single z1 (with nothing else added)

If you click on the "email me a price" B&H will send you an email virtually instantly. I seriously doubt you'll find another reputable dealer that sells significantly below the price they send you.

yeah, i'm a big fan of BH, and I will most likely be supporting them. Anyway, the link to the project we are working on marketing is

http://www.craterlionproductions.com/destinationfood

The site doesn't explain too much about the show because we have a specially built version for interested networks etc.

I have shot and directed a DVD for Cavalia (Cirque with horses)
We've shot for 3 weeks, and used 4 sonys z1 and fx1, mini35 and canon h1.
The last one (Canon) has produced the best image in poor light conditions, but the clumsy zoom control and lack of lcd or high res viewfinder was a major drawback.
The process of color matching between the shots from those two cams was very painful.
When you place the shots on the timeline side by side you see a huge difference
(Avoid this if you can!)
I'll try to post some stills.

I am my self an owner of FX1 with all the accessories, and looking to get a second camcorder (mainly to get close-ups).
Since I am shooting often green screen my first pick is HVX, but because of my experience I'll probably end up getting another Sony, and keep on renting for the green.

That's my two cents
Albert Rudnicki
Director
www.ahproductions.com
www.yayofilms.com

Albert,
What makes the HVX your "first pick" for greenscreen?

fx1 & z1
 

to spread these evaluations a bit further:

Recognizing some superior feature sets, would the experts agree that from an optics and image standpoint the z1 and fx1 are indentical? (or not)

On optics and electronics alone, the images are identical. However, the Z1 includes some electronic enhancements that do allow it to generate a superior image, which is why it is the cam chosen on the pro front vs the FX1

"What makes the HVX your "first pick" for green screen?"

I guess 4:2:2, dvcpro50, 720p is plenty of reasons to use it for chroma key.
Good optics is a plus.
I am not sure about 1080p, all that pixel shifting :)

As far as comparison between Z1 and FX1, we have shot with them side by side, and there is no difference in the image (both in 60i mode)

The pixel shifting is there regardless.
Bear in mind that with a horizontal imager of 540, you're missing out on a lot of color information, because that additional sample isn't really there. And in HD, 4:2:2 really doesn't actually apply (No matter whose cam we're discussing) as it's an SD standard.
So, with the lowered horizontal resolution, mathematically it's really about the same as 4:2:0. In part, I'm parroting what was demonstrated regarding HD compression from Poynton, but at the end of the day, it's pretty clear he's right.

Regarding the FX1 and Z1, if you set them both to auto mode, no special anything in the stream, this is so...they're identical. The DSP's however, which is what really determines how any of these cameras work whether it's JVC, Sony, Panasonic, or Canon, is what really counts. And the DSP's are not the same on the FX1 as the Z1.

Would it be correct to conlude that, for shooting wedding receptions, if camera price is not a consideration, the choice between shooting with an XL-H1 or an FX1/Z1 is not entirely a clear cut choice to make?

Also, has anyone directly compared the quality difference between using black stretch on a Z1 and shooting the identical scene without using black stretch on the Z1, then stretching black in post?