|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
October 16th, 2008, 11:24 PM
|
#1 |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Lyndhurst NJ
Posts: 78
|
DVX100b vs Canon xl-h1
Ok i clearly know the main difference is the ability to shoot HD. However I notice the Canon has a great film look in 60i, but to obtain a film look in the dvx you need to be in 24p, am I wrong on this, or is the canon that much better?
|
|
|
|
October 20th, 2008, 04:42 PM
|
#2 |
|
Better than Halle Berry
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 435
|
Apples to Oranges- really there's not much to compare between these two cameras.
DVX100- standard definition, true 24p DV. Priced under $3K. XL-H1, HDV, HD, faux 24 frame mode that is pretty much useless in post-production. Priced around $7K. Unless you just are in love with Canon there are many other cameras I can think of that blow the XL-H1 out of the water(some for less money)- like the Panasonic HVX200 and HMC150, the Sony EX1 and EX3. -Noah Noah |
|
|
|
|
October 20th, 2008, 07:56 PM
|
#3 |
|
Wrangler
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Eagle River, AK
Posts: 4,100
|
Subjective superlatives aside, Canon 24F is laid to tape as true 23.976 fps progressive.
True: these cameras are apples to oranges. SD vs HD. False: 24F is useless in post-production (perhaps that opinion arises from choice of post gear/software; Canon Frame Mode is proprietary but hardly "faux" and fairly widely, albeit not universally, supported in editing software by now). BTW, the XL H1 is no longer current. Canon has replaced it with the XL H1a (no HD SDI) for under $6K street price and the XL H1s (with HD SDI) for just under $9K. But all of these points are extensively discussed in the XL H1/a/s forum.
__________________
Pete Bauer The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science. Albert Einstein Trying to solve a DV mystery? You may find the answer behind the SEARCH function ... or be able to join a discussion already in progress! |
|
|
|
|
October 21st, 2008, 07:59 AM
|
#4 | |
|
Obstreperous Rex
|
Quote:
From Barry Green: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.p...7&postcount=46 "It's like the 24F argument -- people have said over and over that 24F is "fake" etc. Well, I put up a quicktime movie showing one and the other, and I defy anyone to make the argument that 24F doesn't work like 24P does. It does." http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.p...6&postcount=59 "It's like 24P vs. 24F. Lots of internet myth and hype, but when you get right down to it, there isn't a difference. I'm saying the same thing with resolution, and showing the pictures -- lots of internet myth and hype abound, but when you look at the same shot at the same time, there's no appreciable difference." Barry's posts that I quoted above referred to his article comparing the HVX200 to the XH A1. The CCD block, processor, and 24F are all identical between the XL series and XH series, so that's why his quotes are relevant here. Hope this helps, |
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
||||||
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
