Excellent article

[Jason Strongfield]

http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/xha1/

[Dennis Hingsberg]

Is it my monitor or do the HVX clips look more colorful?

I wonder if the A1 "HD Auto Focus" feature is any better than their focus was on the XL cams...


:p

[Robert Lane]

Originally Posted by Dennis Hingsberg

Is it my monitor or do the HVX clips look more colorful?

The HVX clips are more saturated/colorful; Barrys' comments say the same thing.

[Holly Rognan]

They seem very colorful indeed. The A1 seems very misrepresented.

[Barry Green]

The A1 is not "misrepresented" in any way. The settings were described clearly. It is exact, uncompressed, unmodified, untouched footage at middle settings, on both. The HVX has a much richer palette than the XHA1, and that's really the only signficant image difference between them; other factors seem very comparable.

[Greg Boston]

Originally Posted by Holly Rognan

They seem very colorful indeed. The A1 seems very misrepresented.

I would expect that from a forum that is geared towards a given manufacturer. That and being unfamiliar with the product being compared.

Here's an incorrect statement I found almost immediately..

And gone is the silly clicky iris switch of the XL2/XLH1, replaced by an iris ring on the lens.

The XL2 was the only XL series to have the 'clicky iris switch'. The XL1/s had a wheel. The XL2 had the toggle switch and people complained loudly so Canon brought back the wheel for the XLH1, contradictory to Barry's statement.

-gb-

[Holly Rognan]

Originally Posted by Barry Green

The HVX has a much richer palette than the XHA1, and that's really the only signficant image difference between them.

Yes, richer by default, not by capability.

[Kyle Doris]

it's funny, i have the HVX and was lucky enough to see a "behinds the scenes" demo of the A1 days before it was released and i loved it, from that meeting i even recommended it to one of my good friends for her specific needs the moment i saw it, i was that impressed... and she loves it.

what i find amusing is that when Barry is fairly objective, people will still get all bent out of shape. he states in the article many times that both cameras produce amazing stuff. this is a 24 on 24 comparison too, the 60i of the A1 is prolly kickin' something awesome.

for me personally i know my needs and wants from a camera lead me towards the HVX, yet that doesn't mean (as with Barry and many other people...) we can't see each tool for their intended purposes. i'm not sure why it should surprise people that the HVX will provide richer colors or dispute it. seems rather odd.

either way, great article, learned a lot, something new everyday i guess; for instance i never knew about that servo problem where only one will work at any one time ... thanks Barry! good read.

[Robert Lane]

Actually that's not the case, Holly. Canon's chips have historically been flatter and less saturated than both Panasonic or Sony and in fact are similar to JVC's color response. Many shooters that I've worked with actually consider the H1 and HD100/150 to be a close match with respect to their color output and often mix sequences from those 2 cameras because of their similar color response. Those same shooters however found it difficult to match the H1 with the Sony Z1 since Sony's chips produce a much more saturated output.

Canon's claim to fame in both digi-video and DSLR's isn't color it's low noise and sharpness. This same less-saturated/good sharpness characteristic continues with this camera and is clearly displayed in all the samples Barry supplied.

So in fact, the HVX does have high color saturation both in default settings and when chroma is pulled up manually - as mentioned in Barry's article when chroma is bumped to maximum the Canon becomes richer whereas the HVX's saturation goes beyond what the Canon is capable of.

That doesn't make the HVX better than the Canon, it makes them distinctly different.

[Barry Green]

We had a massive discussion over there as well, so it's probably not fair to Chris to rehash it all over here.

Let me just say that I'm still puzzled why people think a $3995 product should do everything a $5995 product does? It doesn't. That's okay. It's a lot less expensive. That's the point.

What the XHA1 does for $3600 "street" is unparalleled, and it's far and away the best HDV camera on the market. It just doesn't do half the things the HVX does (which is why the HVX costs more).

And yes, richer by default, and richer by capability. If you look at the photos of the courthouse and the trees, I show both cams on "neutral" settings, and also on "maxxed out" settings.

[Juan Diaz]

Here are a few articles that may help balance out (or not) all the opinions flying around. Remember they are *opinions*. Bottom line is, if you're happy with your camera then...well...you're happy with your camera! The links are in no particular order and the XL-H1 articles are there because the picture performance is virtually identical to that of the A1's.

http://www.dv.com/columns/columns_it...leId=187202354

http://www.dv.com/reviews/reviews_it...leId=184429497

http://www.dv.com/columns/columns_it...leId=187202363

http://www.dv.com/columns/columns_it...leId=193001363

http://www.adamwilt.com/HD/4cams-part1.html

http://www.adamwilt.com/HD/4cams-part2.html

[Greg Boston]

Juan, there won't be any platform wars here at DVINFO. Any threads that go in that direction will magically disappear in short order.

-gb-

[Juan Diaz]

Originally Posted by Greg Boston

Juan, there won't be any platform wars here at DVINFO. Any threads that go in that direction will magically disappear in short order.

-gb-

True. And that's a good thing.

[Greg Boston]

Originally Posted by Barry Green

Let me just say that I'm still puzzled why people think a $3995 product should do everything a $5995 product does? It doesn't. That's okay. It's a lot less expensive. That's the point.

I certainly don't expect the same level of performance from a camera that's $2K less. That's the problem though with putting up a review title of X vs Y. Anytime you stick 'vs' in a comparison, people expect a 'winner' between the two.

I'm more concerned from a journalistic standpoint of your known affiliation to Panasonic. It makes it appear that there is a conflict of interest in your reporting. I think it would have been perceived better if you had simply written a review of the XHA1 by itself and left the HVX totally out of the picture.

JMHO,

-gb-

[Robert Lane]

Originally Posted by Greg Boston

...Anytime you stick 'vs' in a comparison, people expect a 'winner' between the two.

I'm more concerned from a journalistic standpoint of your known affiliation to Panasonic.

I agree with Barry's decision to do a head-to-head using the HVX. It is to date, the only truly different handheld HD camera on the market, since literally every other offering is HDV-based.

From the weath of "vs" comparos both on the web and in magazines it's easily apparent that regardless of form factor (removable lenses or fixed), all the HDV cameras have very similar output characterisitcs and all shooting the 4:2:0 codec. This is a significant and noteworthy distinction and could easily be the sole reason any reviewer would choose to bring the HVX in the mix to demonstrate this color difference not only between codecs but chipsets.

You could say, that by default the HVX - within the handheld HD market - has become the color standard by which other HD cams will be measured. That is until someone creates a completely different codec other than HDV for the sub-$10k market. But as I say right now there are only 2 choices: HDV or DV100, and only Panny makes a DV100 camera; Sony, JVC and Canon are all producing versions of HDV.

You could also argue that the comparo should have been between a Sony and a Canon since Sony's color is more HVX-like however, this is an HVX forum and as such I'm sure the basis for the comparo was for HVX owners or wannabe's to see the color difference between a new HDV camera and the HVX.

So, with respect to color only, there is a clear winner: the HVX, no contest. And as far as Barry's journalistic integrity I've never considered anything he has shared to be blindly brand-loyal; he openly shares both strengths and weaknesses of anything he reviews - something I'm mindful of myself.