Again Travis I NEVER said better. I have been very careful on this subject. Each has a unique look. Now I will say the XHA1 image is better than the FX1 but I will NEVER say the XHA1 is a better image than the DLSR's. That I know for a fact is not true. The only reason I gave my opinion in this thread is that Denny wanted to know how the DLSR's are working for everyone. I having shot my last 7 jobs with only DLSR's (including yesterday) gave my honest opinion on the subject. I don't own a EX1 which if I did I would mix the two on the jobs. I have an XHA1 and would not mix them on the job. I would use one or the either. As I like the image from both. I love the color from my XHA1 and I love the look from my DSLR. No where did I say one was better than the other.

This has been a great thread, and it is great to get so many opinions and views, thats why this place is so great. Thanks everyone for sharing.

I think most will agree that in the perfect world you would have both. For those who say no, how do you dare to do creative things when the number 1 concern is covering the event.

If you can have both A and B cam running then you are free to do rack focus, and try things with a DSLR for those special effects. Nothing would feel better than syncing two cameras, both with good audio and video and having a 3rd clip with some great effects. Would make editing fun, and not stressful.

As I start adding more and more DSLR, I will pick up a 7D, and leave it set up just for video. I do not like having all that heat on my 1D IV.

Isn't this called progress? I don't know anyone that is still listening to 8-Tracks anymore either. I've been shooting weddings for 18 years and the gear has changed immensely and will continue to do so. Does that mean that I should regret shooting DSLR in the year 2010? No. Again, all the money that I've spent on DSLR and plastic addons (around $8,000) I've already made back by charging the bride more and now the money is all going into my pocket. I will shoot around the same amount of wedding in 2010 that I did in 2009. I will make more money in 2010 shooting DSLR than I did shooting with conventional video camera's in 2009.

Remember when videographer's had to carry a Camera and a portable VCR with shoulder strap? Do I laugh at them now? Of course not. That was the best technology they had at the time.

Blake, During which part of the wedding day does the 12 minute clip concern you? There are XLR adapter's that you can plug into the 7D just like you would into a GL2.

You stated it as a fact that the 7d had a much better resolution and I just wanted to correct that, that's all.

Again, I apologize. You did say that it looks 'just as good', not better. Sorry about that. d;-)

Well, I guess it still depends on how you measure resolution. The 7D records 1920x1080 HD video. The XHA1 records 1440x1080 HDV video. From that point of view, the 7D does appear to record a higher resolution image, right? But I suppose you can infer that the aliasing on the 7D reduces that resolution, even though to the eye it generally makes it appear even more crisp.

At the end of the day, my litmus test is how the footage looks to my eye. I could really care less about how the two cameras reproduce a test chart. My clients aren't purchasing videos of charts. d;-)

So when you said that the 7d has a much higher resolution you were referring to the fact that it records 1920x1080 compared to the 1440x1080 of the xh-a1?

Pretty much, and the fact that the XHA1 is recording HDV which is compressed 1440x1080 video.

After all is said and done, it's 90% shooter and 10% camera. Last month I had the privilege of listening to Jason Magbanua speak at our videographers association meeting in the SF Bay Area. BAPVA: Meeting Information He shared some of his work with us which was truly amazing. If I were getting married, I would ask him to shoot it even if his camera had a crank on the side!

His favorite cameras are the FX-1 and the FX-1000. His "dream camera" is an AX-2000. He shoots with a DSLR sometimes as a third or fourth camera. He pointed out that one of the reasons that he shoots with a DSLR sometimes is that Canon is paying him to be an evangelist. He likes to shoot with three other shooters which frees him up to shoot the special shots. His personal focus is same day edits. He made it clear what he prefers to shoot with however. You can watch his presentation on UStream if you wish BAPVA Monthly Meeting Broadcast on USTREAM: This is the monthly meeting channel for the BAPVA.. Drawing

Here is his website which is actually a blog http://jasonmagbanua.com/blog/

As for my relatively irrelevant opinion, I believe that DSLRs definitely add a great deal to event shoots. I shoot with an EX1R as my primary camera. My first choice for a second camera is a good shooter with a DSLR. It's only when some people get a pro or con 'tude that it can stir up a visceral reaction with some folks. ;-)

As you said, at the end all that matters is how the viewer perceives it and if it looks real good, even with the technical imperfections (if you know how to bypass them) who cares if it looks bad on a resolution chart. On the other hand, a resolution chart doesn't lie, no matter how many technical specifications you use to compare it with.
There are people that can make footage from a xh-a1 shine and there are people that can make 5d footage look like crap. It's the person behind the tool that can make the difference, you just need to assure that you have the right tool for the right job and that you know how to use it.
Even I am looking now to buy a dslr but just for very specific situations, as I work alone with weddings f.i. I"d rather not depend on a dslr to get my critical shots but for very dark receptions or some fancy shots, if I get the time, I don't see why not. Also for weddings it won't be an investment because no way a couple would pay more here even if they see the end result is visual more pleasing but it would give me a better looking portfolio that might attract more clients, only they won't pay extra for it.
For corporate work where I can control every aspect of a shot I do see more possibilities and in that way it might be a good investment.

[t. Also for weddings it won't be an investment because no way a couple would pay more here even if they see the end result is visual more pleasing but it would give me a better looking portfolio that might attract more clients, only they won't pay extra for it.
For corporate work where I can control every aspect of a shot I do see more possibilities and in that way it might be a good investment.[/QUOTE]

Noa, have the bride watch both samples and charge more for the better image. She'll pay more.

No, she won't. If you would be living in Belgium or the Netherlands you'd understand why :) The wedding market here is not a place you like to be in as a wedding videographer if that was your only source of income.

I'm a little late to this game. Been shooting with two Xh-A1 and HV30 on steadicam. Just like everybody else am impressed with all the wedding footage shot with DSLR. I'm going to do my first DSLR wedding this saturday using 3 T2i. Lens, battery, slider, follow focus, rail, steadicam, memory cards.. .all ready. and I have been practicing too. It'll be an exciting day!

The T2i is a great price value. But FYI, I have a couple of associates who have ditched it in favor of a 7D because the T2i's menu is more awkward to navigate in actual shooting situations. Because of this, the T2i is a PITA to shoot with compared to a 7D.