You are viewing an archive of the old fxhome.com forums. The community has since moved to hitfilm.com.

Which camera should I get? I need help selecting a camera.

Posted: Sun, 24th Aug 2008, 8:57pm

Post 1 of 24

Leon215

Force: 825 | Joined: 3rd Apr 2007 | Posts: 9

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User

Gold Member

I'm going to make a movie with some long fighting shots. I wanted to know which camera you think I should get.
The Canon XH-A1 or the JVC GY-HD110U. If you have any other cameras that you can think of please let me know.
Thank you smile
Posted: Mon, 25th Aug 2008, 3:18pm

Post 2 of 24

Adman

Force: 1224 | Joined: 29th Oct 2006 | Posts: 245

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

I would definitely say the Canon any day. It, like any other Canon, has that famous Canon look which is loved universally and only a canon could reproduce the colours in such a way the as it does.
If you are willing to spend a bit more, it might be worth going for the Panasonic HVX 200, but that can work out a lot more expensive with the purchase of P2 cards, which are still ridiculously expensive.
Anyway, that is a whole other debate. To sum up your post, I vote for the Canon.
Hope that helps.

-Adman

Last edited Tue, 26th Aug 2008, 8:30pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Mon, 25th Aug 2008, 3:31pm

Post 3 of 24

Serpent

Force: 5426 | Joined: 26th Dec 2003 | Posts: 6515

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Heh, that is the WORST reason to pick a Canon. I love Canon, and they make great cameras and lenses. But for the price, you've got to look at reviews and feature sets. A forum isn't going to give you what you want. Want interchangeable lenses? Go for the JVC. This is VERY important to some people. If you are going to stick a 35mm adapter on the end for interchangeable lenses, ignore that feature. It's very situational and we can't give you a straight forward answer. A lot of 12-year-olds are going to recommend the Canon because Atom and Ben glorify it, and because they've heard of it (again, good camera, but there are others). So again, you just aren't going to get what you want here.

So I'm not going to put my vote in for either, I'll put my vote into: do more research.
Posted: Mon, 25th Aug 2008, 4:11pm

Post 4 of 24

Coureur de Bois

Force: 1394 | Joined: 23rd Sep 2002 | Posts: 1127

VideoWrap User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

So... I just want to make sure I'm getting this right; you're stuck between just those two cameras. Your only requirement is something that would be good for "long fighting shots"...

neutral

Flip a coin.

cool
Posted: Mon, 25th Aug 2008, 5:12pm

Post 5 of 24

Adman

Force: 1224 | Joined: 29th Oct 2006 | Posts: 245

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Serpent wrote:

A lot of 12-year-olds are going to recommend the Canon because Atom and Ben glorify it, and because they've heard of it
True they do glorify it, but only recently do I realize that most of what they say Canon wise is the truth. I have been using the XL1 recently and it is utterly amazing. I will also, hopefully, be using the XH A1 soon, so I will know first hand.
In all fairness, I am being slightly bias in my post as I did not thoroughly research both cameras. I just went with that instant heart flutter I felt when I read 'Canon XH-A1'. biggrin
Posted: Mon, 25th Aug 2008, 5:20pm

Post 6 of 24

Serpent

Force: 5426 | Joined: 26th Dec 2003 | Posts: 6515

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Right, glorifying it is justified. I'm just saying, it isn't the only option and picking a Canon because of the signature "L series" body/lenses they make is stupid. Anyways, you've acknowledged that, so my work here is done. wink

Also, Gorion speaks the truth. There is no camera designed for fight scenes. So to me, it doesn't sound like you genuinely are about the cinematographical aspects of the camera and you just want to make some fight scenes. Save yourself the money and get an HV20.

Last edited Mon, 25th Aug 2008, 5:22pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Mon, 25th Aug 2008, 5:22pm

Post 7 of 24

Thrawn

Force: 1995 | Joined: 11th Aug 2006 | Posts: 1962

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Rating: +1



Nuff said.
Posted: Tue, 26th Aug 2008, 5:11am

Post 8 of 24

Redhawksrymmer

Force: 18442 | Joined: 19th Aug 2002 | Posts: 2620

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Adman wrote:

I have been using the XL1 recently and it is utterly amazing.
You think? I used a XL1s for a couple of years, and besides the "pro controls" of being able to pretty much do every setting manually, I didn't think that high of the quality produced by it. Don't get me wrong, it's a great camera - although it is a bit outdated now. I haven't had time to use the JVC GY-HD110 just yet, although I've shot some stuff on the XH-A1, which has got a couple of great CCDs (the same ones used in the XL-H1).

It really depends on what you need really - you won't neccessarily get the best looking pictures from the most "advanced" cameras. I remember that the Canon HV30 we used for behind-the-scenes stuff on the FXhome Film Project produced better images (in terms of crispness/sharpness) than the HVX-200 we used for filming (which in turn looked better as we used 35mm lenses on it).
Posted: Tue, 26th Aug 2008, 7:18am

Post 9 of 24

Adman

Force: 1224 | Joined: 29th Oct 2006 | Posts: 245

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Redhawksrymmer wrote:

Adman wrote:

I have been using the XL1 recently and it is utterly amazing.
You think? I used a XL1s for a couple of years, and besides the "pro controls" of being able to pretty much do every setting manually, I didn't think that high of the quality produced by it. Don't get me wrong, it's a great camera - although it is a bit outdated now.
OK, perhaps utterly amazing when you compare it to my cam. I just feel that all the Canon's I have used/seen footage from/researched, seems to have that extra special look that no other brand can match. Granted allot of that look is down to grading, but many people agree that the color reproduction on Canon's is something special. And for the record, not all my opinions have been swayed by Ben and Atom smile. I totally agree that it is outdated, but after doing allot of research on the XH-A1, I would definitely say that cam. Keep in mind that I don't have any details on the JVC, so as I said, I am being pretty bias.
Posted: Tue, 26th Aug 2008, 7:25am

Post 10 of 24

BlueSmudge

Force: 808 | Joined: 30th Dec 2004 | Posts: 401

CompositeLab Pro User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

I saw some DVX footage today that was just my friend walking around with his camera and that made me wish Panasonic had not jumped right to P2. They truly have the film look down.

I'm still extremely happy with my A1, especially now that I have a DOF adapter for it.
Posted: Tue, 26th Aug 2008, 8:20am

Post 11 of 24

pdrg

Force: 5405 | Joined: 4th Dec 2006 | Posts: 4143

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

It boils down to this - at their heart, Canon are an optics company who make electronics, Sony/Panasonic are electronics companies making optics.

If using them professionally (corporates or TV) a good cam op will get a great result with either, especially after a grade.

For feature films, none of those three really gets much of a look-in compared with the Panavision genesis and Thompson Viper.

I mention this as the differences at the consumer end of the market are pretty minimal between manufacturers, and it becomes a bit of a "get what you pay for" exercise.

Edit - Actually I take that back. If the camera is to shoot "long fighting scenes", you do not need a £2000 camera. Not that it wouldn't work, but it's a bit like taking a Bentley to a rally - it'll do the job a treat, but why spend so much? Seriously it staggers me that you'd want to spend 2 grand on a camera you won't use more than 5% of the features of.
Posted: Tue, 26th Aug 2008, 9:18am

Post 12 of 24

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Redhawksrymmer wrote:

It really depends on what you need really - you won't neccessarily get the best looking pictures from the most "advanced" cameras. I remember that the Canon HV30 we used for behind-the-scenes stuff on the FXhome Film Project produced better images (in terms of crispness/sharpness) than the HVX-200 we used for filming (which in turn looked better as we used 35mm lenses on it).
Yeah, interesting that you mention that. Watching the most recent making of video in full resolution on a good screen, the stuff that comes out of the HV30 is really quite stunning. Especially considering that none of the behind-the-scenes stuff was lit properly, and was all hand-held. It just looks phenomenally good.

It's a shame we have to downgrade the quality of the making of videos for the website, as you don't quite appreciate how spiffy the HV30 is.
Posted: Tue, 26th Aug 2008, 2:21pm

Post 13 of 24

Leon215

Force: 825 | Joined: 3rd Apr 2007 | Posts: 9

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User

Gold Member

Gorion wrote:

So... I just want to make sure I'm getting this right; you're stuck between just those two cameras. Your only requirement is something that would be good for "long fighting shots"...

neutral

Flip a coin.

cool
1. I would really like to thank all of you for responding to my topic.
2. I really wasn't clear on what I said in my previous sentences. I just want to know which camera is better as a whole. If I were to buy this camera I would use it for all of my production needs not just for a couple of "fighting sequences". You must understand that I would be using this camera for all of the movies that I would make in the future.
3. I was just asking you which camera was a better camera to invest my money in. I wanted to know which camera was better than the other.
Posted: Tue, 26th Aug 2008, 5:04pm

Post 14 of 24

Lior

Force: 3013 | Joined: 27th Jun 2005 | Posts: 377

VisionLab User PhotoKey 4 Pro User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Adman wrote:

I would definitely say the Canon any day. It, like any other Canon, has that famous Canon look which is loved universally and only a canon could reproduce the colours in such a way the as it does.
If you are willing to spend a bit more, it might be worth going for the Panasonic HVX 200, but that can work out a lot more expensive with the purchase of P2 cards, which are still ridiculously expensive.
Anyway, that is a whole other debate. To some up your post, I vote for the Canon.
Hope that helps.

-Adman
The whole pipeline is expensive for an HD production but well worth it. As for the p2 cards, I find it at a good price range for what it does. Film lasts less than 4 min. When you are done you can't reuse it. You seal it away and that’s the last you see of it. The p2 cards permit you to record up to 32 min. Soon 64min which is beyond amazing. I myself am a firestore and p2 card user. The benefits is beyond amazing. In the end it comes to what your budget is. I would highly recommend sticking to Panasonic’s new HVX200a if you got the cash for it. Just remember it is not a out of the box camera. You need allot of time to fully understand it. Also if you use Raylight for about 200 bux or so you will be able to edit footage of uncompressed data on a low end PC. But in every HD production lights are extremely needed and not the cheap kind either. Be prepared to spend at least 10,000 usd and that is at the least for the workflow and that is in addition to the camera itself. Overall it is a small price to pay for real HD. Remember most film festivals will want you to either transform your movie to film which is extremely expensive or go to a house and uprez your sd footage to HD which is also costly and never really looks like true HD (Don’t even bother with uprez progs out there.). In the end the HVX is really the best bang for your buck. Just my call. Good luck to you.
Posted: Tue, 26th Aug 2008, 7:09pm

Post 15 of 24

CX3

Force: 3137 | Joined: 1st Apr 2003 | Posts: 2527

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

I dunno... I've never really been a big fan of Canon's prosumer cams at all

I still recommend the Panasonic DVX100a (Though I'm soon to get the HVX200 this week). It's so much easier to run and gun with the DVX100a as well. I also find it to be my favorite camera for filming fight and/or action sequences. Canons XL series, I'm not a big fan of. It's too bulky and weird shaped. I hate shooting with it -- I also hate the focus ring on the XLS, it seems delayed to me. Unless you have the money to shell out for the diff lenses they offer -- I'd first see how much you could grab a DVX for. If it's around the same price, I say go with it. If not, then go with the canon.


EDIT: Also, I gotta say...

Adman wrote:

I just feel that all the Canon's I have used/seen footage from/researched, seems to have that extra special look that no other brand can match.
This is biased bull hah. No offense but you're 15, man. After reading that statement, I highly doubt you've done decent research on this. Be easy with your words before you say things like "no other brand can match" because that's laughable.
Posted: Tue, 26th Aug 2008, 7:34pm

Post 16 of 24

pdrg

Force: 5405 | Joined: 4th Dec 2006 | Posts: 4143

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

If we're bigging up expensive prosumer kit here as well as top-end consumer, try the EX-1 from Sony (you could try the EX-3 if you need interchangeable lenses etc, but I seriously doubt it), uses SxS cards instead of P2, and they should be cheaper as they published the card standard for competitors to make as well. Best value 1080p you'll find, and a 35Mbps data rate.
Posted: Tue, 26th Aug 2008, 7:54pm

Post 17 of 24

Adman

Force: 1224 | Joined: 29th Oct 2006 | Posts: 245

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

CX3 wrote:


EDIT: Also, I gotta say...

Adman wrote:

I just feel that all the Canon's I have used/seen footage from/researched, seems to have that extra special look that no other brand can match.
This is biased bull hah. No offense but you're 15, man. After reading that statement, I highly doubt you've done decent research on this. Be easy with your words before you say things like "no other brand can match" because that's laughable.
First thing, I don't really see how age is at all relevant in this. If you are saying that because of my age I am in some way less capable of passing judgment and recommending a camera, you are going on the assumption that younger people are some how less wise or intelligent than adults. To support that arguement you really have to prove it, and that, to be perfectly honest, is an impossibility.

Sorry to get all heated on you there man, I have just been watching a video blog on the subject of age being related to being wise. It is a sore subject biggrin

I really just want to set straight that I was indeed being bias, and I say so in my post. I have been using that camera the past few weeks and that is probably my main reason for acting in such a way. So for that I apologise, but having brand preference and trying to enforce your preference or opinion on someone else is pretty much how humans operate. Also this whole thread is open for that, he is asking for opinions on two cameras and I am giving my two cents. I would go Canon now every time (after using numerous other cameras and researching them), and it is just natural I would want others to think that way too. I think it is slightly unfair that because of one bias statement, you automatically assume I do not thoroughly research my statements before hand. Granted, I am one to rear towards being a fan boy of certain brands, but to be honest I think it is perfectly healthy to have strong brand preferences and opinions.

And for the record, the view that Canon's reproduce colours like no other brand is shared by many other people, and it is not some bias statement I randomly pulled out of a hat. Granted I did use very strong words to describe that claim, but that is all I meant.

Anyway, I hope that you won't disregard my opinions in the future because I was bias on this occasion, and to conclude my opinion on the two cameras, go Canon all the way.
Posted: Tue, 26th Aug 2008, 9:23pm

Post 18 of 24

Lior

Force: 3013 | Joined: 27th Jun 2005 | Posts: 377

VisionLab User PhotoKey 4 Pro User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

CX3 you are 100 percent correct. I have and I own also a dvx100b and I got to say the size is so small and it can do so much. I followed allot of your productions. Believe me man the HVX200a is well worth the money. I just upgraded from the hvx200 to the 200a version it is like night and day. I also own a HPX and I have to say the HVX realy gives it competition. You put the dvx to great work I cannot wait to see your stuff on the HVX. Rock on bro.
Posted: Tue, 26th Aug 2008, 10:26pm

Post 19 of 24

D3L3T10N

Force: 317 | Joined: 23rd Jun 2007 | Posts: 472

CompositeLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Adman wrote:

you are going on the assumption that younger people are some how less wise or intelligent than adults. To support that arguement you really have to prove it, and that, to be perfectly honest, is an impossibility.
Age=Experience.

If you are older you are more likely to have had more experience with a wider range of cameras/equipment. Also younger people are more impressionable--they are more likely than adults are to plug a camera just because other people like it or they've seen it once or twice. Everyone knows that Tarn, pdrg, redhawk, CX3, Serpent, and others know what they're talking about, and I guess you just have to prove yourself before people will take you seriously. Its one thing to cite specific personal experience, and recount specific things you like/dislike about a camera, but its completely different to just say, "Its amazing". Anyway, just my .02.
Posted: Tue, 26th Aug 2008, 10:46pm

Post 20 of 24

Adman

Force: 1224 | Joined: 29th Oct 2006 | Posts: 245

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

D3L3T10N wrote:

Adman wrote:

you are going on the assumption that younger people are some how less wise or intelligent than adults. To support that arguement you really have to prove it, and that, to be perfectly honest, is an impossibility.
Age=Experience.

If you are older you are more likely to have had more experience with a wider range of cameras/equipment. Also younger people are more impressionable--they are more likely than adults are to plug a camera just because other people like it or they've seen it once or twice. Everyone knows that Tarn, pdrg, redhawk, CX3, Serpent, and others know what they're talking about, and I guess you just have to prove yourself before people will take you seriously. Its one thing to cite specific personal experience, and recount specific things you like/dislike about a camera, but its completely different to just say, "Its amazing". Anyway, just my .02.
I know how much people respect tarn, CX3, redhawk ect, because I do too. It maybe so that you have to prove yourself around here, but this is nothing to do with that. This thread asks for an opinion, and I gave my two cents. I feel that the Canon is the way to go.
I do respect CX3, but I don't particularly like being patronised about my age. I do feel that age is irrelevant on many occasions, and I can stand proud and say that I am not intimidated to argue that age isn't everything. I do feel that the claim that young people are impressionable is a bit of an assumption. Perhaps with younger people at around 7-12 year olds, but for people of my age group it is slightly insulting to suggest we are easily swayed, at least for me. Granted, age does atomically mean that that person could of had more experience, but not necessarily. My point is, I spend next to all my time researching the film-making world and I have been since about the age of 10. It means so much to me film-making, and to suggest that my opinion is less valid because of my age is a bit upsetting. I am aware that I was bias, but I did state that in one of my posts, and at the end of the day, most opinions people have of products will be bias.

EDIT:
I also feel this thread is becoming something it shouldn't. A post about what camera is turning into a heated debate on the relevance of age. Granted, it is mostly my fault for being so hasty to defend myself the way I did. I think we should try and get this topic back on track.

Sorry guys for hijacking this thread biggrin
Posted: Tue, 26th Aug 2008, 11:02pm

Post 21 of 24

D3L3T10N

Force: 317 | Joined: 23rd Jun 2007 | Posts: 472

CompositeLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Adman wrote:

for people of my age group it is slightly insulting to suggest we are easily swayed
I'm 16, btw. Its not meant to be an insult, it just has to do with psychological development. Anyway, back to the cameras. I'm also looking for a prosumer type camera, and I'm interested to hear what everyone thinks.
Posted: Tue, 26th Aug 2008, 11:07pm

Post 22 of 24

Adman

Force: 1224 | Joined: 29th Oct 2006 | Posts: 245

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

He he.
I was in a debating mood earlier. We should indeed get back to cameras. biggrin
Posted: Wed, 27th Aug 2008, 2:15am

Post 23 of 24

EvilDonut

Force: 200 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2008 | Posts: 595

Member

Don't listen to the haters.

At 19 I knew video game programming, 2d/3d graphics, assembly language, 3d modeling, visual fx, c++ oop programming, sql programming, device driver development, infinite/cody development, socket programming, calculus, algebra, and client/server databases. Far more than most men twice my age.

So everything is relative. The "experienced" guys have useless knowledge over 20 years old (Hey let's use a Commodore 64!). Mine was new, marketable and current. A look at who's doing the technical stuff at any game company should give u a look how companies view "age" when hiring.

And there are just as many immature morons who are clueless about the world at age 50 as are at age 17.

You seem like an intelligent mature person at age 16. Keep at it. smile

d
Posted: Wed, 27th Aug 2008, 2:58am

Post 24 of 24

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Thrawn wrote:



Nuff said.
Heh. smile

No need constantly repeating myself, I guess. After being in constant-use with the entire Canon prosumer line; I can safely say I love the brand. But that isn't to say the likes of Panasonic or Sony aren't equally-impressive or good. But for the price-point, Canon does near a damn good job of swaying me. JVC I don't know a terrible amount about simply because they haven't had the great ratings, reviews, and exposure the past few years Panasonic and Canon have had- but there's a reason for that.

And, for now, that's all I'll be saying. smile