Jump to content


Photo

HVR-Z1U or DVX-100B


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 Mark Chicago

Mark Chicago

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Camera Operator

Posted 27 April 2006 - 05:32 AM

I want to get into filmmaking and can't decide which camera to buy.
After dozens of hours internet researching I can't decide between AG-DVX100BE and HVR-Z1U (yes, I will shoot in PAL)
I know for movie making is the only way 25p - that means AG-DVX100BE.
For weddings and events shooting should I go with 25p or interlaced (or HD interlaced)?
HVR-Z1U is HD which can come in handy in near future when HD in Europe is more common. But what about using Z1 for making music videos, commercials or indie films? CineFrame doesn't seem very usable to get flm look. Is there some other way to achieve film look from Z1's HD footage in post processing? Will the film look be the same as DVX100's?
To put it simply, I don't know if I should go with HD to be safe for the future, or go with 25p to get film look.
How are the wedding shot? Interlaced or progressive?
Thanks for your opinions.
Mark
  • 0

#2 Vedran Rupich

Vedran Rupich
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 37 posts
  • Student
  • Örebro, Sweden

Posted 27 April 2006 - 11:09 AM

Sure the progressive look of the panasonic is good, but this is not a reason enough not to switch to hd.
I know alot of guys using the z1 professionally for music video making.
I would recommend the hvr-z1, with AE and magic bullet you can deinterlace the footage and achieve a more filmic motion and look. So if you compare just 25p to HD, I would go with the HD as this is always doable in post (artifacting and a quality loss may occur)
If you can afford a HVR-z1....go with it!
  • 0

#3 Matt Sandstrom

Matt Sandstrom
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 464 posts
  • Director
  • Stockholm, Sweden

Posted 28 April 2006 - 07:39 AM

CineFrame doesn't seem very usable to get flm look.

what do you mean? have you seen it? i think it works very well. perhaps you're thinking of the cineframe 24 mode? i've only heard bad things about that but you're shooting pal so you can use the much better cineframe 25. if you're shooting sd video that means true progressive scan. it only interpolates in hd and even then it's doing a pretty good job.

/matt

Edited by mattias, 28 April 2006 - 07:40 AM.

  • 0

#4 Canney

Canney
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 76 posts
  • Other

Posted 28 April 2006 - 11:35 AM

The HVR-Z1u its got better picture and performance than the 100B. But the reason's to go highdef shouldn't be because of framerates. It should be because you want enhanced widescreen picutres with stunning color and quality. But if you looking at the 100b and SD cameras take a look at the Sony DSR-PD170. I chose that over AG-DVX-100 because it had better picture quality and could film in a lot lower light.
  • 0

#5 Mark Chicago

Mark Chicago

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Camera Operator

Posted 28 April 2006 - 03:03 PM

what do you mean? have you seen it? i think it works very well. perhaps you're thinking of the cineframe 24 mode?


Actually, I haven't seen Z1's cineframe 25. Thanks for the insight. I will do more research on that topic.

At the begininnig I tended more towards Z1, but I couldn't handle the idea of getting a camera with HD which I will probably not use very often, and with not so good progressive SD. Also I've read that Z1 low light sensitivy is lower than DVX100. (i might shoot church weddings) Is this true?
There is so many great looking movies shot with DVX100, that I still can't make up my mind if I should go with Z1.
Any idea how to finally do decide?

Edited by MarcoPolo, 28 April 2006 - 03:10 PM.

  • 0

#6 Canney

Canney
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 76 posts
  • Other

Posted 29 April 2006 - 09:07 PM

The Z1u does have lower light perfomrance than the DVX100. The Z1u is 2 lux allthough some people say its three and the DVX100 is 3 lux. But the DVX100 has grainer pictures at 3 lux than the Z1U.

Plus the Z1u is a native widescreen camera. The DVX100 is not.
  • 0

#7 LPVideo

LPVideo

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • Camera Operator

Posted 04 May 2006 - 08:05 PM

The Z1u does have lower light perfomrance than the DVX100. The Z1u is 2 lux allthough some people say its three and the DVX100 is 3 lux. But the DVX100 has grainer pictures at 3 lux than the Z1U.

Plus the Z1u is a native widescreen camera. The DVX100 is not.


I'm sorry, but the DVX100BE records native 4:3 and 16:9 (you can chose letterbox or squeeze)

Plus, If you record with a Z1 in HD and then (via COMPONENT) capture in a SD system, images will be better than those made with a DVX100.

I hope that it's a free forum opened to anyone and it's not a private forum.

Your posts are very interesting.

Thank you

Luca
  • 0

#8 Mark Chicago

Mark Chicago

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Camera Operator

Posted 06 May 2006 - 03:07 AM

After reading your replies and doing some more research I have bought the FX1E. I figured that Cineframe 25 should be enough for me or I can do 25p in post. Plus now I have HD so I should be relatively safe for the future.
Comparing FX1 and Z1 - my question is, how important are XLR inputs? I know I can buy Beachtek adapter for FX1, but is there any advantage of having them except wide choice of mics with XLR connectors?
Thanks.
Mark
  • 0

#9 Matt Sandstrom

Matt Sandstrom
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 464 posts
  • Director
  • Stockholm, Sweden

Posted 07 May 2006 - 06:38 AM

if you use cineframe 25 in sd it's true progressive scan. it only interpolates in hd.

/matt
  • 0

#10 Canney

Canney
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 76 posts
  • Other

Posted 08 May 2006 - 07:28 PM

I'm sorry, but the DVX100BE records native 4:3 and 16:9 (you can chose letterbox or squeeze)


If I recall correctly the 3ccd chips on the DVX100 are native for 4:3 recording and when you film in 16:9 you are loseing a bit of resolution cause it isn't using the chip in full, even for the squeeze mode. I think it uses an aquasition mode which maintains a higher quality 16:9 image and uses more of the chip but not all of it. Thus still loses resolution when compared to a 16:9 native chip camera.
  • 0

#11 LPVideo

LPVideo

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • Camera Operator

Posted 15 May 2006 - 07:39 AM

After reading your replies and doing some more research I have bought the FX1E. I figured that Cineframe 25 should be enough for me or I can do 25p in post. Plus now I have HD so I should be relatively safe for the future.
Comparing FX1 and Z1 - my question is, how important are XLR inputs? I know I can buy Beachtek adapter for FX1, but is there any advantage of having them except wide choice of mics with XLR connectors?
Thanks.
Mark

Mark, I don't know which use you have to do with a camcorder but XLR inputs are very important for a lot of events (that need a professional camcorder and professional mics) such as theatre, interviews, fashion events and many more....
Be careful with the standard HDV, It records at 4:2:0 with a MPEG2 - Long GOP compression, so If you record a very moving object with a lot of details, some frames will be converted in a wrong way, because it makes an inter-frame (and not INTRA-frame) conversion...You will see the squares...
I think that HD camcorder maret is a market that begins from down, so I think we have to wait two or three years to buying the best HD prosumer camcorder( I think it's panasonic HVX 200).

Ciao
  • 0

#12 ivo

ivo

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 30 May 2006 - 02:02 PM

I did a film output (35 mm full frame blow up done by CRT recorder) of exact same footage(medium and close-up shot of a person a la still photo portrait style) shot with Sony HDV Z1U in 1080i at 25fps interlaced and Panasonic DVX-100A set at 24p (29.97 interlaced). Prior to film output both were de-interlaced. The film was projected in a regular film theatre alas not side by side but one after the other. The Sony produced a far superior image in every respect - tonality, grain, film-like look, contrast. The DVX 100A looked very much like miniDV - grainy, contrasty, video-like.
  • 0

#13 Tom Hurwitz

Tom Hurwitz

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York

Posted 14 August 2006 - 04:17 PM

I can't imagine a use that a starting cameraman could have for which the Z1U would not be superior.
Over the course of 3 long documentary productions, i have found the following:
It's image quality under ideal and adverse conditions is excellent. It's handling of contrast in exterior situations puts the Panasonic cameras to shame. Its color rendering is fine for a small camera (its blue is over punchy but so is almost every other camera's). Its low light capability is less than DVcam, however three and six db of gain is almost invisible, and puts the camera up to 400 to 600 effective ASA. It handles well, and all the other points made above apply.
  • 0


Ritter Battery

rebotnix Technologies

FJS International, LLC

Visual Products

Rig Wheels Passport

Metropolis Post

CineTape

Abel Cine

Willys Widgets

Glidecam

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Wooden Camera

The Slider

Paralinx LLC

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineLab

Tai Audio

Technodolly

Aerial Filmworks

Opal

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Aerial Filmworks

CineLab

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Glidecam

CineTape

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Abel Cine

Opal

Metropolis Post

Rig Wheels Passport

Wooden Camera

Tai Audio

Technodolly

Paralinx LLC

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Willys Widgets

FJS International, LLC

Visual Products

rebotnix Technologies

Ritter Battery

The Slider