Jump to content


Photo

Whats More Filmic? dvx100a or sony dsr500 & dvfilm


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 Jonathan Bryant

Jonathan Bryant
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 284 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Athens, GA

Posted 24 May 2005 - 10:10 PM

I know everyone is saying not another one of those camera a vs camera b posts again. But I do corporate videos,and local commercials. If money were no object I would buy a sdx900 ,varicam,song 900,or shoot on 35mm. Right now I have access to a sony dsr500, I own a betacam and a cheap k3 16mm camera. I like the DSR500's color and gamma curve but it still looks like video. The k3 I have is horrible soft in the viewfinder that it makes it impossible to focus correctly. I have become interested in the dvx because of 24p, its film gamma, and from what I understand the lens is not as electronic as the sony pd150. But I still have reservations because it is 1/3inch chips and has a fixed lens. Has anyone had experience with the dvfilm plugin that is supposed to make interlaced look more progressive in the moving parts of the frame but still stay sharp? How does the DSR500 with dvfilm processing compare to true 24p from the DVX?
  • 0

#2 Sean Morris

Sean Morris
  • Sustaining Members
  • 83 posts
  • Other
  • Sydney / Australia

Posted 24 May 2005 - 10:45 PM

Hi,

Id stay with the DSR500 bigger chips, better lens options, better electronics etc..
and a far more superior cam than the DVX.

Cheers
Sean
  • 0

#3 Dominik Muench

Dominik Muench
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 443 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Brisbane

Posted 24 May 2005 - 11:39 PM

i agree with sean: when it comes to miniDv the dvx is great, but the dsr500 has a bigger chip and you can do all the gamma and color correction stuff later on as well. also, the dsr has a better gain control than the dvx.

Edited by Dmuench, 24 May 2005 - 11:40 PM.

  • 0

#4 jeremy edge

jeremy edge
  • Guests

Posted 25 May 2005 - 12:12 AM

i agree with sean: when it comes to miniDv the dvx is great, but the dsr500 has a bigger chip and you can do all the gamma and color correction stuff later on as well. also, the dsr has a better gain control than the dvx.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


My K3s dont look soft in the viewfinder at all.are you using the stock lens? Maybe try a better lens like a car zeiss jena? Tried adjusting with that little screw by the viewfinder?

Seems to me if you had a client say ask for a commercial with a very film like look to it.Why not just do it on film? The vision 2 stocks have excellent grain and might even be mistaken for 35mm on a normal ntsc tv set.And a 30 or 60 sec. commercial wouldnt eat up too much film.

You already have a great video camera , and a workable film camera ....why spend $3000 on a lesser video camera that doesnt do a better job of video than your sony or a better film look than your k3?
  • 0

#5 Jonathan Bryant

Jonathan Bryant
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 284 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Athens, GA

Posted 25 May 2005 - 04:01 PM

My K3s dont look soft in the viewfinder at all.are you using the stock lens? Maybe try a better lens like a car zeiss jena? Tried adjusting with that little screw by the viewfinder?

Seems to me if you had a client say ask for a commercial with a very film like look to it.Why not just do it on film? The vision 2 stocks have excellent grain and might even be mistaken for 35mm on a normal ntsc tv set.And a 30 or 60 sec. commercial wouldnt eat up too much film.

You already have a great video camera , and a workable film camera ....why spend $3000 on a lesser video camera that doesnt do a better job  of video than your sony or a better film look than your k3?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Yes I have the stock screw on k3 lens and am curious what other reasonable lens I could buy? I think you can buy a pentax 35mm lens and use it on my K3. But I am not sure since I understand there are 2 different lens mounts for the k3. Where can I find Zeiss glass to use on my k3? I thought I was real limited on lens options for the k3, so this is news to me that I can have a Zeiss on my k3, sweet!

Good to know the DSR500 still holds its own. Besides less depth of field how does it far compared to the 2 new sony hdv cameras? I have seen them at shows but have no real world experience with them. From what I understand it has a better lens but still electronic, poor low light performance, and motion artifacts.

So what is the best way to give the DSR500 a progressive look? Is DVFILM the best plugin? From what I understand it makes it somewhat progressive but without softing the image. Anyone had a experience with that?
  • 0

#6 Tom Wills

Tom Wills
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 12 posts
  • Steadicam Operator
  • Buffalo, NY

Posted 25 May 2005 - 05:01 PM

Magic Bullet always has worked for me. The "For Editors" plugin for your editing system is good for stuff where not converting to 24p and de-artifacting isn't a big deal, and the full one is perfect, but it takes HOURS to render. If you've got the time, the full one does produce marginally better video.

I shot a 30 minute documentary on 1 CCD MiniDV and with Magic Bullet, was asked how I afforded to shoot on HD.
  • 0

#7 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11941 posts
  • Other

Posted 25 May 2005 - 06:03 PM

Hi,

To be fair, I think that's probably got more to do with the fact that your observers didn't know what they were talking about, rather than any particular magic associated with Magic Bullet. It's worth remembering that the vast, vast, overwhelming majority of people don't even understand the question "what format was it..." and of those that do, the vast, vast, overwhelming majority of them don't differentiate between well-shot video and film that reliably. In fact, I'm fairly convinced I could go out and shoot some super-16 under a ceiling light in a white-walled room, handhold everything badly, and have people claiming it's video.

There is no difference in public perception between "film" and "video" any further than there is a differentiation between "good" and "bad." It's possible to obtain either result with either format.

Yikes, did I really write all that? It's so damn tired.

Phil
  • 0

#8 Tom Wills

Tom Wills
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 12 posts
  • Steadicam Operator
  • Buffalo, NY

Posted 25 May 2005 - 07:11 PM

Yes, I understand that comment wasn't really the final nail in the coffin, nor was it meant to be. Sorry if anyone felt I was trying to mislead them there.

I should clairify what people said, including my father, a former film cameraman and current HD editor. The first thing you'll notice about magic bullet is that it ups the contrast by leaps and bounds. The footage has a distinct, non-crushed black, and whites that are crisp and not blown out. It also adds on a filmstock look. I particularly like one of them, Bufallo, which is a very high saturation one. It really builds the color from a dull DV-ish hue to something you'd expect from something much more grandeur.

Sorry if I confused anyone, but really, Magic Bullet is incredible. I'll grab some frames from Final Cut tonight to show.

Attached Images

  • beforeafter.jpg

Edited by Tom Wills, 25 May 2005 - 07:17 PM.

  • 0

#9 jeremy edge

jeremy edge
  • Guests

Posted 26 May 2005 - 12:49 AM

"Yes I have the stock screw on k3 lens and am curious what other reasonable lens I could buy? I think you can buy a pentax 35mm lens and use it on my K3. But I am not sure since I understand there are 2 different lens mounts for the k3. Where can I find Zeiss glass to use on my k3? I thought I was real limited on lens options for the k3, so this is news to me that I can have a Zeiss on my k3, sweet!"

Just google or search ebay for zeiss m42

Pentacon 29mm 2.8 is an excellent choice too...I believe they were made at the zeiss jena factory.

I have also 2 super takumars and just got back 6 mins of footage shot with them and they look really nice...much better than the stock lens.

Be sure that viewfinder is set correctly! or it will all look soft.

Sorry Phil, I'm sure you could make 16mm look unprofessional if you try but I doubt seriously that anyone with an eye will mistake it for video.

Video can look wonderful yes but if you are searching for that cinematic look we are used to seeing in movies and 35mm comercials...then its easier to shoot film to get that.At least I would take my cheap k3 over a dvx 100 anyday...unless I was shooting a large project.

Now the hvx200 ...that has my eye...but it is $6000. If i had the money I would get one over a better movie cam because of its versatility.I could shoot 24p stuff that was in the ballpark of super 16 and great sd and hd video all in one cam. but hey ,unless I win the lottery.....

If you shoot with the Sony.... go for a great "video" look.Theres lots of stuff on tv with good looking video....of course there's the bad too...like some of the mtv stuff but lots of it is good stuff too.

Intersting side note....speak of the devil.
My band was playing Friday night and 3 of the West Coast Customs guys came in the club...followed by a small video crew.they must be documenting their tours.They were doing a local car show that day.They brought in a dvx100 and what I believe was an sdx900.

Edited by jeremy edge, 26 May 2005 - 12:53 AM.

  • 0

#10 Rich Steel

Rich Steel
  • Sustaining Members
  • 128 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Scotland

Posted 26 May 2005 - 10:49 AM

I was one of the first (early) adoptors of the Sony DSR500 here in the UK some 6 years ago now. So I know the camera pretty well, inside and out. Surprisingly I downsized to the DVX100a about a year ago and I can honestly say the little DVX is a much better camera. Regardless of chip set size and fuctionality of the the cameras the DVX would win hands down if I had to select one or other to shoot on. It's that old adage again...."it's not the size that counts, it's what you can do with it".

Why?

Progressive scan and matrix functionality on the DVX. I've shot stuff using the P&S Mini35mm with some film lenses and the results are absolutely, positivelly superb.

Oh! and its a damn sight cheaper to buy and insure.

YES the DSR has a better resolution but the DVX is just more film like when you play with the settings.

Just my 2cents worth
  • 0

#11 Rich Steel

Rich Steel
  • Sustaining Members
  • 128 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Scotland

Posted 26 May 2005 - 10:54 AM

Forgot to say:

I agree with Sean Morrris's post regarding chip sets and electronics but as for saying its a "FAR SUPERIOR CAMERA" what a load of old bollocks that comment is.
  • 0

#12 Rich Steel

Rich Steel
  • Sustaining Members
  • 128 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Scotland

Posted 26 May 2005 - 11:06 AM

I was one of the first (early) adoptors of the Sony DSR500 here in the UK some 6 years ago now. So I know the camera pretty well, inside and out. Surprisingly I downsized to the DVX100a about a year ago and I can honestly say the little DVX is a much better camera. Regardless of chip set size and fuctionality of the the cameras the DVX would win hands down if I had to select one or other to shoot on. It's that old adage again...."it's not the size that counts, it's what you can do with it".

Why?

Progressive scan and matrix functionality on the DVX. I've shot stuff using the P&S Mini35mm with some film lenses and the results are absolutely, positivelly superb.

Oh! and its a damn sight cheaper to buy and insure.

YES the DSR has a better resolution but the DVX is just more film like when you play with the settings.

Just my 2cents worth
  • 0

#13 Sean Morris

Sean Morris
  • Sustaining Members
  • 83 posts
  • Other
  • Sydney / Australia

Posted 26 May 2005 - 07:35 PM

Rich,

Each to their own!. I am happy that you have found a way to
produce better pic's with a DVX, good for you!

I usually shoot with my Thomson LDK, 1657D 16x9 heads,
but I don't mind the DSR500 for lower budget work. Its
quiet a nice camera with a decent layout and no fiddly
buttons to press, maybe a bit too much plastic
but nevertheless.

I use both camera's DVX, DSR quiet a lot and always find the
DSR500 to have a more "smoother look" less "handycamish"
look, of course it depends a fair amount on the glass you
have attached, how you have the pic setup etc..and what
type of camera you are comparing it to.

Plus id like to add neither camera looks like film!.
only great looking - superb video!

Cheers
Sean Morris
  • 0

#14 Nate Downes

Nate Downes
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1638 posts
  • Florida, USA

Posted 26 May 2005 - 10:42 PM

I shoot with a Carl Zeiss Jena on my K-3, absolutely pristine lens.
  • 0

#15 Riku Naskali

Riku Naskali
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 310 posts
  • Other
  • Finland

Posted 28 May 2005 - 03:27 AM

Sorry if I confused anyone, but really, Magic Bullet is incredible. I'll grab some frames from Final Cut tonight to show.

Even I don't think Magic bullet is that bad.
  • 0

#16 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11941 posts
  • Other

Posted 29 May 2005 - 06:37 AM

Hi,

Sorry, I'll take the DSR. The lack of resolution on the DVX is patently obvious.

Phil
  • 0

#17 jeremy edge

jeremy edge
  • Guests

Posted 06 June 2005 - 04:01 AM

I shoot with a Carl Zeiss Jena on my K-3, absolutely pristine lens.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


I was just curious downmix.....which jena do you use?

I'm waiting on a 35mm 2.4 to come from europe and I cnt wait to see how it looks.
Although I bet it wont do for handheld at that focal length.Tripod only.

Still awaiting the fisheye zenitar 16mm as well.....overseas shipping.
  • 0


The Slider

CineLab

Opal

CineTape

Aerial Filmworks

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Abel Cine

Willys Widgets

rebotnix Technologies

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Metropolis Post

Visual Products

FJS International, LLC

Technodolly

Wooden Camera

Tai Audio

Paralinx LLC

Rig Wheels Passport

Ritter Battery

Glidecam

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Ritter Battery

Abel Cine

The Slider

Wooden Camera

Tai Audio

Willys Widgets

CineLab

Aerial Filmworks

rebotnix Technologies

CineTape

Rig Wheels Passport

Opal

Technodolly

Metropolis Post

Visual Products

Glidecam

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

FJS International, LLC

Paralinx LLC