VideoUniversity.com
Home Free Library Store
Free Catalog

Please support VU by making your B&H purchases and links through this B&H ad. Doesn't cost a penny more. <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com?BI=603&KBID=1017"><IMG src="/images/flash_ads/videoUniv2_revised_conv.jpg" alt="B&H Photo" width="260" height="70"></a>
Video University Sponsor
Advertisement

See The New VU Postcard Catalog

To post in the forums see the Forum Guidelines.

Join or Renew Today.
New Benefits for all VU Members
Forum Guidelines and FAQ
Main Index Search Posts
Who's Online Log In


Home: Video University Forums: HDV:
HVR-VX1...Z1 killer?

 

 


videobear
Veteran


Dec 7, 2006, 12:27 PM

Post #1 of 14 (2290 views)
Shortcut
HVR-VX1...Z1 killer? Can't Post

I was standing in front of the Sony booth at GV Expo, staring at the recorded footage from the V1U showing on one of the monitors (beautiful sunsets, landscapes, etc). I mentioned to the guy standing next to me how great the images looked. He turned to me with a mournful look and said, "Yeah...and we just got in a shipment of Z1s. I'm wondering if we'll be able to sell 'em now."

The Z1 still has the edge in some areas...dual PAL/NTSC capable, slightly better low light spec, somewhat greater control over image parameters. On the other hand, the V1's cheaper, smaller, has 24p, a longer lens, and actually has more pixels in the imager. Not sure yet how it'll do in the wedding market (the low light issue, you know), but I'm really excited about this camera.




Regards,
Doug Graham
Panda Productions


renniedj
User

Dec 7, 2006, 12:58 PM

Post #2 of 14 (2288 views)
Shortcut
Re: [videobear] HVR-VX1...Z1 killer? [In reply to] Can't Post

kewl maybe the price of the z1 will fall some so I can pick up a couple more......

Thanks,

David Rennie

Trinity Wedding Video


RustyB
Veteran


Dec 7, 2006, 5:45 PM

Post #3 of 14 (2279 views)
Shortcut
Re: [videobear] HVR-VX1...Z1 killer? [In reply to] Can't Post

I'd gladly give up some LUX rating for a 20x lens and 24p. 24p isn't necessary for wedding videos, but a 20x lens and XLR inputs are for me. I'd really hate to buy a camera that doesn't have 24p now, and could easily settle on a PD170 for my cheap wedding videos, but for shooting anything else....I'd hate to fork out $4000 for a camera that only shoots the 60i "home video look".

Low light capability is something that can be solved with proper light...if possible/available/practical.

I shot every wedding this year with a FX1, "upgrading" from a VX2000. For my last wedding, I sold my FX1 and rented a PD170. Here are some comparison shots, both shot with the Sony 10/20 light, at about the same distance. No image processing, no effects, straight off the timeline:

(And before everyone starts trying to make a scientific analysis of these two grabs, that's not why I'm posting them. No, conditions were not INDENTICAL. Just a simple observation...so don't get bent out of shape thinking I'm trying to trick everyone or prove someone wrong.Laugh They're both very pretty in their own right.Tongue)


FX1; Shot in HDV; Downconverted to DV during capture; Sony 10/20 light






PD170; Shot with camera in "WIDE" mode; Sony 10/20 light









The PD170 is brighter, but it also has more of a "video" look to it than the FX1

The wedding ceremony in the 2nd pic was downstairs in a very dark chapel...the pd170 struggled with no light being used. The FX1 would have not done well at all.

Using the PD170 or VX2000 in 'wide mode' is not the end of the world...and I've got hundreds of happy customers that would attest to that fact.

An FX1 is not up to par for weddings IMHO. Not enough zoom, no XLR inputs, and the standby delay renders the camera useless. The poor lowlight capability is not a killer, but it doesn't help.




If I had $4000 to blow, I'd love to give the V1U a shot....but not the FX7 by a long shot. If you have no plans for your camera other than wedding video...get a PD170 and be done with it. Last I checked, they were only $2700, and by far the best cam I've shot a wedding with.




Faith Poison Wedding Films Blog
Intergalactic Award-Winning Epic-Cinematic Wedding New-Doc Style Indie Fusion Bridal Movies on Hi-Definition Blu-Ray Disc


MLiebergot
Veteran


Dec 7, 2006, 5:57 PM

Post #4 of 14 (2275 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RustyB] HVR-VX1...Z1 killer? [In reply to] Can't Post

Rusty, when you say that you were shooting your PD170 in wide mode, do you mean you were using the cameras internal 16:9 stretch wide mode?
Would you say that using a PD170 and a Century Optics Anamorphic Adapter would work better, rather than softening up the PD170's picture using the cameras internal wide mode?

Michael

Cameras: I do use them.
Audio: Yes, it does come with audio if you like.
Software: I am learning...
Support: I need all that i can get.
Computer: MAC BABY!


RustyB
Veteran


Dec 7, 2006, 6:31 PM

Post #5 of 14 (2271 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MLiebergot] HVR-VX1...Z1 killer? [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
Rusty, when you say that you were shooting your PD170 in wide mode, do you mean you were using the cameras internal 16:9 stretch wide mode?
Would you say that using a PD170 and a Century Optics Anamorphic Adapter would work better, rather than softening up the PD170's picture using the cameras internal wide mode?



Yep, the internal crop & stretch mode. I shot hundreds of weddings like this.

I never used the anamorphic adapter, but from it's specs, I don't see it a realistic option for shooting weddings/events by a long shot (IMHO). For shooting a movie, I think it would be great. For run-n-gun, the adapters seem to have too many focus/zoom thru issues. At a wedding, shots are lost or gained depending on split second adjustments. For what I charge for a wedding, it would be a complete waste of money anyways. I could shoot them with my native 16:9 Canon Elura 100, and it would make more financial sense. Laugh

I got the FX1 because I wanted native 16:9. Did the customers notice? Doubtful. Can I tell the difference on my SD DVD's? In the average wedding lighting....not really. The FX1 had a nice big 16:9 which was really nice and placed in a great spot, but the pd170's tiny letterboxed image on the LCD was brighter.

The LCD mount on the FX1 allowed me to use it "shoulder mount" cam, with the big battery and wireless receiver mounted on back as a shoulder brace. Worked great for short periods. I always did this with my VX2000/PD170, but the LCD is right up against my bad right eye.

I think it sucks that they didn't mount the V1's LCD similar to that of the Z1.




Faith Poison Wedding Films Blog
Intergalactic Award-Winning Epic-Cinematic Wedding New-Doc Style Indie Fusion Bridal Movies on Hi-Definition Blu-Ray Disc


MLiebergot
Veteran


Dec 8, 2006, 9:29 AM

Post #6 of 14 (2255 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RustyB] HVR-VX1...Z1 killer? [In reply to] Can't Post

Rusty you make some good points. One more question though, you say:
"I got the FX1 because I wanted native 16:9. Did the customers notice? Doubtful. Can I tell the difference on my SD DVD's? In the average wedding lighting....not really. The FX1 had a nice big 16:9 which was really nice and placed in a great spot, but the pd170's tiny letterboxed image on the LCD was brighter."

Were you watching you SD DVD's on a HD or standard TV? I only ask this because I would wonder how your SD DVD's shot with PD170's would look compared to the FX1's true 16:9 when viewed on an HD set using one of those up-converting DVD players like my Sony.
I still shoot with PD170/VX2100's and love the low light ability, but miss the true 16:9 sensors, as the PD170/VX2100's 16:9 stretch softens teh image up too much for my taste, especially when viewed on an HD set via up-converting DVD player.
This, more picture information to be scaled down for better footage, and the extra color information, are the only real reason that I would want to move to HD currently, as most every one of my customers in my area are viewing footage on a wide screen HD or EDTV type set.
The reason I haven't moved yet would be teh added expense of a new computer system (I have a Pentium 3.4 Hyper system currently), and capture, convert, and render (to SD 16:9 DVD) times would be too time consuming to be cost efficeint currently for me.


Michael

Cameras: I do use them.
Audio: Yes, it does come with audio if you like.
Software: I am learning...
Support: I need all that i can get.
Computer: MAC BABY!


RustyB
Veteran


Dec 8, 2006, 4:43 PM

Post #7 of 14 (2235 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MLiebergot] HVR-VX1...Z1 killer? [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
....The reason I haven't moved yet would be teh added expense of a new computer system (I have a Pentium 3.4 Hyper system currently), and capture, convert, and render (to SD 16:9 DVD) times would be too time consuming to be cost efficeint currently for me.




That's why it isn't that big of a deal to me to keep using a PD170. My customers aren't paying a dime more for videos shot in HDV, than they are for videos shot with a VX2000. They're not paying for computer upgrades or extra render times. They're not paying for software upgrades. Actually after buying an FX1, my price went DOWN by $1500. Laugh So a little softness to save a buck is okay by me. When this becomes a hobby again, I'm gonna buy a new HDV cam and upgrade my PC/software, and shoot as few weddings as possible, with no concern about profits. In the mean time, I still haven't paid off my last two editing computers, and have yet to make enough profit to buy a camera after making 100's of wedding videos...I've bought all of mine with loans/severance pay/annuity cashout...and sold every one of them to stay in business.

I only watched one of my VX2000 16:9 DVD's on a customer's "upconverting" Samsung DVD player once, displayed on a nice HDTV. The MOB remarked on how clear it looked. IMHO, it looked only slightly worse than it does letterboxed on a SD 4:3 TV, which is what I have. But, from everything I've seen/read, even Hollywood SD DVD's look like crap stretched to fill the screen area of an HDTV. The only two friends I know with HDTV's watch SD television on theirs, and it always looks like total crap, not to mention it's ALWAYS in the wrong aspect ratio.

I'd like to be ready when customers actually start requesting HD-DVD's or BD's to watch in their players, but I'm not going to expect to make any profit from the upgrade. Videographers aren't going to charge extra for the upgrade when it becomes a reality, because who's gonna lose business simply because they didn't buy the latest gadget? Most videographers aren't working for profit, so what's another investment in gear? Videographers offering HD upgrades for $$$ today aren't really offering anything of real value...borderline scamming the clients IMHO.




Faith Poison Wedding Films Blog
Intergalactic Award-Winning Epic-Cinematic Wedding New-Doc Style Indie Fusion Bridal Movies on Hi-Definition Blu-Ray Disc


KevinShaw
Veteran

Dec 11, 2006, 3:37 AM

Post #8 of 14 (2147 views)
Shortcut
Re: [videobear] HVR-VX1...Z1 killer? [In reply to] Can't Post

If the V1 hurts sales of the Z1 that may be as much a matter of pricing as anything else. But for event videos the V1 could be a tough sell if early low-light reports are accurate, leaving the Canon XH-A1 as the real Z1 killer this year.

As far as Randy's comments about the FX1 are concerned, there's some truth there but other people are using the camera successfully for weddings. And there's definitely a noticeable image quality difference between in-camera widescreen footage from 4:3 DV cameras versus proper widescreen video from HD(V) cameras, although that may not be a big deal to some customers. In the long run widescreen/HD cameras are the way to go now, with low-light issues being the main thing slowing a mass migration to newer cameras.

Agreed that HD cameras may not make many videographers more profitable, so that's something to keep in mind before buying new equipment.


Christopher
User


Dec 12, 2006, 3:52 PM

Post #9 of 14 (2118 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RustyB] HVR-VX1...Z1 killer? [In reply to] Can't Post

Brides won't pay more for HD over SD because most of them won't see a major difference. The way the footage is shot and cut is much more important, as well as the way the DVD is presented (packaging, menus, etc.).

This is the main reason I don't see Blu-Ray or HD-DVD ever replacing DVD. The only real advantage either offers is improved picture and audio. Technophiles will love the new format the same way they preferred Laser Disc over VHS. (Eh, I probably shouldn't even go there in this thread.)

I love my FX-1, and I'm looking pretty closely at the new V1U because of the XLR inputs and the 20x zoom. 24p will be great for my short film projects, but there's no need for it to shoot weddings. I'm currently using my HC-1 as a balcony cam. The footage from that is adequate, but I really want to replace it with another FX-1 or possibly the V1U before my next booked wedding in March 2007.
---
FX1, HC1, iMac G5, Final Cut Studio
The Signal - in theaters October 23, 2007


(This post was edited by Christopher on Dec 12, 2006, 4:04 PM)


renniedj
User

Dec 12, 2006, 4:52 PM

Post #10 of 14 (2106 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Christopher] HVR-VX1...Z1 killer? [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
Brides won't pay more for HD over SD because most of them won't see a major difference. The way the footage is shot and cut is much more important, as well as the way the DVD is presented (packaging, menus, etc.).

While content is and will always be king, brides will pay more for HD if it is sold to them correctly. At least my experience suggest as much. We charge double for HD what we charge for SD and nearly half of our clients opt for HD. I know others are having the same or even greater success in up selling couples to HD.

Thanks,

David Rennie

Trinity Wedding Video


RustyB
Veteran


Dec 12, 2006, 7:11 PM

Post #11 of 14 (2094 views)
Shortcut
Re: [renniedj] HVR-VX1...Z1 killer? [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To

In Reply To
Brides won't pay more for HD over SD because most of them won't see a major difference. The way the footage is shot and cut is much more important, as well as the way the DVD is presented (packaging, menus, etc.).

While content is and will always be king, brides will pay more for HD if it is sold to them correctly. At least my experience suggest as much. We charge double for HD what we charge for SD and nearly half of our clients opt for HD. I know others are having the same or even greater success in up selling couples to HD.



Half your clients are paying double for an HD upgrade? That's awesome! What are you delivering their video on? BD or HD-DVD? And what has been the compatibility rate?

For about a year, a questioned customers as to whether they'd be interested in getting a free copy of their video in HD, printed onto a HDV tape. None of them were interested in the least, as none of them knew what they would do with the tape. I don't see all the other proprietary HD formats as being realistic for business (Avel link players, WMV on hard drives or squeezed onto CD-R, etc), and customers I polled were likewise not at all interested in reconfiguring their home entertainment system just to play their wedding video a couple times, especially since they'd have SD-DVD copies to watch anyways, since none of their friends or family could watch it in HD either. And that's when my price for a basic package was $2500!

I only had one potential client ask me about HD, and it was before the FX1 was even released. I think it was really another videographer in-cognito probing my business.Laugh

Now I'm not real concerned with it...I'm down to charging under $999, for long-form wedding/reception, cinematic highlights video, no time limit, 7 copies on DVD with menus/printed surfaces/printed cases, private website featuring highlights video online, wireless mics, and a 1-2 week delivery time after the wedding. LaughLaugh My customers should be lucky I don't shoot their wedding with my Canon Elura, let alone HD. Tongue




Faith Poison Wedding Films Blog
Intergalactic Award-Winning Epic-Cinematic Wedding New-Doc Style Indie Fusion Bridal Movies on Hi-Definition Blu-Ray Disc


renniedj
User

Dec 12, 2006, 8:01 PM

Post #12 of 14 (2089 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RustyB] HVR-VX1...Z1 killer? [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To

In Reply To

In Reply To
Brides won't pay more for HD over SD because most of them won't see a major difference. The way the footage is shot and cut is much more important, as well as the way the DVD is presented (packaging, menus, etc.).

While content is and will always be king, brides will pay more for HD if it is sold to them correctly. At least my experience suggest as much. We charge double for HD what we charge for SD and nearly half of our clients opt for HD. I know others are having the same or even greater success in up selling couples to HD.



Half your clients are paying double for an HD upgrade? That's awesome! What are you delivering their video on? BD or HD-DVD? And what has been the compatibility rate?

I wondered if this question would be asked.... In short we are not delivering the HD version of their video.... yet. By the first of the year we will begin shipping HD-DVD versions and sometime during first quarter 2007 begin to offer clients the option of BluRay. By April all of our 2006 HD clients will have either an HD-DVD or BluRay version of their video. Keep in mind they have had SD versions for some time now. We did communicate with our HD customers in advance that the HD version would be delayed for a unknown period of time as we waited for the technology to catch up with our cameras/editing abilities. Not one of our clients was even remotely worried by the staggered delivery.

Thanks,

David Rennie

Trinity Wedding Video


Christopher
User


Dec 14, 2006, 3:26 PM

Post #13 of 14 (2009 views)
Shortcut
Re: [renniedj] HVR-VX1...Z1 killer? [In reply to] Can't Post

rennidj,

Thanks for your input on this thread. I have a few more questions for you, if you don't mind sharing:

1) What is the average SD package price of the clients who are paying more for the HD upgrade?

2) What size market do you serve (small, medium or large)?

3) Within your market, are your SD prices competitive with other wedding videographers, or are you priced at the higher-end of the market?

4) For the SD packages, do you shoot HD and downconvert? Or do you shoot with SD cameras?

I'm guessing you cater to the higher-end market, and that's where I'm aiming to be in a year or two. Any other input is appreciated, of course. Smile
---
FX1, HC1, iMac G5, Final Cut Studio
The Signal - in theaters October 23, 2007


renniedj
User

Dec 14, 2006, 10:47 PM

Post #14 of 14 (1989 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Christopher] HVR-VX1...Z1 killer? [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
rennidj,

Thanks for your input on this thread. I have a few more questions for you, if you don't mind sharing:

1) What is the average SD package price of the clients who are paying more for the HD upgrade? My average SD package of only those clients choosing HD is around $2,400. With HD the total cost is about $3,900, though we have hit $6,000 three times in the coming year so far.

2) What size market do you serve (small, medium or large)? Medium size market with total three county population of about 2.5 millon and roughly 25,000 weddings annually.

3) Within your market, are your SD prices competitive with other wedding videographers, or are you priced at the higher-end of the market? My SD prices are at the lower end of the higher end - make sense? Most other vendors I work with - photogs, DJ's think of me as high end but there are many videographers priced higher than me (but most are less).

4) For the SD packages, do you shoot HD and downconvert? Or do you shoot with SD cameras? Everything is shot in HD. Some couples will upgrade after the wedding when money is not as tight. If they do not upgrade we down convert in camera and edit in SD

I'm guessing you cater to the higher-end market, and that's where I'm aiming to be in a year or two. Any other input is appreciated, of course. Smile


Thanks,

David Rennie

Trinity Wedding Video