HV20 with more equipment or XH-A1 with less equipment

[youngfilmmaker]

I have on a 5 grand budget. I am currently planning to get the HV20 in a few days. My question is, should I get the HV20 and use the extra 4 grand for equipments or get the XH-A1 and have less equipment? Is the picture quality of the HV20 inferior to the XH-A1? Can an HV20 carry an entire feature length film with enough equipment? Thanks.:hv20-smilie03:

[Lunchbox]

Even with XH-A1, you still need to get something like UV filter, wide angle lens adapter, tripod, extra batteries, portable charger, external mic. The same goes with HV20. I like the overall output from the Xh-a1 but HV20 isn't bad either. I think it also depends on how "pro" you want to be.

[threadhanger]

Even the A1 needs a wide angle adapter? I was under the impression that it had a wider zoom out than the Hv20.

[muroshi]

The picture quality of the HV20 is not much inferior. With an adapter it blows the XH-A1 away. I'd rather get some good lights with the money. If you don't have to show off in front of clients, I would say, go this route.

[Lunchbox]

The A1 is wider than HV20 but I still need the WA lens adapter as I always shoot in tight area / small room. It is a must for me. The Canon WA lens is expensive... almost $500.

[funkg]

I did a price comparo before I bought. If I remember correctly, it will cost you about 4k-4.5k to get a full setup (light kit included) with the hv20. The same will be about 5.5k-6k for the a1. The costs equalize because with the hv20 your budget starts to skyrocket once you add the 35mm lens adapter+lenses. Also, with the hv20, you have to upgrade your sound system and power system.. compared to the a1.

In the end I when with the hv20 because I did not want to break the 5k barrier, plus I kinda liked the idea of using 35mm lenses. I learned so much about camera/lens fundamentals by doing so. However, I do sometimes regret not getting the a1, especially now that I'm starting to blow a lot of money on 35mm lenses.

[muroshi]

Well, you still need a 35mm-adapter for a XH A1 if you like to get the same shallow depth of field. It's not a question of either HV20 and 35mm-adapter or XH A1. A full XH A1 package will cost 8k but I guess more. I went the HV20 way also and with an editing station (okay macbook pro) I will spend 6.5k without lights and only with two nikkor lenses.

[funkg]

I guess my logic was that the A1 will allow for better control of in camera DOF because of the built in aperture and exposure options. Add a couple of ND filters to the budget and you will be able to get nice DOF. Also, a 35mm adapter with the a1 will render useless that awesome zoom and features like rack focus. So yeah, if I got the a1 I woulnd't get a 35 lens adapter..

[muroshi]

That's not really the case (it's sensors are even smaller from what I know). And as with a 35mm-adapter the only manual controls are more or less the on/off-button and shoot-button, because the HV20 acts as a capture engine.

I would get the letus extreme and the HV20, and some good old nikkors (look at red.com, there's a thread for lens tests). If you have something over: Lights all the way!

[wrlds_apart]

Here is footage using the HV20 with their Brevis adapter.

http://www.cinevate.com/images/brevisonice.mov

To find out more about that setup you can just go to cinevate.com and click into their forum.