A question probably asked before: What's the difference?
So I've been hearing about the Canon XHA1s for a while now, and I really would like to know what they have that my HV30 doesn't. I ask, because I plan on shooting a feature sometime in the future... and if I can change to a cam that allows full DOF control (native) and shoot to tape, then I'll make the change.
So... what is it that the difference?
well, there is a whole world of difference. You are capable of getting much greater image quality out of the XH A1S. Infinitely more manual control, image control, 3CCD sensor block, better glass, much better audio functionality, etc.
The list goes on and on... but the cam costs several thousands more...
www.galvanHD.com
My cams: Canon XLH1S + Nanoflash/Canon HV40/Canon T3i/Canon 7D/Canon S100
The difference in the amount of replies is whether you use descriptive thread titles or not....
The XH-A1s has a 20x zoom lens, 3 CCDs, XLR inputs and lots of buttons. The depth of field is about the same for either camcorder without an adapter. When shooting 24p the HV30 achieves higher resolution.Originally Posted by DanielRutterFilms
I have both XHA1 and HV20. The major difference in terms of picture quality comes down to MUCH better low light performance of A1. You'll also get a slightly better resolution - clearly distinguishable in HD, less if you downconvert to SD. The dynamic range is also better. However, HVx0 has cinemode preset that is very close in terms of dynamic range, but the problem is that it's deadlinked to a heavy noise reduction algorithm that kills much of the fine details and the gain is locked at 0 db, whereas you have complete manual control over different presets features in A1.
The DOF is quite the same in both cameras since the sensor size is nearly equal. If you need a shallower DOF you have to use a 35mm adapter or look for one of those DSLR cameras. Either way has limitations and drawbacks.
the xh-a1 has MANY more gamma presets , some of them quite awesome as far as I know
I love my hv30, but I know what her limitations are ;-)
(she's sexy as hell too)
"The most important thing is not what's inside the camera, but rather what's in front and behind it"
There are 3 gammas selectable in A1: flat - which is what cinemode in HV series follows; and cine1, cine2 - these represent just the degree of curvature of the gamma curve, or the degree of contrast in visual terms.
There is a simple mess in terms. A1 calls curved gammas "cine" and uses a flat gamma by default while HV uses curved gamma by default (which is either cine1 or cine2 in A1 terminology) and switches to flat gamma in what it calls "cinemode".
In addition to the gamma curves in the A1, which zigi-zigi has accurately described, the A1 has other adjustments that affect the effect of the curve. When they graph it they look like additions to the curve.
The DOF is the same in both until you use the zoom of the A1. At full zoom the DOF narrows twice as small as the HV20 because the A1 has twice the zoom.
The HV20 can be used as a macro (extreme close up), the A1 can't. The HV20 isn't as good with movement (CMOS) the A1 is good with movement due to the CCD sensors. The HV20 has HDMI out and the A1 has component out. The HV20 can handle all modes of the A1 tapes like 24f even though the HV20 can't produce 24f itself. The cameras are really very complimentary.
Last edited by Duke; 2010 January 20th at 23:22.
So essentially, my HV30 is a baby version of the A1... without all the buttons, extra zoom... etc? Would I be better off buying another HV30? Or maybe adding to my kit by buying a 7D? I wanted a better camera in terms, so I could use my HV30 as secondary cam. I like the idea of having at least a two-cam setup (less takes)... I think the 7D would be best to use for quality wise... I just find it hard to be taken seriously using my little cam. Thats why I was interested in the bigger cams...
You are shooting a feature, not taking part in a peeing contest.
Your argument might hold true if you were doing event shooting (but then also only to a specific extend).
When you do multicam shots, try to stay with one camera/codec type. It'll make editing easier.
"It is dark the other side. Very dark!" - "Oh, shut up and eat your toast!"
As the above posters state the A1 is in a class completely different than than the hv30. You really cant compare the two, as one's a prosumer camera and the other a consumer cam. I would go with the XHA1 over th 7d. It's way more versatile. The 7d is a great cam. But if your worried about the WOW effect, the A1 is it. The 7d looks just like a regular DSLR. In the end it's WHAT YOU PRODUCE THAT MATTERS.
I'm feeling frisky!
HV30 is great and the outdoor footage is comparable to XH-A1. When shooting indoor, A1 is much more powerful in controls and output. With the light trick on HV30, I'm able to use it as a B-roll cam to my A1 for shooting weddings.
Also, both the A1 and HV20 have much higher resolution than the 7D. The 7D does not share the same media. Throw in the hugely different DOF and its harder to cut 7D footage in, while A1 and HV20 have mostly similar DOFs.
And the 7D has the same CMOS rolling shutter issues as the HV20, so I don't think the 7D and HV20 compliment each other nearly as well as the A1 and HV20 do. They seem to be made for each other.
Hmm, this looks weird to me. The 7D has much better optics and much larger sensor. Shouldn't it achieve a higher resolution?both the A1 and HV20 have much higher resolution than the 7D
Unfortunately its true. The 7D has an 18 megapixel sensor so they have to do something to get that down to 1920x1080. Some people think there is line skipping and pixel skipping involved, but Canon says it's bin-ing (combining many pixel's worth of data into one. Think of it like these pixels combined into one square pixel:
OOO
OOO
OOO
The advantage to that is it probably creates some extra light sensitivity because of the greater surface area.
The problem with that is it creates aliasing (stair step) artifacts and moire patterns at certain frequencies.
End result is a lesser ability to resolve fine detail. Resolution chart tests have confirmed this.
Last edited by Duke; 2010 February 8th at 00:07.
I get your point. Actually, it kind of puzzled me that they implemented video on an 18MP DSLR (originally 23MP with the MkII), when they really only need 8MP. At the same time, they never produced a single chip 8MP VIDEO camera, while they DO already have 8MP CCDs used in older EOS models. A continuous video stream from that kind of chip with a 180° shutter would make for a nice video film camera, at full HD, wouldn't it?
Yet... getting a better resolution from a HV30 than from a D7... There must be something more to it. Better low light, I know. Maybe less noise? HV30 is quite noisy...
It's not a shock the HV30 resolves more lines than the 7D does. In fact, looking at any chart shot with the 7D it is blindingly obvious. The design of the 7D uses aliasing to get to that high resolution. In video cameras, they work the other way, using an OLP filter to get rid of aliasing. If you anti-aliased all the artifacts in a 7D, it'd be barely better than an SD camera, comparable to an Andromeda modded DVX100.
HDSLRs are simply not designed to replace, nor be better than, a conventional video camera. They've got their special strong points, but also their weaknesses. Comparing an HDSLR and a video camera is a difficult comparison, and when price is factored in (HVX200 vs 7D), it becomes even less clear which is the better choice.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
