XH-A1 vs. DSLR

[Bif]

I'm aware of that. I'm referring to the DSLR look... it's choppy and stuttery.

To YOU it looks "choppy and stuttery". This is because "persistence of vision", what makes motion picture work, can be perceived differently by different individuals. It's not anybody's fault, but more than a few people can perceive the "flicker" effect of some of the slower frame rates. I've even seen some comments in these forums from individuals who don't like to work in 24fps because of this, and most of the women in my family used to be subject to headaches after coming out of a movie until modern equipment began projecting each frame twice to smooth this effect out.

The motion picture film is still exposed at 24fps but what we're seeing is now 48fps in the theatre, motion blur is still the same, all we're missing is the "flicker".

Some people can see this flicker at 24fps, I'm one of the many who cannot see it. But I used to work with 8mm film and at the frame rate of 18fps I remember seeing a definite flicker effect.

So I work largely in 29.97 progressive because I don't want that small percentage who see 24fps "flicker" to perceive my work as "choppy and stuttery". So far I've seen no comments of such.

Again. Just like film, its 24p frames of photographs playing in sequence. It looks MORE like film than video. If its choppy, it was done wrong. Its not the camera. Its the operator.

See my comments above. It's neither the camera nor the operator. Some people are just more susceptible to seeing (or almost seeing) the flicker effect of the slower frame rate. My wife has always been sensitive to headache from watching a movie in the theatre for a couple of hours, one of the neurologists she's seen had seen medical papers covering the effects of motion picture projection. She cannot quite "see" the flickering but is affected by it nonetheless. In recent years because modern projection equipment "smoothes it out" by projecting each frame twice she seems to be much less affected.

24fps is no longer needed like it used to be. It's an "archaic" holdover from the film days when the rate at which film was "consumed" was a very important economic consideration (price film and processing costs nowadays!). Many in the industry are looking forward to video being done at 60p as a norm someday, and not for slow motion.

I often render my video out at 1280x720 60p (one of the render settings offered in my NLE) for the "smoothing" effect of the faster viewed frame rate.

HDSLR users must treat the cam more like a film cam. If a videocamera operator cant make the adjustments, or doesn't want to, then he shouldn't use an HDSLR in the first place. You can't whip pan with them, just like real film. The movements have to be "weighted" and slower, like real film cameras.

Some really good points here. One of the things I'd also add is that the folks who spent some years behind an SLR (be it film or digital) were the ones who had the easiest time adapting to the video DSLR.

I really don't have a "dog in this hunt". I don't care what gear they use on their film. Each one of us will use the gear we feel the most comfortable with or what our budget allows and that's the way it ought to be.

Bruce Foreman

[peterarcson]

I am not talking how the footage looks, but how the camera operates. Like I stated before- there are several things missing when shooting with DSLR, Can you shoot- sure, however not without some workarounds. When you consider the true cost of having a full DSLR setup, might as well just buy an AF100 (just saw on ebay for 4k with 16 hours on it). Btw comparing XH1 and DSLR is like comparing apples and oranges- XH1 is an ENG camera, DSLR is not.

[Almohada]

Here are a couple questions again for those who own an XHA1:

Would 52mm wide angle on 72mm step up work?
Any workflow suggestions?
Can I use two XLR mics - one left channel, one right? I believe I can link or unlink them when capturing in FCP...

[cgbier]

72 to 52 is step down. You'll have some nice, artistic vignetting. Bit the bullet and by a 72mm WA lens. The Canon one is made for this cam!

[cgbier]

you can use two mics with out a problem. Yep, channel one is left, channel two is right.

Workflow? It is an HDV cam. Workflow is the same as with an HV.

[Almohada]

72 to 52 is step down

oops. Yes, step down. OK so if I use my 52mm Raynox on it, zoom in where I don't get any more vignetting, do you think it will still be wider than the stock lens? It's not my cam so I don't want to shell out a hundred+ bucks for a lens that I won't use - ya know what I mean? I wish someone who has these pieces can try and let me know how it works out.

Workflow? It is an HDV cam. Workflow is the same as with an HV.

Yeah I was just wondering about the frame rate issue. Couldn't find too much info about it for my specific questions. For example, the workflow is the same as the HV, but from what I read it shoots in true 24p so that means I DON'T have to remove pulldown? Do I capture using the HDV 24 or HDV60i preset?

Sorry for asking all these questions, I need to know this cam in and out within a few weeks... it's not even mine and don't have access to it now so that makes it much harder.

Thanks so much for your help, CG.

[cgbier]

52mm? Won't work. You zoom in too far that the purpose of a WA is gone - you can shoot naked with a better picture quality.

Capture into a 24p timeline if you shoot 24p.

[Almohada]

Capture into a 24p timeline if you shoot 24p.

So it is true 24p. Finally no pulldown removal!!! (it's not like I've ever done it anyways, I would've needed to for a film of this caliber, though)

Thanks again for all your help.

[Bif]

I am not talking how the footage looks, but how the camera operates. Like I stated before- there are several things missing when shooting with DSLR, Can you shoot- sure, however not without some workarounds. When you consider the true cost of having a full DSLR setup, might as well just buy an AF100 (just saw on ebay for 4k with 16 hours on it). Btw comparing XH1 and DSLR is like comparing apples and oranges- XH1 is an ENG camera, DSLR is not.

The camera does what the operator has the skills to make it do. Concerning "DSLR is not (an ENG camera)", tell that to Dan Chung, a journalist who frequently uses DSLR to make visually stunning documentaries in China and other worldwide locations, much of the time having to use ENG approach to keep up with events.

A comment found on a site that had one of his efforts in Uganda:

Dan’s taking this camera off the shelf and out into the world where it can shine light on issues that need to be seen and heard. The intrinsically high production quality imagery the 5dmarkii is producing can only further justify what an invaluable tool this camera is when placed in the right hands. What’s most amazing to me is the intimacy Chung is capturing in his subjects whilst running and gunning.

And another (News video shot on 5DmkII - The Economic crisis hits China):

If all news only looked this good! Something about the filmic black crush of the 5dmarkii that takes what typical ENG Digibeta would capture and turns it into docu-gold.

Dan Chung is not the only one. You guys can "pontificate" all you want about what is suitable for what, but the "REAL PROS" are out there producing professional results with whatever the heck is put in their hands.

I've said before "I don't have a dog in this hunt". I use what I use (actually both conventional video cameras and DSLRs) and others can have their preferences. But it flat bothers me to see IGNORANCE and PREJUDICE pushed as "truth".

Those who are looking to learn here just may believe it.

Bruce Foreman

[azmyth]

WoW... I'm not sure how to respond to some of the posts in this thread.

I'm with Bruce, use the right tool for the job. I own an HV40 and a Canon DSLR. I LOVE how my DSLR footage looks in comparison, and I LOVE being able to shoot with very little light. Want a lesson in madness, try to shoot a horror movie with an HV40 or similar camera.. you better be packing some kind of light kit.. we had 4 300w CFL softboxes, 2 500w tungstens, 2 800w redheads, and a half a dozen 500-1000w shop lights and we still didn't have enough light in some cases.

I went out to the location to shoot some broll with my t2i, in the same location we filmed one of the original scenes. I shot with only the lighting that was there, and my footage was 10x better and cleaner than the original stuff, where we had 3 500w shop lights and 2 300w cfl's pumped into it. Had I had the T2i when I started, it would have cut production time almost in half, because lighting is the single most time consuming process of the entire film. I'd still use my HV40 for some shots, mostly during the day or on a jib.

I like how some of these guys are saying that the XHA1 is made for "film", its a digital video camera.. its made for "video", thus it will look like "Video", because it is a "video" camera. It will look great regardless which camera you use, I just think some people need to stop with all the ragging on DSLR's with false statements. Every "Joe" I've shown the footage to, has stated how much better to them it looks than my HV40 does.. it was an upgrade for me. Your mileage may vary.. I say stop fussing about what camera you use, and just make a movie and use the tool thats right for the job. Sometimes its a DSLR, sometimes its a video camera.

[Braceface]

Bingo

[Almohada]

I like how some of these guys are saying that the XHA1 is made for "film", its a digital video camera.. its made for "video", thus it will look like "Video", because it is a "video" camera.

I like how some of these guys are saying that DSLRs are made for "video", it's a digital still camera... it's made for "photography", thus it will look like "photography", because it's a "photo" camera.

[azmyth]

I like how some of these guys are saying that DSLRs are made for "video", it's a digital still camera... it's made for "photography", thus it will look like "photography", because it's a "photo" camera.

The difference is.. is that noone on here suggesting DSLR's have said that its the end all be all. Its "tool". If you want your feature to look like film, rent a film camera and shoot on film. Thats as simple as it gets. We haven't suggested that the XHA1 is a bad camera, its a great camera. I'd shoot with it in a heartbeat if I owned one, and if I had a GOOD light kit I'd use it over my DSLR any day of the week.. but it comes down to what I need most, and as brace mentioned.. I don't record audio to my camera ever.. so.. don't need XLR inputs.. but because of the type of stuff I shoot.. the low light capabilities of the DSLR just cannot be denied. In some stuff I don't even need to bring in lights at all. With the XHA1 especially with any kind of depth of field adapter... even for indoor stuff your gonna need a crap ton of lights.

If I had access to both, I'd use the XHA1 for the daytime shoots, and anything you don't need shallow dept of field on.. and use the 5D on all the night stuff, or anything with lower light.

Or, get a crap ton of lights and shoot on the XHA1 exclusively. It will look good no matter which one you use, thats the point I'm making.

Noone who uses a DSLR denies that video is not its main design function, it just happens to do a fairly bang up job of it. If its enough for the season finale of House, a crap ton of feature films and shorts popping up everywhere, and Phillip Bloom and Shane Hurlbut.. its good enough for me.

I have an actress friend who has been in several features over the past 6 months, and a TV show pilot.. all of them were shot on DSLR. I asked her how she liked it compared to traditional big video cameras and she said "Its alot quicker.. less lights, less set up time... can get the camera in places you can't get a big video camera". She knows nothing about the tech side of it, and she felt it made her job easier as an actress because she was able to spend more actual time "acting" instead of waiting for crew to set up a zillion lights.

it all goes back to having the right tool for the right job. I think you can't go wrong with either.

[Bif]

I like how some of these guys are saying that DSLRs are made for "video", it's a digital still camera... it's made for "photography", thus it will look like "photography", because it's a "photo" camera.

Seems like you just can't "let go" of it, can you?

People in the imaging industry have been saying for almost 2 decades that the line between still imagery and motion picture have been "blurring". Well both still imagery and motion picture are "photography" and the line between the two is now more "blurred" than ever before. Both must be used according to the principles of BASIC PHOTOGRAPHY so both must look like good photography (unless the objective and purpose is to make it look otherwise).

Either type of camera will produce whatever the operator (or production crew) has the imagination and SKILLS to make it achieve the visual concept required.

Look, no one here has criticized your choice of gear for your project. In fact all the comments that reference the XHA1 have stated it is an excellent performing piece of equipment. If you have the skills, it flat doesn't matter what you use.

"Nuff" said?

Bruce Foreman

[Almohada]

I don't know why it got out of hand. I just needed to decide which one to use and I had a few questions about the XH. I haven't shot with a DSLR before so whatever I said about them is just from my observations. You never know, one day I might get a chance to use one and fall in love with the look. Maybe it's just the youtube or vimeo compression or the added color correction. Maybe I need to see raw footage. Anyways, I don't have time to experiment with that now, I just need to focus on my shoot now that I have those XH questions answered.

Yeah I have a small light kit - but it's not enough. I don't mind shooting with the XH and taking time to light the scenes. That's what makes it fun, at least for me. I'm going to pick up a few more lights soon.

[Bif]

I like how some of these guys are saying that the XHA1 is made for "film", its a digital video camera.. its made for "video", thus it will look like "Video", because it is a "video" camera.

Unless "film making" skills, expertise, and techniques are properly utilized in which case it can look like "film". There is no one "thing" you can point to that will automatically make a project look like "film". Filmlike lighting will help, filmlike camera technique will help, filmlike "vision" will help, many things will help but no one setting or application by itself will do it.

That's what makes so many of these arguments pointless. The "true believers" that one type of camera or another is suitable or unsuitable are ignoring the fact that true PROS are out there proving the "true believers'" arguments "hold no water".

Bruce Foreman

P.S. I take it your camera is now "well"?

[Bif]

I don't know why it got out of hand. I just needed to decide which one to use and I had a few questions about the XH.

Maybe we can chalk it up to the "typed" word. No facial expressions or body language to help interpret.

Decisions on what to use can be difficult enough, but what we have access to is what we use.

I haven't shot with a DSLR before so whatever I said about them is just from my observations. You never know, one day I might get a chance to use one and fall in love with the look.

That may come, best not to "push" it. Those who have the easiest time adapting are the ones who shot a lot with SLRs either as a job or "addictive" hobby. A couple more years and we may see affordable camcorders with larger sensors and adaptability to existing lenses.

Maybe it's just the youtube or vimeo compression or the added color correction. Maybe I need to see raw footage. Anyways, I don't have time to experiment with that now, I just need to focus on my shoot now that I have those XH questions answered.

That compression will do it. Best examples will be the downloadable files from "plus" members like Philip Bloom, Dan Chung, and Shane Hurlbut. "Plus" members videos are generally left as uploaded and not compressed, I have to delete all of mine from before I paid for "plus" upgrade as several have been reprocessed and recompressed more than once. Some just flat look awful (shot with non DSLRs too).

Good luck on your project.

Yeah I have a small light kit - but it's not enough. I don't mind shooting with the XH and taking time to light the scenes. That's what makes it fun, at least for me. I'm going to pick up a few more lights soon.

Small light kits can work if you don't try to make it cover too large an area. What kind of film will you be trying to work on? Narrative, music documentary? (You did say almost entirely at night).

Bruce Foreman

[HueyNRolf]

Did you consider shooting in daylight and doing a day for night effect in post?

[azmyth]

Bruce my camera is "Well" thanks lol.
I've been meaning to post some new test footage with it, just haven't gotten around to it.. right now I'm enjoying the madness of mixing dialog on a feature film.. grr. Almo, best advice i can give is use your "pro" lights to light your scene.. and use 1000 and 500w shop lights to provide big patches of light if you just need to illuminate so the camera can "see".

[Almohada]

What kind of film will you be trying to work on?

Short narrative. Entire thing at night.

Did you consider shooting in daylight and doing a day for night effect in post?

It won't work and besides I think it's too risky. Much easier for me to shoot at night than blow the whole thing if it doesn't work out in post.

Almo, best advice i can give is use your "pro" lights to light your scene.. and use 1000 and 500w shop lights to provide big patches of light if you just need to illuminate so the camera can "see".

Yeah I'm going to have to get some of those shop lights I think. I'm still waiting on locations so I don't know what I should prepare. I still didn't mess with the XH but I think I'm just going to turn the exposure down until I don't get any grain, then start adding lights. I'm going to check for XHA1 online tutorials right now...

[azmyth]

I mean you can rent some 1 and 2k fresnel's if its just a short, but we lit a bunch of areas outside at night and it was not easy. The hardest part isn't lighting the scenes, its getting enough light in so you can see. In one scene outside near a wooded area, we had that place lit up like it was daytime to our eyes, and it still looked super dark on the camera. On my feature, we have some scenes that are a bit grainy.. just had to roll with it.. it doesn't look bad, most of the time it worked out so it seems like an aesthetic choice vs. we didn't have enough light.

[Almohada]

Damn. Yeah, it's going to be hard but what can I do. Yeah the scene I'm most worried about is a house exterior. We do not have a permit so I also need to find a location which is well hidden so I can use all that lighting and preferably a house with a street light in front. I just need to light the house so it's barely visible and you can tell that it is a house. I'm also thinking to do some up-lighting against the house or up-light surrounding trees to give it a nice touch. Depends on the location, though. It will be fun no matter what.

[Bif]

Short narrative. Entire thing at night.

A few years ago the only lighting I had was studio strobe. For a few outdoor scenes at night involving a "flashback" to a VietNam combat experience I lit my actor with hardware store 11" clamp on reflector floods with 60Watt bulbs. I used one fairly close in to him from an angle about 100 degrees from the camera axis and it worked perfect. Low key enough to not "overlight" him and the dramatic effect was just right for the sequence. It was directional enough so that with a rolled up black paper tube "snoot" the beam spread was controlled.

I did it in my back yard and didn't have to light anything else, with the background totally dark I was able to luma key in some explosions and shell bursts.

With a limited light kit you can work in close to your acting talent and have enough light to use. But I don't think it's a good idea to try to light people with "shop" lights, too "harsh" and really too bright. Like others have suggested those may be best used to light areas.

Yeah I'm going to have to get some of those shop lights I think. I'm still waiting on locations so I don't know what I should prepare. I still didn't mess with the XH but I think I'm just going to turn the exposure down until I don't get any grain, then start adding lights. I'm going to check for XHA1 online tutorials right now...

One technique that may help if you get a bit of noise in dark areas is to try "crushing" the blacks just a little in post. It will help to run some exposure tests using your locations. If this kills noise only in the darkest parts of the frame, try combining it with a slight increase in contrast in post. If it works it can add to dramatic effect.

And I just got this LED light in, haven't had a chance to fully test it yet but it is amazingly bright for the price. I use 6 AA rechargeable cells in it.

http://www.amazon.com/LED-CN-160-Dim...834539&sr=8-11

Bruce Foreman

[Bif]

Bruce my camera is "Well" thanks lol.
I've been meaning to post some new test footage with it, just haven't gotten around to it.. right now I'm enjoying the madness of mixing dialog on a feature film.. grr.

Glad it's working.

Gotta shut this down, doggone cat is trying to "enforce" a bedtime curfew on me. Kids are grown, wife doesn't fuss at me but the cat that moved in with us 3 years ago sure does.

Bruce Foreman

[Almohada]

Thanks Bif! Actually that exterior scene will just be wide shot of the house. There's some stuff going on outside but I'm not going to get that detailed. So there won't be any close-ups at all. Yeah I'm planning to do some test shoots with the camera. I just watched some tutorials online, I guess I will pump up the shutter speed or use the f-stop ring to get rid of grain.

Thanks for reminding me about that LED light, I'm going to need one of those for the interior car scenes.

Hey does anyone know at what shutter speed the footage starts to get choppy? I never what to go over that...