Digi or DVCPRO50?

[ARussell]

That is the question. I'm looking to move on at last from Beta sp, I already own a dx100 and so know of the filmic look achieved with 25p (yes 25 not 24- I'm in england) which is impressive. I hired a digi beta for a shoot last year and thought it was great, but they're so expensive. The 900e dvcpro50 seems to be the better buy but is the quality comparable? The digi seems to be more widely used, why is this? (just because its sony?) If I do go with the panasonic any idea which would be a good lens? Formosa shots looked nice by the way

[NoahKadner]

On a technical level- Digibeta and DVCPRO50 are pretty similar- 50Mbit, 4:2:2 color, etc. Perhaps digi is more used because Sony is the more comfortable brand name to many. Personally I think the SDX is a steal- plus you get 24p- no DigiBeta has this.

Noah

[tspect]

Strictly personal preference view: Digibeta camcorders have that Sony color look where the skintones are a bit on the warm/red side. Watch Discovery HD Theater channel. A lot of them shot on the F900 (non-DigiBeta, but similar to all of Sony's camcorders). You'll see that many of the scenes, the skintones are too red (particularly indoors). I don't think that reflects real-life. On a comparision with exact same HD lens (Fuji HA13x4.5-ERM), I prefer the Panasonic SDX900. The skintones are less reddish and have more of the other colors (similar to professional still digital camera). And what impresses me is the FILMLIKE gamma, which makes everthing soft and has an artistic look to it. If you have the patience, you can set it to look to Sony's. I did it using the Velvia look (VIVID) on the Panasonic's site. Quite remarkable. Another reason is that when I watched the NBC broadcast of the Olympics back in 1996, I realized the full potential of the Panasonic broadcast grade camcorders. The colors to me are more appealing than Sony's. And of course, it's more economical than Sony. I'm not advocating for Panasonic or Sony, but just want to point out the true facts.

Side note: Digibeta has 2:5 to 1 instead of 3.3:1 compression. It uses DCT compression scheme and a larger 1/2" tape. Whatever the case maybe, DigiBeta came out years before DVCPRO50 and that's why there's a lot more usage from the high-end post houses. I don't think those guys will salvage their investment for DVCPRO50.

Last secret: You have to use top quality broadcast lens to get the high-end look. There is NO WAY around it. This is the most underlooked element. You can increase all of the vertical details you want in the DSP, it still will not be able to compete w/ quality optics. The lens will cost more than the SDX900, but it's worth every penny.

If time permits, I'll post all of my shots with the SDX900 and HD lens (after the clients cleared the rights).

[crow]

When Digital Betacam came out, it was great, and it still is a great format. We use it for mastering, and all our 16mm and 35mm film transfers. We examined it as an aquisition format, but tape size and cost were prohibitive, so we went with DVCPRO 25/50. We shot with an older Panasonic camera docked to a D90 DVCPRO back for 4 years before we moved up to the SDX900. We edit all SDI between DVCPRO and D-Beta and it is a great combination. I would not recommend shooting D-Beta in the field though, unless you have legacy library footage or several D-beta studio decks around. The 900 is an incredible camera, it impresses me at every shoot with the way it handles difficult lighting situations. Another factor was that we had 4 years worth of DVCPRO tape library, and didn't want to move to another format.

All of the D-Beta camcorders are older technology, and the tapes will cost more to buy per minute, and cost you more to store per minute. When you have hundreds of tapes on your walls, every inch of shelf space adds up...