I can only seem to find the JVC GR HD1 cam, but isn't that really old? Surely there is more in the bush these days...?

Sony just recently released a pro-sumer HD camera: http://news.sel.sony.com/pressrelease/5327

As far as HD goes nowdays you are still better off hiring cameras, because HD is still in serious development.

Panasonic and Sony are the industry leaders at the moment with their full pro HD.

I'm going to test the new Sony and see how well it does, and then probably buy it. Somewhere theres a Sony FX1 with my name on it.

Supposedly, it uses the same compression as DV so it doesn't take up a lot more space. I can't wait to get one.

Does anyone have any clue as to why the XL2 isn't a HD capable cam? It just seems so obvious that it would have that option, it being the top of the line from Canon.

HD technology is extremely primative at the moment. I know a lot of pros that refuse to buy HD because within 2 minutes of purchase it is outdated, and the image quality isnt that good because the gear is the same price, but has the more expencive HD processors, naturally that extra cost has to come from somewhere.

Why stuff up a good formula. The whole XL productline(xl1,xl1s,xl2) are all awesome cameras. DV is still the prefered system in that price range by the majority of the market.

Put bluntly, very few people in the industry actually give a s*** about prosumer HD at the moment.

Oh!

Hey all, I'm new to these forums. This is my first post.
Wasn't Once Upon a Time in Mexico shot with a sony HD?
(I'm technically ignorant as of yet, just repeating what I'm pretty sure I heard on the commentary)

yes, but I believe that camera is about roughly US$1200 per day to hire, plus lenses.

I believe it is the same Sony-Panavision camera/lense system that brought the world star wars in HD.

quote:

---

Originally posted by the parnell:
Put bluntly, very few people in the industry actually give a s*** about prosumer HD at the moment.

---

So what? Prosumer HD isn't exactly meant for "people in the industry." It's meant for people who can't afford a $100,000 rig but still want great-looking video. I don't think anyone here is placing it on the same level as "real" HD.

It's inexpensive, it's user-friendly, and it's high quality. I'm sure a lot of "people in the industry" still don't take MiniDV seriously, so why should they care about another inferior format?

I know guys who shoot docos primarily in miniDV, because it is so compact, and on a year long shoot, flying arround the world, they naturally want to hire a compact camera.

I said 'at the moment'. These guys are waiting for the general replacement of miniDV before they start using HDV because there (a) is no large product range to choose from. (b) none of the post houses arround here are HDV friendly. yes they can do high defn. but not HDV.