I work in a Soho Post facilty and I've see the rushes from a number of projects shot on the Panasonic DVX 100p and I've gotta say I'm impressed.

There only seems to be one problem with it and that's the fact it's a 4x3 camera (although I've seen footage shot with it's letterboxing feature and it still looks pretty good)

Although I love the XL1 I think that Panasonic might have moved to the top of the pile.

I own an AG-DVX100 and I am quite happy with it so far. I don't like how it crops the top and bottom of the image to create the letterbox effect but I don't think any cameras in this range actually shoot in real widescreen format anyways. The image is still good and the 24fps is a very nice feature. The only thing is that when in 24fps mode you cannot use the quick focus button wich is only minor. Most people probably wouldn't use it anyways.

What? $1000!! That's crazy talk!!

How much does that camera cost?and also did you add the lettering box or did it already have it on the camera itself?

??

Here is a good site with good prices on some cameras check it out.
?url? http://reviews.cnet.com/4502-6500_7-0.html?tag=pageNav&orderby=-7eRating&qt=&100021id=&500919id=10775&501071id=&1000036id=?/url?

Knowledge is locked. Experience is the key.

I've had my XL1s a little over a year now and I have no complaints.

One thing to keep in mind, just because someone gets the 'best' camera, if they are inexperienced and don't have talent, it won't matter ? it's the boys not the toys that'll make a difference (no offence to any woman here, but boys rhymes nicely in the saying.)

The dvx 100 is a great camera, we used it on our last feature, if you want to see the image quality, check out our trailer.
www.greydogmovie.com

Best is always in the eye of the beholder, a bit philosophical, yet true. The big issue here or more to the point is what separates these cameras. Yes 24fps is great, why? Well all of us here know that is the defacto film camera frame rate. When stuff is shot at that rate on DV it looks more like film. Film look is cool or at the least we think it's cool.

Not to get too off topic or start a big film look debate, the 24fps rate has a big effect on our minds. For some reason (insert scientific research data here) it looks really good to us humans.

Canon will release the new XL2 in April at NAB. Although I can in no official way state it's entire specs (loads of "good" speculation can be found here http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=16746) it will do 24p and have widescreen (16x9) CCDs.

Since others have mentioned it I have to throw in my two cents. Unless you have widescreen CCDs in your camera always shoot in 4x3. If you want letterboxing or widescreen do it in post. If you plan ahead and frame your shoots accordingly this won't be a problem. Cameras w/o wide CCDs use a "cheat" that sacrifices resolution and image quality to produce the wide image.

I've used both the XL1s and the DVX100. I really like the look of 24p however, I still strongly believe the ability to use different lenses easily makes all other issues moot. I often find myself in "rational" discussions with other filmmakers who shoot almost exclusively with 35mm film. All have been impressed with results obtained with a DVX100 but more so with a XL1s with a good lens.

If you want to get real serious I recommend a mini35 ( http://www.pstechnik.de/datasheets/d_mini35.htm). The good news is that it is available for the DVX100 also; the bad news is the price tag for a setup, about $8,000 US. Lenses make an awesome difference and better create the film look.

I have a vast array of nice Canon lenses from my still photo days and own a couple of XL1s's, as a result I'm a Canon guy. I also like the fact that Canon does not (yet) have a broadcast or high-end product line. To me this means they have a lot of latitude in the prosumer arena. Does this mean their products are best? Yes, it does. Why, because I am an idiot and I say so.