First off as a newbie to the forum I gotta say this is an excellent resource.

So I'm looking to do an upgrade on a budget. I have been doing wedding videos with a Panasonic DVC7 which I have actually been very happy with, nice camera for the price as long as you use a camera light for the reception, and a JVC GR-HD1 that I bought when they first came out.

Thanks to this site I have picked up some tips on improving the HD1s quality through the use of filters, but I still like the DVC7 better, it has alot less of a "video" look to it.

So I am wanting to upgrade, we currently have never been asked if we offer HD so I'm not really concerned about that until next year when it will probably be more popular in my area. Should I buy a nice used 3ccd SD camera to get through the year or buy somthing like the Sony HD1000u? Budget is around $1500.

The ultimate goal is to get into something like the Canon XH-1A when I'm ready to start offering HD but thats not an option at this point.

So what would everyone recommend?

Gonna have a hard time finding a cam that will perform well enough in low-light on that budget. You might be able to find a deal on a Canon XL-1s or XL-2 for that price, but you'll be strapped for extras (batteries, etc.). I know you're not so concerned with HD at the moment, but you might consider the Canon HV-20 or HV-30 as well.

Thanks for the reply. So something like an XL1 would still give better performance than a cheaper HD cam?

I would definitely stay away from the HV20 or 30 or any similar cameras for use as a primary camera. They are great little cameras, but you'll get better faster if you're using a camera that gives you more control. Also, the demand for HD is still fairly slim from my experience, so there's no rush to upgrade (as I found out this past summer).

You might want to check out something like Craigslist for used gear, or maybe B&H.

Thanks for the reply. So something like an XL1 would still give better performance than a cheaper HD cam?

Depends on what your criterion is. HD cams have issues with low light, although with on cam light they do fairly well... While the small HD cams are always a compromise to some degree as to how much manual control you've got, it's hard to argue with the image quality under most conditions.

Even picking up a used HV20 or 30 (or other small HD camera...) to get some experience with HD wouldn't be a bad idea to ease the transition. Problem is that once you shoot HD, you'll probably want to make the jump, even if there isn't any demand!

My problem exactly. Got all excited about HD and forgot about computing necessities. Now I'm stuck with an HD cam I can't really utilize to its fullest 'cause I can't turn projects around in good time with this ol' hunk o' junk!

Let the penny-pinching begin...

I have used the Sony PD-170 and VX2100 to shoot many weddings before just now switching to HD. Those cams are AWESOME in low light. Much better than the XL's. It's to bad, I just sold mine the other day for $1400 with W/A, extra batteries and filters. I think you will be very impressed with those cameras. The PD-170 has the XLR inputs where as the VX2000-VX2100 does not.

I would buy the FX7 over the HD1000 there's only $ 500 difference in pricing. It gives you 3 CMOS compared to 1 CMOS for the HD1000. I have also used the DVC 7 in the past, posed no problem with me coz I light the reception. It has since died, I am currently using a vx2000.

I did an existing light test shoot last night with my DVX100, right after putting down my EX1. Looking at the footage from the two reminded me why the DVX was a game changer. If you don't NEED HD, and you have to shoot in low light, I cannot recommend that unit strongly enough. I wish their sub $10k HD cameras were as nice.

Thanks everyone for your replies. I might see if I can swing an FX7, looks like a decent camera. If not I think I'll search for a used DVX100 or PD170. If I can get a good enough deal I can use that through the season and than put money asside to upgrade to nice HD cams.

I have a fair amount of videos booked for this year and although the single chip cameras have done well for me I find I'm spending too much time in post doing clean-up, adjusting color etc...

I did an existing light test shoot last night with my DVX100, right after putting down my EX1. Looking at the footage from the two reminded me why the DVX was a game changer. If you don't NEED HD, and you have to shoot in low light, I cannot recommend that unit strongly enough. I wish their sub $10k HD cameras were as nice.

Adam... I was in your shoes a few months ago when it came to buying a new camera. I originally wanted a PD170 or VX2100 for the low light capabilities. I ended up going with the DVX100B and have been BLOWN away by it's performance. Even in low light it performs well... Also with this cam you can record in 24p... Which to me looks a lot nicer then interlace, gives a more film look.
You can usually find a DVX100A or B on the market place... There are so many to choose from right in your price range. Highly recommend this camera.
good luck

I echo Adam's kudos to this forum. I am a newbie here too, and was just about to post a message very similar to Adams.

I currently have a Sony TRV900 and want to buy a good used SD cam to use as a primary with the TRV as a second cam or backup.

What would you choose, to buy used for about $1000 or $1200:
-Canon GL2
-Panasonic DX100 (or 100b?)
-Sony VX2100

If you want to just pick one, i'd appreciate it. But if you have time to elaberate on why one is better than the other, then you are very very helpful and i won't forget it, my friend.

Thanks!

First off as a newbie to the forum I gotta say this is an excellent resource.

So I'm looking to do an upgrade on a budget. I have been doing wedding videos with a Panasonic DVC7 which I have actually been very happy with, nice camera for the price as long as you use a camera light for the reception, and a JVC GR-HD1 that I bought when they first came out.

Thanks to this site I have picked up some tips on improving the HD1s quality through the use of filters, but I still like the DVC7 better, it has alot less of a "video" look to it.

So I am wanting to upgrade, we currently have never been asked if we offer HD so I'm not really concerned about that until next year when it will probably be more popular in my area. Should I buy a nice used 3ccd SD camera to get through the year or buy somthing like the Sony HD1000u? Budget is around $1500.

The ultimate goal is to get into something like the Canon XH-1A when I'm ready to start offering HD but thats not an option at this point.

So what would everyone recommend?

For $1500 you'll get VX2100 in great condition with some accessories. If you lucky then maybe PD170. Can't go wrong with those. I did 4 years on my VX2100 and want to upgrade just because I need HD cams for more film-like projects - not only weddings.

Read this:

EMediaLive.com: Shooting Stars (http://www.emedialive.com/Articles/ReadArticle.aspx?ArticleID=5079&PageNum=1)

In short DVX100, better features, better audio, better sensors, real 24p mode, better glass, better handling. I suspect the VX2100 would have fared somewhat better, but I'd still take a DVX over two of any other DV cams including anything I could get at B&H today.

Now finding one used at $1000 or $1200 may be another matter...

I echo Adam's kudos to this forum. I am a newbie here too, and was just about to post a message very similar to Adams.

I currently have a Sony TRV900 and want to buy a good used SD cam to use as a primary with the TRV as a second cam or backup.

What would you choose, to buy used for about $1000 or $1200:
-Canon GL2
-Panasonic DX100 (or 100b?)
-Sony VX2100

If you want to just pick one, i'd appreciate it. But if you have time to elaberate on why one is better than the other, then you are very very helpful and i won't forget it, my friend.

Thanks!

How many hours of use on a used DVX100B would you consider too much to buy?


Read this:

EMediaLive.com: Shooting Stars (http://www.emedialive.com/Articles/ReadArticle.aspx?ArticleID=5079&PageNum=1)

In short DVX100, better features, better audio, better sensors, real 24p mode, better glass, better handling. I suspect the VX2100 would have fared somewhat better, but I'd still take a DVX over two of any other DV cams including anything I could get at B&H today.

Now finding one used at $1000 or $1200 may be another matter...

How many hours of use on a used DVX100B would you consider too much to buy?

Depends on how you plan to use it. If you are going to use tapes in it (god forbid), then plan on getting the tape transport inspected and cleaned as a price of buying. If you plan to shoot to hard drive, then I wouldn't worry how many hours are on the unit.

A unit like mine that is kept bagged, and shot nearly exclusively indoors in controlled settings will show remarkably little wear. And I moved off tape early, so my unit shows VERY low hours. A unit that was used for mostly outdoor pursuits in harsh conditions may show a lot of wear in less than 100 hours.

Just have to know what you're buying and from who.

Lou,

Check this place out if you haven't came across it yet. MarketPlace / Buying Gear - DVXuser.com -- The online community for filmmaking (http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/forumdisplay.php?f=17)
This is where i bought my DVX100B with 44 hours for a pretty decent price. Most of the people on this forum board are legit sellers (but I still advise you to do your homework).

I had the GL2 for about a year and half. Thought it was awesome until I handled some of it's competitors models. It's not great for low light....

I've used the VX2100 before. defiantly better then the GL2 and works well in low light.

I own the DVX100B, and i'll quote Perrone and say that I would not honestly trade it for 2 of any other camera that you mentioned. Having the option to record in 24P means a lot to me and makes a huge difference in my work. It handles well in low light (especially in 24P). The image looks great... audio's great... It's just a great camera...

Check out the site I mentioned, they must sell at least 1 or 2 cams a day.... Good luck.

Have to agree that DVX is a better camera if you want to use its manual features. I'm sure it'll last longer on the market as far as its potential use in other projects. After that it might be wise idea to smoothly upgrade to HVX-150/170/200 - all accessories will work, also easier usage due to the same/similar controls.

Just bare in mind one rule - try to stick with one brand/model lineup. It's will be cheaper in a long run.

Hey guys, thanks so much for the advice. I work in television news, so it is hard for me to choose after learning to shoot on $50k betasx cams.

But i like the panasonic dvx100 after all this research and advice.

One more question... is there a big difference between the 100a and 100b?

Lou,

Check this place out if you haven't came across it yet. MarketPlace / Buying Gear - DVXuser.com -- The online community for filmmaking (http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/forumdisplay.php?f=17)
This is where i bought my DVX100B with 44 hours for a pretty decent price. Most of the people on this forum board are legit sellers (but I still advise you to do your homework).

I had the GL2 for about a year and half. Thought it was awesome until I handled some of it's competitors models. It's not great for low light....

I've used the VX2100 before. defiantly better then the GL2 and works well in low light.

I own the DVX100B, and i'll quote Perrone and say that I would not honestly trade it for 2 of any other camera that you mentioned. Having the option to record in 24P means a lot to me and makes a huge difference in my work. It handles well in low light (especially in 24P). The image looks great... audio's great... It's just a great camera...

Check out the site I mentioned, they must sell at least 1 or 2 cams a day.... Good luck.

Search out the B and forget the A, Lou - as Panasonic did. The A had no slow shutter speeds - a huge omission in my view, and was only on the market for a short time - whereas the B was on sale for something like 3 years.

The three cameras you list are all strangled by their inability to shoot native (i. e. sharp) 16:9 though, so you've got to ask yourself if this is important to you or your clients. Don't be swayed by Panasonic's talk of 'anamorphic' widescreen, or Sony's letterboxed v'finders.

These three cameras are cheap on the secondhand market right now not because of their failings (they're all very good cameras) but simply because their pictures don't fill modern TV screens.

tom.

Sorry...double post

These three cameras are cheap on the secondhand market right now not because of their failings (they're all very good cameras) but simply because their pictures don't fill modern TV screens.

This is my problem also. Everybody is buying widescreen TV’s now and the only way to combat this is to go HD. I guess you can always buy 16x9 adapters but that is just a bandage that can cause more issues then it's worth. I think if you buy an SD camera now you will regret it in the future thinking that you could have used that money to invest in HD.

I am really struggling with which camera also. It sucks to see all of your hard work "stretched" on your clients TV. At least with HD clients with 4x3 TV’s will get letterboxing with the correct PAR.

I am thinking maybe the FX1000 for me because of its low light capabilities. But I am struggling with the hot shoe problem. If you use a light you cannot get the LCD open or closed. I don't get it.

Let us know what you decide. I will be interested in what your final thoughts are.

I think if you buy an SD camera now you will regret it in the future thinking that you could have used that money to invest in HD.

I think this really depends on what you're doing. I pulled my DVX100 out of mothballs to test how the footage holds up for streaming. Honestly, it's NICE. Even with the 16x9 extraction. If the idea is to go to broadcast (DVD, BluRay, etc.) then by HD. It's where the market is going. But honestly, good SD Cams like the DVX hold up just fine for web work and can save you a fortune.

I think this really depends on what you're doing. I pulled my DVX100 out of mothballs to test how the footage holds up for streaming. Honestly, it's NICE. Even with the 16x9 extraction. If the idea is to go to broadcast (DVD, BluRay, etc.) then by HD. It's where the market is going. But honestly, good SD Cams like the DVX hold up just fine for web work and can save you a fortune.

I think we are mainly talking wedding videography.

I think we are mainly talking wedding videography.

I tend to forget that the Wedding/Event videography tends to steer heavily toward wedding.

I'm going to resurrect this thread with one more question. It seems the majority of the replies advised getting a better SD cam to get through this season as opposed to a cheaper HD cam. I came accross a GL2 with very low hours, the guy has only used about 10 tapes through it, and he will sell it to me for $1K. I understand its not the best low-light camera but I am used to using camera lighting anyway.

It seems like a pretty good deal, comes with widescreen lens, shoe mount Canon XLR adaptor, 1 battery and charger.

Every other thread I read on this site seems to state that I'd be better off with a cheaper HD camera.

So is this deal worth jumping on?

I'll chime in here with my bit of advice. For $1,500 you can get a lightly used FX7 whose major drawback is low light performance, but I've done 20+ weddings with my FX7's and as a former VX2000 owner I've never looked back. The image quality difference between the two is night and day except for in the worst lit situations and I've learned to compensate in those situations either by dropping the shutter speed to 30 or turning on an on camera light (receptions).

Sure there are situations where I'm shooting +6 or +9db with the FX7 as opposed to 0 or +3 with the VX, but by the time you take it down to SD on the final DVD output much of that noise is virtually lost and the added sharpness and overall image improvements are more than worth this trade off to me.

Now if you've got a computer that can't handle HDV editing, then an old SD cam might be the way to go, and I've never found anything in the DVX100's image to complain about, especially when shot in 24p, but for me I haven't looked back since switching to HD even with the tradeoffs I have to make with my FX7's.

Another thing to consider with the DVX100 vs the FX7 is if XLR audio inputs mean anything to you or not. For the way I work, not having XLR's isn't a problem, but for you it might be a deal breaker. I tend to use my cameras as imaging devices and nothing else.

Adam,
I have shot with the Canon XL1, XL2, GL2, and XHA1 but own Sony PD170 and HVR HD1000U. In my experience, the GL2, XHA1, and XL1 do not produce as rich a color gamut as the Sony line of cameras and Sony cameras do not compete with the optics on the Canons (probably why high end Sony broadcast cams have mounts for Canon and Fujinon lenses.)

All that aside, I am currently competing for a contract that, if it goes through, will result in me upgrading my PD170 to either an FX1000 or Z5U at which point I will be selling my PD170 with all accessories in original box and Mack warranty (still has 2 yrs and is transferable.)

My Pd170 hrs meter currently reads
45 x 10H -operation
17 x 10H -drum time
14 x 10H - tape run
43 x 10 - Threading

It will probably be around May when I am ready to sell and I will put it up on the classified section here, or sell to B&H used department when that time comes. If you are interested or can wait. Thought I would throw that out there and see if you are interested.

For what it is worth, my market segment doesn't have much in the way of HDV interest right now either. I bought my HD1000u to begin learning the HD workflow and test my systems capability for HD delivery. However, I have booked 2 event jobs that i got specifically because i was able to deliver HD, that I would not have been able to get otherwise. In my experience it is best to learn a new skill before it becomes job critical. FWIW...

Best wishes, i am sure you will be happy with your purchase no matter what you decide.

Bryan - my apologies on buying the HD1000u, the FX1000 should kick that thing squarely in the teeth.

Bryan - my apologies on buying the HD1000u, the FX1000 should kick that thing squarely in the teeth.

Actually, i love my Hd1000U. I am very happy with my purchase, like any camera you have to work around it's limitations, but i have shot it side by side with a Canon XHA1 and had customers prefer it every time. When I pick up my FX1000 or Z5 the 1000U will be the b-roll but it really does a great job in my experience as long as you take time to learn it. And you should hear clients when they see it. The body impresses even if i know it is just a shell...

So your apologies aren't needed I am happy as could be with it. It does not replace my PD170 but compliments it nicely on anything but dark shoots. Thanks for your sentiment.

In the right circumstances it delivers stunning results.
http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o221/DaughertyVideography/raw_screen_03.jpg
...and....
http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o221/DaughertyVideography/IMG_009.jpg
...but sometimes it shoots mud that you have to fix in post..

PD170 on left - - HD1000U on rt
50 wat on cam light on 170 scene lit with rope/xmas lights as shown in the background. tent reception with no other lighting

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o221/DaughertyVideography/screen_campare.jpg

Thanks everybody for the replys. Bryan, your posts have been very helpful in the HD1000 thread. As it stands now HD is not popular in our market yet and we are pretty booked up for this wedding year with jobs that are contracted for SD.

I've got a wedding this Sat. I think I am going to test drive the GL2 before I decide to buy it and see how the footage compares to my DVC7 and HD1.

I haven't even switched my HD1 to the HD setting. I think I will start shooting test footage in HD that I can use to make sure my computer is up to the task of editing HD.

If the GL2 significantly outperforms my other 2 cams than I'll go for it, if not I'll finish the year with what I've got and get an XH-A1 at the end of the year.

...we are pretty booked up for this wedding year with jobs that are contracted for SD...I think I am going to test drive the GL2 before I decide to buy it...If the GL2 significantly outperforms my other 2 cams than I'll go for it, if not I'll finish the year with what I've got and get an XH-A1 at the end of the year.

Congrats on the heavy booking during the economic downturn. Trying before you buy is always a great option if you can. If you have any change of heart on looking at my PD170 I can PM before i put it up for sell later this year. Best Wishes.

Yeah we're one of those DJ companies that also offers videography so offering a package deal really helps bookings. But my degree is in broadcast production so I'm not one of those DJs that one day just decided I could shoot video without any clue as to what I'm doing. We already have 2 of those in my area.
Bryan, I'll definitely keep the PD17 in mind, thanks.

One big thing in this area is that many of the photog's view us as nails on their coffins and not viable partners. I have talked to some brides at trade shows who even told me of one photo studio even has a brochure entitled "why videography is wasted money" But I am digressing from the OP, and falling off topic. Let us know what you think of the GL2 after you test run.

I came accross a GL2 with very low hours, the guy has only used about 10 tapes through it, and he will sell it to me for $1K.It seems like a pretty good deal, comes with widescreen lens, shoe mount Canon XLR adaptor, 1 battery and charger.So is this deal worth jumping on?

It sounds genuine though rather expensive but then all sellers are open to offers. You say a 'widescreen lens' - you mean it comes with an anamorphic (possibly Century?) This makes the camera far more useful in this day and age, and will see you through to making SD DVDs in 16:9.

The only downer here is that you have to learn to read a very horizontally compressed v'finder and side-screen, and composition can be difficult. You'll also have a restricted zoom range and won't be able to use a wide-angle adapter.

The XLR adapter is a goodie too - they're pretty rare and were outrageously expensive when new.
So go make a silly offer, knowing that there are secondhand FX1s out there at not a lot more.

tom.

Aargh, darn typos, I meant wide angle. I could definitely look into an anamorphic lens, would that be better than using the 16:9 setting that the camera has? Would either cause a significant loss of clarity in the picture?

I will definitely make a lower offer but I don't see him coming down much, I know he checked ebay to set the price and saw alot of GL2s selling for $1200.

Thanks

It sounds genuine though rather expensive but then all sellers are open to offers. You say a 'widescreen lens' - you mean it comes with an anamorphic (possibly Century?) This makes the camera far more useful in this day and age, and will see you through to making SD DVDs in 16:9.

The only downer here is that you have to learn to read a very horizontally compressed v'finder and side-screen, and composition can be difficult. You'll also have a restricted zoom range and won't be able to use a wide-angle adapter.

The XLR adapter is a goodie too - they're pretty rare and were outrageously expensive when new.
So go make a silly offer, knowing that there are secondhand FX1s out there at not a lot more.

tom.

...I will definitely make a lower offer but I don't see him coming down much, I know he checked ebay to set the price and saw alot of GL2s selling for $1200.

You might check ebay yourself, I know last time i tried to do a sell price comparison on eBay for my PD170, I saw a lot of PD170's PRICED at $2500 and up but they had 0 bids, the ones that were SELLING were typically much less than that. He might be basing his pricing on other sellers just as unrealistic. Just a thought.

So after more looking I found a lightly used HD1000u for $1200 with the basic accessorys, charger battery etc... I'm thinking for $200 more this might be a better way to go than the GL2.

Any thoughts?

Sure the HD1000U isn't a PAL camera?

As to using an anamorphic on the GL2. Go that route if you're serious about making 16:9 SD DVDs. Using the camera's in-built 16:9 mode loses you 25% of the vertical resolution at a stroke (when viewed on a 16:9 TV. Letterboxed on a 4:3 TV there's no loss of resolution).

tom.

Adam a brand new HD1000 goes for $ 1700 (Canadian) so it should be around $ 1500 (US), I would buy the HD1000 over a used GL2 @ at $1200.

There's a posting for Craiglist a VX2000 for $ 950 with wide angle lens. I am a vx2000 user and I love it.

Just my 2 cents but the decision is yours.

Sure the HD1000U isn't a PAL camera?
No it's NTSC and HDV. Adam, i don't know if this is the same one you are looking at but B&H has one in their used section for $1199.00 same price from a reputable source.

Used Sony | HVR-HD1000U Digital High Definition HDV | HVRHD1000U (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/used/518555/Sony_HVRHD1000U_HVR_HD1000U_Digital_High_Definition.html#accessories)

Bryan thats the one. I don't have any reservations about buying from B&H.

If the price was equal, would you go for a Sony HVR-HD1000U or a Panasonic DVX-100b???

Bryan thats the one. I don't have any reservations about buying from B&H.

Interlace only, no 24fps, no PCM audio... tapes.. weak low light performance...same money...

I'd take the DVX.

Lou - you've got to ask yourself one question - will you and your clients be watching on 16:9 TVs and projectors? If the answer's yes, then the DVX is a no-no (unless you're happy to use an anamorphic).

People have been watching SD signal on 16:9 TVs for years. Nothing new there. Certainly not ideal, but common. HDV is about as far from ideal in HD as you can get.

I'm certainly not talking HDV Perrone, only aspect ratios.

Agreed on aspect ratios. I mentioned HDV because the camera he is considering is HDV. It would take a HECK of a deal for me to jump into HDV at this point. And $1199 on a used camera isn't it.

I was just asking, because i'm in the same boat as the other guy. Looking for something to get me through the year, and upgrade next year.

I can get either, used, for 1200.

I appreciate the advice.

Agreed on aspect ratios. I mentioned HDV because the camera he is considering is HDV. It would take a HECK of a deal for me to jump into HDV at this point. And $1199 on a used camera isn't it.