I have a VX2000 and want to jump to a better or much better dv cam that offers a noticably higher quality image and I mean noticably. Can I get it with $6000 or do I have to jump into the $10,000 range. Any experienced users who have made the jump? Any web sites that offer these image comparisons?

Thanks,

Ralph Bowman

Your next small step would be the DVX100, and from there, the JVC DV5000 with 1/2" CCDs. After that look at digi BETA.

And none of those Frank mentioned have auto focus, which may be a real consideration in fast-paced event videography. Do you have a lot of time to set up your shots? Can you do it over if you didn't get it right the first time? Or do you need a VX/PD?

I suppose this is a matter of opinion, but I have used both the VX2000 and DVX100 and the image quality is not the jump that I think you are trying to go for. Maybe I'm wrong about this, but other than the advanced image controls on the DVX, I didn't really see much of a difference in image quality over the VX.

I'm assuming Ralph is asking about a higher definition or resolution camera when he talks about higher "quality", not necessarly something that is able to shoot a more attractive image with better controls over color, tone, gamma, etc. But please just clarify this Ralph, so then everyone might be able to assist you a bit better.

Also, the DVX100 does in fact have auto focus, it just doesn't work in progressive or 24P modes.

You might also look at the high-end DVCam cameras like the DSR300 and 570. However, you're looking at over $10 000 for either of them new.

Yes, I am looking at better resolution because I am having to switch from people and events to trees and flowers. Natural beauty very close up is very good with the vx2000 but twenty ft. away turns into the old svhs look. I guess I need also to run and gun with auto focus and auto exposure but then I find myself in interviews in the forest that need care and depth of focus and then suddenly I need steady cam work, inexpensive, that is, where I am following a hiker on a trail. The VX is terrific, but sometimes I need beauty in my 20ft. shots. Thanks for jumping in and helping me with a delimma. I want it all and cheap!

Ralph Bowman

A used DSR-300A will run you under $5000 with lens. Add more money for batteries. Probably from $500 for NP-1Bs and charger to $1500 for LiOn and charger (used)

The 300 or 300a are significant steps up in quality but from the sounds of what you are looking for, D-9 or DVCPro50 (both way more expensive) are what you want.

Understand that conventional NTSC isn't great in any case. But if you stick with progressive scan DVD output, DV or DV50 quality is fairly impressive. If you haven't, I urge you to look at the VX-2000 output on progressive scan DVD before concluding that it is a dud for your nature shots.

You are pretty much wasting your money if your output is VHS, however.

You make some good points, Dave. I was only trying to answer his question about improved image quality.I have a VX2000 and want to jump to a better or much better dv cam that offers a noticably higher quality image and I mean noticably.

<<<-- Natural beauty very close up is very good with the vx2000 but twenty ft. away turns into the old svhs look. I guess I need also to run and gun with auto focus and auto exposure but then I find myself in interviews in the forest that need care and depth of focus and then ....
Ralph Bowman -->>>

A reveal from long shot using DV will always give you that point at which everything turns to crud, simply because that is the point where the fine detail is beyond the confines of the medium. You will also see colour smudging on flower heads etc - altogether very unpleasant even with DSR570

I guess the most cost effective way out of this is to shoot Super-16, which will also help with your DOF requirement. Charles Papert may be able to advise you on a suitable choice.

If you really want a demonstrably better image you'll need to move up to 1/2 in chips. Better still, will be 2/3 inch chips. The corresponding cost of support gear will also go up. Think batteries, tripods, matte boxes, wireless mics, filters, and Steadicams, etc.

I agree with Robbie, that after using both, the DVX100 is not going to deliver on a much better image. Only the corresponding jump in chip size and the improvement in S/N ratio, color space and bit depth bring better image quality.

If you shoot in one of the dvx100 progressive modes you will notice a definate increase in picture quality. I'm not sure why no one else has pointed this out. oh yeah that's right it's a sony board. Anyway interlace mode on the dvx100 will be similar in quality to the vx if that is your planned way of shooting. This is subject but I do like the Panasonic's more natural color balance. Sony tends to oversaturate and turn the image into a circus. Another camera that nobody mentioned is the jvc HD cam. That WILL get you a much higher resolution picture at a slight cost of color depth because of its 1 ccd.

Pick your poison.

The DVX100 won't give you any substantial gain in picture quality in 60i. What it will do is give you two new shooting modes, 30P and 24P. But as far as 60i, it will be very comparable to your existing VX2000.

The JVC HD camera involves much more sacrifice than just a little color depth: you also sacrifice any and all aspect of professional controls. I strongly urge anyone considering HDV to wait and see what the second generation brings.

As for a "jump" in picture quality at the $6000 price point, the only game in town would be the JVC DV5000U, and it offers a significant jump in picture and excellent bang for the buck. But, again, the prospect of new HDV cameras could radically alter the balance of power. When it's in a "happy" mood, the JVC HDV is stunning -- but when it's not happy, it's a miserable experience. Wait and see how Canon, Sony, and Sharp implement HDV, and also JVC may introduce a follow-up that addresses the HD1/HD10's limitations.

Actually, I had considered the DV5000U for myself -- until I saw that it had no auto focus.

I don't think any "Pro" cameras with manual lenses have auto focus, I thought this might be a problem too before I bought a DSR-390 but after using it for a few months it isn't. And it does produce a much nicer image than my VX2000.

John.

No 1/2" or 2/3" camera offers autofocus, that I know of. Neither do any film cameras. So if you're looking for a jump above VX2000 picture quality, it will involve sacrificing autofocus.

As far as shooting landscapes and nature goes, DV just has some serious limitations. You can minimize these with good composition, exposure, etc, but they still remain.

This has been driven home to me on my current project where I'm using a lot of computer animation, including landscapes created in Bryce. The individual frames look great when you same them as JPEG's, but once you compress them as DV you really lose the fine detail and they turn into something completely different.

After a lot of experimentation I've been able to get results that I'm pretty happy with, but the next time I try something like this I'm pretty sure I'll want to go the HD route...

PDX10 will give you better resolution on wide screen

Wait till someone comes out with a decent HDV camera. It will not take that long.

HD will soon become the only way to shoot anything to have any kind of longevity.

UD (ultra definition) systems were demonstrated already and Sony is about a year away from introducing UD resolution projection systems.

If you can wait, forget SD.

Yes, HD. However, a jump to digiBeta will be a big jump---both expensive, so maybe settle for the DV5000. Oh, and one more thing. Most, if not all, pro cams don't come with OIS. Personally, I found the VX2000 resolution very good. If I owned one, I wouldn't be dreaming about something better just yet.

Don't let the kit a person uses plant pre-conceived ideas in your brain about how good a filmmaker they are. Good video comes much more from experience than from expensive kit, believe me. Sharp lenses and expensive microphones will not go amiss, but even so, what really matters is experience.

tom.

Good one, Tom. I think. I'm still quite happy using my old---real old---1 chip JVC miniDVs. I think it's because:

A) they're paid for
B) their lux requirements are low
C) they do the job
D) I'm used to them / easy to use
E) they're paid for

Which JVC models do you have, Frank? As I understand it, the older miniDV cams were better in low light than any of the newer low-end ones.

I have 2, JVC GR-DVL9500U models. Not as good as many of the newer models, but they hold their own, and then some, with lower light conditions. Plus they're paid for. :)

This may not be the correct forum for my question but, please endulge me. In comparrison to most of you in the DVi Community I am a novice. I am reading your posts and am blown away at the incredible amounts of knowlegde you people have. Could you take a second and let me know what type of digital work you do. Are you professional DP's, Cameramen, etc? I am just extremely curious.

Weddings, funerals, instructional videos, the odd news clip when I catch something, and a lot of video just "for fun." I'm no pro. A pro would be someone with at least broadcast training and shooting 20 or more hours a week (except on holidays). :):)