Hi All,
I'm new to the DVi community, so I'll introduce myself first. My name is Eric, I am a junior at Penn State University, and I'm a Film/Video major. I am looking to buy a prosumer camera to shoot projects for school, as well as some side jobs I have including shooting women's volleyball and basketball games for a campus TV network. I have been using a friend's Panasonic DVX100, which I love, but I am no longer able to use it, so I need to buy a camera for myself. PSU has VX1000s, PDX10s, and PD150s, and I have used and like them all. I really like the PDX10, and I am a poor college student, so it's pretty appealing since it's usually under $2000. I have never used the GL2, but I've heard it is a great camera also. Would I be better off going with a PDX10 or GL2? Also, I'm having trouble finding a good website to buy from. B&H has a great reputation, but is consistently higher priced than sites like Broadway Video, or ibuydigital.com. Any help at all would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

I can't really answer regarding the GL2 since I haven't used one, although I hear good things about it also. There have been a number of discussions on this topic, here's one thread (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14255) that might be of interest. I use a PDX-10 and a VX-2000 and have grown very fond of the PDX-10. If I had to give one of them up I'd definitely keep the PDX-10. I think the most important question you need to ask is "how important is 16:9?" If it's a top priority then it will be hard to beat the PDX-10. The XLR inputs and audio quality are another big plus.

I suggest you just browse through the PDX-10 and GL-2 forums here for starters. Also, it would help to post your question to either the PDX-10 or GL-2 forum instead of the VX-2000 forum :-)

thanks a lot, Boyd! that other thread really helps, and I will definitely be checking the pdx10 and gl2 forums!

Eric as a previous owner of both cameras- I say go for the GL2- it does everything the PDX10 does only with less problems (really NO problems).....the big selling point for the PDX10 is it's native 16:9 widescreen shooting capabilities.....the GL2 masks it's frame electronically so there's a resolution loss if you plan on shooting 16:9 footage- otherwise get the GL2! (trust me on this one)

(The GL2 has a pro lens and 20X optical zoom- you wont find a better lens unless you opt for the Panasonic DVC80/DVX100 with Leica lenses)

I say get a GL2 as well, and forget the PDX10 Eric. Ah - but if you're going to shoot 16:9 today, tomorrow and every day thereafter, go get the PDV10.

For all other shooting the GL2 is much nicer. You have independent control over the ND filter whereas the PD has three auto NDs over which you have precious little control. The Canon keeps you informed via viewfinder readouts, but the Sony has a silly horizontal bar that doesn't tell you when you hit max or min aperture, or what gain-up setting you're using.

The GL2 is two stops more sensitive. In low light this is a huge advantage. The GL2 also has a proper 6 bladed diaphragm and far less CCD smear - a 'feature' that has ruined lots of my PDX footage. On tape replay the Canon doesn't lie. The Sony will read 'manual' when it was shot auto, and tell you a shot was taken at f1.6 at full telephoto - when the max aperture is only f2.8.

It's a camera of two halves all right. Great in 'average' light, poor in low or bright light.

tom.

Don't buy from those places that advertise cheap prices. if you actually manage to get what you want, the products will be grey market with no US warranty. Stick with B&H or J&R. Both are very reliable and thier prices are well below list. Also J&R tries hard to match prices from elsewhere but you have to ask.

Eric, I am a newbie as well and was put in a similar situation before I get my XM2 (GL2). I lingered among many forums for months before I made the decision. PDX10p and XM2(GL2)community on this forum are those I spent almost on daily basis.
This is how I came thru. based on people's threads from different forums:
1. Ambiguity of F-stop on PDX10 scares me off. Will there be any chance you want to do manual focusing while subject distance is beyong your control, i.e. moving object at high speed? A smaller aperture other than F-4 might help in this case.
2. Vertical smear on PDX10 is more prominent than XM2 (GL2), as you can figure out it is common for smaller CCD. Big brothers can always plan the lighting setup to cope with, but it is not the case to amateurs; at least to me.
3. I almost put my money on a PDX10p for its compactness, not until I hold a XM2 in my own hand did I find out it is not really that big. Those photos you saw on different websites might mislead you on the size. Go to a retailer and feel both cams.
My last one might put you in agony:
You might come across others threads saying they have problems with MiniDV tape on various cams. I dare say it is a problem by no means someone can clarify; whether it is a mixed-using of tape, or simply a tape issue, or the cam itself, or may be both. But I have not seen any PDX10 user complaining their DVCAM tape.

Judging the above, I bet my money on my XM2 and I am still learning to dig deeper.
One Last note: No OIS can beat a tripod.

Eric,
The GL-2 also has the longer zoom and since you are in to sports that may be an added value.

Regarding the vendors you mentioned ..... DON'T GO THERE !!!!!
Go to the section Community Marketplace, Great Deals from DVInfo.Net Sponsors in this forum and contact them when you are ready to buy. B&H is just one of several, but they are all First Class. The one thing you will get from them you won't get from dirt-cheapies (like the ones you mentioned) is service, let me make that SERVICE. And that is worth any difference in price.

Good luck, Nick

P.S. Woman's college vollyball eh. Tough, but somebody has to do it, right?

Thanks to everyone, your advice was all extremely helpful. I ended up going with the PDX10 for 3 reasons.
1) It was just a little cheaper, and I wanted to make sure I had enough money to get a good tripod and bag, as well as filters and a better battery.
2) The 16:9 factor. Ultimately, it seemed as though this was the ONLY choice for shooting in 16:9, which is definitely something I wanted to do.
3) The XLR inputs. I know there is an adapter for the GL2, but once again, that is something extra to buy and I was trying to be as economical as possible. I shoot a lot of interviews, so the XLR ins were a major deciding point.
I ordered through B&H and they were extremely helpful. My order came in 3 days, and I absolutely love the camera. Thanks again to everyone!

Congrats Eric! We'll look forward to hearing your impressions as you put the new camera through its paces.

Congratulations and enjoy!

Does anyone ever take into account that the PDX10 shoots on the more stable DVCAM format, personally I feel this fact is so often left out when discussing the pros and cons of the PDX10 against the gl2. Here in the UK most tv stations wont accept anything less than DVcam format.

What does that mean, "more stable"? My understanding was that DVCAM offers little advatage over miniDV as far as picture quality is concerned. Of course, I could be wrong.

I had the oppurtunity to use my PDX10 quite a bit this past weekend. I shot the usual college volleyball (first and second rounds of the NCAA tournament), and the cam performed beautifully. I used my tripod so I have no complaints about the camera's weight displacement, and the picture and sound were excellent. I played around with the manual settings a good bit and got a great looking picture. I also ended up using the cam to record a narration track for a very short film assignment (documentary film-making class), and I was very pleased with the quality of sound. I love the camera, and I can't wait to shoot more with it.

One quick question though, in the sound settings in the menu, is it better to shoot with the sound in 32K or 48K. To be honest, I'm not sure what either means, so could someone please explain that to me? Thanks!

Congratulations, Eric. Are you using DVCAM tape or MiniDV tape?

Hey, Leonard. May be I am a bit sarcastic, do you think DVCAM is considered more robust simply because of wider pitch, or just people don't have a chance to use different brands?

Colin,
So far I have been using regular Mini DV tapes. I'm not really sure where I can buy DVCAM tapes to be honest with you. Could someone tell me a good place to get them from? Thanks!

Hey Eric,

I will pass it to someone else to tell you where you can get DVCAM tape.
DVCAM tapes are easily available here in HK, but it is thousands miles from where you live. They come in two versions, one with memory chip and one without. I do not know how they work, Boyd might have some insight.
FYI, I am not a PDX10 user, mine is XM2. But digging here and there really help me out.

<<<-- Originally posted by Eric Long :

One quick question though, in the sound settings in the menu, is it better to shoot with the sound in 32K or 48K. To be honest, I'm not sure what either means, so could someone please explain that to me? Thanks! -->>>

Shoot at 48K. Set it and forget it, it's the standard. 32K audio tracks might need to be resampled (especially if you're mixing footage from other sources) by your editing software, which is a hassle and unneccesary and is asking for trouble. ;^)

DVCAM tape can be had in quite a few places. My favorite is Tape and Media.com. Good people, very nice to deal with. Actual human beings (and I mean that in the best sense!) http://www.tapeandmedia.com/DVCAM_Tapes.asp BandH has them as well, I'm sure many places do. I think the PDX takes the "mini" DVCAM version.


I've not been too worried about the DVCAM possibilities--as I understand it (and I am probably wrong about the specifics, if not the gist) it just gives you more of the same signal, making it more secure from dropouts, etc. That's how it might be more robust, more "stable" (again, I think this is true). The picture is the same quality, but you are a little safer from any inadvertant snafus. I use the regular miniDV tape exclusively, and have NEVER had a problem with them, or the picture they record.

Plus, the DVCAM tapes are shorter, and much more expensive...

Just a few thoughts....

1. "out of the box" the PDX-10 is set to default as DVCAM recording. You need to go into the menus to turn this off, so if you haven't taken this action then you are shooting in DVCAM mode.

2. You can shoot and record DVCAM on regular miniDV tapes with no problems, and from what I read this is what most PDX-10 and PD-150 users do. The DVCAM tapes are (IMO) ridiculously expensive. I've never used one personally. I generally shoot in regular DV SP mode, but occasionally switch to DVCAM if I'm paranoid about losing something important. I have been using the Sony Premium DV tapes exlusively and haven't seen any problems. I'm sure there are cheaper mail order sources, but the best local price I've found is 3 tapes for about $20 at CompUSA. For some reason the Sony tapes don't seem to be all that widely available around here, and they generally cost more than the Panasonic and Fuji tapes I see.

3. The DVCAM tapes are no shorter than the regular miniDV tapes. Recording time is determined by whether you set the camera for DV SP or DVCAM in the menus. If set to DVCAM you only get 40 minutes on a standard 60 minute mini DV tape, because it spins faster.

4. Chris is correct about DVCAM writing the same data to tape, but in a format that is more resistant to any recording glitches.

5. I agree you should just shoot 48k audio. I think that 32k option allows you to record 4 channels of audio instead of 2, but at a lower quality level. Have never tried it personally. I'm not sure what support the PDX-10 has for this, but I imagine you could add the other tracks (such as music or FX) when you edited on the computer.

This got me thinking.... Adam Wilt's website is a great resource for this sort of technical information. DV and DVCAM allow the following audio options: 2 ch @ 48 kHz, 16 bits;_
4 ch @ 32 kHz, 12 bits;_
will accept 2 ch @ 44.1 kHz, 16 bits via 1394 I/O; unlocked (but can record locked audio via 1394) And regarding DVCAM, Adam says: DVCAM is very close to DV; if you take the information in IEC 61834 and compensate for (a) 50% higher track pitch, track width, and tape speed; (b) 1/3 shorter run times per tape length; (c) defaulting to locked audio; and (d) no support for LP mode, you should have most of what you need. Conversely, you can reverse-engineer a lot about DV from this DVCAM information – and unlike the DV standards documents, this info is free!
For more detailed information on DVCAM see the brochures at Sony''s website (http://www.sony.ca/dvcam/brochures.htm)

<<<-- Originally posted by Boyd Ostroff : Just a few thoughts....

2. You can shoot and record DVCAM on regular miniDV tapes with no problems, and from what I read....

This is a revelation, Boyd. I haven't spent any time thinking about it, really, but just the sameI never knew this. I always thought the DVCAM tapes were special to that format! Probably just what the manufacturers want me to think! Very cool info.

To your knowledge, are the "DVCAM" tapes any different in substance, or are they just labelled as such?
-->>>

From what I hear the cassettes are better made, and perhaps the tape is manufactured to a higher standard. Evidently they also have nice storage cases. But I have no personal experience. Let me see if I can get one of our fellow moderators to post some first hand knowledge.

Boyd, DV may allw the audio specs you indicated but my "prosumer" SONY 950 records only one track at 16 bits and two at 12. I need to record at 12 if I want to add narration, sound effects, etc. The sound is actually not bad (played through TV speakers).

Leonard, I think the 950 records a stereo track (2 channels) at 16 bits/48K, or 2 stereo tracks (4 channels) at 12 bits/32K.

Have you thought about adding the necessary narration track(s) and sound FX tracks in post? Almost all editing software allows multiple audio tracks. That way you can record at 16/48 and have all the extra tracks you want.

You're probably right, though--the 12 bit/32K recording mode is quite fine. Human ears can only hear so much, especially when it ends up coming through a TV speaker...but just the same, might as well default to the higher standard, if it doesn't get in the way of what you're doing.

iMovie only has two tracks at 12 bits. I guess I would have to go to Final Cut to get more. Fortunately, I'm getting on in years and my hearing is not so good - saves a lot of money on audio gear.