Couldn't find an XLR adapter for this out of production camera. What make and model was ever available and where can I find one. I want to buy a used VX2100 for a 2nd camera and deck. Thanks, Ed

Any of the Beachtek's ones should work - DXA-2 or DXA-4 if you have battery powered mics or the DXA-6 if you need phantom power.
Also try Juicedlink... i can't find them anywhere in australia so don't know how they compare to the Beachtek.

Juiced link is better, and I like mine. I'll tell you though you are better off ditching the 2100 and getting a PD 150 or PD 170 if possible.

The XLR boxes throw the balance of the camera off a lot, and you are adding a layer of complexity to your setup that I don't care for.

It works, but I strongly dislike it. You cannot set your camera down on the floor or ground without it tipping over when you go handheld.

For wedding ceremonies another option is to buy a small inexpensive camera like the canon hv30, putting it on the Juiced link and leaving it there. I run an HV 30 with the Juiced Link and I run two wirelesses off of it. Now I have a balanced FX1000. for the reception I do not need xlr anyway

Thanks, Jeff. Juicelink seems to be the best bet.

Thanks, John. I'll look into the PD's

I found the PD 150s actually have a better picture than the VX2100. I had two of the PD150s and I still miss them. The PD150 can often be had for under $900. You could sell your VX2100, and you'd end up with a better cam and have your XLRs.

Can't agree with Jeff, and the DXA-4 under my VX2k gave me not the slightest balance or stability worries in many a year. Also the PD has exactly the same picture quality as the VX series (bar production tolerances).

But I would agree with him the fact that you should move to a native 16:9 camera, even if you only intend to shoot SD.

tom.

Tom, I used a Juiced link, not a Beachtek as you do/did. When off the tripod it cannot be set on the ground to a table, etc without tipping over, which is a restriction when going for certain low angle shots.

Your experience may be different with a Beachtek.

The PD 150 (as I said I had two) has been said by others to have a warmer picture than the VX2100, but your experience may be different. The chips are not the same, which you, as a veteran cameraman, know. From my limited experience I did prefer the PD150.

I shot around 100 weddings with the 2X PD150 VX2100 combo and they were usually able to be matched nearly perfectly, but if any camera of the three was off, it was the Vx2100 every time. Initially I thought the issue was with the viewfinder, but it wasn't. White balance usually matched them, but I still liked the image from the older camera best.

It is possible I had a defective VX2100, but I don't think so. I sold it to someone who is still quite happy with it.

The PD 150 (as I said I had two) has been said by others to have a warmer picture than the VX2100, but your experience may be different. The chips are not the same, which you, as a veteran cameraman, know. From my limited experience I did prefer the PD150.

Ah - that explains it Jeff - your Juice and my Beach are quite different.

But what isn't different is the VX and PD imaging quality. In fact the whole lens / chip-block assembly is completely interchangeable between the two cameras (VX2k & 150; VX2k1 and 170).

Your 150 and the newer VX2k1 are indeed different in the spec sheets (the latter being a 1 lux, the former a 2 lux camera), but I've always reckoned it was smoother post amplification from chips to tape that was allowing Sony to claim this, whereas in fact the chips were unchanged model to model.

tom.

Thanks, Jeff. Ilooked into used PD150's and your right-much better solution.I found the PD 150s actually have a better picture than the VX2100. I had two of the PD150s and I still miss them. The PD150 can often be had for under $900. You could sell your VX2100, and you'd end up with a better cam and have your XLRs.

I don't know what it was Tom, it was weird, as it would seem "logical" that the newer VX2100 would be better.

But as I said I still miss those old cameras, they were amazing. The FX1000 just isn't the HD equivalent. Not even close in my book.

Recently I showed a potential customer videos made with the older cameras and the newer ones.

I never even brought up the subject of cameras, except to say that "this video was made with our newer cameras and the other was made with our older cameras."

She asked if she could opt for the older cameras.

An HD camera is of no advantage when it gets grainy in low light, which the FX1000 does much more than the older cameras.

It would be a smart Move Ed.

Good info, Jeff. Interesting how well the price has held for VX2100's

Ed
I don't know what it was Tom, it was weird, as it would seem "logical" that the newer VX2100 would be better.

But as I said I still miss those old cameras, they were amazing. The FX1000 just isn't the HD equivalent. Not even close in my book.

Recently I showed a potential customer videos made with the older cameras and the newer ones.

I never even brought up the subject of cameras, except to say that "this video was made with our newer cameras and the other was made with our older cameras."

She asked if she could opt for the older cameras.

An HD camera is of no advantage when it gets grainy in low light, which the FX1000 does much more than the older cameras.