The VX700 was a single-chip version of the VX-1000 and not at all popular. Not popular is not the same thing as not good.

If it had controlable audio, it would be an OK choice. \

You might think about shooting with S-VHS. A Panasonic 456 is down around your ballpark.

There are very good Hi-8 cameras out there but unfortunately, Sony stopped making the extremely good tape and dropouts can be a problem with the second-best tape from Fuji.

I used to work for a huntin show too...I agree with Mike as far as the PD-170 goes, I just got one the other day, but I do have issues with the lense, I don't think that you'll have enough zoom for hunting type applications. It would do well if your subject is close in, but that's not always the case. As far as low light, it is great.

I would go for the XL-2, because of the 20x zoom and the interchangable lens..

But that's just my opinion..........Happy Huntin...

Hi - What did you end up getting?

We decided to hold off for the time being. For 80% of our clients to date, we haven't needed the new camera. When we have needed the higher-end camera we've rented.

We decided to hold off for the time being. For 80% of our clients to date, we haven't needed the new camera. When we have needed the higher-end camera we've rented.

Why not stay with your xl1 and buy a mini35? You can then rent film lenses as needed per shoot. This not only gives YOU great picture images but it will give the CLIENT a very high tech professional "image" Look around on some of the other threads for pictures of the xl1 with mini35 setups. There is no way a client is going to think that doesn't look profesional.

Where can I go to compare a Sony DSR390 vs a Panasonic DVC200? I'm now looking for a higher end camera. At this point I'm looking to spend less than $10,000. Don't worry about accesseries such as lights/mics/batteries/tripods/etc.

Is one better than the other?? Also, what's the difference between DV and DVCAM tape, since the DVC200 is DV and the DSR390 is DVCAM?

The DVC200 is a proper $10k system, a 390 system will cost more, given everything you need.

DVCAM runs at a higher speed and uses 50% more of the space than DV, but the image quality should be the same. You rarely hear of any dropouts with DVCAM cameras. But, as noted, the 390 costs significantly more than the DVC200. I'm not sure it's worth the difference in cost for most people.

What are the differences between the DVC200 and the DSR390?

Steve-

I have been doing some filming for a hunting show and I use two cameras. I use a sony dsr-pd150 and a canon gl1. The sony has great low-light capabilities, great audio, and excellent video sharpness. Its only downfall is the 12x lens is not big enough for western hunting with shot over 300 yards. This is why I bought the gl1. It comes with a 20x lens and I put a 1.7x lens on top for 34x total zoom. It shoots great video also. The low-light isn't as good and the audio is horrible. If I were you, I would get a canon gl2, get a telecoverter lens and upgrade the audio with a good shot gun mic. The gl2 is compact and with your buget of $6000, you might be able to get two of them. I like using two cameras on a hunt---one for filming the hunter and one for the impact shot. With the teleconvert lens on, you cannot shoot closeups because of vignetting effect (porthole). It takes a little practice using two cameras, but it's worth it with the amount of footage you can get on one hunt.

Which network are you going to be airing on?

One other thing Steve. Chances are, there will be times when you are going to want to film two different hunts and you will need two cameras. Once you get going and people know you are filming hunts, you are going to be busy.

Have you thought about adding a western hunting affiliate to your show?

We already have a few DVCPRO50 cameras and I'm just looking to add another camera, for those times when all of the gear is out, without the expense of a DVCPRO50. My first thought was a smaller camera such as the Sony PD170 or even the canon XL2 (we already have an XL1s), but my thought now is to get a bigger camera such as the DVC200.

I'm not sure what camera would best suit my needs without spending the high end dollar of another DVCPRO50. I hope this helps.

Probably the closest thing to the DVCPRO50 camera would be a DSR570, but with a decent lens, batteries, etc., you're talking around $25K, and it's still DV25. So, it all depends on what you want to spend. I personally would prefer to stick with DVCPRO50 if at all possible...maybe consider looking for a good used one?
The 1/2" chip Panasonic DVC200 would be better than the 1/3" chip cameras.

What do you think a good used DVCPRO50 would go for and how is it different than a DVC200? Again, I'm not the most technically savvy person, that's why I ask.

DVCPRO50 is a better quality format than DV25. Most people can barely tell the difference, if any, between DV50 and Digibeta. I don't know what a used camcorder would go for. I believe the SDX900 sells for close to $40K with lens and power, and it's too new for many used ones to be around. I wonder if Panasonic has a B-stock thing for their broadcast line as Sony does. That would be the place to look.

The DVC200 is a 1/2" chip DV25 camera. To my knowledge all the DVCPRO50 cameras are 2/3" chip higher end ones. Don't confuse Panasonic's DVCPRO50 with their DVCPRO, which is a DV25 format. People just say DVCPRO when they mean Panasonic's DVCPRO25. It seems to be the format of choice more for local TV news than for production people who tend to lean toward DVCAM, which is Sony's professional version of DV, but DVCAM and DVCPRO and DV are all DV25 formats. DVCPRO50 is a different animal entirely, and costs a lot more.

I like Adrian's idea of the mini35.

You've stated there is no real reason to buy a shouldermount, and even stated there are real reasons not to - you don't like them.

It's just the image thing, you admit.

If you feel bowing to image is unavoidable that's unfortunate but don't go to the extreme of purchasing a cam you don't feel otherwise inclined to purchase!

Turn a dull act into an exciting one - use the oppurtunity to get a mini35!

Then when you do feel it's time to move from the xl1, you can take your mini35 and lenses with ya...

Just my opinion.

I have a sony trv900 which I like but I may upgrade to perhaps an xl2, vdx100a, or the pd170. My usuage is to tape our co. events for self promotion on dvd and the web.

Which camera is an upgrade and most practical for me?

A local camera shop has had the xl2 for 3 days, I ran some footage from it as well as on the trv for comparison last night. I am not familiar with 24p. How can I best compare the output with fcp hd to see the major improvements. I noticed right off that the resolution was better as well as zooming.

gar/ohio

I would say that any of these three cameras would be perfectly fine for what you want to do. Perhaps others will chime about 30p as it relates to dvd and web video compatibility. Doing searches here on each of these cams and/or visiting the appropriate forums will help too. I shoot with the PD170 and love it love it love it!

I also have a TRV900 and was ready to upgrade. The cameras you mention may be overkill for what you describe. Unless you need XLR audio in the camera, you may want to consider the Sony VX2100 and Canon GL2. They are both good event cameras. You don't need 24p (DVX100a) or even 30p (XL1, XL2, GL2) for that matter. Also, you can pickup a used XL1s on ebay for about the same $2500 as the VX2100 or GL2. The VX2100 will give you a better image than the GL2.

I'm sure that this has been asked a million times...

I am looking to get a pro-sumer camcorder. I have a limited budget, and some specific needs...

I will be filming in a variety of conditions, mostly documantary-style work. I will be working in daylight and many indoor locations (offices, warehouses), which is fine. However, I will also be doing a lot of work inside recording studios, which can often have dim (Mood) lighting. Additionally the other demanding environment (though I will be doing much less of this) will be filming in a night club(s). Not the dance kind, but filming bands on stage, etc.

Obviously these can be somewhat demanding in terms of lighting. I am thinking that even a camera with good low light capabilities might not be enough in some of these situations, so I will have to bring some lighting. The problem here is that the lighting must be unobtrusive (not get in the way of people in cramped spaces like a recording studio control room), and easily moveable in realtime (like filming a band on stage) and not blinding to anyone. Diffused lighting will be what I need I am assuming.

I am VERY new to this field of work, so I have gone online and ordered some books on DV, lighting, etc. I also have a friend that went to film school that I might be able to get to help me with lighting and camera work.

Now, currently my budget is around $1500 max (though I am saving mroe money as time goes by).

Because of this I am looking to buy used. It seems that the best used prices are currently on eBay (and I know how to watch out for scammers on eBay). So, I am basically looking at cameras that sell new for around $2100 or less to get me to a realistic expectation of finding a $1500 deal on a camera.

So far I have narrowed down my choices to the following cameras:

Sony VX2100
Sony VX2000
Sony DSR-PDX10
Pana AG-DVC30
Pana AG-DVC80
JVC GR-HD1

Most of these sell for $1700 - $2200 new from reputable online resellers.

Oddly enough, I see that the VX2000 is selling for about $100 MORE than the VX2100!

I have seen several JVC GR-HD1s go on ebay for $1500 or less. Ditto w/ the DVC80

I would like to be able to use the camera to digitize analog video by inputting the analog video into the camcorder and then converting it to DV. It would be easier than getting an external device to do that, and probably cheaper.

The cheapest of the bunch *seems* to be the JVC GR-HD1. I have heard, however, that it does not have a "wider" angle lens like the Sonys or the Panasonics, and performs poorly in low light. I am wondering if, in the environments that I mentioned, ALL of them would perform poorly enough that I would need external lighting, rendering the arguement about the JVCs poor lighting capability a moot issue? WIth the JVC's single CCD, how does the image quality compare with other miniDV Cams listed when running in 480i (std DV) mode?

Personally I like the idea of "future proofing" with the HD capabilities of the JVC, plus the price. But for right now I really can't see a situation where I would use anything higher than DVD resolution (480p/ 30fps). How are the other cameras at de-interlacing their 480i/60fps footage? Is there any noticable loss of quality? If not, then would I be better off getting something like a Pana or Sony for its better std video capabilities/lens, etc and de-interlacing rather than getting the JVC?

What other applications would I need or want HDV for?

My projects (some of them) will end up being in a presentation/proposal for TV/Cable broadcast. Mind you, that means that my filming will be in the *proposal* to the execs, not in the *ACTUAL* broadcast material (though with luck that could happen in the future). The proposal will most likely be (as far as my filming goes) presented on a DVD.

Thanks for any input! I have researched these cameras a lot, but still can't decide which would be better for me, and at the right price. Over time my budget my grow a little bit, but not too much, and I think I have set somewhat realistic price expectations for the cameras that I have chosen.

Alex F

Oh yes, SMPTE time coding is a definite plus as well. It will help address any video/audio syncing problems that may arise. I can borrow a friends external (rack mount) SMTPE box, but I'd rather not deal with that, plus it would be borrwed rather than owned. :-) If filming a band on stage if I can get good enough audio quality and internal SMPTE that would be great. However, with moving the camera around I would get different audio perspectives, which is not good. I will probably bring some external recording equipment, and then sync up the audio and video post.

I would like to present some of the material in 16:9 and some in 4:3 if possible. How much image quality is lost when doing digital squeeze 16:9? How noticable is it?

A little bit about my background...

My experience lies mainly in audio - recording, writing, engineering, etc. I also do graphics work, but that is still graphics ala Photoshop. I do a lot of audio recording, mixing, etc. and have most of the necessary equipment for that (mics, etc.), though I do have to buy a new control surface for NuEndo since my old drummer took mine when he moved (I got other stuff - fair trade when splitting up out stuff!).

Thanks again.

Alex F

I'd say go for a used Sony VX1000 (the best natural colors, and great picture), used Sony VX2000, or a new Sony 2100.
Don't go for the Canon GL series, unless you like a very grainy picture.

ALso consider a used Canon Gl1 or GL2. The Gl1 will defintiely be under $1500, and you might be able to get a GL2 for that price if you look for a while.

I was looking at the GL2 as well (just forgot to list it). How does the GL2 perform in low light? Will it be an issue in my environments anyway? Why would you reccomend the GL2 over any of the others listed since they are all pretty much in the same price range?

Thanks,

Alex F

You haven't said why you want to replace the 900. It is a good camera and you won't see a very significant change with your 'upgrade.' What type of events do you tape? Can you tell us what you want to achieve that cannot be accomplished with the 900?

A camera store is a notoriously poor place to test any camera. Unless your test of the XL2 or any other camera is in the conditions in which you will use it, you cannot really compare the cameras for your purposes. Do you mean you ran both the 900 and the XL2 in the same conditions as your events?

BTW, the XL2, with it's 5 lux low light requirement, is going to perform just slightly worse than the 900 IIRC. The 900 requires somewhere around 4 lux IIRC. That say's nothing about noise, etc., however.

I've used the 900 in weddings and general applications with good results. Not as good as my PD150 but it was very close until they turned the lights out.

Be careful about the VX1000. That is a very old camera. As I understand it from when I looked at getting one cheap on eBay, you can't export to it via Firewire, only import from it.

i do not have a camera as of yet, but im looking for one... i know i want a 3 chip camera , i was planning on getting an xl1s but now they are discontinued so i started looking on the classifieds on this board and emailed several people about their offers....

but now ive been kinda looking at the pd170's and those are neat...but i dont wanna be spending 12 bucks a tape cause i wanna be able to film alot. i could use all the advice anyone could give me im so ignorant in so many things but i wanna learn so bad....

a few friends and i are gonna start filming/photo/dj'ing weddings pretty soon and i want something that will do the job for that but i aslo film alot of rollerblading so i want something that is easily handled and durable ....i dont know of anyone around where i live that is into cameras like i am so i dont have anyone to talk to about this......

Originally posted by Ernest House : Be careful about the VX1000. That is a very old camera. As I understand it from when I looked at getting one cheap on eBay, you can't export to it via Firewire, only import from it.

Not true, unless you got one with at faulty port.
And you shouldn't be importing on it anyways, get a cheap minidv camera to use as a deck.

Moderator note: I have created a new thread from a post in the
"these are the people in your neighborhood" forum to help
Jared on his way.


Jared: take a bit of time to browse around the forum and see
what other people are getting. There is a lot of talk about which
camera to get etc.

We also have a dedicated wedding forum which you can find at:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=72

You should be able to find plenty of XL1S on sale here at the
forum. Why do you think the tapes for the PD170 are 12 bucks
a tape?

Keep in mind that you want a good quality tape. Without it you
might not have the footage you thought you wanted.

More about tape can be found in our dedicated tape forum:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=64

Good luck!

I agree that any of the 1/3" chip cameras will be a significant upgrade over your TRV900. Unless you are using external mics and need XLR connectors, as one poster mentioned, you may be spending more money than you have to with those choices. The VX2100 is Sony's "consumer" version of the "prosumer" PD170. It does not have XLRs and records only in DV rather than in DVCAM/DV, which is why it is cheaper. It may be your best bet because it is cheaper than the others, and it will operate almost identically to the camera you are accustomed to using.

The 900 can create very good video. Much better than the chip-size would indicate. Gary has yet to tell us what he wants to do and where he wants to do it. In reasonable conditions, the replacement cameras may create footage that is almost indestiguishable from the 900.

thanks rob, your advice is helpful... i was reading in a b and h camcorder catalog that a 32 minute tape for dvcam type cameras is like $11.99.....but i may have misunderstood.....like i said..im still learning alot.....but thanks again for you help

You can still use regular cheap miniDV tape in the PD170, can't you?

i think you can but its probably not very good for the camera....im gonna go post that as a question in the tape forum.

Again, confusion between cassette sizes and recording formats.

DVCAM is a Sony-proprietary recording format, not a tape size.

The world of DV features both small and large cassette sizes.

The PD170 uses the small sized cassettes, just like nearly every other camera discussed around here.

The PD170 can record in either the Sony DVCAM recording format or in the more standard plain-vanilla DV format.

The DVCAM recording format runs the tape faster than plain DV format, hence the shorter recording time capacities cited for DVCAM for a given tape length.

I don't know what tape you cited at $12/32 min but I can tell you that shorter tapes are more expensive than standard 60 min tapes. Also, full-sized cassettes (for larger cameras) are, of course, more expensive.

Sony's PD170 page can be found here (http://bssc.sel.sony.com/Professional/webapp/ModelInfo?m=0&sm=0&p=2&sp=11&id=71949).

I think the TRV900 is the best of the 1/4" chip cameras, but if you set it up next to a 1/3" chip camera, there's a pretty big difference. Doesn't mean there's anything wrong with the 900, but if he's ready to upgrade, a 1/3" chipper will do a better job.

When Agnes Varda did "The Gleaners & I," she intercut TRV900 stuff with DVCAM footage from a 2/3" chip dockable, a DSR30 I think. Most people never noticed the difference because the 900 shots were quite a bit different from the longer shots with the main camera. I've done similar things between the 900 and the DSR250, and I've also used shots from the 900 and 250 in shows that were shot mainly with the DSR500. If the shots are different enough, you can often get by with that; but in a close side by side comparison, the differences in the cameras really shows up.

So in other words, Jared: you'll be fine with using just regular
DV tapes @ 60 minutes (don't use longer tapes or long play
features on a camera!). No worries and it is cheaper.

Ok sorry if this is the wrong thread but need some info about what to buy. We just got 20 grand for a production camera but am having a bit of a time deciding which one would be best.. Yep only one camera will be purchased. So here is my delima. We want a dockable and a hard drive recorder and something to have 4:2:2... The problem is we have 2 dsr-30'2 1 dsr-20 and a panasonic dv-2000 decks, All DV25. Dockable is a must due to not trusting in standard DV for much longer, Thought about a DVCpro 25/50 back to have the best of both worlds but don't have the money for the DVCpro 50 deck and not sure if we can capture out of the camera. And it looks like a FS-3 hard drive recorder for DV25 would be a bargin if we got a dsr-390 or 590... We would love to get an Ikegami with a Ikegami dockable disk recorder which IS 4:2:2 BUT that only works with AVID Systems.... so HELP me spend 20 grand... thanks

a Panasonic AJ-D610WBPS1 or Sony DSR570 :)

I'd go with the Sony DSR570 - only because I haven't tried the other one ;-)
I use the Sony for broadcast work with the BBC and it's a great camera - especially for 16:9, which is the norm here.

Robin

We just went to SBE here in NY and it looks like we are leaning toward the 570... so thanks for the advise....

I've been using the DSR500 for close to 4 years now (the 570 is a minor upgrade). I don't think you can beat it in the DVCAM world. But it is still DV25. Why don't you get the 35 dockable, since you already have a 30?

Hi guys and gals. Someone's asked me what a good cheap minidv camera would be best to get? I have no clue about cameras of this sort so wouldn't mind a few ideas I can chuck their way.

They want something small and easy to carry at around the US$800 mark.

Can anyone offer some suggestions etc?

Cheers
Aaron

I bought a Canon Optura 20 from B&H a few months ago...Great little camera and it was less tha $500....

OK - I need to purchase a new camera this fall and I've been doing alot of forum reading and because I live in Mexico I can't just go down to bestbuy and try out these cameras so please give me a hand - pdx10- gs400 - xi - optura 3,4, or 500- pc350 - and the pal equivalents . Big question , I know( that's why I'm posting here ) but please give your reason for choosing your favorites. I'm now leaning between the pdx10(xlr, hi-res viewfinder) and the pal pc350e ( for it's size and the fact that it has real 25p ). I'd like to stay with sony because of lanc and my varizoom but I'm more interested in image detail than anything else so if you think the panasonic or the canons' outperform the sonys' , please tell me why. Id be especially interested in hearing about the pal gs400 and more about the xi's 1/30 shutter. thanks for reading and esp. thanks for posting- Kurth

<<<-- Originally posted by Kurth Bousman : because I live in Mexico I can't just go down to bestbuy and try out these cameras -->>>

Actually the PDX-10 is part of Sony's pro line and you won't find it in regular retail stores. This is another thing which sets it aside; I'm told that cameras in the pro line have much faster turnaround for repairs (although I have happily never put this to the test).

I haven't used any other cameras on your list, so I don't have any basis for comparison. My reasons for choosing were that most of the others on your list didn't exist when I got mine, and I also wanted 3 CCD's.

The PDX-10's viewfinder is pretty nice, but I personally use the big, bright LCD panel most of the time. With the addition of a cheap LCD hood I can see it fine even on a sunny day outside. The PDX-10 also shoots DVCAM (if that matters to you) and has a nice black finish.

hi Boyd- I was just using bestbuy as a humorous example i.e. BHphoto etc. that I'm unable to do hands-on comparing- that's another good point about sony pro - although I've never had to use it for my pd100a it's another check on the pdx10- dvcam - well I believe you told me on another thread ( and in the manual )that the pdx10 also shoots reg dv which is more appealing - being able to shoot both. I use my viewfinder alot so the b&w on the pdx10 is appealing. I've been looking more lately at the pc350e. What do you think of John Jay's post on that camera. The downside is it doesn't have a headphone jack for monitoring but if it has real progressive , well isn't it assumed that progressive has about 40% higher res plus the extra 100 lines of pal? I've held the pdx10 and it is a beauty and for it's pro feel , I'll probably end up w/it and use nattress film effects but that's not the same as real progressive. Also , living in mex , I have a whole other set of criteria that are dictated by low profile ! which plays to the pc350- the pdx10 , while small , is real pretty and that attracts attention. Well , who knows , maybe the reviews of the fx-1 will be so awesome that I'll have to not buy the canon20d ( which is getting alot of bad reviews ) and go for the new sony-I just don't like buying new products ! thanks - take care- Kurth

IIRC, the 350 is one of Sony's new cameras that moves all the controls to the touchscreen which I don't think I'd like. Does it even have full manual control? How about battery life? Doesn't it use those little batteries that fit inside the camera? It does look like an interesting product, but maybe a little too "consumery" for my taste...

I suppose another option to consider might be the HC-1000 which supposedly has the same 16:9 mode as the PDX-10. It also has gone the touchscreen route and uses smaller batteries than the PDX-10.

The FX-1 looks like a real beauty, but evidently considerably larger and heavier than the PD-170.

I'd say the FX1 is *somewhat* larger and heavier than the PD170. Wouldn't say that "considerably" is the word for it. Everything is relative, anyway.

The current Canon Optura line offers native 16:9 at price points of $900 to $1200.