Check out the Optura 600 (http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=166&modelid=11733). (that's the 600 not the 60). There are links to reviews in the Optura FAQ (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=50128)

Though it's still advisable to get an inexpensive digicam for what you want to do.

Probably good advice to get a separate digital camera instead
of trying to double dip.

What inexpensive mini-dv would you suggest?

The Canon Optura 50 (http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=166&modelid=11152) or Optura S1 (http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=166&modelid=11815)

thanks Michael, I'll check those out.
I'm downgrading from a GL-2, so I want something which still has some digital video quality so I can use it for some Video Documentaries if I'd like to. Doesn't have to be as good as the GL-2, but you know what I mean..

We have a Outdoor Hunting and fishing show and to say the least we are not easy on our equipment. We are using a GL2 at the time and are looking at getting another camera. We have not had good luck with the GL2. It is less than 2 years old and we have spent 1000 in repairs. Any opinions would be appreciated on GL2 and others in that price range.

Thanks

I would look at the Sonys (PD170) I know from personal experience they can take some rough handling. Not to mention that the 150 was the camera of choice for the embeded journalist during the beginning of the Iraq war. Talk about some rough conditions!
Don

if the camera is for shooting only and not audio, i'd recommend the vx2100 or vx2000 for sake of saving money. if you need a combo of video and audio power, get the pd series, 150 or 170. Definitely hardcore, reliable cameras, no doubt about it.

i wonder if it isn't your particular unit. my GL2 has been all over the place. up mountains (13 - 14,000 ft. peaks), at beaches, camping. i've put it through all kinds of torture. mine seems very sturdy, compact, and rugged.

i recently bought an fx-1 and think it is a pretty sturdy unit. i bought it lightly used for just about the same price i paid for my original GL2, and it has magnificent HDV quality. i would probably not buy the old sonys, not when you can get HDV at these prices. shooting landscapes and outdoor footage is where HDV really dazzles. and you can always downconvert out of the camera to SD. the fx-1 gets a bad rap for lowlight performance, but i don't think it is all that bad. you should check it out. the ergonomics on that camera make it very fun and easy to operate.

Don't know if this is the right place to post but I was wondering if someone could give me some tips on wich camera to buy.

I'm going to buy the DVX100b or the FX1 this week but even after reading alot of information I found on these forums I'm still not sure wich one.
HDV ain't really important to me yet, only in case of resale this might be important, and neither is 24p / or at least I think ,I prefere faking the so called "cinema look" in post production.

I really liked the z1u wich I had placed at my disposal for a couple of months, and I really liked the design and options of the camera.
But I still don't know whats the best choice in picture quality wich is the most important factor for me but with picture quality I do mean best looking, and not most pixels ccd.

I will be using the camera to film shortfilms etc. Not weddings or other, mostly short fiction films.

Thanks already,

Daniël

If you are going for shorts, and for the most filmlike quality, and not perse resolution or pixels, I think the DVX would be the best choice.

dear all

just been selected to take part in a 5 day film-making challenge in singapore

http://www.phoenixinwonderland.com/shm/sts/take5guerilla.php

the challenge does not allow 3CCD cameras [quite glad that they did that, or i might have plonk down money for a VX2100]

i'm looking at the Panasonic GS35, but i don't really want to rely just on a camcorderinfo review

any other suggestions?

hopefully, the camcorder has
1. headphone out
2. mic input
3. manual controls
4. hotshoe [GS35 doesn't have this]
5. top-loading tape mechanism

i could throw a curve ball and buy a Sony HDR-HC1 [its a 1-CMOS sensor], but don't think i should spend so much on my 1st camcorder...

thanx in advance to all for your suggestions

I have an Optura 50, looks great. It has a RGB color filter so it will (in good light) give you color similar to that of a 3chip. The Optura 60 fufills your other desire for a hotshoe('bout 100 bucks more). Also the HC1 has a bottom loader...so its a pain in the butt to take off a beachtek adapter, and also makes "quick release" plates not so quick (first hand experience...if you need to swap out tapes quick and use a tripod...dont get and HC1)
Also you'll probably have to search for the other model names because you need the pal versions...good luck!

thanx for the recommendation, now looking thru some of the reviews
the PAL version is MVX40i [10x] or MVX45i [14x]
however, there seems to be a handling flaw, as the LCD screen, if tilted, will block the function key...

You would think that would be a problem, but it really helps in my opinion...you're finger won't be in the way of the LCD. It takes a little bit of getting used to, but in the end of it all unless you need to constantly keep switching between the function button and the menu button, it doesnt bother me.

thanx for your comments

in the end, i got a panasonic gs25 at a computer show

$749 singapore dollars
came with
6 DV tapes
2 extra batteries
tripod
256MB SD card
semi-soft case
lens cleaning kit

Hi - Got a friend who asked me what to get in the $500-$800 range. I've never researched that price range, would anyone have a suggestion? They'd prefer new but obviously a better camera could be had if used. No film type stuff just a decent camera with some optical zoom and good optical stabilization, won't be using a tripod much. Thanks for any input.

I can't speak to a specific model since they change so fast. But he should make a list of what features are important to him and then pick one.

If I wanted a consumercam for a friend, I would have them look at:

1. Optical zoom range 10x okay but some are 20x or more...
2. MiniDV format (most likely, but maybe HDD or DVD is better for their needs
3. Physical size of the camera
4. Nightshot capability
5. Brand (Sony, Panny, or Canon)
6. Firewire port

For me, I also want

good manual controls for focus, iris, & WB
top loading
mic and headphone jacks

Unless he REALLY wants still pics & video in one unit, he should know that two cams are usually better than one.

Thanks Bob - Nice area, my parents just retired there, may be down over the winter.

this is a nice camera for the money... 3 chip, mic input... BUT it has 1/6 inch chips I think which means needs more light..

I think it performs similarily to GS400 which has 1/4.7" CCDs.

Thanks Bob - Nice area, my parents just retired there, may be down over the winter.
Let me know if you are coming down. We will go shoot something. :)

You're darn right we will Bob - Happy Holidays

1/4.7 chips are going to be better in low light then 1/6 chips, no doubt about it. I have the GS200, and my nephew has the GS400. Needless to say, the GS400 performs better then the GS200, but it's more expensive too.
The GS200 is a good cam for it's money, though. 3CCD, manual controls, including manual focus ring,...

Really appreciate all your replies, I am enlightening my friend with all your input. Thanks again

Optura 60 is my top pick in this bracket. Next up for me would be the Pana GS400, but its quite a bit more.

The Optura 50/60 are the ONLY cams I know that satisfy these wants/needs in that price range. The Panasonics do not really have OIS(optical image stabilization), even in the menu on the camera it says EIS (electronic image stabilization) this is something I have found strange, because every advertisement says they have optical...I have an Optura 50, tried out the GS150/ GS250 and saw a good comparison of the video, bought the $700 (at the time) Optura 50 because it looked better than even the $1000 Panasonic GS250...even with a single ccd!

<snip>I have an Optura 50, tried out the GS150/ GS250 and saw a good comparison of the video, bought the $700 (at the time) Optura 50 because it looked better than even the $1000 Panasonic GS250...even with a single ccd!

Not only do Opturas have a great image, but they're the only cams I know of in this price range that have manual audio control. I really think Canon did a super job when they engineered these. Its like they didn't hold back any features that they could reasonably put into the cams for the price (and then some).

The Optura 60 is under $700 from one of our sponsors. The GS400 is still over the $1k mark.

i'll also give the nod to the optura 60 i'm happy with mine

see my review http://www.emptyloft.com/optura60/

Not sure which forum this would go in, so I stuck it here in Open DV.

I'm going to be in the market for a new SD camera in the near future. I've been looking at Sony, Panasonic, and Canon. Currently I have a GL2, which aside from the tape transport replacement has worked pretty well. But I need to add to the stable.

I've compared the specs on the Sony PD170, Canon XL2, and Panasonic DVX100B. Most of my shoots are staged or studio. The 3 cameras appear pretty darn similar from the spec sheets. I do tend to shoot in 16:9 on the GL2, so whatever I get will need to be able to do that with good results.

I've seen a bunch of threads on the GL2-level cameras (VX2100, PDX10, etc), but didn't seem to see many comparisons between the XL2-level cameras. I like the 20x default zoom on the Canon--with the others I'd have to get an adapter to increase the zoom. I've seen some posts that PD170 does not do 16:9 well; is that true or opinion?

I've also been reading about the FX1. How well does that camera fit in with the XL2-level of camera?
Thanks,
Matt

I was in the same exact position as you 2 weeks ago. After having my GL-2 for 2 years, i didnt know what to buy, check out this thread for some help. I went with the XL2 though, amazing camera.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=55959

Good luck man

Not sure which forum this would go in, so I stuck it here in Open DV.

I'm going to be in the market for a new SD camera in the near future. I've been looking at Sony, Panasonic, and Canon. Currently I have a GL2, which aside from the tape transport replacement has worked pretty well. But I need to add to the stable.

I've compared the specs on the Sony PD170, Canon XL2, and Panasonic DVX100B. Most of my shoots are staged or studio. The 3 cameras appear pretty darn similar from the spec sheets. I do tend to shoot in 16:9 on the GL2, so whatever I get will need to be able to do that with good results.

I've seen a bunch of threads on the GL2-level cameras (VX2100, PDX10, etc), but didn't seem to see many comparisons between the XL2-level cameras. I like the 20x default zoom on the Canon--with the others I'd have to get an adapter to increase the zoom. I've seen some posts that PD170 does not do 16:9 well; is that true or opinion?

I've also been reading about the FX1. How well does that camera fit in with the XL2-level of camera?
Thanks,
Matt

The XL2 has true 16:9 sensors. AFAIK the others ar 4:3 and achieve their 16:9 output by letterboxing off part of the frame.

Guiseppe,
Thanks so much for your reply and the post.

I'm pretty impressed by the video clips from the FX1 that were posted. I'm curious, though. Does anyone have any examples of shooting SD in the FX1 or HVX for comparison? HD would be nice, but I don't own an HD monitor, and my work goes almost exclusively to DVD. How does HD look when downsampled to SD?

Also, doe anyone in the Denton/Dallas/Fort Worth area know of any camera rental shops? The yellow pages have escaped me...

Thanks,
Matt

hey everyone,

I've been researching the hell out of every camera i could think of for the past month and it looks like in about a month from now, i'll be ready to actually purchase a camera! I'll be starting with just a camera and buying equipment as i find a need for it. I plan on using the camera for weddings, commercial work (if i can find it) and of course making my own films.

I've almost completely settled on the Panasonic DVX100b. It has excellent low-light performance from what i've read (although noisier than other cameras after gain?), which was an important factor for me and has true 24P/30P, another important factor.

So the question is, should i consider anything else? I'm in no rush and can think about it for longer than a month if needed.

Also, what particular equipment should i start thinking about? Audio and lighting are the only 2 that come to mind and i know next to nothing about either (in terms of what to look for and why). Popular models for either would be very useful at this point, just so i can start somewhere.

Hope to hear from you guys soon and thanks for getting this far :D

Raji

We could help you a lot more if you could tell us your estimated budget.

i'm looking at around 3-4k for a camera and depending on how well it goes, maybe about 1-2k for audio and lighting... i don't know much about the last 2, which is why i was reluctant on throwing out a figure. I don't know what's realistic and i don't know how far the camera alone will take me before i'll HAVE to start purchasing audio and lighting equipment.

Are you interested in HD at the moment, knowing it needs much stronger computerpower?

If not, you could look at a Panasonic DVX100B or a Canon XL2. I think those are the best SD cams out there now. Maybe the XL2 is the best, but comes with a bigger price tag too.
For events and weddings, the Sonys are the best, then you'd maybe look better into a Sony PD170.

Can't really help you with lightening and audio, although I suppose 1k is a good start budget for audio. But I'll leave that to others, more experienced, to handle that part.

Good thing is, with 3-4k you can buy a really good SD cam, but you fall a little behind for a good HD cam, exept for maybe the FX1, but that won't be as good in low light as the SD counterpart. and good lowlight performances are important for event work and weddings.

For a minimum of hassle, and maximum in low light efficiency in the mini DV world, the Sony PDs (150, 170 ) or the VX's (2000 and 2100) are your best bet. They can shoot in the low light of wedding receptions without obtrusive on camera lights.

Of course, there is always the issue over whether on camera lighting should be used no matter what, or whether the videographer should light the wedding and or reception for his needs... There are different camps and client expectations. Since the Sonys can work well in either circumstance, they would be best all around performers.

Now, in HDV, the Sony FX1 and Z1 may have stepped back from that low light predominance...

Chris Barcellos

no at the moment, HD is pretty much out of the question. Mostly because of the cost associated with getting a GOOD camera that has HD. Not to mention that the price tag sky-rockets when you want 24P too. Then there's the processor power, where i'm not even close (my PC is almost 4 years old but i've been refraining from an upgrade until i can justify it with paying gigs). So yeah, HD is completely out of the question. And i recently read at a DVX website (so this is probably somewhat biased) that the FX1 performed pretty poorly in comparison with the XL2 and the DVX 100a.

Why is the PD170 (or Sony in general) better than the DVX for wedding/events? Are you saying that because of the low-light performance?

I was looking at the PD170 before i found out about the DVX and it's a mighty good camera. Even better in low-light than the DVX is, plus it looks heftier and perhaps more reassuring for the people who want to know that their wedding/event videos are going to look good for the price they pay. The only thing about the Sony is that it doesn't have 24P or 30P... that's a huge factor for me.

The XL2 simply looks ultra professional (to me at least) so it has a very strong coolness factor, which i think Canon has always had with their products. I just realized that the XL2 isn't as expensive as i thought it was (thought it was at least 5-6k), but i also remembered that reviews rated it as slightly worse in terms of low-light performance compared to the PD170 and DVX100... so i think the XL2 is out.

Thanks a lot for your response Mathieu. Any other feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Don't feel bad about HD, my personal opinion is it isn't necessary at this moment. The format has to grow a bit on the prosumers, you can read about all the troubles that people have with the editing of HD and HDV on the HD-cameraboards here.

Yes, the PD170 is a better camera for weddings, only for the low light. Much better!
BUT you are right too: it doesn't give you such a filmic image as a DVX or an XL2, and I can understand why that's important (I myself make narratives too).

About the XL2 and the DVX: if you can afford the XL2, I would go for the XL2. Maybe not as good as the DVX for low light, but the difference will be small (I also read that comparison you talked about) and it is being said that the DVX, how great the cam is, tends to be a bit noisy, where you can get a very clean image with the XL2.
And the lens on the XL2 is superior too.
The DVX is smaller and maybe easier to carry with you. I personally think a bigger camera like an XL2 (I have an XL1s) is easier to handle, because you can make shots on your shoulder fairly easy and still have decent results, where the DVX is clearly a handycam-model.
But the DVX is also a bit more easy to handle out of the box then an XL2, although with an XL2 you should be able to get a better image.

You should search some threads here about the DVX versus the XL2, there are plenty of them, and one person who owns both is Ash Greyson on these boards. He says pretty much the same as I did now: the XL2 is heavier, more difficult, but actually a better camera then the DVX.
But again, with a bigger pricetag, and maybe (I don't know) you prefer the handycam model of the DVX and the pretty easy setup.

Little footnote, and it's surely nothing that should really influence your choice, but the XL2 looks more professional then a DVX or an PD170, which, to SOME (not many, and remember, people hire you for your skills, not your camera, but... still) clients for weddings can make a little better impression.
For weddings, though, Sony cams are the best.
Just wanted to note this, because there's for example a thread here on dvinfo about someone who said looks DID matter (but it was a pretty funny thread).

thanks guys for the help and suggestions. I'm still going to stay away from the Sony cameras, just because of their lack of progressive scan.

However, and this is a HUGE however, i'm not nearly as sure about the DVX as i was. 2 reasons, both of which came from you Mathieu :D

1) The DVX really IS grainy! Even in normal lighting conditions it seems. Am i just seeing things? After your comment, i looked more closely at the caps from various sites and yeah... lots of noise! The XL2 by comparison is really clean.

2) I hadn't thought of this, but yeah, the DVX really is more of a handycam model... isn't that going to be a problem anytime i want to take the camera off the tripod? I would think so... I just don't want to end up with home-video shakiness all the time. The XL2 having that shoulder mount probably helps a ton. Anybody know how the DVX performs off the tripod?

So yeah, now i'm really starting to lean towards the XL2 since it has the features i want and is only about $500 more than the DVX.

The only real concern i have about it is its viewfinder. It's apparently very difficult to focus with it? I know from using my Canon Rebel 350D that i simply refrain from using the manual focus because the viewfinder is so small and it's very difficult to manually focus accurately... fortunately, the Rebel is just a still camera. With a camcorder, an out of focus shot (especially in non-repeatable situations like weddings etc.) this would be DEVASTATING, wouldn't it??

Though you ruled out the Sonys, I think the autofocus features in these cameras is pretty good. Head to head against the Canon XL1 a few years back, my VX2000 performed heads above the that camera. I understand the XL2 had improved somewhat, but there was still a lot of drift. The Sony provides a quick autofocus in most lighting situations. And you can focus with a temporary autofocus button, and then change over to manual to avoid drift as your central focus might move to side.

Chris Barcellos

DVX100b is better than the A but noisy and in low light... VERY NOISY! It does have great colors and ease of use. XL2 has less noise but is much harder to use and master... if you are looking for low light performance, PD170 is the way to go. Widescreen? No other choice but the XL2... 4:3 24P with ease of use? DVX



ash =o)

Ok, i think maybe i need to clarify something about low-light. My idea of low(ish)-light is indoors, with the only lighting being light bulbs or fluorescent lighting. Really low light means a single candle or something to that effect, right? I don't know if this made any sense. I just know from my still camera that simply being indoors drastically changes what i have to do to achieve a good result, so i assumed it would be somewhat similar with camcorders.

With that in mind, imagine i was shooting a wedding video (which i'm actually doing in April this year), will the XL2 do a good job? I'll either be shooting inside of a mormon church (mostly fluorescent lighting) or at a reception center.

Chris, thanks for the comments. I've also read about that drifting issue with the XL1 and i've read that the XL2 has pretty much fixed it... it's good to know that it may still exist though, so thanks. Reviewers seem to have varying opinions on things like that.

Ash, thanks for your input, i know you have (or at least had) both the XL2 and the DVX. I'm glad the noise issue was brought to my attention before a purchase. I still can't believe i missed the issue from all the caps and video i've seen. About the "ease of use", i've learned over the years with software that i've bought for 3D work that the easier it is to use, the more limiting it becomes when you grow as an artist. I need a camera that will grow with me and the XL2 seems to be a good choice in that respect too.

In decent light and in 4:3 I can cut the DVX100b and XL2 seemlessly... if I use the DVX in stretch mode I have to differ the lengths of shots... For someone who is not a very skilled operator I will always recommend the DVX, it has a robust following and great resources. Both cameras will grow with you but the XL2 offers better 16:9 and more options for lenses, etc. Hard to miss with either, the determining factor for many is 4:3 vs 16:9



ash =o)

Keep in mind here Raji that, for a relativly new cameraoperator, you can't expect to just buy a fancy new 24p camera, pick it up, and shoot 24p or 30p and get good results. As you can see through all the posts here, shooting anything progressive or in 25p is a different world than 60i.

While all the cameras available in your price range will enable you to make great looking wedding videos and such, the primary factor in good video is having a good operator. A very experienced operator can take a crappy camera and still get good pictures. (Or, as I like to say, Lance Armstrong would still win the Tour De France even if he was riding a Huffy!) So, hopefully you have allready looked at all the posts concerning how to properly shoot and edit with progressive material.

Not mentioned yet are the camera ergonomics. The XL-2 wins here. You definatly want a shoulder mount camera for shooting weddings unless you'll be on sticks the whole time. Standing and hand-holding a camera all day will kill your back if it's not a shoulder mount like the XL-2.

As far as audio is concerned, check out the Sennheiser Evolution G2 wireless Lavs. Great sound, good price ($500 each @ B&H), and user selectible frequency's with a frequency scan feature. We had a lot of problems with other mics in the $500 range with RF interference and poor reception range, and the Sennheisers have been flawless so far.

My website is www.floridaracing.org . I currently shoot stills, but I want to get into making videos, as I have another guy that goes with me to most events that shoots the stills already.

I am sort of set on the canon XL1s, but would like your professional opinons since I am new to professional video, in which I do not mind learning to do.

Basically I will be shooting all sorts of auto racing, from drifting to drag racing. The events will mainly be during the day, but some will run into the evening and night.

I plan to run the camera on my shoulder or tripod, but plan to buy a boom/jib (with only vertical movement, since getting both vertical and horizontal movement booms run into the 1000s) some what soon after my camera purchase. I also might buy a cheap steadicam for walking with it in the pits and such.

I want the quality of the video to look as movie like as possible, with my budget being about 2200-2300 MAX (new or used, doesnt matter).

Thank you for your help,

Mark

Everyone with a reply is going to have a different opinion. I would say the XLs, but if you plan on running around with it on a Stedi Cam and a Jib, it might be a little to heavy.

Maybe a Panasonic DVX100 or Canon GL2?

hello mark,

got my xls about a year ago. shoot mostly of a tri pot. since i only have the viewfinder, i got myself a 7" mountable lcd, and a 14 field monitor.

greetings

Each major brand/camera does one thing better than the others. For the Canon, it is the longer than normal 20x zoom lens, which may be of real benefit for some types of car racing. I own a DVX, which is wider than average 10x zoom (useful for my type of work, keeps me from needing a WA adapter in many situations) , while Sony might be called an average 10x zoom.

OTOH, most people think that the DVX has more capabilities to be "film-like", whatever that means. It took me a couple of months to figure out which was best for me. They are all tradeoffs of one "better" for one "worse". Try some different ones if you can, maybe even hire some people (students?) cheap just to shoot some test footage with you, so you can see what they all do in your environment and which you like best. Also see how they feel in your hands. It may be cheaper to hire a student for a few hours than to rent a camera.