Hi Carla,

I may not be right in the end, but "look before you leap" is always a wise choice I think. Can you get hands-on with any of these cameras? I'm not going to recommend an exact model of camera as a first response, as that would be unfair on your decision-making process.

One big question is - what is your budget? AF100 + lens + tripod might be more than you are willing to pay.

A benefit of the smaller cameras is they can look a lot less intimidating to the people who you are interviewing. You can break down the JVC (take the handle off) and be left with a very small, compact camera that you can take anywhere, and not look like a TV crew.

For interviews, you could stick one of theses cameras on a simple Manfrotto 701HDV-type tripod and it will get you started, and may even be everything you'd ever need. You also have less to carry with a compact camera and simpler tripod. It's all part of the equation.

As always, if you can try a camera in a store, or borrow one, or find someone who'll let you fondle their camera(!) - it's the best way to see what suits you best.

Think of the editing too; the 50Mb/s highest output of the Canon is probably overkill for you, and may lead to headaches when editing - a lower bitrate would suffice on this camera. You also have to buy reasonably expensive Compact Flash cards, instead of the relatively affordable SDHC cards in the JVC - and the JVC records native Quicktime files if you have an Apple Mac, which can be useful.

Will the compact cameras give the same results as an AF100 or similar spec of camera? No, I don't think so. But do you _need_ that higher spec of camera? Only you can tell!

There is a lot to think about here! This is only scratching the surface... But ask away, one thing you're not going to be short of here are opinions.

Mike - Thanks for this additional info. It all helps me think this through. The editing is one reason I was leaning to the JVC, since I just got Final Cut Pro X. I am concerned about the intimidation factor, since I have interviewed elderly people who are even nervous about an audio recorder. But I guess the main concern I had with these Canon and JVC models is the frequently repeated remark in B&H reviews about being them bad in low light, since most of my interviews will be indoors. So I guess I will just have to be sure that I do the lighting setup properly!

I don't have one but from the people here on DVInfo I trust, the AF-100 a fine camera and does well in low light. It's a manual lens camera so you'll be zooming, focussing and exposing manually using the focus and exposure assist features of the camera. There's a learning curve to all cameras and each one has negatives.

I suggest you take the B&H reviews with a bit of a grain of salt. There's an AF-100 forum here with lots of information and users willing to help you figure out if it's good for you. They'll also be there to help you out if you decide to get one.

Thanks for letting me know about the AF-100 forum. I will check that out!

One thing about that though.... (and I am generalising, and not trying to offend)

If you go to the AF100 forum, the advice leans towards "buy an AF100"!

If you go to the NX5 forum, the advice leans towards "buy an NX5"!

etc.

The only exception is the NX70 forum, where the advice tends to be "don't buy an NX70"! <grin>

Yes, I have noticed that tendency in reviews :-). I would love to see a "top ten" type of rating somewhere. I know that would be of limited use, but does such a thing exist?

@Carla, don't outsource this decision. This isn't a toaster or a car. There are plusses and negatives to each camera and there are situations for which some cameras are not suitable and other situations they may ONLY suitable for.

A camera may be FANTASTIC for a certain kind of shoot and that's what people may rave about but in another type of shoot, be less than suitable. A feature that's a positive in one case may be a don't care in another. As you read DVInfo, you will hear cameras commonly referred to as tools in a toolbox and that you pick the right tool for the job.

All that said, from what you describe as your main use, how you describe yourself and the fact that on your own you avoided a very common pitfall and arrived at a reasonable selection (AF-100), I think it will be a good selection provided you are willing to climb the learning curve. From what I see and read, you will get stunning results. There are other cameras that wouldn't be good but if you outsource the decision, you may end up with a great camera according to someone else but for you, be a poor choice. BUT, if you don't want to learn to get the most out of your camera and want it to do everything then the AF-100 isn't a good choice. You won't get as good a result either and that's the rub: point and shoot camera to get bad-mediocre results vs a quality manual camera that with skill is capable of getting stunning results.

When you read the AF-100 forum, keep an eye out for posts by Olof Ekbergh. He's an AF-100 user with a bazillion years of production experience with all kinds of equipment. He and his wife run Westside AV and they are a sponsor of DVInfo.

That's a photo tripod. It will basically work but a video tripod has a bowl at the top and a head that fits in it. You level the head by loosening the head, swivel it until level and tighten. No leg length adjustments. ...

The Rode NTG-2 has a battery compartment. As long as your camera has phantom power (the af100 DOES), the battery is unneeded and making the thing bigger than you need.When you go to mount it on your camera someday, it'll start to get in the way. The NTG-1 is smaller (I have one) and the AT975 is even smaller (I wish I had one).



Just to clarify a little, there are plenty of very good video tripods that don't use bowl heads. On some of these you can buy a ball leveller to have the best of both worlds with a flat mount head.

And with the NTG2 mic, whether there is a battery installed or not, it's the same size. Adding the batt affects the weight, not the size, as the compartment would just be empty if you used Phantom. If the point was that a batt-compatible mic is bigger inherently than a different non-batt mic, that's usually true, but many people like having the versatility of two power choices.

...And with the NTG2 mic, whether there is a battery installed or not, it's the same size. Adding the batt affects the weight, not the size, ...

The NTG-2 is 10.94 inches and the NTG-1 is 8.54 inches long. My point was that the NTG-2 is longer than the NTG-1 and when phantom is available, the extra length unneeded and unwanted if/when camera mounted. I was not implying it was longer when the battery was in it.

@Carla, don't outsource this decision. This isn't a toaster or a car. There are plusses and negatives to each camera and there are situations for which some cameras are not suitable and other situations they may ONLY suitable for.

A camera may be FANTASTIC for a certain kind of shoot and that's what people may rave about but in another type of shoot, be less than suitable. A feature that's a positive in one case may be a don't care in another. As you read DVInfo, you will hear cameras commonly referred to as tools in a toolbox and that you pick the right tool for the job.

All that said, from what you describe as your main use, how you describe yourself and the fact that on your own you avoided a very common pitfall and arrived at a reasonable selection (AF-100), I think it will be a good selection provided you are willing to climb the learning curve. From what I see and read, you will get stunning results. There are other cameras that wouldn't be good but if you outsource the decision, you may end up with a great camera according to someone else but for you, be a poor choice. BUT, if you don't want to learn to get the most out of your camera and want it to do everything then the AF-100 isn't a good choice. You won't get as good a result either and that's the rub: point and shoot camera to get bad-mediocre results vs a quality manual camera that with skill is capable of getting stunning results.

When you read the AF-100 forum, keep an eye out for posts by Olof Ekbergh. He's an AF-100 user with a bazillion years of production experience with all kinds of equipment. He and his wife run Westside AV and they are a sponsor of DVInfo.

My challenge is trying to evaluate cameras when I know so little (hence the outsourcing impulse :-). Ideally I would have more experience before buying, so I may try renting for awhile. Thanks.

Hey guys,

Thought i'd post this here instead of starting a new thread. I know this question gets asked over and over again, but after sifting through a lot of threads and reviews, i'm still a bit lost.

I'm looking for a video camera for event videography and the occasional short film, budget of no more than $4000 or so. I have a XA10 currently, but i'm in need of a second camera.

I've been set on the Canon XF100 for its MXF file format and broadcast friendly 50mbit recording, but after doing a lot of reading it seems that there may be better options out there.

Any advice/tips appreciated! Cheers.

Have you considered a DSLR?

I used an XA10 as the master camera at a speaking event recently while shooting the tight stuff with a 5D2. With the 5D2 in the Natural picture style and the XA10 in Movie (or is it Cinema) and both with minimum contrast and sharpness, they cut together really well. Dialing both to the same color temperature really nailed it. The XA10 did a fixed wide shot and ran continuously, capturing audio. The 5D2 only runs for 12 minutes at a time, so it was great for the tight shots as I had to tilt and pan and could stop/restart the recording during transitions.

Clearly, the 5D2 doesn't work well at events on it's own, but the XA10 makes it quite viable - especially with its XLR inputs and phantom power. I just set the 5D2 audio to Auto and use it for sync.

Of course, a DSLR really shines for short films. The 12 minute limit isn't an issue. The artistic control over DOF is empowering. Light sensitivity simplifies setups. The range of available lenses is huge.

A 5D3 would eat most of your budget before lenses. A 5D2 with a Mosaic Engineering VAF anti-aliasing filter would leave more change on the table. A new T4i or 7D2 could be introduced soon. (Disclaimer: I have no inside info. Just reading tea leaves.) Just be aware that the camera and lenses make a package and that a full frame 5D2 would lead to a completely different set of lenses than a crop cam T4i.

Whether this is viable or not probably depends most on what types of events you shoot and how you shoot them. The more that the camera and subjects move, the more challenging it is for a DSLR. Shooting video of speakers at a podium is a piece of cake. A toddler who jumps up and down to stick her face in the camera will be tough to track. Style matters too. At weddings, out of focus moments can look romantic. At a court proceeding, an out of focus moment looks like a mistake.

The irony for events is that I find the 5D2 easier to operate than the XA10 for video. The 5D2 has a number of buttons and informative displays that make the settings easy to set and double check. I found the XA10 touchscreen menus to be much slower for accessing key items.

Anyway, a DSLR is worth a consideration, but it really depends on the type of events you shoot. For narrative short films, a DSLR is an easy choice.

Thanks for the reply Jon.

I should have mentioned that I have a 600D too. It's obviously not a 5D but in terms of picture quality I think it comes close enough.

I do tend to use my XA10 more often due to its simplicity compared to a DSLR. I love the control over the DoF with the 600D but I just find the post production workflow to be quite tedious.

Plus I shoot more events (sports, weddings, etc) than short films, so I think a video camera is the better choice. And I think the XA10 would be a great B camera if I had something with more buttons/manual controls and a better shooting format (AVCHD is good but i'd prefer MXF).


Thanks for the comments, much appreciated :D

Yeah, the 600D definitely qualifies as a DSLR. :)

Regarding post, have you tried NeoScene and Plural Eyes? If you transcode directly from the card to the hard drive, it's not much slower than copying AVCHD files - if you have a fast computer. I generally sync by hand, but PluralEyes can help simplify the audio part.

I generally think of the production part (keeping focus, rolling shutter if handheld, aliasing, changing lenses) as the bigger limits to event production, rather than workflow. For a 90-minute event, I can transcode and sync pretty quickly, compared to the time it takes to make creative decisions, add titles, transitions, color correct, and (especially) render. Then again, every minute saved can help!

The XF100 looks like a nice choice. It should match the XA10 well, and it has many of the buttons that I wish we had on our XA10. I haven't used it, but it's likely a really nice choice - unless some surprises appear next week at NAB...

Obvious ones in that price range you probably already looked at are the current crop of 3-ring, 3-chip solid state cameras from Sony (NX5u, AX2000) and Panasonic (AC130 and AC160). The 3-ring cameras tend to have the manual controls and non-menu buttons you probably refer to. There's also the idea of picking up a used EX1 in that price range. You have to go up to the $6K range to get 3-ring, 3-chip, solid state in the Canon line as they've abandoned the sub $5000 market with that kind of camera. You'll want to have decent control of the image so as to match it with your other cameras.

A newcomer in that price range is the just announced PMW-100 but it hasn't shipped so you won't find much other than Sony's press release stuff.

Interesting comments, thanks.

Yes i've looked at the cameras mentioned above. There's a lot of choice and the decision gets a bit daunting.

What is the general consensus on CMOS vs CCD? In my price range I could go for either one... but both seem to have pros and cons..

CCDs are really no longer being used in new cameras. Especially at this price point. There are however, old cameras like the tape based XH-A1s that is still being sold that uses a CCD. JVC has a CCD based solid state camera... the HM100 I think. I looked at it as a B-camera and decided against it because of it's poor low light performance. In it's day, it was well received and there are things about it you may like. But according to what I read it needs light. FYI, Luminous Landscape did a pretty thorough and seemingly independent review of it. I have not used it so caveat emptor.

Cameras with CCDs do not have as good low light performance as their equivalent CMOS endowed cameras (e.g. the Sony Z5 1/3" 3-CMOS was slightly better than the similarly equipped Canon A1s). Research will reveal that CMOS cameras have varying levels of "Rolling Shutter" effects. Some cameras are worse than others. Your 600D, XA10 and the XF100 are all CMOS. It's just the way modern cameras in this price range are made.

Thanks, that pretty much confirms what I thought. I personally don't have issues with rolling shutter on my XA10 unless there's camera flash or similar.. and even then I don't hate the effect.

I'm tossing up between the XF100, AC-130, and a couple of the Sony models at this stage.. I guess it's just a matter of research and hopefully making the right choice!

Do any cameras in that price range have any significant control over depth of field (in comparison to a DSLR for example)? My one complaint about the XA10 is a very wide DoF. I realise it's the nature of that type of camera with that type of lens/sensor, but it'd be nice to get something with a slightly shallower DoF.

The XF100 should be good enough for your work.

Caveat: Don't assume the 'broadcast-ready codec' of the XF100 as being acceptable. The codec definitely meets the high specifications of major broadcasters, but the sensor fails.

For shallower DOF you might want to stretch the budget and aim for an AF100 or FS100. If it is a paying business it might turn out to be a sound investment. You could sell one of your existing equipment to cover some costs.

Could you explain a bit more about what impact the sensor has on broadcast specifications?

I was under the impression that 1920x1080, 50mbit, 4:2:2 colour was all that really mattered.

Thanks for the input.

The specifications call for a minimum sensor size. In the case of BBC for example, cameras must have a sensor with a diagonal size of greater than 0.5 inches per CCD. The XF100 is 1/3 inch CCD and does not qualify. You'll need 1/2 or 2/3 inch 3 CCD cameras to meet that requirement.

You really didn't expect a $3,000 camera to be eligible for broadcast when the same company has a $16,000 monster that offers roughly the same codec, did you? AFAIK, the C300 is the cheapest production worthy broadcast-ready camera that does not require an external recorder. The Scarlet might be close, but I wouldn't go to the trouble of assembling a complex system with an unconventional workflow if all I wanted was HD broadcast, but that's just me.

Technical specifications for each network is available online. Some of these specs are from the dinosaur era and don't make sense in today's age, but are strictly enforced nonetheless. Networks work in tandem with camera manufacturers, and the latter have to protect their expensive babies, some of whom cost more than the Sony F65 or Arri Alexa.

Could you explain a bit more about what impact the sensor has on broadcast specifications? I was under the impression that 1920x1080, 50mbit, 4:2:2 colour was all that really mattered....

I think the matter was expressed well by Alister Chapman in a similar discussion about the PMW-100 which also has a single 1/3" chip and 4:2:2 CODEC:
http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/digital-video-industry-news/506594-new-sony-xdcam-pmw-100-a-4.html#post1725851

Hi,

I'm needing some advice, I'm wanting a 'cheap' camcorder for filming my little one. Just to keep a video diary '(of sorts) for her future. I've tried using a basic 100 pound camcorder but when i transfered the footage to disc, to show on a TV. The image quality was poor!!

Some, I'm needing a camcorder that has a reasonable quality when transfered to disc, to show on a TV, I don't mind if it using mini dv tape, i'd prefer one that records to a card.

thanks
andrew

Hi,

I'm needing some advice, I'm wanting a 'cheap' camcorder for filming my little one. Just to keep a video diary '(of sorts) for her future. I've tried using a basic 100 pound camcorder but when i transfered the footage to disc, to show on a TV. The image quality was poor!!

Some, I'm needing a camcorder that has a reasonable quality when transfered to disc, to show on a TV, I don't mind if it using mini dv tape, i'd prefer one that records to a card.

thanks
andrew

100 pounds is way too heavy to be convenient!
:-)

Seriously speaking, I occasionally use a Canon Vixia and the results are very nice. Good enough to intercut with my Sony EX1 without it being too obvious.

Greetings:

I need to recommend a camcorder for a friend who will be recording teacher's training seminars at NYC Education Department for the next three years. The sessions are held in an auditorium where light levels are about 80-100 Lux ( ¼ sec F 2.8 ISO 100 on my Sekonic meter)

Their budget is around $6000 for a camera which should have AF and along OIS will full manual controls.

I was thinking about suggesting either Sony EX-1R or Panasonic AF-100 with 14-42mm Panny lens.

Need your advice.

TIA

Sony FS100 with the sony 18-200 lens and the f2,8 wide angle sony lens with the super wide angle (11mm) adapter. Camera and both lenses should run around 6k.
That's what I shoot with.
Bruce
Yarock Productions (http://www.yarockvideo.com)

Thanks Bruce.

Initially, I was shying away from FS100 due to awkward form factor.

I'm not sure if the 18-200 would be quick enough aperture wise at F6.3/200mm for extensive indoor work. I mean, the camera can do it with gain and all, but I can't help but think that an EX1R would just be...easier? Not to mention the power zoom and faster lens. Just as long as you're fine with SxS cards.

I just got done doing some event work with AF100 and 70-200mm F2.8 and it is a CHALLENGE to keep speakers in focus with the large sensor. I take it these seminars don't necessarily need to be "pretty" but instead functional and more or less seamless. It will still look good! I'm also assuming that the person recording them doesn't necessary want to spend a ton of effort follow focusing, zooming, etc.

Thanks Nate.

I would suggest to them a couple of SD Card Adapters instead of SXS cards for EX1R.

Also I am looking into upcoming GY-HM650U.

JVC is touting F11 sensitivity at @2000 lux for 1/3' Sensors.

Not too many places have these cameras in stock.

Is samy's camera a reliable place?

Looking to upgrade to a more professional camcorder. I am using a Sony HDR-CX 550V now but as do more projects thank to my mother in-law pass the word out to all her relatives and after completing some vacations and my Mother in-law 70th Birthday I see that I need a better camcorder. I do a lot of kids soccer and other sports Air shows special events etc. I would like to keep the price below $3600. But if I have to save some more so be it. Looking at the Panasonic AG-AC130 Sony HDR AX2000 and the Canon XF 105. Would love to here from others who may own these cameras what is the advantage and this advantage of the three. My editing system is Premier Pro CS6 But also have Avid Media Composer 6 on my system also.

Sara...I rely on B&H for my camera purchases. Living in NYC, you can actually GO there, you lucky girl.

i have a 'A' and 'B' cam, mostly for weddings and stuff, what i'm considering is a third camera locked off high up mostly.
I'm looking at the new GoPro3 but having some difficulty on deciding if it should be a 'Black Edition' or 'Silver Edition' anyone looking at these?

ok
just answering my own 'which camera should I buy' question and i gotta say, in light of some talk of the cameras not working too well, i'm deferring any thoughts about GoPro for a few months at this stage, maybe might look at Sony's offering instead.
;-)

Hi all,

I currently own a Sony Z1 which I use primarily to film dance concerts / events (wife is a dance teacher!), so basically stage lighting / indoor / low light, strobes, smoke, zoom, movement, etc. Often need to manually lock / set focus, adjust gain, exposure, etc (on the fly - usually don't know in advance what I will be presented with - sometimes just end up in full auto!), and also make reasonable use of the manual audio controls with various feeds from mic, line in, etc (again, can adjust a lot on the fly depending on backing track volumes, singing, etc). Overall happy with the Z1, just getting on a bit now (1100 drum hours), tapeless would be nice, and looking for something full HD and improved picture quality.

I've read through a lot of posts, brochures, etc, and I think the equivalent replacement I'm looking at is the HXR NX5P. Yes? Same / better picture quality? Sharper / better in low light? Does it have the same level of manual controls? I also saw the HDR AX2000, which appeared a similar model, but lacking the manual controls? Anything I should know about the AVCHD recording format - limitations? I often need to record up to 90 minutes with no break, and sometimes up to 2 hours. Is there any other camera I should look at? Mostly just want to be sure I'll have the same features / controls as the Z1 (or better), and that I'm not taking a backwards step anywhere.

Thanks in advance,

Peter.

The NX5 seems to be what you're looking for.

As far as other models to consider are Panasonic's AG-AC160 or JVC's GY-HM600. They are newer than the NX5 and I believe they offer a small low-light advantage over the NX5.

I've read through a lot of posts, brochures, etc, and I think the equivalent replacement I'm looking at is the HXR NX5P. Yes? Same / better picture quality? Sharper / better in low light? Does it have the same level of manual controls? I also saw the HDR AX2000, which appeared a similar model, but lacking the manual controls?

Think of the NX5 as the tapeless Z1 and of the AX2000 as the tapeless FX1. The AX2000 has plenty of manual controls, the NX5 has a few more, plus the HXR-FMU128 flash memory recorder, which might just be you ticket to looong hours of non-stop recording.

AVCHD is more taxing on your editing system but if you have a fairly up to date, say Intel i7 based PC, you should be good to switch.

Thanks guys for the quick responses.

I went and looked at an NX5 today, and like you say, it is basically a tapeless Z1 - so exactly what I am after! The flash unit looks nice, but expensive, I will think about that one. I'll just stock up on SD cards for now. All the other controls are very familiar, and it looks like the correct camera for me to move to next.

I'm hoping my PC will be good for editing, I just updated it all 6 months ago with an i7, 32GB ram, Quadro 2000 video card, etc - if I'm underpowered with that, I'm in trouble.

Thanks again,

Peter.

You may want to look at the new FDR-AX1 that will come out next month. It looks to have better performance than the NX5U. XAVCS codec at 50Mbps for 1920x108 and will do 60P too. Bonus it will do 4K for you to crop from. XQD cards are more expensive than SD cards but a firmware upgrade next year will bring AVCHD to the FDR-AX1 too. I edit 4 track multicam native AVCHD with Edius no problem on a system not quite as powerful as yours.

Ron Evans

Hello All,

Looking at buying some cameras, I live in Australia, was looking at the Sony HXR-NX3, was using one a couple weeks ago and liked the unit, I am currently using a few HVR-Z7's, but am expanding more and would like this unit as my next model.

If anyone would suggest another model go for it, I have used Canon's, Panasonic's and Sony cams over the years, but prefer the Sony layout more so.

Another question also, I was looking at buying from from the USA, as some of those companies sell PAL units now. I can buy the unit in Australia for around $4.1k or buy from USA for around $3.2k, and that's with duty fees added.

Would Sony service it in Australia even if I bought it in the USA if it had an issue?

Thanks.

My understanding is overseas units would not be serviced. You would need to send a USA unit back to the USA.

Three years ago I took a year to buy a camera. Many considerations.

I picked the Panasonic AG-AC160A which I still like because of its 22x zoom. At the time (3 years ago) I did a lot of theater work where I had to be 65 feet from the stage.

My projects today have more of a focus on interviews/documentaries so today I might go for the Panasonic DVX-200 4K camera.

I know my troubles will begin once I go to 4K (more hard disks, longer rendering times etc) so I plan to stick with the 160 as long as possible.

Now that the pricing for the NX100 is out at $1,699, that's a very very nice price for a traditional form run and gun camcorder with 1" sensor providing shallow DOF, while maintaining plenty of external buttons and 3 rings.

Sony HXR-NX100 Full HD NXCAM Camcorder HXR-NX100 B&H Photo Video

I'll probably sell my NX5 and get 2 of the NX100s.

NX100 anyone using this yet?
Details on good or bad?

I am not 100% plugged in, but I don't believe the NX100 has shipped yet. I'm interested in it as a 2nd cam to my FS5.

I received the NX100 a couple of day ago and after a quick test, it does not appear to even match the AC90 for sensitivity... appear noticeably darker open at 0dB.

[REVISION: Another quick test showed NX100 to be slightly better... about 1/3 stop estimate.]

ax100 vs x70 vs xa20 vs xf200

A theoretical discussion:
During my last vacation, my little Canon ZR40 proved woefully underpowered. Not wide enough lens, not enough low light picture, so-so sound. The only thing it was really good at was being small enough to put in my cargo pants pocket and shoot inconspicuously in places I maybe shouldn't have been shooting.

This is what I'm looking for in a travel camera:
Very good picture quality.
A wider lens.
Big telephoto not as important, but a good image stabilizer is.
Very good low light performance.
Good sound with the on-board mic.
Small size is preferable, but if it won't fit in my pocket (and I realize it likely won't) then I don't care how big it is -up to a point (XL2 too big).
Must have shoe mount.
Some manual control would be sweet.
HDV would be nice for future considerations, but not essential since it limits my choices.
Widescreen would be nice, but not essential.
24p not needed.

What would my perfect travel/vacation video camera be?

apple iphone 5s :) funny how things have progressed in 12 years

Sony AX53 or really small FDR-X3000 or HDR-AS300 BOSS stabilizers for excellent stabilization and good picture quality

Trying to decide on a camera for short films, documentary and youtube. It's BMPCC 4K vs. Fujifilm X-T3. I know the X-T3 has a 30 minute record limit, but I can work around that since it is $999 ($500 off).
This is a comparison I found on Youtube that has me leaning BMPCC 4K. What are your thoughts?

BMPCC 4K vs FUJIFILM XT3 - YouTube

Sorry about the other thread