Will i be disappointed with the Lux 4 low light of the FX7 when shooting weddings? I would be coming from the Lux rating of 1 with the VX2100. I use the Sony HVL video light during most receptions anyway, will this compensate enough?

Thanks all.

Hi Darryn

I use my Panasonics (1/4" chips) with a light and also my big sensor Sony also with a light...It's much better to get good footage and using a light for me is no big deal. Go for it!!

However I have found that the PowerLED lights are way better to use (I have a 6 and an 8 LED...Models 5010A and 5080) and on my Sony F770 batteries they last all night.

Chris

The FX7 sensors are 1/4", it's not much of a camera for wedding work. It's poor in low light and it's not even a native 16X9 sensor. You can certainly do better. I had one. Shot one wedding with it and got rid of mine at a loss, was happy to get rid of it. In a dark church you cannot use light and the camera stinks in low light.

Thanks Chris, great to hear. These powerLED lights give a broader light, is that why you like them? Just curious...

The FX7 sensors are 1/4", it's not much of a camera for wedding work. It's poor in low light and it's not even a native 16X9 sensor. You can certainly do better. I had one. Shot one wedding with it and got rid of mine at a loss, was happy to get rid of it. In a dark church you cannot use light and the camera stinks in low light.

Any suggestions in the $1000 used range, I gotta get 2 and prefer Sony and tape

That's a fair point from Jeff!! Churches here are strict on lights!!!

Why still tape??? I has hesitant a few years back too and you will save a lot of money not having to buy tapes and have long capture times.

Stay away from the HC1500 and MC2000 ..they only have a single sensor and it's bad in low light!!

Under $1K for wedding cameras will be a tough call ... even used!!

Chris

With such a tight budget you might consider a handicam, have a look at one of my videos, the first 01:30 is shot with 2 sony cx730 and one sony xr520 and starting from 02:55 the speeches where also done with 2 sony cx730's. Also the Indian ceremony was shot with 2 sony cx730 (all steadicam shots are with a dslr)

Those new Sony's are capable of providing you with a high quality image and they will blow away the fx7 in low light, they even rival my dslr with a f1.4 lens at 1600 iso as long as you don't zoom in because they ramp very quickly, but wide open they can see in the dark.

Password for the video is noa5
Private Video on Vimeo

We went from the VX2100 to the FX1 (very similar to the FX7) and it wasnt a problem at all. Dont forget that the VX2100 rating of 1 LUX is in the special low light mode which has a frame rate of 12fps so the chances are you never actually used its 1 lux capability.

You will be just fine. You might want to look at some light, even a 20watt will help you no end.

If you operate the camera in full manual and really understand it you will be amazed at the results you can achieve.

Heres the last thing we ever shot on the FX1 before moving to all DSLR. Password: fx1

Private Video on Vimeo

I tend to support Noa. I moved from my FX1 to my NX5U partly because the little Sony cameras ( SR11 and XR500 at the time) made it look like the consumer camera. Secondly I shoot theatre ( always low light mixed with high contrast coloured lights ) and the AVCHD did a better job than HDV in lots of situations. The XR500 was noticeably sharper than the FX1 at a quarter of the price. The other nice thing moving away from tape was I can go to a show and not have to worry about tape changing or battery changing as all my cameras would happily record for more than 4 hours, the small ones closer to 6 hours. The other nice thing moving away from tape is the transfer to PC for editing. I can transfer the files from 4 cameras used in the show to the PC in about an hour. When I was all tape this was a days job !!!!! However moving away from tape means a solid backup routine. I use LTO3 data tape about close to your budget !!! However SD cards are close to tape in cost.

I use the little Sony's unattended most of the time and they do a great job in all sorts of situations. Like Noa says at wide angle they see in the dark.

Ron Evans

I think it's all a matter of preference, I have seen and used them all, the vx2100, the fx1, the fx1000 and if you want a level of controll and a camera of some size, then a second hand fx1 or even better a fx1000 (I you want to stay in the sony camp) will serve you very well. But with such a low budget then I think the fx1 would be the only option. The fx1 delivers a very nice image in good light with beautifull color but it suxs in low light. I think we have to be honest here that it is a first generation hdv camera and it is no match at all for today's generation of cameras in low light or even my little cx730.

Another thing to consider with buying such older camera's is warranty, because there isn't any, if there is a problem you might be quickly looking at repairing costs half the prize of what you have paid for it.

I have adapted very well now to shooting with handicams, I do use dslr's as well but the new small sony handicams are little wonders, they don't have the same resolution a ex1 can deliver and for that you might be better of buying a Panasonic but the clean image at very high gains, the very wide angle lens, the amazing stabilisation, the nice colour right out of the box and the very good auto controlls (if you would need them) have made me a fan.

I easily can carry several in a backpack, do multicam shots on my own and if one would get stolen or gets damaged I don't have to break the bank to get a new one. The video I posted is such a 3 cam example in the church with 2 camera's in full auto.
I did buy one small and very cheap shoulder support and a loupe to attach to the viewfinder for handheld work so I have a bit bigger size of camera to hold onto and I never could get that stable footage handheld with my xh-a1.

For me at least they have been the best small investment yet and certainly something to consider if you are buying on a budget.

Darryn, do you prefer tape simply because you haven't tried tapeless, or had much luck?

As Noa says, cameras like the Canon HF G10 blow away the FX7 and FX1. I had three VX2100s, the PD150, the FX7, the FX1 and and three FX1000s. I have shot with them all extensively.

The HF G10 blows all of the above cameras away, in my opinion, and there is the XA10 for more manual control and pro audio.

If you must stick with the tapes, I also suggest to go with the FX1 and you're at least getting 1/3" sensors. The FX1 is a fine camera, but compared to the VX2100 you will most definitely be disappointed, but it can't be helped. I went from the VX2100 to the FX1000 and was severely bummed out. The VX2100 is still the king of low light, it was the best camera, in my opinion, for wedding work. SO amazing in low light.

Eventually you do learn to work with the HD cameras, but it is a shock leaving behind the VX2100. Best of luck.

Dont forget that the VX2100 rating of 1 LUX is in the special low light mode which has a frame rate of 12fps so the chances are you never actually used its 1 lux capability.

This is certainly got my wheels spinning again, I did not know this and I do NOT shoot in low light mode! I know from experience what i can get away with when shooting the VX in low light and have been using this in my amateur-analysis when discounting models stating 3 or 4 lux. Is there a lux rating I do not know about when the VX is not in low light mode?

My VX has never used a light at a ceremony and has always provided great footage and I only add the light once they dim the lights at the reception. I just need a lateral move from the VX to HD, ideally in the Sony brand. If the VX had an HD button I would be all set :)

Darryn I think the fx7 would be a massive compromise for you. I would wait until your budget could handle getting the right camera for you rather than compromising. Especially if it is your livelihood.
Bill

Honestly, and I know it may not sound very professional, I would have a hard time using the smaller cams in the business of shooting weddings. It may even be a male thing, but the image of the bigger camera makes me "feel" like a pro even though I only scratch the surface of its capabilities. Last week I picked up a Vixia HF R300 for some different projects and I stared at it for hours thinking this could actually do the trick! While slightly embarrassing to admit, I only touch 2 buttons all day at weddings, start and zoom. I am in full auto mode, connect a beachtek adapter for my shotgun and lav mics for ceremony only, and that's it.

My biggest technical-spec requirement is the lux rating and I base that on my experience with the VX. I can get away with lack of XLR but just thought they would be convenient. Was sticking with sony since I have a gazzilion batteries. Sticking with tape due to my silly-workflow, but I am used to it. I like having 4 1-hour files when it comes to editing, I am not used to having the hundreds of files when importing digital files.

Sorry to ramble on, just had no idea that upgrading would be so taxing on the brain.

Well, I had that same feeling as I have been shooting with a Canon xh-a1 before and I know you don't have to show up on a corporate shoot with a handicam but you can at a wedding, that's why I showed you the trailer to see these camera's do perform and in my case outclass my xh-a1 in almost every aspect when it comes to image quality. My clients also choose me for what they see on my site or what I show them as demo at my place and what they hear from other people I worked for and not for what I shoot with, I have had not one client refusing me because of the camera's I use and for me it's a win win situation, low investment and high enough quality. If you have such a tight budget you better think twice before spending your money on a 5 to 7 year old camera.

It may even be a male thing, but the image of the bigger camera makes me "feel" like a pro even though I only scratch the surface of its capabilities

It's all between the ears, trust me, it's not the image of how you look like that matters but what you eventually deliver to your customers. :)

Darryn I now have less files to deal with going to digital AVCHD than with tape. For most of the shows I do I would need to change tapes so for a 2 hour or so show I would often have 4 tapes from each camera, 2 for each Act often changed to make sure I didn't miss anything at the end of the act even if a 1 hour tape would do. Then I would have the problem of syncing these tapes since I lost some time changing tapes and would need to change tapes at different times in the different cameras etc etc. Now I have just 1 file for each act from each camera. Audio sync seems more accurate than with tape etc etc. Even though the cameras record to FAT32 I always use the Sony transfer utilities so only ever see the clips defined by the start and stop of the camera. So for a show its the whole act on each camera and sync is thus a lot simpler than tape. The NLE's I have ( Edius, Vegas and CS6 ) will all bring the AVCHD files onto the time line in order so having lots makes no difference anyway.

You may also run into the problem that the quests will shoot better video with their Compact cameras or cell phones !!! I have just got a Sony HX30V camera and it shoots lovely video at1920x1080 60P that matches or is better than my CX700 !!! Also my Sony Xperia T cell phone also shoots nice video too !!!

Like Noa says its not what you use its what you deliver that counts.

Ron Evans

Darryn,

From a biz standpoint, you need to look at the cost and amortization - you've probably "used up" your 2100's, although you can probably sell them for "something" to put towards your new equipment.

As Noa points out, a top end consumer Sony/Canon/Panasonic will likely smoke a several year old "pro" camera. Since you need a minimum of two cameras, you should consider whether "investment" in older models that are already showing their age is preferable to buying somethign more "state of the art". FWIW, the improvements in the top end consumer models have been getting smaller and smaller, and indeed the Sony "new" cameras announced have been cut back - the high end "consumer" cam is being killed by cell phones and still cameras like the HX30 (and Sony killed most or all of their higher end still cams this year too... dang cell phones and tablets!).

You can get some EXCELLENT HD image aquisition devices pretty cheap if you know what to look for, and it's not all about size. You probably should look at the "small handycams" thread...


The FX7 actually was discontinued once, and brought back... it's a good handling camera, I'd love to see it revived in a 4K format (yeah, "HD" is so old hat already <wink>), but it's going to struggle in low light (the suggestion to drop ahutter from 60 to 30 works fairly well), and you are talking about a camera that was well regarded when it first arived on the scene... but is now getting pretty long in the tooth.

I understand the goal of not replacing all the accessories (do that exact same thing with my Handycams!), but you're looking at a major changeover (sort of wondering if you have factored in computer upgrades for HDV or AVCHD, depending on how big a jump you decide to take), a few extra batteries and some big memory cards are not going to be your main concern.

The tapeless workflow is painless for the most part, so don't let that freak you out, newer cameras can give you a LOT better image quality, and you won't regret if, even if you only go to an FX7... but don't get it side by side with a 2011/2012 pocket P&S or Handycam...

Honestly, and I know it may not sound very professional, I would have a hard time using the smaller cams in the business of shooting weddings. It may even be a male thing, but the image of the bigger camera makes me "feel" like a pro even though I only scratch the surface of its capabilities. Last week I picked up a Vixia HF R300 for some different projects and I stared at it for hours thinking this could actually do the trick! While slightly embarrassing to admit, I only touch 2 buttons all day at weddings, start and zoom. I am in full auto mode, connect a beachtek adapter for my shotgun and lav mics for ceremony only, and that's it..

Darryn I'm ditching my Sony Z1/FX1 after many years - they are 1st gen HDV and show it - very poor/noisy/soft images in low light.

If your budget is $1,000 buy a used Panny TM900 (I have two of them) or failing that an X900 - they are great in low light - shoot 1080/60p and have nice wide lenses (x900 slightly wider)

Panasonic TM900 Full HD 1920x1080p 3D Ready Camcorder: Amazon.co.uk: Camera & Photo


Put it in a Gearbox cage for extra satabilization

GearBox GB-1 - Video Accessory Cage by PNC | Photography and Cinema - Store (http://www.photographyandcinema.com/products/gearbox-video-camera-accessory-cage)

Mount a rode VideoMic

Rode VideoMic Shotgun Microphone | DV247 (http://www.dv247.com/microphones/rode-videomic-shotgun-microphone--26256?gclid=CKrQk67M-7QCFSHHtAodtnoATg)

Put it all on a decent monopod

Manfrotto 560B-1 Fluid Base Video Monopod - Monopods - Bags & Tripods - Harrison Cameras (http://www.harrisoncameras.co.uk/Bags-and-Tripods/Monopods/Manfrotto-560B-1-Fluid-Base-Video-Monopod_MAN-560B-1.htm?gclid=CMu21c3M-7QCFWbKtAodMCEAGA)

You will get great footage and will look a little more like a pro than just using a small handycam - all for under $1000

+ 1

I got a very cheap shoulder mount on ebay with rails and a shoulder pad to attach a beachtek adaper and the camera onto, I also can slide a magnifying loupe onto the viewfinder so I can use the setup as a mini shouldercamera (DSLR Mini Shoulder Pad Rig Mount Rails with Handles for Sony T3i T2i GH2 D60 D90 | eBay (http://www.ebay.com/itm/DSLR-Mini-Shoulder-Pad-Rig-Mount-Rails-Handles-Sony-T3i-T2i-GH2-D60-D90-/370625824934?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item564b0548a6) it's the topleft image, seems to not be available anymore)

The handheld shot in the video I posted where I stand right behind the priest was done with this shoulder mount, you can't get much more stable then that.

I know I spoke about the image you project when holding a camera, whether it's a shouldercamera or handicam doesn't matter I was not entirely honest, but only a little bit :) Now I don't care about the fact that I use the handicams, whether it's on a tripod or just handheld and I don't care much about what people might think at a wedding. Because I know they do deliver that's all that matters to me but, well, almost.

The shouldermount I got for 2 reasons, one is that it does provide me with extra stabilisation when filming handheld but the second one is that I wanted it when filming in church, there is a point where I"m out in the open during the vows and ring exchange and where I need to be filming handheld, in Belgian churches you always stand just behind the priest and the couple at that moment, like in the video I posted.

At that point everyone in church could see me handholding the camera (when I didn't have the rig yet) and it felt a bit "awkward" standing there holding the camera in front of me like an "amateur"' would do on holiday and I have to admit, only that moment gave me a uncomfortable feeling even if the footage turned out great.

So I just got the small shouldermount to take away that last doubt.

Honestly, and I know it may not sound very professional, I would have a hard time using the smaller cams in the business of shooting weddings.

The HF R300 is good, but noticably better is the step-up HF M500 which actually uses the same sensor as the expensive XF100. You can always market the small camera size as a technological innovation that is less intrusive to the wedding ceremony! On the other hand, people more easily understand the intrusion of someone holding a professional looking camera. In my experience it is possible to obtain very nice widescreen SD from noisy HD source. However, given the currrent prevalence of bluray disks in the discount stores, in only a few years it is likely that widescreen DVD will not be enough to satisfy many customers.

If your budget is $1,000 buy a used Panny TM900 (I have two of them) or failing that an X900 - they are great in low light - shoot 1080/60p and have nice wide lenses (x900 slightly wider)What advantages does the TM900 have over the newer X900? It seems crazy to pay more for a used camcorder in preference to a new one with warranty. My understanding is that the cameras are very similar.

Nigel in various reviews the TM900 beats the X900 in low light performance - I scoured quite a few user forums as well

Panasonic HDC-TM900 Comparison - Panasonic HC-X900 Camcorder Review (http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Panasonic-HC-X900-Camcorder-Review/Panasonic-HDC-TM900-Comparison.htm)

Low light performance is a big deal for me after years with the Z1/FX1 so my B cameras need to have that edge - plus I got a good deal on 2 refurbished units from amazon with 3 month guarantees - Also Darryn's budget is $1,000 - a new X900 will soak most of that up with nothing left over for extras.

There's probably not that much in it really but every little helps - the images from the TM900 are great - 1080/50p and 32GB internal capacity - plus they're nice and descreet - great for on top of a light stand!

Pete

Only issue I have with the TM900 is that has 3X 1/4.1 sensors. My research has show that smaller sensors optimized for photos, those with a high pixel density such as the Panasonic cameras, suffer a loss of image quality for video. The developers of the GH3 camera discussed this when talking about the development of the GH3 camera. Consumers want to see a high pixel count for photos, and great video at the same time. Too high of a pixel count fitted onto a tiny 1/4" sensor is not a good thing and video will suffer from it.

Smaller sensors means less dynamic range, and it shows with footage I've seen from the TM700/900. We can't get around physics with these tiny sensors. To me 1/3" is a minimum requirement for any camera. We mustn't ignore that 1/3" is going to collect more light, all things being equal than a 1/4" sensor, and 3X 1/4" do not equal a 3/4" sensor, it doesn't work that way.

The common misconception I hear people state is that three sensors is better than one. This is not necessarily true. It can be, but more often no it's not. It depends. I know my nearly 1" sensor DSLR style camera has much better dynamic range and light gathering ability than any camera I know with three 1/3" sensors.

My preference for a small video camera is one, newer 1/3" sensor, which has superior dynamic range, which means less blow outs, and better matching with my DSLR style camera. It also means, in this case, shooting up to 20db gain with no grain.

The 1/3" sensor of the Canon XA-10 and G10, which is the same sensor as used in the venerable XF-100 ($2795) is great in low light, has a high dynamic range, and is newer than the Panny sensor, unless the 900 sensor has been updated, and even so there is the 1/4.1 issue that cannot be ignored.

TM900/700 users tend to be rabid fans about their cameras, so I know this is a sticky wicket, but felt like tossing this in the mix for consideration.

You're right of course Jeff - I was just trying to get Darryn some 'bang for his buck' - he only has $1,000 budget after all - although he can probably get the Legria G10 but not have any change left - The TM900 will still give him change to spare and 50p compared to the canon 25p!

All that said I only use the Pannys as extra cameras to my Sony EA50 - probably amounting to less than 5% of the shots in my finished weddings.

Pete

Your recommendation is sound, of course Peter, the TM900 is a fine camera at a ridiculously low price point for it's features. Personally, I have had such disappointing results with the two 1/4" sensored cameras that I've owned I am really against them for myself.

The TM900 is not popular for no reason, it is a well-loved camera with a good reputation, but I also believe a video is not stronger than it's weakest link. I have had to depend on backup footage so many times, and now that I deliver Bluray discs with every wedding, every shortcoming shows up in such glaring detail.

But you're right, for the money the camera is a bargain and it gets the job done, even if it cannot quite measure up to the quality of the main cameras.

Nigel in various reviews the TM900 beats the X900 in low light performance - I scoured quite a few user forums as well

Panasonic HDC-TM900 Comparison - Panasonic HC-X900 Camcorder Review (http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Panasonic-HC-X900-Camcorder-Review/Panasonic-HDC-TM900-Comparison.htm)

Low light performance is a big deal for me after years with the Z1/FX1 so my B cameras need to have that edge - plus I got a good deal on 2 refurbished units from amazon with 3 month guarantees - Also Darryn's budget is $1,000 - a new X900 will soak most of that up with nothing left over for extras.The reviews all seem to say that there is precious little difference between the TM900 & X900 except the latter has a wider angle lens. The only complaint in the reviews that I have read is that there is so little difference in quality & performance between the older & newer models.

The X900M is currently $743.99 from Amazon which is well under budget

The Upcoming VIXIA HF G20 with improved low light improvement over the XA10 and G10 will be sold for MSRP for $1099.

It does cost more, it does not have 1080 60p ):

Supposed to be available February.