I just saw an older thread that mentioned using a cheap dv cam for capturing tapes to hard disk for editing. I've always believed (read it somewhere) that it's best to use the camera that was used to record the tape in order to get the max possible quality image for editing. My target is a commercial DVD, so I want to preserve max possible image quality.

So the question is: is head wear really such a concern that it's worth spending the money for a dedicated DV deck for capture (or some "cheaper camera")?

Then I supposed the next question is: is the idea that the recording camera will render the best possible captured image a fallacy?

This has been gone over in "The long black line", but for a quick answer:

You don't loose quality by capturing from a cheap deck. It's digital, so as long as you use a MiniDV camera to capture you will get the exact same data that came from the XL. That includes 24p, 16:9 info, etc.

Whether a deck or cheap cam is "worth it" is up to you... I don't think your XL2 will up and die from being used for capture. OTOH I don't capture with mine, I have smaller cameras that were either cheap or quit taking good pictures so I use them for capture. I thought about buying a deck but was unsure how long I'd really be on MiniDV and it would cost more then a cheap camera that I can use for taking pictures.

Right, the recording camera doesn't make a difference in MiniDV. There are some times that a recorded tape will only play on the camera that captured it. That is not normal, it's a serious problem with the camera. Copy the tape(s) before sending it off for service!

ps: that wasn't quick :D

Thanks Jeff!