It may be because the VX has been such a wildley popular camera for so long. It's picture quality has been pretty much the best in it's range for a while so many more have experience with it as opposed to the 80. If the picture quality and low light is as good as the 2000 then I think your are right the 80 has it easily beat. The 10x hurts though because I am used to 20x on the GL2. I wonder is a 2x piece of glass works well for the 80? It would make it heavier though and I use a flow pod and don't need any extra weight.

This site complares the low-light capabilities of the VX2000 and the DVX100:

http://www.bealecorner.com/dvx100/compare/index.html#lowlight

The DVX has gamma settings that the DVC80 does not, but I think it is reasonable to use the interlaced DVX100 shots as a basis for the DVC80's capabilities. Regardless, this will give you a general impression.

It looks like the VX2000 edges out the Panasonic by just a bit, but I guess it depends on how low your light will really be (depending on the location/church, etc). For me, the low-level difference was not enough to persuade me to get the Sony.

Unfortunately, for some of the reasons you mentioned, there is more written about the Panasonic DVX100 than the DVC80 -- you can use some of the DVX100 articles to help aid your decision, but the DVC80 is not just the DVX w/out progressive so take that information with a grain of salt.

I wish I had more hands-on experience w/ this cam and could offer more help -- I've used this cam at night, but in a very well-lit area.

Full size 3.5" lcd... xlr inputs with industry accepted "best sound of class" via good audio section (meaning actual circuitry)... Leica lens (I don't care if you say they only bought the name... every review says, "exceptional lens at this price")...

I always like Sony for reliability and reputation. I own Sony dv cams even now... but I'm still blown away by the dvx.

The '80 is close enough... which by the way, unless you're saving a TON off the dvx (over $600) I don't know why you wouldn't just get a dvx? But that's your baby... if you want the absolute best low-light get the Sony... for a slightly worse low-light you get a lot of great stuff with the Panny... I think too much goodness comes with the Panny to ignore it.

XLR inputs ALONE will prove to be a joy... not to mention the other stuff... you'll see.

<<<-- Originally posted by Matt Gettemeier :

The '80 is close enough... which by the way, unless you're saving a TON off the dvx (over $600) I don't know why you wouldn't just get a dvx? -->>>


At B&H, the DVX100 is $950 more than the DVC80 ($2350 vs $3300) -- making the DVC80 the same price at B&H as the VX2000 and sooo much more attractive (price wise) than the DVX100. I must say, though, that I had to talk myself out of spending that extra $950!

Also -- from what I've read, the added benefits of the DVX100 (24p, cine-gamma) only shine in controlled environments -- if you're making a movie, then that's great. But if Rob's just shooting weddings, though, he probably won't have too much control over his environment. Of course, this is an assumption on my part, feel free to rebuke.

After reading every post I could find I've ordered the 80. My only real concern is how I will handle 10x zoom. I'm used to the GL2 20x but everything else sounds pretty good. I'll add my $.02 cents comparing the 80 to the GL2 but I expect the 80 will surpass the GL2 a bit.

Just got the DVC-80 this afternoon. Have spent about 30 minutes so far with it. Testing in Auto mode side by side against my GL2 in Auto mode.

The picture is really my main interest so that is what I am going to mention. Some of my reason for getting the 80 was to improve on the low light capability of my GL2.

-I must say I was suprised at what a small difference there was in the low light quality between the 80 and the GL2. The 80 was only slightly better. I thought there would be a bigger difference with the larger chips.

-Also I found that backlit areas had a better contrast range with the GL2 over the 80.

-In wide shots detailed objects and letters have less defenition with the 80 than the GL2. I don't like that too much.

-Of course there is no red shift in the panasonic color. The color is definately superior in the Panasonic. It doesn't blow out certain colors and the colors are more true to life. There is a wider range of differenciation between colors in the Panasonic.

-The 80 is quite a bit heavier and less ergonomic that the GL2. I can forget about the camera when I'm using the GL2 but it feels like the 80 is a big brick. The eye piece is like a horses leg. Maybe I might not mind the weight and size if there were an increase in the picture quality but it's not there.

Please take these initial thought with a grain of salt as I just started checking it out. I'll spend more time with it this weekend. I am suprised and a little disappointed because I want to like the 80 more and the GL2 is nearly $600 cheaper at the moment. After I've had a chance to evaluate more I may end up just returning it for another GL2. We'll see.

Any feedback from y'all is always appreciated.

None of what you've said surprises me. I own the dvx100 and a gl2 and based on experience as well as some of the test data I've seen, the real benefit in terms of sharpness and resolution is when you are shooting in progressive mode on the DVX, something the dvc-80 doesnt do. In interlaced mode I would expect to see a marginally cleaner signal with marginally better light sensitivity, but no increase in sharpness

That you are seeing less resolution could be related to the larger chip, and your fstop. To do a test, try to have both camera's on manual in good lighting with an aperture hovering about f5.6 to f8. This would be the sweet spot in either lens, and should produce similar results.

My experience with the DVX has been that it has a more natural, neutral highlight than the gl2..can't be sure if the dvc80 is the same or not.

Remember, as has been said many times in this forumn, these camera's have much more in common than they have differences...if you see a comment that says that one camera has 10 times the resolution and infinitely better low-light capability...chances are the person saying it doesn't have both cameras in his or her hands.

I have found the DVX to be the most substantially improved camera on the market in terms of resolution, but this is only because it is the only progressive scan camera on the market...so in essence it is in it's own class. Yet even with this statement we recently shot a two camera setup with the gl2, and displayed the footage on an HD monitor...the difference between the two would only be noticed by the few of us who care about such things.

Barry

Thanks for the reply Barry. I have felt a little insecure about the GL2 picture or really it's low light capability and have had some VX2000 envy for a while, hearing rave reviews. Then when the 80 came out I thought I can have all the 2000 benefits and get great xlr inputs and get rid of the red shift. Maybe I've taking my GL2 for granted. I think I see that some of the evaluations discussing the image quality of one camera over another, in the class of camera we often talk about here really are like splitting hairs. Side by side comparisons are a good reality check when you can get the cameras in hand.

I wasn't blown away by the picture on the dvx at first. However after some tweaking and learning the controls I have found that it's the little details that make the dvx100/dvc80 a superior camera in it's price range(s).

Picture quality aside I can't imagine that you are not the least impressed with the fact that you now have: professional audio controls; the gl2 still uses 1/8" plugs. Sooner or later this will bite you in the rear (did me). Real manual lens. This is a close call because the Canon lens is excellent but you are stuck with the gummy servo focus. Larger camera. This is subjective but I like how the dvx feels. It's not front heavy but it's larger base allows a firm grip with my left hand for keeping the shot steady. The GL1/2 feels light not nearly as stable. Large flip out viewfinder. I'm also surprised you don't like the viewfinder. I hate the smaller consumer type viewfinders found on the gl1 and trv900. I wear glasses and always have a hard time getting my eye close enough to the diopter. Now if they would just put a b&w 1" crt it would be perfect.

Hey Mathew,

In response to your points let me explain how my use of the camera affects my thoughts...

I use a separate hard disc recorder for audio and do mostly weddings so I only have to sync the audio once in post. If I was doing a movie I would really need the xlr's with stopping and startng scenes multiple times. The 20x on the GL2 for me beats out the smoother zoom on the panasonic again because of wedding use rather than movie use. I can't always control where I am alowed to stand. For anything else you can set up your shot so the 10x limit of the panny is fine. I'm a little guy so weight matters and the panny is hard to manage when I am trying to use it with my flowpod. The two together are heavy. You are right it looks more professional, and the viewfinder is better although I'm ok with the GL2 viewfinder. I can't use the LCD cause the panny already uses A LOT of battery life.

I'm intrigued by the camera market, and in need of buying a camera for my job.

I was looking at the DVC80 and DVX100. Of course it's cool to have a 24p camera and progressive 30p too, but elsewhere, what would be the differences between the two?

I am interested mainly because the two cameras seem very "photographic". That is, the true manual focus, for instance, and all the on camera controls. That is important for my job.

The DVC80 has a manual focus too, doesnt it?

Emilio

Here's the Panasonic site's informational pages on the DVC80 (http://www.panasonic.com/PBDS/subcat/Products/cams_ccorders/f_ag-dvc80.html).

I love my DVX 100. But if it weren't for 24/30p, I would have probably bought a GL-2.

<<<-- Originally posted by Barry Goyette : None of what you've said surprises me. I own the dvx100 and a gl2 and based on experience as well as some of the test data I've seen, the real benefit in terms of sharpness and resolution is when you are shooting in progressive mode on the DVX, something the dvc-80 doesnt do. In interlaced mode I would expect to see a marginally cleaner signal with marginally better light sensitivity, but no increase in sharpness

That you are seeing less resolution could be related to the larger chip, and your fstop. To do a test, try to have both camera's on manual in good lighting with an aperture hovering about f5.6 to f8. This would be the sweet spot in either lens, and should produce similar results.

My experience with the DVX has been that it has a more natural, neutral highlight than the gl2..can't be sure if the dvc80 is the same or not.

Remember, as has been said many times in this forumn, these camera's have much more in common than they have differences...if you see a comment that says that one camera has 10 times the resolution and infinitely better low-light capability...chances are the person saying it doesn't have both cameras in his or her hands.

I have found the DVX to be the most substantially improved camera on the market in terms of resolution, but this is only because it is the only progressive scan camera on the market...so in essence it is in it's own class. Yet even with this statement we recently shot a two camera setup with the gl2, and displayed the footage on an HD monitor...the difference between the two would only be noticed by the few of us who care about such things.
-->>>

Your comments sound very interesting to me, because the GL2 was the camera I had been considering to buy now. Later I would get a DVX100 to become my "A" camera.

But sometimes I wonder if that makes sense really. Have you used both cameras on the same shooting? Do the differences in color shift or resolution come up on the editing? How much can you adjust on any of them to make them click when inter-editing?

A third option had been the Sony PD-X10, but I read many comments to it's low light response or some artifacts on brilliant backgrounds.

What might be the best option?


Carlos

I've compared a lot these cameras and I'm almost buying the GL2. I want to share some information that usually gets overseen:


-While the DVC80 and DVX100 have wide lens and 10x zoom, the GL2 has a 20x zoom. (Even better than the XL1s!).
I prefer the zoom to the wide because an optional wide-lens is cheaper and easier to find than a zoom-lens. I find 10x falls short.

Zoom doesn't just allow to shoot far subjects. There is a lot of creative possibilities the way a bigger zoom 'flattens' the perspective.
Say your scene is a couple chatting on a cafe bar. So you want a good depth of field. If you shoot from too close, the other people at the background will appear too far (too small). You'd probably want to shoot from far, say, across the street, so people in the BG will appear 'closer' yet out of focus.
Well, this is not easy to explain in words. A clearer example, say you want to shot your subject dancing, the moon in background. The closer you go to your subject, the smaller the moon appears.
So you want to get as far as you can, and zoom the lens to have the moon as big as possible behind your subject. This is best achieved with the GL2, and as you are shooting the moon, you'll need a slow shutter speed, so go on.

-The pannasonics don't have slow shutter speeds, which the GL2 has. This allows you to make bright night pictures using a tripod. Pictures from the big city buildings, for instance. And while you are taking pictures on a tripod, you could be interested on interval recording, too. So keep reading <g>

-The DVC80 lacks interval recording, for shooting time-lapse images. This is very specific but useful in my case because my main job are commercials. I'll want to create some nice time lapse pictures of flowers brroming, the sky changing during the day... people going in and out the bank, or the shop, during an entire afternoon...

Join this, the 20x and the slow shutter speed and you'll have very bright night shots from the big city buildings over the entire night, with lights on the windows going on and off, the 20x full moon passing fast behind the buildings, and finally the morning sunlight overexposing the take to a white. Impressive.


Then there are these, less important differences IMO:

-If audio is important the pannasonics have XLR inputs, although it's important to know that the GL2, with a miniplug stereo, has total manual audio level controls, also with 2 knobs. Then there's the XLR adapter, if it's really important.

-I'd like the GL2 had a zoom ring like the sony vx2000's, but its zoom is key driven like most prosumer camcorders.

-The DVC80 has a 3.5 inch LCD screen, and the GL2 has a 2.5 (like sony 150/2000)

-The DVC80 is very pretty for the video market. The GL2 looks a bit fancy to me. since 'image is everything' there are cases when this is important.



I'd like to have all the features from the GL2 in a DVC80 black body, but at the end of the road I prefer the GL2.

Emilio

Carlos,

Yes I have shot several scenes with both cameras (A-B situation, not comparisons of the same shot.) Surprisingly, the cameras have distinctly different renderings of color, and it was impossible in one situation to make them match under a typical interior daylight situation, to say one is better at color would be going too far, just that they definitely have different pallettes. In editing I was able to color correct enough to bring them into line.

Unfortunately the compression eats up the quality of both images, but you can view the scene at

http://www.ladyxfilms.com/theater/e15/episode_15.shtml

It's the third scene, with two characters having a conversation in a diner

The remainder of the film was shot with the DVX.

Barry

Barry I'll take a shot at guessing which cam is which. The tight shots of the guy in the green shirt was with the GL2?

Today's unseasonably warm 65 degree temp led me outside to my favorite video hunting grounds, Crotona Park, Bronx NYC....to gather footage of hawks who have settled in NYC and made it their home...

...no 24P, no Cinegamma, just 60i large 3-chip DVC80 camcorder in hand (not even a tele lens add-on- just a Haze -1 fliter).....

...clicked the onboard 1/64 ND filter and setup with 1/500th shutter speed and waited.....spotted a few hawks when I noticed a single hawk that seemed to pick out her next prey......which appeared to be not more than 30 feet from me....some sort of bird.....sitting on a rock with DVC80 in hand and sitting there with my wife, this is what I got today.......

http://stevenunez.com/video/rtnov03.mov

To me, this personifies consumer DV....shoot what you want and remember it forever!

(I actually got the actual animal consumption but left it out in this case~!)

wheres the gore?? LOL

the music is erfect as well mate! good stuff..

nature is amazing

Thanks Peter.....the music is from one of the After Effects tutorials from a book's CD-rom......I believe it's an Art Beats sampler aiff.

For us non-pro's, this is what shooting is about.

After shooting 3 weddings with my new DVC-80, in varying locations and conditions, I can now report without hesitation that this camcorder surpasses my VX-2000 in several ways:

Imagery: Factory setting is cooler, more neutral, some say duller, but once you learn how to tweak settings imagery can match and surpass the Sony. To my eyes the Panny has "cleaner" video.

Low Light: Toss up. The Sony performs better in full Auto. The Panny will match the Sony's low light performance if you take the time to learn how to use it manually.

Lens: The Leica wide-angle zoom is ideal for tight spots, like 3-shot ceremony coverage, and small reception halls. With a manual/servo switch, the Leica performs more like a broadcast lens. Snap zooms anybody?

Audio: No contest here. The Panny wins hands down. Audio quality and control is superb. Using a combo of on-board mike and wireless set at 12 o'clock, audio never peaked once, even at close proximity to DJ speakers!

More Pros: All-black and very pro-looking; ergonomic and perfectly balanced; superior vtr control; great built-in microphone; scene-files; large (3.5") and very sharp built-in LCD screen.

Cons: Dull, unsharp, consumer-class viewfinder; useless headphone amplifier; 24 hour (military) time only; 10X zoom not long enough; sub-standard battery technology (Compared to Sony).

Price: Feature for feature, pound for pound, at $2,300 street price you just cannot beat the DVC-80 for the money. Like the ad says the DVC-80 gives you MORE BANG!

P.S. No, I do not work for Panasonic.

I'd much perfer the Sony's VTR control over the Panny's stupid joystick anyday!

No way- the Pan's "joystick" is an absolute joy to use....it's a plus in my book!

The DVC80 is awesome- I can't wait for the DVC30 with it's 16X zoom lens!!

<<<--

Audio: No contest here. The Panny wins hands down. Audio quality and control is superb. Using a combo of on-board mike and wireless set at 12 o'clock, audio never peaked once, even at close proximity to DJ speakers!

-->>>

How did you mix the wireless mic with the built-in mic signal without an external mixer? Is one panned right and the other panned left?

I'm thinking about buying the DVC80, but I want stereo sound, which requires a separate external stereo, my wireless receiver (mono), and a small mixer. Either that, or drop $400 on a Sony MP3 MiniDisc recorder at Guitar Center.

Tim,

The beauty of the Audio on the DVC80 is that you can assign the left channel, for example, to the excellent built-in mike, and your right channel to an external mike or line source. This arrangement will give you stereo audio without the aid of an external mixer.

<<<-- Originally posted by George Vallejo : Tim,

The beauty of the Audio on the DVC80 is that you can assign the left channel, for example, to the excellent built-in mike, and your right channel to an external mike or line source. This arrangement will give you stereo audio without the aid of an external mixer. -->>>
GV,

In your example, CH1 set to INT L is only recording half the stereo soundfield picked up by the built-in microphone, which defeats my purpose of recording true stereo ambient sound (both L and R channels from a stereo source) along with a mono signal from an external mic (panned either straight up the middle or routed to both L and R channels). Therefore I still think I'd need an external mixer.

On the other hand, if I wanted a to create mono mix in post, your recommendation would work just fine.

Right Tim, if you want to take three inputs and and have them all panned differently you are definetly going to need a mixer(with any camera), Or a multitrack recorder. With a multitrack you could work out your stereo field in post.

I've pretty well settled on that DVC80 cam, and worked up a system with an AT short shotgun and lavs, etc. But I dont' have a headphone solution. Of course we all know one weakness of the DVC80/DVX100 is the lack of headphone amp/vol. control.

A Shure FF33 or Sound Designs 302 mixer would be dandy, as mixers and headphone amps, but both are over $1k.

What headphone amp solutions have ya'll found/used for these cameras? I'd like at least two headphone outputs, and the ability to run at least two mics.

Thanks, in advance for your thougths and advice.

http://www.boosteroo.com/

~$30

Okay, I did a fairly extensive search for this topic...

I shoot legal video on a GL-1 with an outboard XLR adapter and audio meter. The GL-2 seems like a logical upgrade, but I'm also considering the DVC80. I've seen all the posts regarding feature comparisons, and most of my questions have been answered.

One final question remains, though. Does the DVC have a feature which allows you to permanantly burn the date/time onto the video track (not on the timecode track). I know you can dub down to a VTR with this information enabled, but...

TIA for the replys.

That's pretty neat, and the price is great. How do you handle volume control?

I actually have one of these and its great.. there is no volume control, basically an on and off. You can handle volume control by getting headphones with in line volume on the cord. It really boosts the audio, and also if you are working with a small crew the extra ports allows you to give everyone around the camera headphones. each port is indipendently amped so you dont need to worry about drops.

interesting.. but I dont think you can, at least I havnt found a way to do it.. given I have never found the need to. Most NLE's though have a layer you can add to give that info.

Thanks for the reply, Jarred. That's a drag that the DVC80 can't burn date/time onto the video clip. I was really leaning towards that camera to simplify my setup. The good news is that the pending DVC30 appears to have that feature; so maybe I'll wait a month or two to make the leap to a new camcorder.

With regards to putting the D/T in during post, the Uniform Rules for Trial Courts require the camera to burn this information at the time of the original recording. They also say something about burning the elapsed time of the recording, too. Most folks I know don't do that portion, though.

yeah.. i guess panasonic forgot about you guys.. that time and date thing for the most part is considerd a home movie thing.

I know that the DVX100 you can display the time and date and it gets recorded to the data track and you can view it while in playback... I guess it depends if you submit a VHS to them or a DVD.

I just got my dvc80, and I am not sure if my camcorder has any problem, it seems to have some clicking sound inside when i shake it (i mean, i didnt shake it crazily, just flap it gently), is it normal?
i was thinking if some of the parts have detached, but i guess my camcorder probably wouildnt even work at all in that case.. now it operates without a problem...

That clicking sound may drive you a bit nutty but it's normal with both the DVC80 and the DVX100. It's part of the optical image stabilizer that flops around when the camera is powered off.

After driving myself nuts splitting hairs in trying to decide whether to buy a DVC80 or a VX2000, B&H (NYC) made the DVC80 the better purchase by throwing in a $100 gift card, which will cover the cost of the on-camera lighting kit I want. (The gift card is a Web site special.) I can't imagine "outgrowing" the DVC80 like I can the VX2000, especially where audio is concerned. I will miss a longer zoom, but I'm optimistic that the DVC80 will be a good all-around camcorder for part-time professional use. ANYTHING will be better than the 3-year-old single-chip consumer cam I'm using now.

I'm a little concerned about B&H, because my order hasn't shipped after almost 48 hours, and their Web site is down. I'll give them a call this afternoon to get the scoop. I'm hoping to get the package by Saturday, so I can try out the camera at my niece's birthday party. I don't have any commercial shoots booked until March, so I'll have a few months to learn the DVC80 inside and out. I look forward to reviewing it on this site and others, as there's very little published on this model. Videomaker magazine reviewed it recently, and they seemed happy enough with it. I can't wait!

BTW, I love this forum. I've enjoyed reading everyone's opinions and advice.

TJB

Tim,

B&H has a very credible reputation- I wouldn't worry about you getting it...if the order was received successfully- I'm pretty sure you'll get it.

I notice the gift certificate also. Would they have to mail it to you before you can use it?

Dave

B&H has just recently started their Gift Card program. The card can be used online, by phone or by mail. But, yes, you do need to have the card in-hand.

More information here. (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?BI=155&O=homepage&A=getpage&Q=giftCard.jsp)

Thanks

Dave

Yes, the DVC80 rocks. It's everything I expected. My B&H packages arrived Thursday, only four days after placing the order with UPS Ground shipping. I will definitely order from B&H again.

I bought a Quantaray 18" x 13" aluminum case from my local Ritz Camera store. All I need before March -- is an on-camera light for light duty at wedding receptions. I'll probably buy a Bescor VS-50 and use a 10- or 20-watt lamp to prolong battery life.

Because my PV-DV100 uses the same batteries, I now have three 1700mAh batteries at my disposal, but I'll be buying a CGP-D28 or equivalent so I won't have to worry about charging batteries on the job.

Hey all,
First of all, thanks for a great forum. It has proven very helpful with my new camcorder purchase. I received the Panasonic DVC80 yesterday, along with a few accessories (Azden X1 XLR microphone, lightweight Velbon tripod...). I ordered from BH and the service was good. The shipping experience was less so. It is the third UPS/FedEX shipment in a short time where the box is pretty badly damaged.

The shipment box was in tatters and taped together. Apparently it had also been opened because the 10-pack dv tapes was gone. I called BH and they filed a claim with UPS and promised to send me another pack. The panny camera box was also slightly damaged and the molding inside broken. I've been worried that the camera might have been damaged.

Tested yesterday evening and today and everything seems fine. It's a super cool-looking piece and a joy to use. It's been a while since I shot video (old vhs-c and u-matic) and I was a bit surprised that shooting outside on a somewhat cloudy day in full auto-mode, without ND filters, the image was very overexposed. Had to increase the shutter speed or apply 1/8 or 1/64 filters to get it nice.

I'm heading off to India over xmas and hope to shoot a small documentary there. Can't wait to start using the panny for real.

Thanks,
Vignir

Hello DVC users.....I've put up a bunch of hawk video frame stills exported from the actual DV footage using Quicktime and recompressed to 500 pixels wide after deinterlacing......for those wanting to see what sort of image quality the DVC80 is capable of- have a look at

http://stevenunez.com/DVC80Stills/index.htm

....there's some compression added in the jpeg format- but the original footage and stills are really artifact free.......have a peek and let me know what you guys think. I had to manually expose for the bird itself so the blue sky is overexposed a bit- this situation really called for a graduated ND filter- but none was on hand so I opted to expose for the bird instead of the background (backlit).....so using the "iris" control I opened the aperature a click or 2 from what the camera wanted to shoot with by default.......further down the thumbnails have a look at the leaves in the running water- that was the camera's actual exposure and it nailed it perfectly keeping highlights in check- the DVC80 is a solid camera for sure!

Have fun

Steve,
First off, great method for showing the frame stills. The slide show format was great.
Second, I liked the color and sharpness of the stills. At first I thought the colors were somewhat dull but then as I looked at the stills for a second time I felt that the colors were more towards realistic and not over saturated (I had to remind myself that everyone in NYC does not have bright pink and green hair spikes) (just kidding, just kidding). I had suspected that the DVC-80 provided good results but these stills showed it off nicely.
Third, The leaves in the water was really good. The colors were great and it was possible to see the ripples in the water. That still probably summed up the DVC-80s quality abilities.

Separate question. Have you had a chance to use the DVC-80 for any macro work, like copying photos or documents? I have a real big project coming up that will require making a video montage of photos (lots and lots and lots of photos), and I was thinking about using the DVC-80. If you used this cam for macro work did you use the existing lens or have to get an adapter?

Thanks for posting the slide show and I look forward to your reply about the DVC-80's abilities with macro work.

Thanks, Nick

Nick,

Thanks for commenting on the posted stills- it's good to know someone is looking and getting a feel for what these cameras can do....I hope the stills encourage potential buyers to consider the DVC80 as I believe it beats allot of better known cams.

For the macro work- I really suggest scanning the photos for the best possible quality- unless you want that video look the camera will give it- but for the utmost quality I recommend scans. I do have 3 tiffen 72mm macro screw-on lenses that really make the DVC 80 shine incredibly- I have the 3X, 2X and 4X lenses and I recorded some incredible macro video of exotic praying mantids (my son)....every detail, even the internal wing veins are easily shown with the DVC80. The DVC80 can focus extremely close without lenses- and it is very suitable for macro work- you wont be able to zoom unless you move the camera back a bit- it does have a minimum focusing distance (stated somewhere in the user's manual).....for $2300 the DVC80 with it's large CCD really can't be beaten!

Steve,
Thanks for the reply regarding using the DVC80 for macro.

Yea, I thought about scanning the photos but I havn't done that before for video (did it for a Power Point presentation). I want to be able to do a slow crawl (probably not the professional term) in various directions on some of the photos, and right now I am not sure what NLE system I'll have to work with. So, I was thinking of the path of least resistance (or headaches and late nights).

I really appreciate your input on the DVC80. Sounds and looks like a winner.

Nick

I'm looking to add a second camera to my studio. I need this camera for alot of interior work such as apt/home interior tours and inside buildings/office spaces.

I will also be mounting this camera to my cobra crane and glidecam 3000 pro. Because of this I was looking at a PDX10 due to it's obvious small form factor.

But, it's limitations in the low light area concerns me as well as the fact that I would have to spend another $200 to $250 for a quality CenturyOptics WA lens for the camera.

That said is this Lecia WA lens already on the camera and does it perform?

NEF

Is this true? The only way to get 16:9 right now, on the DVC80, is to crop the image? There is no electronic or anamorphic adapter that can do this?

I'm kinda sold on this camcorder, I just want to make sure I know exactly what I'm getting into.