The gigantic "which camera should I buy" thread!

Mike Rehmus · July 12th, 2003, 12:12 PM

If you have the money, skip the 1-chip cameras. They just don't deliver, except in the most ideal situations, the image quality of the 3-chippers.

Thomas Garcia · July 12th, 2003, 04:40 PM

"If you have the money, skip the 1-chip cameras. They just don't deliver, except in the most ideal situations, the image quality of the 3-chippers."

Even the cheap Panasonic 3 chipper?

Mike Rehmus · July 12th, 2003, 09:23 PM

Well, as compared to their cheap 1-chipers, I suppose so.

If you go onto rec.video or rec.video.desktop, you will probably find someone there that has one and can report on the performance.

That said, I'm not certain that 'cheap' anything is much of a bargain but it does depend on what you want to do with the camera.

I use 3-chip cameras for work but carry a PC110 for vacation and as a backup camera. Cause in good light, it's pretty good. And certainly smaller than a PD150!

Christopher Hughes · July 13th, 2003, 03:17 PM

I have a SONY PC100 (same as 110 but without flash) and its a brilliant little camera. Its nice and small, and if you add on a High Grade wide angle and external mic - Sennheiser MKE300, its a great little camera. It produces great little results.

Sure, its not a 3chip, but you after cheap...so this is cheap, but not cheap and nasty...you cannot go worng with this camera. I even did a wedding using this camera and the set-up I said above and they were happy (not used for a Pro job) but they loved it to bits)

Its an excellent holiday cam as already mentioned...I have hiked it up on top of mountains and across deserts and alsorts...Great camera and has always came through for me!!!

Christopher Hughes · July 13th, 2003, 03:21 PM

And another thing, they have been used for broadcast. I know amongst others, MTV gave the stars some for backstage and road-trip footage. and the British version on Jackass (started before days of Jackass) have used the PC100 with MKE300 mic.

So It cannot be that bad!

Mike Rehmus · July 13th, 2003, 07:59 PM

I do use it for commercial work in five places:

1. When I'm out running with the police. A PD150 is way too big for these old bones to carry.

2. I use it as an camera behind and over the shoulder of the officant at weddings. Sometimes hidden in flowers, sometimes out in plain sight. I tell the bride to look at the LCD screen which is flipped forward and to center herself and the groom if they want some good pictures. For really close quarters, I have a Century wide angle (which is much better than the same brand on my PD150).

I find that frequently, in spite of wiring the groom and the officiant and sometimes a house sound feed, I go to the PC110 for some bit of the audio. I've also recorded a string quartet to it and the quartet said the sound was the best they'd ever recorded including some pro CDs in a studio. Guess it was the wedding occasion that influences them.

3. I do Model Engineering Exhibitions (you have a big one in London every year). I use a PD150 or DSR-300 as the main camera but then use the PC110 handheld to look into the nooks and crannies of the models. Upside down, sideways, it doesn't matter. I flip it in post.

4. At long events, like a Grad Night or other party, I'll put the camera on the monopod and hold it way up over the events or way low, upside down at ankle level.

5. When taping a band, I can get much more appealing shots than the tradional walk through the band when it's playing. Over the drummer, down at his feet, looking through the kick drum (clear drum heads) right over the keyboard, right at the level of the keyboard but between it and the musician. Well, you get the picture. I'm bored after 4-5 hours and start experimenting.

On top of it all, the megapixel still camera is just right to capture shots for the slipcover and labels.

Oh yeah, it was great on the cruise to Alaska last month.

Thomas Garcia · July 14th, 2003, 08:12 AM

Thanks everyone,

Would the PC100 have the same image quality as the TRV-38? Does the TRV-22 have the same image quality as the TRV-38? How about the Optura's? I think the effective video pixels are different. Thanks for all your help.

Garret Ambrosio · July 14th, 2003, 10:55 AM

I look up both the PC110 and the TRV38, they both appear to use the same "engine" lens, CCD, etc. I used the TRV30, as a backup camera. The replacemtn model is the TRV50 I think one of these babies can be haad for less than $1000.

Dan Lahav · July 24th, 2003, 09:12 PM

I'm sorry if this question is brought up a lot but I'm really stuck here. I absolutely cannot decide between the Canon XL1s, Sony VX2000, and the Panasonic DVX-100. I am an amateur film student seeking a dependable camera for shooting movie after movie. Here are my arguments for each camera:

XL1s: I love the fact that this camera has been around a while and has so many Canon original and 3rd party accessories. I do not like the fact that these accessories are very expensive. I also like the fact that this camera sounds very sturdy and reliable. However I do not like that it has no LCD/and BW viewfinder. Also another minus is if i plan to transfer to film, it doesnt have 24P support.

VX2000: I have heard that this camera offers razor sharp images at a relatively inexpensive price. I have heard great things about this camera however I dont know if i'll need to swap lenses for any reason and i dont know of much 3rd party support. No 24p either...

DVX100: I have heard this camera also offers excellent quality and can be transferred to film easily, however i heard about some manual control flaws and zoom flaws as well.

I have researched these cameras to no end and cannot come to a conclusion. I do not have much hands on experience with cameras, so I'll need your advice on what kind of camera an amateur film-maker really needs. Renting is not an option at the moment unfortunately. I'd appreciate your input.

Alex Knappenberger · July 24th, 2003, 09:42 PM

Welcome to the forum.

If your main thing to do is to do movie type productions, then out of them 3, the DVX100 is the camera to get. I guess it's 24p is a big selling point, but it also has built in color curves (cine gamma) and all that other stuff. The others are great cameras too, but are better for things like documentaries and news, etc etc...

About transfering to film, ask yourself if thats really a option in the near future?

Good luck.

Dan Lahav · July 24th, 2003, 09:57 PM

transferring to film is probably not a likely option in the near future... I need a prosumer camera to learn on first.

Alex Knappenberger · July 24th, 2003, 10:00 PM

Oh sorry, I misinterpreted what you said.

Anyway, it's probably the camera for you, but i'd suggest finding a place where you can try them all out first before you buy.

Frank Granovski · July 24th, 2003, 10:56 PM

Quote:

Camera choices choices choices!

The good news is that you have a lot of choices. Just decide what your needs are, then decide which camera suits these needs best.

Matt Gettemeier · July 25th, 2003, 02:15 PM

Personally I'd have to go with the pd150 before the vx2000. So if you decide on Sony you might be tempted to take a serious look at the differences in those two cameras vs. the real-world price difference in those two cams. With the introduction of the dvx100 Sony has been continually pressured to lower the price points on the vx2000 and the pd150 and I believe the street cost difference in those cams is becoming what I would call "negligible"... figure the cost of a Beachtek dxa6 to the price of the vx2000 before you calculate the actual price difference.

But that brings me to the real point here, and that is the reason that the dvx100 HAS put the squeeze on Sony and Canon's cams in that range. It's because the dvx100 is a darn good camera. Panny pulled out all the stops on this cam... as far as the zoom issue it won't be long before you can get a vz-rock or a manfrotto 522p to turn your zooms into magic... or if you have the cash you can get a dvx100 with a Zoe right now.

The Canon is appealing for a lot of reasons. I love almost everything about that camera... except the fact that the dvx100 is tormenting it right now... hence I personally went with the dvx.

Glenn Chan · July 25th, 2003, 06:09 PM

Well you can save money by getting the VX2000 and spend money on things like feeding your crew, lights, a computer to edit on, paying off debts, etc. In my opinion, it gives pretty good images. Check out image grabs at http://tinyurl.com/hpio

Cameras even cheaper than the VX2000 have been used to make movies shown in theatres so you may not be missing out on that much. A lot of your success will depend on your stories, and you need a little bit of money to turn those into films so if you save some money you can make more films. Your production values should be good enough that they don't detract from the film, which the VX2000 doesn't do. The Panasonic of course has wider latitude, has cinegamma, and is better for film and DVD transfers. From what I hear, the Canon has a really sensitive auto-focus.

In terms of audio, you should get a beachtek adapter ($250canadian), a shotgun mic like the Sennheiser ME66/K6 ($380USD + shipping from B&H), a windshield if necessary (rycote softie is good), and a camera mount or a boom (which you can build). Being able to hear your actors clearly is a good thing. If you're adventurous, you could ADR everything but that uses up a lot of time. It's definitely possible nowadays, but it is time intensive and possibly not worth the money you save.

July 12th, 2003, 12:12 PM	#211
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	If you have the money, skip the 1-chip cameras. They just don't deliver, except in the most ideal situations, the image quality of the 3-chippers. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

July 12th, 2003, 09:23 PM	#213
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	Well, as compared to their cheap 1-chipers, I suppose so. If you go onto rec.video or rec.video.desktop, you will probably find someone there that has one and can report on the performance. That said, I'm not certain that 'cheap' anything is much of a bargain but it does depend on what you want to do with the camera. I use 3-chip cameras for work but carry a PC110 for vacation and as a backup camera. Cause in good light, it's pretty good. And certainly smaller than a PD150! __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

July 13th, 2003, 07:59 PM	#216
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	I do use it for commercial work in five places: 1. When I'm out running with the police. A PD150 is way too big for these old bones to carry. 2. I use it as an camera behind and over the shoulder of the officant at weddings. Sometimes hidden in flowers, sometimes out in plain sight. I tell the bride to look at the LCD screen which is flipped forward and to center herself and the groom if they want some good pictures. For really close quarters, I have a Century wide angle (which is much better than the same brand on my PD150). I find that frequently, in spite of wiring the groom and the officiant and sometimes a house sound feed, I go to the PC110 for some bit of the audio. I've also recorded a string quartet to it and the quartet said the sound was the best they'd ever recorded including some pro CDs in a studio. Guess it was the wedding occasion that influences them. 3. I do Model Engineering Exhibitions (you have a big one in London every year). I use a PD150 or DSR-300 as the main camera but then use the PC110 handheld to look into the nooks and crannies of the models. Upside down, sideways, it doesn't matter. I flip it in post. 4. At long events, like a Grad Night or other party, I'll put the camera on the monopod and hold it way up over the events or way low, upside down at ankle level. 5. When taping a band, I can get much more appealing shots than the tradional walk through the band when it's playing. Over the drummer, down at his feet, looking through the kick drum (clear drum heads) right over the keyboard, right at the level of the keyboard but between it and the musician. Well, you get the picture. I'm bored after 4-5 hours and start experimenting. On top of it all, the megapixel still camera is just right to capture shots for the slipcover and labels. Oh yeah, it was great on the cruise to Alaska last month. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

July 14th, 2003, 10:55 AM	#218
Garret Ambrosio Major Player Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Vallejo, CA Posts: 263	I look up both the PC110 and the TRV38, they both appear to use the same "engine" lens, CCD, etc. I used the TRV30, as a backup camera. The replacemtn model is the TRV50 I think one of these babies can be haad for less than $1000. __________________ "USA Today has come out with a new survey - apparently, three out of every four people make up 75% of the population." -David Letterman

July 24th, 2003, 09:12 PM	#219
Dan Lahav Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: CA Posts: 172	Camera choices choices choices! I'm sorry if this question is brought up a lot but I'm really stuck here. I absolutely cannot decide between the Canon XL1s, Sony VX2000, and the Panasonic DVX-100. I am an amateur film student seeking a dependable camera for shooting movie after movie. Here are my arguments for each camera: XL1s: I love the fact that this camera has been around a while and has so many Canon original and 3rd party accessories. I do not like the fact that these accessories are very expensive. I also like the fact that this camera sounds very sturdy and reliable. However I do not like that it has no LCD/and BW viewfinder. Also another minus is if i plan to transfer to film, it doesnt have 24P support. VX2000: I have heard that this camera offers razor sharp images at a relatively inexpensive price. I have heard great things about this camera however I dont know if i'll need to swap lenses for any reason and i dont know of much 3rd party support. No 24p either... DVX100: I have heard this camera also offers excellent quality and can be transferred to film easily, however i heard about some manual control flaws and zoom flaws as well. I have researched these cameras to no end and cannot come to a conclusion. I do not have much hands on experience with cameras, so I'll need your advice on what kind of camera an amateur film-maker really needs. Renting is not an option at the moment unfortunately. I'd appreciate your input.

July 12th, 2003, 04:40 PM	#212
Thomas Garcia New Boot Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 13	"If you have the money, skip the 1-chip cameras. They just don't deliver, except in the most ideal situations, the image quality of the 3-chippers." Even the cheap Panasonic 3 chipper?

July 13th, 2003, 03:17 PM	#214
Christopher Hughes Major Player Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Sunderland, England (y Merida, Mexico) Posts: 269	I have a SONY PC100 (same as 110 but without flash) and its a brilliant little camera. Its nice and small, and if you add on a High Grade wide angle and external mic - Sennheiser MKE300, its a great little camera. It produces great little results. Sure, its not a 3chip, but you after cheap...so this is cheap, but not cheap and nasty...you cannot go worng with this camera. I even did a wedding using this camera and the set-up I said above and they were happy (not used for a Pro job) but they loved it to bits) Its an excellent holiday cam as already mentioned...I have hiked it up on top of mountains and across deserts and alsorts...Great camera and has always came through for me!!!

July 13th, 2003, 03:21 PM	#215
Christopher Hughes Major Player Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Sunderland, England (y Merida, Mexico) Posts: 269	And another thing, they have been used for broadcast. I know amongst others, MTV gave the stars some for backstage and road-trip footage. and the British version on Jackass (started before days of Jackass) have used the PC100 with MKE300 mic. So It cannot be that bad!

July 14th, 2003, 08:12 AM	#217
Thomas Garcia New Boot Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 13	Thanks everyone, Would the PC100 have the same image quality as the TRV-38? Does the TRV-22 have the same image quality as the TRV-38? How about the Optura's? I think the effective video pixels are different. Thanks for all your help.

July 24th, 2003, 09:42 PM	#220
Alex Knappenberger High School Student Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Canton, Ohio, USA Posts: 609	Welcome to the forum. If your main thing to do is to do movie type productions, then out of them 3, the DVX100 is the camera to get. I guess it's 24p is a big selling point, but it also has built in color curves (cine gamma) and all that other stuff. The others are great cameras too, but are better for things like documentaries and news, etc etc... About transfering to film, ask yourself if thats really a option in the near future? Good luck.

July 24th, 2003, 09:57 PM	#221
Dan Lahav Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: CA Posts: 172	transferring to film is probably not a likely option in the near future... I need a prosumer camera to learn on first.

July 24th, 2003, 10:00 PM	#222
Alex Knappenberger High School Student Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Canton, Ohio, USA Posts: 609	Oh sorry, I misinterpreted what you said. Anyway, it's probably the camera for you, but i'd suggest finding a place where you can try them all out first before you buy.

July 25th, 2003, 02:15 PM	#224
Matt Gettemeier Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: St. Louis, Missouri Posts: 936	Personally I'd have to go with the pd150 before the vx2000. So if you decide on Sony you might be tempted to take a serious look at the differences in those two cameras vs. the real-world price difference in those two cams. With the introduction of the dvx100 Sony has been continually pressured to lower the price points on the vx2000 and the pd150 and I believe the street cost difference in those cams is becoming what I would call "negligible"... figure the cost of a Beachtek dxa6 to the price of the vx2000 before you calculate the actual price difference. But that brings me to the real point here, and that is the reason that the dvx100 HAS put the squeeze on Sony and Canon's cams in that range. It's because the dvx100 is a darn good camera. Panny pulled out all the stops on this cam... as far as the zoom issue it won't be long before you can get a vz-rock or a manfrotto 522p to turn your zooms into magic... or if you have the cash you can get a dvx100 with a Zoe right now. The Canon is appealing for a lot of reasons. I love almost everything about that camera... except the fact that the dvx100 is tormenting it right now... hence I personally went with the dvx.

July 25th, 2003, 06:09 PM	#225
Glenn Chan Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 4,750	Well you can save money by getting the VX2000 and spend money on things like feeding your crew, lights, a computer to edit on, paying off debts, etc. In my opinion, it gives pretty good images. Check out image grabs at http://tinyurl.com/hpio Cameras even cheaper than the VX2000 have been used to make movies shown in theatres so you may not be missing out on that much. A lot of your success will depend on your stories, and you need a little bit of money to turn those into films so if you save some money you can make more films. Your production values should be good enough that they don't detract from the film, which the VX2000 doesn't do. The Panasonic of course has wider latitude, has cinegamma, and is better for film and DVD transfers. From what I hear, the Canon has a really sensitive auto-focus. In terms of audio, you should get a beachtek adapter ($250canadian), a shotgun mic like the Sennheiser ME66/K6 ($380USD + shipping from B&H), a windshield if necessary (rycote softie is good), and a camera mount or a boom (which you can build). Being able to hear your actors clearly is a good thing. If you're adventurous, you could ADR everything but that uses up a lot of time. It's definitely possible nowadays, but it is time intensive and possibly not worth the money you save.