The gigantic "which camera should I buy" thread!

Noah Hayes · December 7th, 2005, 09:14 PM

The Optura 50/60 are the ONLY cams I know that satisfy these wants/needs in that price range. The Panasonics do not really have OIS(optical image stabilization), even in the menu on the camera it says EIS (electronic image stabilization) this is something I have found strange, because every advertisement says they have optical...I have an Optura 50, tried out the GS150/ GS250 and saw a good comparison of the video, bought the $700 (at the time) Optura 50 because it looked better than even the $1000 Panasonic GS250...even with a single ccd!

Philip Williams · December 7th, 2005, 10:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Noah Hayes

<snip>I have an Optura 50, tried out the GS150/ GS250 and saw a good comparison of the video, bought the $700 (at the time) Optura 50 because it looked better than even the $1000 Panasonic GS250...even with a single ccd!

Not only do Opturas have a great image, but they're the only cams I know of in this price range that have manual audio control. I really think Canon did a super job when they engineered these. Its like they didn't hold back any features that they could reasonably put into the cams for the price (and then some).

George Ellis · December 8th, 2005, 11:02 AM

The Optura 60 is under $700 from one of our sponsors. The GS400 is still over the $1k mark.

Robert Mann Z. · December 8th, 2005, 12:27 PM

i'll also give the nod to the optura 60 i'm happy with mine

see my review http://www.emptyloft.com/optura60/

Matt Vanecek · December 25th, 2005, 12:56 AM

Not sure which forum this would go in, so I stuck it here in Open DV.

I'm going to be in the market for a new SD camera in the near future. I've been looking at Sony, Panasonic, and Canon. Currently I have a GL2, which aside from the tape transport replacement has worked pretty well. But I need to add to the stable.

I've compared the specs on the Sony PD170, Canon XL2, and Panasonic DVX100B. Most of my shoots are staged or studio. The 3 cameras appear pretty darn similar from the spec sheets. I do tend to shoot in 16:9 on the GL2, so whatever I get will need to be able to do that with good results.

I've seen a bunch of threads on the GL2-level cameras (VX2100, PDX10, etc), but didn't seem to see many comparisons between the XL2-level cameras. I like the 20x default zoom on the Canon--with the others I'd have to get an adapter to increase the zoom. I've seen some posts that PD170 does not do 16:9 well; is that true or opinion?

I've also been reading about the FX1. How well does that camera fit in with the XL2-level of camera?
Thanks,
Matt

Giuseppe Palumbo · December 25th, 2005, 01:03 AM

I was in the same exact position as you 2 weeks ago. After having my GL-2 for 2 years, i didnt know what to buy, check out this thread for some help. I went with the XL2 though, amazing camera.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=55959

Good luck man

Steve House · December 25th, 2005, 08:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt Vanecek

Not sure which forum this would go in, so I stuck it here in Open DV.

I'm going to be in the market for a new SD camera in the near future. I've been looking at Sony, Panasonic, and Canon. Currently I have a GL2, which aside from the tape transport replacement has worked pretty well. But I need to add to the stable.

I've compared the specs on the Sony PD170, Canon XL2, and Panasonic DVX100B. Most of my shoots are staged or studio. The 3 cameras appear pretty darn similar from the spec sheets. I do tend to shoot in 16:9 on the GL2, so whatever I get will need to be able to do that with good results.

I've seen a bunch of threads on the GL2-level cameras (VX2100, PDX10, etc), but didn't seem to see many comparisons between the XL2-level cameras. I like the 20x default zoom on the Canon--with the others I'd have to get an adapter to increase the zoom. I've seen some posts that PD170 does not do 16:9 well; is that true or opinion?

I've also been reading about the FX1. How well does that camera fit in with the XL2-level of camera?
Thanks,
Matt

The XL2 has true 16:9 sensors. AFAIK the others ar 4:3 and achieve their 16:9 output by letterboxing off part of the frame.

Matt Vanecek · December 25th, 2005, 09:03 AM

Guiseppe,
Thanks so much for your reply and the post.

I'm pretty impressed by the video clips from the FX1 that were posted. I'm curious, though. Does anyone have any examples of shooting SD in the FX1 or HVX for comparison? HD would be nice, but I don't own an HD monitor, and my work goes almost exclusively to DVD. How does HD look when downsampled to SD?

Also, doe anyone in the Denton/Dallas/Fort Worth area know of any camera rental shops? The yellow pages have escaped me...

Thanks,
Matt

Raji Barbir · January 3rd, 2006, 10:26 AM

hey everyone,

I've been researching the hell out of every camera i could think of for the past month and it looks like in about a month from now, i'll be ready to actually purchase a camera! I'll be starting with just a camera and buying equipment as i find a need for it. I plan on using the camera for weddings, commercial work (if i can find it) and of course making my own films.

I've almost completely settled on the Panasonic DVX100b. It has excellent low-light performance from what i've read (although noisier than other cameras after gain?), which was an important factor for me and has true 24P/30P, another important factor.

So the question is, should i consider anything else? I'm in no rush and can think about it for longer than a month if needed.

Also, what particular equipment should i start thinking about? Audio and lighting are the only 2 that come to mind and i know next to nothing about either (in terms of what to look for and why). Popular models for either would be very useful at this point, just so i can start somewhere.

Hope to hear from you guys soon and thanks for getting this far :D

Raji

Mathieu Ghekiere · January 3rd, 2006, 10:45 AM

We could help you a lot more if you could tell us your estimated budget.

Raji Barbir · January 3rd, 2006, 11:12 AM

i'm looking at around 3-4k for a camera and depending on how well it goes, maybe about 1-2k for audio and lighting... i don't know much about the last 2, which is why i was reluctant on throwing out a figure. I don't know what's realistic and i don't know how far the camera alone will take me before i'll HAVE to start purchasing audio and lighting equipment.

Mathieu Ghekiere · January 3rd, 2006, 01:41 PM

Are you interested in HD at the moment, knowing it needs much stronger computerpower?

If not, you could look at a Panasonic DVX100B or a Canon XL2. I think those are the best SD cams out there now. Maybe the XL2 is the best, but comes with a bigger price tag too.
For events and weddings, the Sonys are the best, then you'd maybe look better into a Sony PD170.

Can't really help you with lightening and audio, although I suppose 1k is a good start budget for audio. But I'll leave that to others, more experienced, to handle that part.

Good thing is, with 3-4k you can buy a really good SD cam, but you fall a little behind for a good HD cam, exept for maybe the FX1, but that won't be as good in low light as the SD counterpart. and good lowlight performances are important for event work and weddings.

Chris Barcellos · January 3rd, 2006, 02:33 PM

For a minimum of hassle, and maximum in low light efficiency in the mini DV world, the Sony PDs (150, 170 ) or the VX's (2000 and 2100) are your best bet. They can shoot in the low light of wedding receptions without obtrusive on camera lights.

Of course, there is always the issue over whether on camera lighting should be used no matter what, or whether the videographer should light the wedding and or reception for his needs... There are different camps and client expectations. Since the Sonys can work well in either circumstance, they would be best all around performers.

Now, in HDV, the Sony FX1 and Z1 may have stepped back from that low light predominance...

Chris Barcellos

Raji Barbir · January 3rd, 2006, 02:56 PM

no at the moment, HD is pretty much out of the question. Mostly because of the cost associated with getting a GOOD camera that has HD. Not to mention that the price tag sky-rockets when you want 24P too. Then there's the processor power, where i'm not even close (my PC is almost 4 years old but i've been refraining from an upgrade until i can justify it with paying gigs). So yeah, HD is completely out of the question. And i recently read at a DVX website (so this is probably somewhat biased) that the FX1 performed pretty poorly in comparison with the XL2 and the DVX 100a.

Why is the PD170 (or Sony in general) better than the DVX for wedding/events? Are you saying that because of the low-light performance?

I was looking at the PD170 before i found out about the DVX and it's a mighty good camera. Even better in low-light than the DVX is, plus it looks heftier and perhaps more reassuring for the people who want to know that their wedding/event videos are going to look good for the price they pay. The only thing about the Sony is that it doesn't have 24P or 30P... that's a huge factor for me.

The XL2 simply looks ultra professional (to me at least) so it has a very strong coolness factor, which i think Canon has always had with their products. I just realized that the XL2 isn't as expensive as i thought it was (thought it was at least 5-6k), but i also remembered that reviews rated it as slightly worse in terms of low-light performance compared to the PD170 and DVX100... so i think the XL2 is out.

Thanks a lot for your response Mathieu. Any other feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Mathieu Ghekiere · January 3rd, 2006, 03:43 PM

Don't feel bad about HD, my personal opinion is it isn't necessary at this moment. The format has to grow a bit on the prosumers, you can read about all the troubles that people have with the editing of HD and HDV on the HD-cameraboards here.

Yes, the PD170 is a better camera for weddings, only for the low light. Much better!
BUT you are right too: it doesn't give you such a filmic image as a DVX or an XL2, and I can understand why that's important (I myself make narratives too).

About the XL2 and the DVX: if you can afford the XL2, I would go for the XL2. Maybe not as good as the DVX for low light, but the difference will be small (I also read that comparison you talked about) and it is being said that the DVX, how great the cam is, tends to be a bit noisy, where you can get a very clean image with the XL2.
And the lens on the XL2 is superior too.
The DVX is smaller and maybe easier to carry with you. I personally think a bigger camera like an XL2 (I have an XL1s) is easier to handle, because you can make shots on your shoulder fairly easy and still have decent results, where the DVX is clearly a handycam-model.
But the DVX is also a bit more easy to handle out of the box then an XL2, although with an XL2 you should be able to get a better image.

You should search some threads here about the DVX versus the XL2, there are plenty of them, and one person who owns both is Ash Greyson on these boards. He says pretty much the same as I did now: the XL2 is heavier, more difficult, but actually a better camera then the DVX.
But again, with a bigger pricetag, and maybe (I don't know) you prefer the handycam model of the DVX and the pretty easy setup.

Little footnote, and it's surely nothing that should really influence your choice, but the XL2 looks more professional then a DVX or an PD170, which, to SOME (not many, and remember, people hire you for your skills, not your camera, but... still) clients for weddings can make a little better impression.
For weddings, though, Sony cams are the best.
Just wanted to note this, because there's for example a thread here on dvinfo about someone who said looks DID matter (but it was a pretty funny thread).

December 25th, 2005, 12:56 AM	#980
Matt Vanecek Major Player Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Denton, TX Posts: 334	Camera Selection Advice Not sure which forum this would go in, so I stuck it here in Open DV. I'm going to be in the market for a new SD camera in the near future. I've been looking at Sony, Panasonic, and Canon. Currently I have a GL2, which aside from the tape transport replacement has worked pretty well. But I need to add to the stable. I've compared the specs on the Sony PD170, Canon XL2, and Panasonic DVX100B. Most of my shoots are staged or studio. The 3 cameras appear pretty darn similar from the spec sheets. I do tend to shoot in 16:9 on the GL2, so whatever I get will need to be able to do that with good results. I've seen a bunch of threads on the GL2-level cameras (VX2100, PDX10, etc), but didn't seem to see many comparisons between the XL2-level cameras. I like the 20x default zoom on the Canon--with the others I'd have to get an adapter to increase the zoom. I've seen some posts that PD170 does not do 16:9 well; is that true or opinion? I've also been reading about the FX1. How well does that camera fit in with the XL2-level of camera? Thanks, Matt

December 25th, 2005, 01:03 AM	#981
Giuseppe Palumbo Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Cleveland, Ohio Posts: 199 Images: 7	I was in the same exact position as you 2 weeks ago. After having my GL-2 for 2 years, i didnt know what to buy, check out this thread for some help. I went with the XL2 though, amazing camera. http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=55959 Good luck man __________________ AIM - N film B www.nbfilms.us

December 25th, 2005, 09:03 AM	#983
Matt Vanecek Major Player Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Denton, TX Posts: 334	How do HD cameras look in SD mode? Guiseppe, Thanks so much for your reply and the post. I'm pretty impressed by the video clips from the FX1 that were posted. I'm curious, though. Does anyone have any examples of shooting SD in the FX1 or HVX for comparison? HD would be nice, but I don't own an HD monitor, and my work goes almost exclusively to DVD. How does HD look when downsampled to SD? Also, doe anyone in the Denton/Dallas/Fort Worth area know of any camera rental shops? The yellow pages have escaped me... Thanks, Matt

January 3rd, 2006, 10:26 AM	#984
Raji Barbir Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Salt Lake City, UT Posts: 97	The age old "which camera should i buy" question!! + equipment questions hey everyone, I've been researching the hell out of every camera i could think of for the past month and it looks like in about a month from now, i'll be ready to actually purchase a camera! I'll be starting with just a camera and buying equipment as i find a need for it. I plan on using the camera for weddings, commercial work (if i can find it) and of course making my own films. I've almost completely settled on the Panasonic DVX100b. It has excellent low-light performance from what i've read (although noisier than other cameras after gain?), which was an important factor for me and has true 24P/30P, another important factor. So the question is, should i consider anything else? I'm in no rush and can think about it for longer than a month if needed. Also, what particular equipment should i start thinking about? Audio and lighting are the only 2 that come to mind and i know next to nothing about either (in terms of what to look for and why). Popular models for either would be very useful at this point, just so i can start somewhere. Hope to hear from you guys soon and thanks for getting this far :D Raji

January 3rd, 2006, 02:33 PM	#988
Chris Barcellos Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Elk Grove CA Posts: 6,838	Sonys are Best for Run and Gun Shooting For a minimum of hassle, and maximum in low light efficiency in the mini DV world, the Sony PDs (150, 170 ) or the VX's (2000 and 2100) are your best bet. They can shoot in the low light of wedding receptions without obtrusive on camera lights. Of course, there is always the issue over whether on camera lighting should be used no matter what, or whether the videographer should light the wedding and or reception for his needs... There are different camps and client expectations. Since the Sonys can work well in either circumstance, they would be best all around performers. Now, in HDV, the Sony FX1 and Z1 may have stepped back from that low light predominance... Chris Barcellos

December 7th, 2005, 09:14 PM	#976
Noah Hayes Major Player Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Sterling, Virginia Posts: 226	The Optura 50/60 are the ONLY cams I know that satisfy these wants/needs in that price range. The Panasonics do not really have OIS(optical image stabilization), even in the menu on the camera it says EIS (electronic image stabilization) this is something I have found strange, because every advertisement says they have optical...I have an Optura 50, tried out the GS150/ GS250 and saw a good comparison of the video, bought the $700 (at the time) Optura 50 because it looked better than even the $1000 Panasonic GS250...even with a single ccd!

December 8th, 2005, 11:02 AM	#978
George Ellis Trustee Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Suwanee, GA Posts: 1,241	The Optura 60 is under $700 from one of our sponsors. The GS400 is still over the $1k mark.

December 8th, 2005, 12:27 PM	#979
Robert Mann Z. Skyonic New York Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: NYC Posts: 614	i'll also give the nod to the optura 60 i'm happy with mine see my review http://www.emptyloft.com/optura60/

January 3rd, 2006, 10:45 AM	#985
Mathieu Ghekiere Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Belgium Posts: 2,195	We could help you a lot more if you could tell us your estimated budget.

January 3rd, 2006, 11:12 AM	#986
Raji Barbir Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Salt Lake City, UT Posts: 97	i'm looking at around 3-4k for a camera and depending on how well it goes, maybe about 1-2k for audio and lighting... i don't know much about the last 2, which is why i was reluctant on throwing out a figure. I don't know what's realistic and i don't know how far the camera alone will take me before i'll HAVE to start purchasing audio and lighting equipment.

January 3rd, 2006, 01:41 PM	#987
Mathieu Ghekiere Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Belgium Posts: 2,195	Are you interested in HD at the moment, knowing it needs much stronger computerpower? If not, you could look at a Panasonic DVX100B or a Canon XL2. I think those are the best SD cams out there now. Maybe the XL2 is the best, but comes with a bigger price tag too. For events and weddings, the Sonys are the best, then you'd maybe look better into a Sony PD170. Can't really help you with lightening and audio, although I suppose 1k is a good start budget for audio. But I'll leave that to others, more experienced, to handle that part. Good thing is, with 3-4k you can buy a really good SD cam, but you fall a little behind for a good HD cam, exept for maybe the FX1, but that won't be as good in low light as the SD counterpart. and good lowlight performances are important for event work and weddings.

January 3rd, 2006, 02:56 PM	#989
Raji Barbir Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Salt Lake City, UT Posts: 97	no at the moment, HD is pretty much out of the question. Mostly because of the cost associated with getting a GOOD camera that has HD. Not to mention that the price tag sky-rockets when you want 24P too. Then there's the processor power, where i'm not even close (my PC is almost 4 years old but i've been refraining from an upgrade until i can justify it with paying gigs). So yeah, HD is completely out of the question. And i recently read at a DVX website (so this is probably somewhat biased) that the FX1 performed pretty poorly in comparison with the XL2 and the DVX 100a. Why is the PD170 (or Sony in general) better than the DVX for wedding/events? Are you saying that because of the low-light performance? I was looking at the PD170 before i found out about the DVX and it's a mighty good camera. Even better in low-light than the DVX is, plus it looks heftier and perhaps more reassuring for the people who want to know that their wedding/event videos are going to look good for the price they pay. The only thing about the Sony is that it doesn't have 24P or 30P... that's a huge factor for me. The XL2 simply looks ultra professional (to me at least) so it has a very strong coolness factor, which i think Canon has always had with their products. I just realized that the XL2 isn't as expensive as i thought it was (thought it was at least 5-6k), but i also remembered that reviews rated it as slightly worse in terms of low-light performance compared to the PD170 and DVX100... so i think the XL2 is out. Thanks a lot for your response Mathieu. Any other feedback would be greatly appreciated.

January 3rd, 2006, 03:43 PM	#990
Mathieu Ghekiere Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Belgium Posts: 2,195	Don't feel bad about HD, my personal opinion is it isn't necessary at this moment. The format has to grow a bit on the prosumers, you can read about all the troubles that people have with the editing of HD and HDV on the HD-cameraboards here. Yes, the PD170 is a better camera for weddings, only for the low light. Much better! BUT you are right too: it doesn't give you such a filmic image as a DVX or an XL2, and I can understand why that's important (I myself make narratives too). About the XL2 and the DVX: if you can afford the XL2, I would go for the XL2. Maybe not as good as the DVX for low light, but the difference will be small (I also read that comparison you talked about) and it is being said that the DVX, how great the cam is, tends to be a bit noisy, where you can get a very clean image with the XL2. And the lens on the XL2 is superior too. The DVX is smaller and maybe easier to carry with you. I personally think a bigger camera like an XL2 (I have an XL1s) is easier to handle, because you can make shots on your shoulder fairly easy and still have decent results, where the DVX is clearly a handycam-model. But the DVX is also a bit more easy to handle out of the box then an XL2, although with an XL2 you should be able to get a better image. You should search some threads here about the DVX versus the XL2, there are plenty of them, and one person who owns both is Ash Greyson on these boards. He says pretty much the same as I did now: the XL2 is heavier, more difficult, but actually a better camera then the DVX. But again, with a bigger pricetag, and maybe (I don't know) you prefer the handycam model of the DVX and the pretty easy setup. Little footnote, and it's surely nothing that should really influence your choice, but the XL2 looks more professional then a DVX or an PD170, which, to SOME (not many, and remember, people hire you for your skills, not your camera, but... still) clients for weddings can make a little better impression. For weddings, though, Sony cams are the best. Just wanted to note this, because there's for example a thread here on dvinfo about someone who said looks DID matter (but it was a pretty funny thread).