VX2100 vs DVX100

Yegor Sak · May 2nd, 2006, 01:09 PM

Im about to buy a new camera, and I came down to these 2, and I could use your input to help me make a decision. Things Im looking for:

Long battery life
Low/bad light shooting
Minimal setup times
Ability to shoot in wide range of environments

Right now Im inclined towards the VX2100, but lack of 24p is the only thing that’s making me think twice. I wont be shooting for film, but I don’t wanna say no to the "film look", since you can notice it even if you distribute the video online (which I plan to do). Does VX2100 still produce the "amateurish handycam look"?

I would be very much appreciated if owners of these 2 cams could post a short, unaltered clip, straight from the camera, so I could compare them in some way.

Thanks a lot

Chris Barcellos · May 2nd, 2006, 01:38 PM

Choose the VX2100.

Long battery life VX2100 is great

Low/bad light shooting-- Best of DV cams, VX2100

Minimal setup times-- VX 2100, easy to learn controls.

Ability to shoot in wide range of environments-- VX 2100 can be hand held, shoulder mounted, tripod mounted, and accepts some pretty nice wide and teleconverters.

24P, if you must have it, can be done is post, along with other post production filmic filters..

Kevin Shaw · May 2nd, 2006, 03:15 PM

Yegor: I have clips from a VX2000 and a DVX100 posted at the following link. The DVX100 had an anamorphic lens on it so looks better for widescreen output, but other than that I'd say the cameras are roughly similar. I'm not a fan of 24p recording so don't have an opinion about that, but people who like shooting 24p seem to love the DVX100. For general-purpose videography, either camera should be a fine choice.

http://www.videomem.com/camera_compa...-15/index.html

P.S. Don't rule out the Sony FX1 if you haven't tried it.

Ash Greyson · May 2nd, 2006, 03:15 PM

PD170 is better than VX2000 in low light... I would get the PD170 before the VX series...that being said, the DVX has a ROBUST community and much more manipulation of the picture, it IS very noisy in low light...but many people have learned to work wournd it.

ash =o)

Chris Barcellos · May 2nd, 2006, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ash Greyson

PD170 is better than VX2000 in low light...

Ash:

How so ? I thought they used the same chip and lens. What was done to PDs/ over VX's to get them better low light capability. I always thought primary issue was sound in, between the two...

David Jimerson · May 2nd, 2006, 07:55 PM

A caveat, if you want to do 24p -- sure, you can convert 60i to 24p, but at the cost of up to half your vertical resolution. There's no substitute for native acquisition.

Matt Ludwig · May 2nd, 2006, 09:07 PM

The PD170 and VX2100 use the same chips, and the major difference is audio, but I think Ash might have been refering to the upgrade from the PD150 and VX2000 to the PD170 and VX2100. From what I've heard (I have a PD170) the differences between the older and newer models isn't very much in low light. But with that said, all four of these cams do rule in lowlight. So my recomendation is the VX2100 (or PD170 if you need the audio extras).

Riley Harmon · May 2nd, 2006, 11:39 PM

can always pick up a beachtek to suppliment for audio, vx2k is a great cam

Dean Sensui · May 2nd, 2006, 11:56 PM

One advantage of the DVX is the ability to make a smooth iris change. If you're doing a lot of that, it might be something to consider.

It's a feature that I wish were on my PD170.

Yegor Sak · May 3rd, 2006, 02:53 AM

I watched the videos... and I could really tell much difference. Was the DVX shooting at 24p?

PD170 is superior to VX2100, but the extra features are pointless to me, and I dont feel like shelling an extra $1000 for them.

David Jimerson · May 3rd, 2006, 08:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yegor Sak

Was the DVX shooting at 24p?

Doesn't look like it, but it's hard to tell -- the WMV wasn't terribly high-quality.

May 2nd, 2006, 01:09 PM	#1
Yegor Sak Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 76	VX2100 vs DVX100 - Help me Decide! Im about to buy a new camera, and I came down to these 2, and I could use your input to help me make a decision. Things Im looking for: Long battery life Low/bad light shooting Minimal setup times Ability to shoot in wide range of environments Right now Im inclined towards the VX2100, but lack of 24p is the only thing that’s making me think twice. I wont be shooting for film, but I don’t wanna say no to the "film look", since you can notice it even if you distribute the video online (which I plan to do). Does VX2100 still produce the "amateurish handycam look"? I would be very much appreciated if owners of these 2 cams could post a short, unaltered clip, straight from the camera, so I could compare them in some way. Thanks a lot __________________ PlanetBoredom.net

May 2nd, 2006, 01:38 PM	#2
Chris Barcellos Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Elk Grove CA Posts: 6,838	Choose the VX2100. Long battery life VX2100 is great Low/bad light shooting-- Best of DV cams, VX2100 Minimal setup times-- VX 2100, easy to learn controls. Ability to shoot in wide range of environments-- VX 2100 can be hand held, shoulder mounted, tripod mounted, and accepts some pretty nice wide and teleconverters. 24P, if you must have it, can be done is post, along with other post production filmic filters.. __________________ Chris J. Barcellos

May 2nd, 2006, 07:55 PM	#6
David Jimerson Jubal 28 Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Wilmington, NC Posts: 872	A caveat, if you want to do 24p -- sure, you can convert 60i to 24p, but at the cost of up to half your vertical resolution. There's no substitute for native acquisition. __________________ www.wrightsvillebeachstudios.com

May 2nd, 2006, 09:07 PM	#7
Matt Ludwig Regular Crew Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Ohio Posts: 51	The PD170 and VX2100 use the same chips, and the major difference is audio, but I think Ash might have been refering to the upgrade from the PD150 and VX2000 to the PD170 and VX2100. From what I've heard (I have a PD170) the differences between the older and newer models isn't very much in low light. But with that said, all four of these cams do rule in lowlight. So my recomendation is the VX2100 (or PD170 if you need the audio extras). __________________ Matt Ludwig MSL Productions - www.freewebs.com/mslpro

May 2nd, 2006, 11:56 PM	#9
Dean Sensui Inner Circle Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Honolulu, HI Posts: 2,054	One advantage of the DVX is the ability to make a smooth iris change. If you're doing a lot of that, it might be something to consider. It's a feature that I wish were on my PD170. __________________ Dean Sensui Exec Producer, Hawaii Goes Fishing

May 2nd, 2006, 03:15 PM	#3
Kevin Shaw Inner Circle Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Sacramento, CA Posts: 2,488	Yegor: I have clips from a VX2000 and a DVX100 posted at the following link. The DVX100 had an anamorphic lens on it so looks better for widescreen output, but other than that I'd say the cameras are roughly similar. I'm not a fan of 24p recording so don't have an opinion about that, but people who like shooting 24p seem to love the DVX100. For general-purpose videography, either camera should be a fine choice. http://www.videomem.com/camera_compa...-15/index.html P.S. Don't rule out the Sony FX1 if you haven't tried it.

May 2nd, 2006, 03:15 PM	#4
Ash Greyson Trustee Join Date: May 2003 Location: Tulsa, OK Posts: 1,689	PD170 is better than VX2000 in low light... I would get the PD170 before the VX series...that being said, the DVX has a ROBUST community and much more manipulation of the picture, it IS very noisy in low light...but many people have learned to work wournd it. ash =o)

May 2nd, 2006, 11:39 PM	#8
Riley Harmon Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Oklahoma Posts: 424	can always pick up a beachtek to suppliment for audio, vx2k is a great cam

May 3rd, 2006, 02:53 AM	#10
Yegor Sak Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 76	I watched the videos... and I could really tell much difference. Was the DVX shooting at 24p? PD170 is superior to VX2100, but the extra features are pointless to me, and I dont feel like shelling an extra $1000 for them. __________________ PlanetBoredom.net