DVX100 vs PD170 at DVinfo.net

Stephen Rota · May 14th, 2004, 09:21 AM

I know that there was a similar post but I would like to ask my few questions please.

I am a film enthusiast and am interested to buy a camcorder.
my idea as to why i require the camcorder is to do short films and have some entries in competitions both locally and maybe nternationally. 16:9 format might be important for projection but i do not exclude outputting to dvd to be seen on tv. I am just an enthusiast and in fact have never used aperture or exposure. what i mean is that i do not know the level in these competitions and could realise that I can not produce such shorts with low-to-no budget. This is basically a hobby.

I have read various reviews but am still undecided. I am only worried that being my first (and maybe last camcorder) the panasonic might be overkill. I mean I assume that since the arrival of the dvx100 such shorts were made using the pd150 and might have been of good quality.

Can you please confirm that if I shoot in 24p:
1. the result is viewable on normal PAL tv.
2. it will have a better quality on PAL tv (as for filmic look or...) than normal dv mode?
3. there are no compatibility problems to edit 24p or 24pa on premiere.
4. what is it about doing fast camera movements or having fast moving objects. what will be the end result in this case?

Is video quality of the panasonic without 24p comparable to the sony?

Do you agree that if I do go for the pana I should go for the 100A model?

Is investing in the pana as a one time buy would be a better idea for the extra price? the Panasonic seems to be only really new model built from scratch with new technology in this price range. But do you feel that it is really overkill for my purposes.

thanks a lot.

Barry Green · May 14th, 2004, 10:34 AM

If you're in PAL territory, you would be getting the PAL version. It doesn't shoot 24P, it shoots 25P. As a result, the answer to all your questions is: yes it will work fine. Yes it's interlaced mode is directly comparable to the Sony. Yes you should get a 100A.

Boyd Ostroff · May 14th, 2004, 11:01 AM

I don't know how deep your pockets are, but both of these options are expensive and I wonder if maybe you should start out with something that will strain your budget less? It would be a mistake to spend all that money on the camera and have to use a cheap tripod for example (good ones start at around $800). Also consider all the extras you will want like wide/telephoto lenses, extra batteries, filters, audio and lighting gear.

Have you considered cameras in a lower price range such as the DVC-30, VX-2100, PDX-10 or GL-2? Are you aware of the differences in these ~$2,000 range cameras and convinced that they justify spending around $1,500 more for a PD-170 or DVX-100a? That money could make a good start on purchasing some of the accessories mentioned above.

Stephen Rota · May 14th, 2004, 02:30 PM

Hi Boyd, thanks for making me aware of the high prices.
In fact if I buy any of the two serious camcorders mentioned I would not buy any other additionals at this stage, and yes they are a bit over my budget. I thought to go for the best since this might be a once in a life time buy. I would not like to come in
two years time and say: if only I had bought the dvx100...
I saw some footage from the dvx100 and was stunned by the colours and quality.

I cannot say that I have seen any footage from the above. These are my reasons for discarding them after reading some reviews. Actually I started reading about these camcorders first
but one reads that model X is better than Y because of ...and I ended up in the top models league.

why not the vx2100: lack of XLR. I would still need to buy an XLR adapter. Which for the price difference and the extra gain control makes the pd170 more attractive.
pdx10: 3 * 1/4.7 CCD, minimum of 7 lux.
I have not read much reviews on the DVC-30.
GL2: no XLR input, 3 * 1/4 CCDs.

Having said all the above if your opinion is that I am seeing too big for a start I would re-consider. after all I do not have a clue what standards to expect out there.
SO HERE ARE MY QUESTIONS:

Do you feel that any of these models would suite my cause? they have 1/4 CCDs or less.
if yes Which do you feel is the best?
I would consider the pdx10 or the dvc-30 for the XLR inputs. would I need any extra gear to control the levels. are these two models old? I have read that teh 16:9 of the pdx10 is very good
quality, what about the 16:9 on the dvc-30? the pdx10 has native 16:9, is the 4:3 result on both camcorders good as well? and is hence the result on a tv of good quality?

would the dvc80 be too much too?
would the result be seen as crap if it is projected?
wouldn't a minimum of 7 lux not show slow fall off detail?

sorry for asking too much.
10x.

May 14th, 2004, 09:21 AM	#1
Stephen Rota Tourist Join Date: May 2004 Location: malta Posts: 3	DVX100 vs PD170 I know that there was a similar post but I would like to ask my few questions please. I am a film enthusiast and am interested to buy a camcorder. my idea as to why i require the camcorder is to do short films and have some entries in competitions both locally and maybe nternationally. 16:9 format might be important for projection but i do not exclude outputting to dvd to be seen on tv. I am just an enthusiast and in fact have never used aperture or exposure. what i mean is that i do not know the level in these competitions and could realise that I can not produce such shorts with low-to-no budget. This is basically a hobby. I have read various reviews but am still undecided. I am only worried that being my first (and maybe last camcorder) the panasonic might be overkill. I mean I assume that since the arrival of the dvx100 such shorts were made using the pd150 and might have been of good quality. Can you please confirm that if I shoot in 24p: 1. the result is viewable on normal PAL tv. 2. it will have a better quality on PAL tv (as for filmic look or...) than normal dv mode? 3. there are no compatibility problems to edit 24p or 24pa on premiere. 4. what is it about doing fast camera movements or having fast moving objects. what will be the end result in this case? Is video quality of the panasonic without 24p comparable to the sony? Do you agree that if I do go for the pana I should go for the 100A model? Is investing in the pana as a one time buy would be a better idea for the extra price? the Panasonic seems to be only really new model built from scratch with new technology in this price range. But do you feel that it is really overkill for my purposes. thanks a lot.

May 14th, 2004, 02:30 PM	#4
Stephen Rota Tourist Join Date: May 2004 Location: malta Posts: 3	re: Hi Boyd, thanks for making me aware of the high prices. In fact if I buy any of the two serious camcorders mentioned I would not buy any other additionals at this stage, and yes they are a bit over my budget. I thought to go for the best since this might be a once in a life time buy. I would not like to come in two years time and say: if only I had bought the dvx100... I saw some footage from the dvx100 and was stunned by the colours and quality. I cannot say that I have seen any footage from the above. These are my reasons for discarding them after reading some reviews. Actually I started reading about these camcorders first but one reads that model X is better than Y because of ...and I ended up in the top models league. why not the vx2100: lack of XLR. I would still need to buy an XLR adapter. Which for the price difference and the extra gain control makes the pd170 more attractive. pdx10: 3 * 1/4.7 CCD, minimum of 7 lux. I have not read much reviews on the DVC-30. GL2: no XLR input, 3 * 1/4 CCDs. Having said all the above if your opinion is that I am seeing too big for a start I would re-consider. after all I do not have a clue what standards to expect out there. SO HERE ARE MY QUESTIONS: Do you feel that any of these models would suite my cause? they have 1/4 CCDs or less. if yes Which do you feel is the best? I would consider the pdx10 or the dvc-30 for the XLR inputs. would I need any extra gear to control the levels. are these two models old? I have read that teh 16:9 of the pdx10 is very good quality, what about the 16:9 on the dvc-30? the pdx10 has native 16:9, is the 4:3 result on both camcorders good as well? and is hence the result on a tv of good quality? would the dvc80 be too much too? would the result be seen as crap if it is projected? wouldn't a minimum of 7 lux not show slow fall off detail? sorry for asking too much. 10x.

May 14th, 2004, 10:34 AM	#2
Barry Green Barry Wan Kenobi Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Carolina Posts: 3,863	If you're in PAL territory, you would be getting the PAL version. It doesn't shoot 24P, it shoots 25P. As a result, the answer to all your questions is: yes it will work fine. Yes it's interlaced mode is directly comparable to the Sony. Yes you should get a 100A.

May 14th, 2004, 11:01 AM	#3
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,800	I don't know how deep your pockets are, but both of these options are expensive and I wonder if maybe you should start out with something that will strain your budget less? It would be a mistake to spend all that money on the camera and have to use a cheap tripod for example (good ones start at around $800). Also consider all the extras you will want like wide/telephoto lenses, extra batteries, filters, audio and lighting gear. Have you considered cameras in a lower price range such as the DVC-30, VX-2100, PDX-10 or GL-2? Are you aware of the differences in these ~$2,000 range cameras and convinced that they justify spending around $1,500 more for a PD-170 or DVX-100a? That money could make a good start on purchasing some of the accessories mentioned above.