does a dvx100b still make sense

[Rob Katz]

does a dvx100b still make sense

i shoot a fair amount of sd for my clients. lots of talking head interviews. distribution is on dvd, web and, occasionally, large screen presentation.

does a dvx100b still make sense?

i would surely say yes if i could shoot 16x9. the 4x3 in sd is very limiting. i know that letterbox works to create that illusion but its effectiveness is limited.

does a dvx100b still make sense?

as for tape vs tapeless, sure i'm sick of log&capture but i can give the client that tape as the archival copy.

pre-amps on a dvx100b are good enough. the pannie "look" is pleasant even in 30p.

does a dvx100b still make sense if i were to buy a low hour, well taken rig for less than $1k?

i'm just not sure if its $ that i should be using for an hd rig.

if you care to share: does a dvx100b still make sense?

thanks in advance

be well

rob

[Jonathan Palfrey]

From I business stand point I think investing that money into a HD camera would make more sense. More and more web content is HD now in fact it could be argued that a HD camera is more important for web work than for other forms as its growing so fast.

I think it depends on where you live, 16:9 is becoming the standard across the world, here in the UK its been the standard for years way before HD. The main reason I got an Sony Z5 was for the widescreen at first, I only started using it in HD 6 months ago.

[Rob Katz]

jonathan-

thank u for sharing your thoughts.

i appreciate your opinions on hd and i don't disagree...if i had clients asking for hd content.

for my business, i still have clients wanting sd to play on a dvd, to project from a laptop, or to put up on a website.

a dvx100b shooting it's version of 16x9, seems to satisfy all of my listed needs. somehow the 16x9 implies a "quality" image to most viewers and the dvx100b's squeeze mode is "good enough" for the web, in a boardroom or on several monitors.

now, i would feel quite different if it were broadcast, projected in a theatre or on a wall of 50" plasmas!

i've come to the conclusion that having the dvx100b around is just another tool in the shop. these days it feels like there is no one single camera that "does it all". in this era of specialization, i'm not surprised that as media makers we need different acquisition tools to satisfy the myriad of demands upon our imagination.

ymmv

be well

rob
smalltalk productions

[Dennis Robinson]

Hi,
I think you are looking for a reason not to have to spend money. It's not for the client to ask for HD etc. it's your job to give them quality if you want to grow your business. I have been shooting HD here in Australia for 4 years and have never had a client request HD. I provide it and clients love my work. These days i am reshooting everything. You will find it difficult to make money unless you invest in good gear. I have the new HPX302 with the 3.5 wide angle Fujinon lens and it would have taken me less than a month to pay for it from work. that's my experience. I also spent the $4000 for the Panasonic 8 inch on camera monitor and it is amazing. Well worth the purchase.

[Troy Williams]

I would not purchase a DVX100 today because it is not true 16x9 camera. Yes squeeze mode can be decent enough but I am a pixel peeper and I can see the difference in true 16x9 footage versus electronic 16x9. My clients prefer DVD and they have large flat 16x9 screens. Because of this, 4x3 is unacceptable and the electronic 16x9 output of the DVX 100 is a little soft. You will be using a lot of filters just to get a quality image in 16x9 IMO.

[Steve Struthers]

Originally Posted by Rob Katz

does a dvx100b still make sense

i shoot a fair amount of sd for my clients. lots of talking head interviews. distribution is on dvd, web and, occasionally, large screen presentation.

does a dvx100b still make sense?

i would surely say yes if i could shoot 16x9. the 4x3 in sd is very limiting. i know that letterbox works to create that illusion but its effectiveness is limited.

does a dvx100b still make sense?

as for tape vs tapeless, sure i'm sick of log&capture but i can give the client that tape as the archival copy.

pre-amps on a dvx100b are good enough. the pannie "look" is pleasant even in 30p.

does a dvx100b still make sense if i were to buy a low hour, well taken rig for less than $1k?

i'm just not sure if its $ that i should be using for an hd rig.

if you care to share: does a dvx100b still make sense?

thanks in advance

be well

rob

A DVX100B would probably be perfect for your applications. I work for a government agency, and its communications department uses DVX100's with no problem, since 99% of what it does is delivered via the government intranet. HD isn't needed because the average desktop computer where I work is a low-end Lenovo machine with a low-end LCD panel.

The other benefit to having a DVX100B is that all of your stuff is done on tape, so your work is automatically archived. You don't have to take the stuff you've done off a card and then burn a DVD archive.

Sometimes I wonder if HD is all that it's cracked up to be where web delivery is concerned, because I've seen lots of stuff on YouTube shot in 360p/480p that looks perfectly acceptable, and the absence of HD really isn't even noticeable.

Just remember to deinterlace your footage, and you should be fine.

[Tom Hardwick]

Does a dvx100b still make sense? Not if you go by the DVX traffic on this DVinfo forum. Doesn't mean it's a bad camera by any means, just that it's had its day.

[Michael Gruich]

The DVX100b still makes a lot of sense. Yes there are better cameras out there, but this camera (and similar cameras) still fills the need of smaller productions and interviews. A lot of people go HD because they can and the prices have some way down. But, look at what they are left with? Having to go to exernal audio recorders because of no built in jacks, or controls.

The picture of the DVX100b in the right hands is stunning to say the least and is sometimes needed over the detail an HD shot produces. I often find myself looking back at the softer look of this camera, the smaller file size, the easier to work with format, and smile.

This was never more clear when my 2 backup cameras were rejected on set for a recent project that had a concern over having to convert the AVCHD footage prior to editing. Standard definition is still very much alive out there on smaller sets and the web for sure.

[Dean Harrington]

The DVX 100 is still used in legal work where a date/timecode stamp is necessary. If your clients need SD ... legal work is still in SD ... then get it if you can make money on it. The move to HD and 16.9 for the web and corporate clients is becoming a regular feature in these markets ... this makes sense for future proofing yourself, so, you might consider a camera like the Ap -hpx 170 (P2 cards ... not my preference) which does both 4.3 and 16.9 SD/HD 4:2:2.