AG-DVC80 various topics

Mathew Evan · September 19th, 2003, 03:31 PM

If you feel uncomfortable with buying from buydig then profeel offers similar prices. The can be a bit pushy and are not the most friendly of folk but they came through with my dvx100.

Scott Plowman · September 19th, 2003, 03:45 PM

i am totally sold on B&H. There is a reason why they are the most popular.. They deliver and have time and time again without a hitch....

Stephen van Vuuren · September 19th, 2003, 04:13 PM

You can equally good or better service at Zotz Digital (call Brian, tell him you're from DVInfo) and better prices than B&H, plus you're helping this site as Zotz sponsors DV Info. I got my DVX100 there plus lots of stuff since. They have been perfect with everything and better than B&H on price.

Rob Easler · September 30th, 2003, 12:25 PM

Buying one of them within 24 hours how about some opinions. Being used for weddings mostly.

John Britt · September 30th, 2003, 03:26 PM

It's funny that you're getting more replies over in the VX2000 forum...

These were the two cameras I was considering so very recently (the PD 150 was on my list at first, but I scaled back the budget a tiny bit). Since both were the same price, it was a battle of features, and for me, the DVC80 won out.

A big selling point for the DVC80 for me was the XLR inputs. As basically a one-man crew, I don't want to bother with either 1) dealing with quasi-XLR sound with a mini-plug/XLR adapter or 2) dealing with an external DAT/MiniCD deck just to capture good audio. So far, I'm happy with the audio.

Basically, I felt that both cameras were very similar in features for the video work I want to do. I really liked the DVC80's XLRs, it felt better in my hand, word on the street was really good...and a lot of other ephemeral things that influenced my decision.

I'm only starting my third week of ownership -- perhaps I'll know more later.

Rob Easler · September 30th, 2003, 05:12 PM

It may be because the VX has been such a wildley popular camera for so long. It's picture quality has been pretty much the best in it's range for a while so many more have experience with it as opposed to the 80. If the picture quality and low light is as good as the 2000 then I think your are right the 80 has it easily beat. The 10x hurts though because I am used to 20x on the GL2. I wonder is a 2x piece of glass works well for the 80? It would make it heavier though and I use a flow pod and don't need any extra weight.

John Britt · September 30th, 2003, 07:01 PM

This site complares the low-light capabilities of the VX2000 and the DVX100:

http://www.bealecorner.com/dvx100/compare/index.html#lowlight

The DVX has gamma settings that the DVC80 does not, but I think it is reasonable to use the interlaced DVX100 shots as a basis for the DVC80's capabilities. Regardless, this will give you a general impression.

It looks like the VX2000 edges out the Panasonic by just a bit, but I guess it depends on how low your light will really be (depending on the location/church, etc). For me, the low-level difference was not enough to persuade me to get the Sony.

Unfortunately, for some of the reasons you mentioned, there is more written about the Panasonic DVX100 than the DVC80 -- you can use some of the DVX100 articles to help aid your decision, but the DVC80 is not just the DVX w/out progressive so take that information with a grain of salt.

I wish I had more hands-on experience w/ this cam and could offer more help -- I've used this cam at night, but in a very well-lit area.

Matt Gettemeier · September 30th, 2003, 09:13 PM

Full size 3.5" lcd... xlr inputs with industry accepted "best sound of class" via good audio section (meaning actual circuitry)... Leica lens (I don't care if you say they only bought the name... every review says, "exceptional lens at this price")...

I always like Sony for reliability and reputation. I own Sony dv cams even now... but I'm still blown away by the dvx.

The '80 is close enough... which by the way, unless you're saving a TON off the dvx (over $600) I don't know why you wouldn't just get a dvx? But that's your baby... if you want the absolute best low-light get the Sony... for a slightly worse low-light you get a lot of great stuff with the Panny... I think too much goodness comes with the Panny to ignore it.

XLR inputs ALONE will prove to be a joy... not to mention the other stuff... you'll see.

John Britt · September 30th, 2003, 10:20 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Matt Gettemeier :

The '80 is close enough... which by the way, unless you're saving a TON off the dvx (over $600) I don't know why you wouldn't just get a dvx? -->>>

At B&H, the DVX100 is $950 more than the DVC80 ($2350 vs $3300) -- making the DVC80 the same price at B&H as the VX2000 and sooo much more attractive (price wise) than the DVX100. I must say, though, that I had to talk myself out of spending that extra $950!

Also -- from what I've read, the added benefits of the DVX100 (24p, cine-gamma) only shine in controlled environments -- if you're making a movie, then that's great. But if Rob's just shooting weddings, though, he probably won't have too much control over his environment. Of course, this is an assumption on my part, feel free to rebuke.

Rob Easler · October 2nd, 2003, 08:04 AM

After reading every post I could find I've ordered the 80. My only real concern is how I will handle 10x zoom. I'm used to the GL2 20x but everything else sounds pretty good. I'll add my $.02 cents comparing the 80 to the GL2 but I expect the 80 will surpass the GL2 a bit.

Rob Easler · October 3rd, 2003, 02:14 PM

Just got the DVC-80 this afternoon. Have spent about 30 minutes so far with it. Testing in Auto mode side by side against my GL2 in Auto mode.

The picture is really my main interest so that is what I am going to mention. Some of my reason for getting the 80 was to improve on the low light capability of my GL2.

-I must say I was suprised at what a small difference there was in the low light quality between the 80 and the GL2. The 80 was only slightly better. I thought there would be a bigger difference with the larger chips.

-Also I found that backlit areas had a better contrast range with the GL2 over the 80.

-In wide shots detailed objects and letters have less defenition with the 80 than the GL2. I don't like that too much.

-Of course there is no red shift in the panasonic color. The color is definately superior in the Panasonic. It doesn't blow out certain colors and the colors are more true to life. There is a wider range of differenciation between colors in the Panasonic.

-The 80 is quite a bit heavier and less ergonomic that the GL2. I can forget about the camera when I'm using the GL2 but it feels like the 80 is a big brick. The eye piece is like a horses leg. Maybe I might not mind the weight and size if there were an increase in the picture quality but it's not there.

Please take these initial thought with a grain of salt as I just started checking it out. I'll spend more time with it this weekend. I am suprised and a little disappointed because I want to like the 80 more and the GL2 is nearly $600 cheaper at the moment. After I've had a chance to evaluate more I may end up just returning it for another GL2. We'll see.

Any feedback from y'all is always appreciated.

Barry Goyette · October 3rd, 2003, 03:17 PM

None of what you've said surprises me. I own the dvx100 and a gl2 and based on experience as well as some of the test data I've seen, the real benefit in terms of sharpness and resolution is when you are shooting in progressive mode on the DVX, something the dvc-80 doesnt do. In interlaced mode I would expect to see a marginally cleaner signal with marginally better light sensitivity, but no increase in sharpness

That you are seeing less resolution could be related to the larger chip, and your fstop. To do a test, try to have both camera's on manual in good lighting with an aperture hovering about f5.6 to f8. This would be the sweet spot in either lens, and should produce similar results.

My experience with the DVX has been that it has a more natural, neutral highlight than the gl2..can't be sure if the dvc80 is the same or not.

Remember, as has been said many times in this forumn, these camera's have much more in common than they have differences...if you see a comment that says that one camera has 10 times the resolution and infinitely better low-light capability...chances are the person saying it doesn't have both cameras in his or her hands.

I have found the DVX to be the most substantially improved camera on the market in terms of resolution, but this is only because it is the only progressive scan camera on the market...so in essence it is in it's own class. Yet even with this statement we recently shot a two camera setup with the gl2, and displayed the footage on an HD monitor...the difference between the two would only be noticed by the few of us who care about such things.

Barry

Rob Easler · October 3rd, 2003, 03:43 PM

Thanks for the reply Barry. I have felt a little insecure about the GL2 picture or really it's low light capability and have had some VX2000 envy for a while, hearing rave reviews. Then when the 80 came out I thought I can have all the 2000 benefits and get great xlr inputs and get rid of the red shift. Maybe I've taking my GL2 for granted. I think I see that some of the evaluations discussing the image quality of one camera over another, in the class of camera we often talk about here really are like splitting hairs. Side by side comparisons are a good reality check when you can get the cameras in hand.

Mathew Evan · October 3rd, 2003, 10:52 PM

I wasn't blown away by the picture on the dvx at first. However after some tweaking and learning the controls I have found that it's the little details that make the dvx100/dvc80 a superior camera in it's price range(s).

Picture quality aside I can't imagine that you are not the least impressed with the fact that you now have: professional audio controls; the gl2 still uses 1/8" plugs. Sooner or later this will bite you in the rear (did me). Real manual lens. This is a close call because the Canon lens is excellent but you are stuck with the gummy servo focus. Larger camera. This is subjective but I like how the dvx feels. It's not front heavy but it's larger base allows a firm grip with my left hand for keeping the shot steady. The GL1/2 feels light not nearly as stable. Large flip out viewfinder. I'm also surprised you don't like the viewfinder. I hate the smaller consumer type viewfinders found on the gl1 and trv900. I wear glasses and always have a hard time getting my eye close enough to the diopter. Now if they would just put a b&w 1" crt it would be perfect.

Rob Easler · October 5th, 2003, 03:31 PM

Hey Mathew,

In response to your points let me explain how my use of the camera affects my thoughts...

I use a separate hard disc recorder for audio and do mostly weddings so I only have to sync the audio once in post. If I was doing a movie I would really need the xlr's with stopping and startng scenes multiple times. The 20x on the GL2 for me beats out the smoother zoom on the panasonic again because of wedding use rather than movie use. I can't always control where I am alowed to stand. For anything else you can set up your shot so the 10x limit of the panny is fine. I'm a little guy so weight matters and the panny is hard to manage when I am trying to use it with my flowpod. The two together are heavy. You are right it looks more professional, and the viewfinder is better although I'm ok with the GL2 viewfinder. I can't use the LCD cause the panny already uses A LOT of battery life.

September 19th, 2003, 04:13 PM	#48
Stephen van Vuuren Space Hipster Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Greensboro, NC Posts: 1,508	You can equally good or better service at Zotz Digital (call Brian, tell him you're from DVInfo) and better prices than B&H, plus you're helping this site as Zotz sponsors DV Info. I got my DVX100 there plus lots of stuff since. They have been perfect with everything and better than B&H on price. __________________ stephen v2 www.insaturnsrings.com

September 30th, 2003, 12:25 PM	#49
Rob Easler Major Player Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Naperville, IL Posts: 219	Need a quick opinion VX2000 or DVC-80? Buying one of them within 24 hours how about some opinions. Being used for weddings mostly.

October 2nd, 2003, 08:04 AM	#55
Rob Easler Major Player Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Naperville, IL Posts: 219	Just ordered the DVC80 After reading every post I could find I've ordered the 80. My only real concern is how I will handle 10x zoom. I'm used to the GL2 20x but everything else sounds pretty good. I'll add my $.02 cents comparing the 80 to the GL2 but I expect the 80 will surpass the GL2 a bit.

October 3rd, 2003, 02:14 PM	#56
Rob Easler Major Player Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Naperville, IL Posts: 219	Initial thoughts on the DVC-80 Just got the DVC-80 this afternoon. Have spent about 30 minutes so far with it. Testing in Auto mode side by side against my GL2 in Auto mode. The picture is really my main interest so that is what I am going to mention. Some of my reason for getting the 80 was to improve on the low light capability of my GL2. -I must say I was suprised at what a small difference there was in the low light quality between the 80 and the GL2. The 80 was only slightly better. I thought there would be a bigger difference with the larger chips. -Also I found that backlit areas had a better contrast range with the GL2 over the 80. -In wide shots detailed objects and letters have less defenition with the 80 than the GL2. I don't like that too much. -Of course there is no red shift in the panasonic color. The color is definately superior in the Panasonic. It doesn't blow out certain colors and the colors are more true to life. There is a wider range of differenciation between colors in the Panasonic. -The 80 is quite a bit heavier and less ergonomic that the GL2. I can forget about the camera when I'm using the GL2 but it feels like the 80 is a big brick. The eye piece is like a horses leg. Maybe I might not mind the weight and size if there were an increase in the picture quality but it's not there. Please take these initial thought with a grain of salt as I just started checking it out. I'll spend more time with it this weekend. I am suprised and a little disappointed because I want to like the 80 more and the GL2 is nearly $600 cheaper at the moment. After I've had a chance to evaluate more I may end up just returning it for another GL2. We'll see. Any feedback from y'all is always appreciated.

September 19th, 2003, 03:31 PM	#46
Mathew Evan Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: United States Posts: 53	If you feel uncomfortable with buying from buydig then profeel offers similar prices. The can be a bit pushy and are not the most friendly of folk but they came through with my dvx100.

September 19th, 2003, 03:45 PM	#47
Scott Plowman Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Kansas City, Kansas, USA Posts: 85	i am totally sold on B&H. There is a reason why they are the most popular.. They deliver and have time and time again without a hitch....

September 30th, 2003, 03:26 PM	#50
John Britt Major Player Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 621	It's funny that you're getting more replies over in the VX2000 forum... These were the two cameras I was considering so very recently (the PD 150 was on my list at first, but I scaled back the budget a tiny bit). Since both were the same price, it was a battle of features, and for me, the DVC80 won out. A big selling point for the DVC80 for me was the XLR inputs. As basically a one-man crew, I don't want to bother with either 1) dealing with quasi-XLR sound with a mini-plug/XLR adapter or 2) dealing with an external DAT/MiniCD deck just to capture good audio. So far, I'm happy with the audio. Basically, I felt that both cameras were very similar in features for the video work I want to do. I really liked the DVC80's XLRs, it felt better in my hand, word on the street was really good...and a lot of other ephemeral things that influenced my decision. I'm only starting my third week of ownership -- perhaps I'll know more later.

September 30th, 2003, 05:12 PM	#51
Rob Easler Major Player Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Naperville, IL Posts: 219	It may be because the VX has been such a wildley popular camera for so long. It's picture quality has been pretty much the best in it's range for a while so many more have experience with it as opposed to the 80. If the picture quality and low light is as good as the 2000 then I think your are right the 80 has it easily beat. The 10x hurts though because I am used to 20x on the GL2. I wonder is a 2x piece of glass works well for the 80? It would make it heavier though and I use a flow pod and don't need any extra weight.

September 30th, 2003, 07:01 PM	#52
John Britt Major Player Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 621	This site complares the low-light capabilities of the VX2000 and the DVX100: http://www.bealecorner.com/dvx100/compare/index.html#lowlight The DVX has gamma settings that the DVC80 does not, but I think it is reasonable to use the interlaced DVX100 shots as a basis for the DVC80's capabilities. Regardless, this will give you a general impression. It looks like the VX2000 edges out the Panasonic by just a bit, but I guess it depends on how low your light will really be (depending on the location/church, etc). For me, the low-level difference was not enough to persuade me to get the Sony. Unfortunately, for some of the reasons you mentioned, there is more written about the Panasonic DVX100 than the DVC80 -- you can use some of the DVX100 articles to help aid your decision, but the DVC80 is not just the DVX w/out progressive so take that information with a grain of salt. I wish I had more hands-on experience w/ this cam and could offer more help -- I've used this cam at night, but in a very well-lit area.

September 30th, 2003, 09:13 PM	#53
Matt Gettemeier Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: St. Louis, Missouri Posts: 936	Full size 3.5" lcd... xlr inputs with industry accepted "best sound of class" via good audio section (meaning actual circuitry)... Leica lens (I don't care if you say they only bought the name... every review says, "exceptional lens at this price")... I always like Sony for reliability and reputation. I own Sony dv cams even now... but I'm still blown away by the dvx. The '80 is close enough... which by the way, unless you're saving a TON off the dvx (over $600) I don't know why you wouldn't just get a dvx? But that's your baby... if you want the absolute best low-light get the Sony... for a slightly worse low-light you get a lot of great stuff with the Panny... I think too much goodness comes with the Panny to ignore it. XLR inputs ALONE will prove to be a joy... not to mention the other stuff... you'll see.

September 30th, 2003, 10:20 PM	#54
John Britt Major Player Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 621	<<<-- Originally posted by Matt Gettemeier : The '80 is close enough... which by the way, unless you're saving a TON off the dvx (over $600) I don't know why you wouldn't just get a dvx? -->>> At B&H, the DVX100 is $950 more than the DVC80 ($2350 vs $3300) -- making the DVC80 the same price at B&H as the VX2000 and sooo much more attractive (price wise) than the DVX100. I must say, though, that I had to talk myself out of spending that extra $950! Also -- from what I've read, the added benefits of the DVX100 (24p, cine-gamma) only shine in controlled environments -- if you're making a movie, then that's great. But if Rob's just shooting weddings, though, he probably won't have too much control over his environment. Of course, this is an assumption on my part, feel free to rebuke.

October 3rd, 2003, 03:17 PM	#57
Barry Goyette Trustee Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: San Luis Obispo CA Posts: 1,195	None of what you've said surprises me. I own the dvx100 and a gl2 and based on experience as well as some of the test data I've seen, the real benefit in terms of sharpness and resolution is when you are shooting in progressive mode on the DVX, something the dvc-80 doesnt do. In interlaced mode I would expect to see a marginally cleaner signal with marginally better light sensitivity, but no increase in sharpness That you are seeing less resolution could be related to the larger chip, and your fstop. To do a test, try to have both camera's on manual in good lighting with an aperture hovering about f5.6 to f8. This would be the sweet spot in either lens, and should produce similar results. My experience with the DVX has been that it has a more natural, neutral highlight than the gl2..can't be sure if the dvc80 is the same or not. Remember, as has been said many times in this forumn, these camera's have much more in common than they have differences...if you see a comment that says that one camera has 10 times the resolution and infinitely better low-light capability...chances are the person saying it doesn't have both cameras in his or her hands. I have found the DVX to be the most substantially improved camera on the market in terms of resolution, but this is only because it is the only progressive scan camera on the market...so in essence it is in it's own class. Yet even with this statement we recently shot a two camera setup with the gl2, and displayed the footage on an HD monitor...the difference between the two would only be noticed by the few of us who care about such things. Barry

October 3rd, 2003, 03:43 PM	#58
Rob Easler Major Player Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Naperville, IL Posts: 219	Thanks for the reply Barry. I have felt a little insecure about the GL2 picture or really it's low light capability and have had some VX2000 envy for a while, hearing rave reviews. Then when the 80 came out I thought I can have all the 2000 benefits and get great xlr inputs and get rid of the red shift. Maybe I've taking my GL2 for granted. I think I see that some of the evaluations discussing the image quality of one camera over another, in the class of camera we often talk about here really are like splitting hairs. Side by side comparisons are a good reality check when you can get the cameras in hand.

October 3rd, 2003, 10:52 PM	#59
Mathew Evan Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: United States Posts: 53	I wasn't blown away by the picture on the dvx at first. However after some tweaking and learning the controls I have found that it's the little details that make the dvx100/dvc80 a superior camera in it's price range(s). Picture quality aside I can't imagine that you are not the least impressed with the fact that you now have: professional audio controls; the gl2 still uses 1/8" plugs. Sooner or later this will bite you in the rear (did me). Real manual lens. This is a close call because the Canon lens is excellent but you are stuck with the gummy servo focus. Larger camera. This is subjective but I like how the dvx feels. It's not front heavy but it's larger base allows a firm grip with my left hand for keeping the shot steady. The GL1/2 feels light not nearly as stable. Large flip out viewfinder. I'm also surprised you don't like the viewfinder. I hate the smaller consumer type viewfinders found on the gl1 and trv900. I wear glasses and always have a hard time getting my eye close enough to the diopter. Now if they would just put a b&w 1" crt it would be perfect.

October 5th, 2003, 03:31 PM	#60
Rob Easler Major Player Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Naperville, IL Posts: 219	Hey Mathew, In response to your points let me explain how my use of the camera affects my thoughts... I use a separate hard disc recorder for audio and do mostly weddings so I only have to sync the audio once in post. If I was doing a movie I would really need the xlr's with stopping and startng scenes multiple times. The 20x on the GL2 for me beats out the smoother zoom on the panasonic again because of wedding use rather than movie use. I can't always control where I am alowed to stand. For anything else you can set up your shot so the 10x limit of the panny is fine. I'm a little guy so weight matters and the panny is hard to manage when I am trying to use it with my flowpod. The two together are heavy. You are right it looks more professional, and the viewfinder is better although I'm ok with the GL2 viewfinder. I can't use the LCD cause the panny already uses A LOT of battery life.