How great/bad is the PDX10?

Bad:

Vertical smear

Low light noisey images

No Iris control


Good:

'truer' 16x9 mode

size

cool colour/build quality


Do any owners agree/disagree? (I am thinking mainly in comparison with the pd150)

I would be really interested in any pd150 comparisons for those who are lucky enough to have BOTH...

Many thanks,

[Margus Kivilaan]

hey,
i had a possibility to try them out side-by-side
pdx10 has an iris control, it's just a bit different from pd150
in low-light there is a big difference, pd150 is much better
pdx10 seems to give smear quite easily
BUT
i've been a bit in skydive shooting projects, it's the first 3CCD cam which does'nt kill your neck when mounted to helmet,
good image quality (not as good as pd150, but beats pd100)
basically same mic connections as pd150

It would be really good to have wider angle of view, or some good wide-angle converter for that camera

at the moment i can test-or-something only pdx10P, if you have some specifical questions, ask.

regards, Margus

[Kenn Jolemore]

I have done alot of shooting with the 950 and specificly tried to get the smear some say is prevalent in these camera's (950 & PDX10) and have had very little of that type problem.Short of aiming the camera directly through a large reflection of bright light into a dark shadow(not a set-up most folks need ) it does not apear to be a problem.(I remember a post about a gym shot straight at large windows with the sun coming in(bad bad shot set-up)but ....)
So my question is ,under what circumstances did this smear occure with you 950 and 10 owners?And were you able to rectify the situation and get the shot you wanted?
KennJ

I thought it wouldn't be a problem too when I was trying to bring myself to put down the money to buy one...

I put a pd150 and a Pdx10 together in a fairly dark room. Looking accross the show room there was a light which was one of those halogen downlighters on the ceiling. The problem occurs when it encounters any light which is BRIGHT ie a candle, headlamp. The Pdx10 shot looked like a lazer beam of vertical white smear going from top of frame to bottom. The 150 exhibited no such distortion, perhapps a small smear at worst which did not ruin the shot completely. The PDx10 has some software thing in it which replicates the smear and extends it length throughout the entire frame. This is obviously a by product of whatever contrast enhancing HAD CCD technology they use in the cam to compensate for having such small ccds.

As i said, no problem I thought. Most shots wouldn't be like that at all...

Then I thought of street lamps at night -- the pdx10 (my only would be camera) would not be able to film anything like that. I though that would be limiting.

Has anyone had success filiming at night?

I don't think there are any ways to guard against this in terms of filters... or in post production...

[Kenn Jolemore]

No problem shooting candles or at night with my 950 but I am aware that it is a problem for alot of the 950's and X10's from reading various posts. I know at least one person who returned there 950 and got another that did not exhibit the smear problem of the first 950 he bought.Ansd of course Forrestt who got a VX2000 and is selling it now after buying the 950 and cvomplaining alot about it.
Of course I would much rather have the 150 if I could afford the difference, but that is another story:0)
KennJ

[Frank Granovski]

Unless you need or want DVCAM, why not go with the VX2000? and add a Beachtek and a Senn..., just a suggestion.

How about the Real 16:9 how many TV lines is it resolving at that resolution on the PDX10 or PDX10P.

I am thinking of making some travel documentaries (production running from feb 03 to jan 04 and I thought by the time I do post production the demand for 16:9 will be even higher.

[Frank Granovski]

You have a point there. But then the MX500 and DVX100 (if it's available in AU) would also be good condenders.

[Julian Luttrell]

I've had my PDX10P for two weeks now, and in general I am pleased with it for a small camera.

It is true that it is prone to smear when confronted by a very high contrast scene (light bulb and shadows for example) - but this seems to be very variable camera to camera. Nothing I have n ot been able to fix by selecting the scene carefully.

I don't use the cam in very low light levels - the worst is indoor shots without camera lighting - so I have not noticed any shortfall here when compared to PD150.

I _do_ mind not having internal ND filters.

16:9 performance, compared to other cams in this price range, is very good. There is a slight vertical softening - comparisons are made a little more difficult by slightly enhanced sharpness caused (I believe) by designing the cam to give hirez still images. As for line count - in the camera section it will be no worse than 4:3 since it uses an even greater width of the CCDs. This will be brought down to 530 lines (as quoted on the Sony site) on tape since this is the (very optimistic) best that can be recorded on DVCAM.

Its size. I love the small size. It takes up less baggage space. It's easy to heft. It's small enough to hand-hold steadily. My wife doesn't think it looks silly.


Regards,

Julian

[Steven Forrest]

This was written to KennJ and sent by E-mail directly to him, by me just now, when I just read his remarks from above. I feel the whole group should hear my side of the "story" as well so the E-mail is copied here:

You (KennJ) wrote and I quote:

No problem shooting candles or at night with my 950 but I am aware that it is a problem for alot of the 950's and X10's from reading various posts. I know at least one person who returned there 950 and got another that did not exhibit the smear problem of the first 950 he bought.Ansd of course Forrestt who got a VX2000 and is selling it now after buying the 950 and cvomplaining alot about it.
Of course I would much rather have the 150 if I could afford the difference, but that is another story:0)
KennJ

My reply:

You didn't read my posts very well obviously. I had a problem with the TRV950 I purchased and sent it to Sony who confirmed that vertical smear was a known and inherent problem of CCDs and especially the small ones. I never got the camera back from Sony because the smear problem WAS a problem for me, even if other people could live with it or find ways around it. Sony was very good to me. I'll leave it at that since it is none of your business how I dealt with Sony.

Also, I never tried another TRV950 so I never said that "another" one did not exhibit the smear problem of the first 950.

The VX2000 I did eventually get was far superior to the TRV950-- in ALL lighting conditions! There was no comparison between the 2 machines. The VX2000 IS Prosumer-pro. In my opinion, the TRV950 is not "pro" anything. Just another high-end expensive camcorder.

The reasons I was going to sell my entire video system and may still do it if the right buyer comes along, had NOTHING to do with the quality of the VX2000. Since I upgraded the relatively poor audio performance of the VX2000 with an expensive mic system using the Sennheiser M66 mic. as the core of the system, the sound as I configured it, was, in my opinion, about as good as you could expect from an on the camcorder mic. system. I have absolutely no complaints about the VX2000. It is a fantastic machine and blows the TRV950 away.

Please get the facts straight before you defame someone on a public forum.
Thank you.
Steven Forrest

[John Jay]

vertical smear:

if you mean white vertical lines extending full frame height about a few pixels wide - I have seen this on many cameras under certain conditions even on 1/2" chippers. Furthermore all the instruction manuals I have read have highlighted it as a feature rather than a fault.

I have noticed the condition appears when shooting something of extremely high contrast (such as a light reflection off a chrome object) at a high speed of 1/250 or greater when in manual mode and also on automatic exposure - sports mode - of some cameras (which I later found to be operating at 1/250 or greater).

The solution in all cases was to reduce shutter speed (slower) until the vertical lines disappear.

[Steven Forrest]

I am a novice at this field but can only state that the VX2000 produces a far better picture under the same exact lighting conditions than my TRV950 did. Where there was excessive (to me) smear due to "extreme" lighting conditions with the TRV950, there was none or only a very slight amount with the VX2000. Also, most importantly, when any was seen with the VX2000, it QUICKLY disappeared when the camera was moved slightly, unlike the long lasting smear I got from the TRV950.
These are only my opinions and what I experienced. Others will have different opinions and may tolerate video with side effects that I am unable to accept.
SF

[John Jay]

Steven

I could show you VX2k footage with appalling vertical stripes on it shot at a Grand Prix race meeting on a very bright day. However the reason was straightforward - I had cranked the speed up when instead I should have switched in the ND, however it didnt make me want to trash the camera!

The point I am making is that if you move out of the cameras operational envelope then unpredictable things will happen and it is not a fault of the camera.

[Steven Forrest]

Thanks for the info. It's good news!
SF

[Kenn Jolemore]

Forrestt , sorry you feel defamed but in truth I just mentioned that you bought a 950 did not like it , returned it for a 2000 and decided to sell it also; further ,I though you posted that you decided that videography was not for you when you posted that you were going to sell you 2000.
If you read my post that upset you , you will see that it was another person who got a second 950 that did not have the smear problem of his first 950.
Again,sorry you were offended by my post and any misinformation it contained as pertains to your situation. Many people buy gear they decide they will not use and than sell it .It is nothing to be ashamed or upset about.Makes way more sense than putting it in a closet forever.

KennJ
P.S. Ther 950 ,like all camera's requires user knowledge to give the best quality it offers and that takes time & patience.