Whats a used PAL pdx-10 worth, at DVinfo.net

Brendan Sundry · September 30th, 2005, 09:16 PM

I have a friend who is interested in getting a 2nd hand pdx10 as he used one at university.

Whats the rough cost? i told him about 2k.

B.Sundry

Tom Hardwick · October 1st, 2005, 10:02 AM

Where are you Brendan - there is a lot of difference between NZ$ and UKP.
The starting point for second hand gear is always half the price you could get it for new. Remember a big chunk of the new price was tax and guarantee cover, so that will be wiped for starters. Then if you know the PDX10's history (and you can read it has low hours on the head) then you can bump up. If you're buying blind you may well have to bump down.

But take half price as the starting point and remember that the new A1 is a lot less than 2k (UKP).

tom.

Brendan Sundry · October 2nd, 2005, 02:44 AM

Im in australia, so is my friend, A pdx seems more expenisive than an hc1 at the moment here.

Ian Landy · October 3rd, 2005, 12:12 AM

Hey Brendan, have you checked out www.globalmediapro.com in NZ?
Cheers, Ian

Brendan Sundry · October 3rd, 2005, 04:32 AM

Ian, those cameras seem many thousands cheaper, ie the fx1 is $3800 Aud and here it would be about 6k i think.
WHats the catch?

B. Sundry

Chris Thiele · October 3rd, 2005, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brendan Sundry

Ian, those cameras seem many thousands cheaper, ie the fx1 is $3800 Aud and here it would be about 6k i think.
WHats the catch?

B. Sundry

I bought my PDX10p from them. They are incredibly reliable and trustworthy. From NZ to little Tassie in under 3 days. You do need to remeber that you will pay GST on that price with postage into Australia but it still works out mountains cheaper. Before I bought from them I did my research and found they had a good reputation. I'm a happy customer :)

Ian Landy · October 3rd, 2005, 03:35 PM

I haven't bought from them yet Brendan but I probably will in the near future. A friend of mine who has a pd10 recommended them to me. I have researched far and wide and they seem to be the best priced for Aussie buyers - even a fair bit cheaper than the ebay sellers.

Good luck, Ian

Brendan Sundry · October 3rd, 2005, 05:46 PM

Thats great news guys, That dvx100 looks kinda tempting at 3800 plus gst and shipping.

Thanks again.

Ian Landy · October 3rd, 2005, 09:15 PM

There are a lot of tempting cam's there eh! It seems to read like the delivery is included in the price Brendan. An extra bonus! Something I haven,t verified with them as yet.

Ian

Tom Hardwick · October 4th, 2005, 12:58 AM

If you’re buying a new camcorder it makes sense to get one designed to shoot native widescreen. You can quickly tell if this is so by looking at the shape of its sidescreen. With these cameras less of the chip is used if you decide to shoot in the 4:3 mode, and I feel that degrading the 4:3 rather than the 16:9 is the best compromise.

tom.

Ronald Lee · October 6th, 2005, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Hardwick

If you’re buying a new camcorder it makes sense to get one designed to shoot native widescreen. You can quickly tell if this is so by looking at the shape of its sidescreen. With these cameras less of the chip is used if you decide to shoot in the 4:3 mode, and I feel that degrading the 4:3 rather than the 16:9 is the best compromise.

tom.

Tom, but shooting in 4:3 with the PDX10 still gives more image resolution than, say, a PD150/170, correct? Or no?

Tom Hardwick · October 7th, 2005, 01:24 AM

Shooting with the PDX10 in the 4:3 mode gives better resolution than shooting in its 16:9 mode. But comparing the PDX10 to the PD170? Yes, I'd say that in 'ideal' conditions, in a well lit laboratory, on axis with a test chart, the PDX10 would win the resolution test.

But it has tiny 1/5" chips such that differential focus is near impossible. The chips exhibit horrible CCD smear in any high contrast situation and the camera is near useless in the gloom alongside a PD170. To me these are real-life shooting conditions and carry greater importance that all-out resolution.

In the days of open reel tape recorders advertisers laboured on the amazing frequency responses that their machines could faithfully capture, and the public began to think frequency response was the measurement of high fidelity. It was when they heard the wow and flutter and the hiss levels that they begun to suspect that hi-fi is a combination of a whole host of parameters.

So it is with camcorders Ronald.

tom.

September 30th, 2005, 09:16 PM	#1
Brendan Sundry Regular Crew Join Date: May 2004 Location: Australia Posts: 112	Whats a used PAL pdx-10 worth, I have a friend who is interested in getting a 2nd hand pdx10 as he used one at university. Whats the rough cost? i told him about 2k. B.Sundry

October 1st, 2005, 10:02 AM	#2
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	Where are you Brendan - there is a lot of difference between NZ$ and UKP. The starting point for second hand gear is always half the price you could get it for new. Remember a big chunk of the new price was tax and guarantee cover, so that will be wiped for starters. Then if you know the PDX10's history (and you can read it has low hours on the head) then you can bump up. If you're buying blind you may well have to bump down. But take half price as the starting point and remember that the new A1 is a lot less than 2k (UKP). tom.

October 2nd, 2005, 02:44 AM	#3
Brendan Sundry Regular Crew Join Date: May 2004 Location: Australia Posts: 112	Im in australia, so is my friend, A pdx seems more expenisive than an hc1 at the moment here.

October 3rd, 2005, 12:12 AM	#4
Ian Landy Regular Crew Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Ocean Shores NSW Australia Posts: 28	Hey Brendan, have you checked out www.globalmediapro.com in NZ? Cheers, Ian

October 3rd, 2005, 04:32 AM	#5
Brendan Sundry Regular Crew Join Date: May 2004 Location: Australia Posts: 112	Ian, those cameras seem many thousands cheaper, ie the fx1 is $3800 Aud and here it would be about 6k i think. WHats the catch? B. Sundry

October 3rd, 2005, 03:35 PM	#7
Ian Landy Regular Crew Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Ocean Shores NSW Australia Posts: 28	I haven't bought from them yet Brendan but I probably will in the near future. A friend of mine who has a pd10 recommended them to me. I have researched far and wide and they seem to be the best priced for Aussie buyers - even a fair bit cheaper than the ebay sellers. Good luck, Ian

October 3rd, 2005, 05:46 PM	#8
Brendan Sundry Regular Crew Join Date: May 2004 Location: Australia Posts: 112	Thats great news guys, That dvx100 looks kinda tempting at 3800 plus gst and shipping. Thanks again.

October 3rd, 2005, 09:15 PM	#9
Ian Landy Regular Crew Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Ocean Shores NSW Australia Posts: 28	There are a lot of tempting cam's there eh! It seems to read like the delivery is included in the price Brendan. An extra bonus! Something I haven,t verified with them as yet. Ian

October 4th, 2005, 12:58 AM	#10
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	If you’re buying a new camcorder it makes sense to get one designed to shoot native widescreen. You can quickly tell if this is so by looking at the shape of its sidescreen. With these cameras less of the chip is used if you decide to shoot in the 4:3 mode, and I feel that degrading the 4:3 rather than the 16:9 is the best compromise. tom.

October 7th, 2005, 01:24 AM	#12
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	Shooting with the PDX10 in the 4:3 mode gives better resolution than shooting in its 16:9 mode. But comparing the PDX10 to the PD170? Yes, I'd say that in 'ideal' conditions, in a well lit laboratory, on axis with a test chart, the PDX10 would win the resolution test. But it has tiny 1/5" chips such that differential focus is near impossible. The chips exhibit horrible CCD smear in any high contrast situation and the camera is near useless in the gloom alongside a PD170. To me these are real-life shooting conditions and carry greater importance that all-out resolution. In the days of open reel tape recorders advertisers laboured on the amazing frequency responses that their machines could faithfully capture, and the public began to think frequency response was the measurement of high fidelity. It was when they heard the wow and flutter and the hiss levels that they begun to suspect that hi-fi is a combination of a whole host of parameters. So it is with camcorders Ronald. tom.