|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
February 20th, 2004, 04:01 AM | #16 |
Trustee
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,483
|
I'm not so sure the VX/PD body is metal. I heard
it's some sort of composite. Surprising no one seems to know the truth. Heard it's magnesium something-or-other. |
February 20th, 2004, 10:16 AM | #17 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 88
|
I'm not sure it matters much. My experience in still cameras and in other areas almost makes makes me prefer a good polycarbonate body over metal. It seems to give more when roughed up, whereas metal often has no give.
A composite body on a metal frame is my preferred body, although magnesium still has its appeal.
__________________
One day at a time. |
February 21st, 2004, 09:58 AM | #18 |
Go Cycle
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Huntington, NY
Posts: 815
|
Some retailers receive sales promotions or incentives unkown to the consumer. When this is the case, a certain camera manufacturer is the ITEM OF THE WEEK. Not only will the retailer reap a profit from the initial sale but will receive a hefty rebate check from the camera company.
So be careful if a sales person steers you towards another camera. With that said, I would get the PD 170 if you are not making movies and if low light capability is an issue.
__________________
Lou Bruno |
February 21st, 2004, 03:43 PM | #19 |
Posts: n/a
|
Ok, Lastly... Steady shot and handling
Ok, lastly, a big concern of mine is how easy it is to use either the PD170 VS. DVX100a for Handheld use
Also, I have read about sony super steady shot. Keep in mind most of my shots will have to be tripod free (Filiming concerts up on stage) So the HAND HELD Stability factor is huge. Tell me what you think John |
February 21st, 2004, 04:43 PM | #20 |
Trustee
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,483
|
Well, with a wide angle on the PD, steadyshot is not that
effective. Are you going to be using a wide angle? |
February 21st, 2004, 05:34 PM | #21 |
Retired DV Info Net Almunus
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 6,943
|
Dave,
Actually, to be more specific, the effects of optical image stabilization are less pronounced as the field of view becomes wider. So, indeed, if you use a wide-angle adapter -and- shoot wide your handheld shots will be a bit less rocky. The closer-in you zoom, the shakier the handheld shot will become, and the greater the need for ois, irrespective of the use of a w-a accessory lens.
__________________
Lady X Films: A lady with a boring wardrobe...and a global mission. Hey, you don't have enough stuff! Buy with confidence from our sponsors. Hand-picked as the best in the business...Really! See some of my work one frame at a time: www.KenTanaka.com |
February 21st, 2004, 05:53 PM | #22 |
Trustee
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,483
|
I thought there was something more to it than
that, seeing as the manual warns that attachment of a wide angle lens "may influence the SteadyShot function". |
February 21st, 2004, 06:46 PM | #23 |
Wrangler
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Vallejo, California
Posts: 4,049
|
The good news is that as the shot gets wider, the steadyshot is less necessary.
__________________
Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel! |
February 21st, 2004, 07:33 PM | #24 |
Trustee
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,483
|
I haven't really compared around, and I always shoot
with my wide on, but I haven't been terrifically impressed with the VX/PD OIS. |
February 22nd, 2004, 02:29 AM | #25 |
Posts: n/a
|
Hey, what about that steady stick?
I saw some "Steady Stick" contraption where you put a rod onto your belt, and it supposedly makes the camera alot more stable. Does anyone else know of this? Also Mike, your making it like theres a reason and/or disadvantage to using the OIS at times, I thought you would always keep this on?
john |
February 22nd, 2004, 11:18 AM | #26 |
Trustee
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,483
|
Actually, some say to turn OIS off when the cam is on a tripod.
Or if you are doing "floating camera" shots, as the OIS will fight what you are doing. I have noticed a jerkiness on panning with OIS on. Anyone else had this experience? |
February 22nd, 2004, 12:11 PM | #27 |
Posts: n/a
|
really?
So lets get back to the first question. What is a better camera to hold the dvx100a or the SonyPD170?
|
February 25th, 2004, 10:53 PM | #28 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 54
|
I, too, am deciding between a GL2, a 170, or 2100. Use will always be hand held, primarily outdoor (travel / animal / zoo / vacation). I already own an XL-1S, so I would not have to buy a couple of spare batteries, and the menu should be pretty familiar.
The OIS works GREAT on the XL-1S, so I presume it also would on the GL2...(?) The big decision maker for me is the 20x zoom on the GL2. I find the XL-1S' 16x short at full zoom, so I bought the 1.6 teleconverter. I'd appreciate everyone's comments about the GL2 as you compare the 170 and 2100. Also, what are the differences between the 170 and 2100? |
February 25th, 2004, 11:51 PM | #29 | |
Outer Circle
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Hope, BC
Posts: 7,524
|
Quote:
|
|
February 26th, 2004, 02:35 AM | #30 |
Trustee
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,483
|
And the 170 doesn't do that annoying constant
shutting itself off every couple minutes. |
| ||||||
|
|