Would you upgrade? at DVinfo.net

Lou Bruno · March 16th, 2004, 06:57 PM

I would like to "throw" a question out for discussion:

If you (or do) own a VX2000 would you upgrade to the VX2100 for the extra features and sell your VX2000?

Boyd Ostroff · March 16th, 2004, 07:45 PM

Personally I would not upgrade (I do own a VX-2000). None of the new features look that compelling to me, although they certainly enhance the camera. Considering the hit you would take selling your used camera, I don't think it would make sense. Since you're asking the question it would imply that you don't find any of the new features are "must haves" either... or do they address some specific problems you have with the VX-2000?

Lou Bruno · March 16th, 2004, 07:51 PM

I just threw out the question to get a feel on how important the upgrades to the VX2100 are to current owners of the VX2000.
I personally agree with you that the loss does not justify a new VX2100 but others may disagree with us and have good reasons to upgrade.

<<<-- Originally posted by Boyd Ostroff : Personally I would not upgrade (I do own a VX-2000). None of the new features look that compelling to me, although they certainly enhance the camera. Considering the hit you would take selling your used camera, I don't think it would make sense. Since you're asking the question it would imply that you don't find any of the new features are "must haves" either... or do they address some specific problems you have with the VX-2000? -->>>

Bryan Beasleigh · March 16th, 2004, 10:03 PM

I just had my VX2000 audio modified, that oughtta hold me for another year. maybe by that time Sony will have put a decent audio chain in the VX/PD series.

There's very little to be gained at this time, I'd wait.

Mike Rehmus · March 16th, 2004, 11:11 PM

I'd take the delta and spend it on another camera or another goodie. Or maybe (really?) just bank the diff.

Alan Christensen · March 17th, 2004, 01:09 AM

I have both a VX2000 and a VX2100. I actually prefer using the 2000 because I prefer its viewfinder. The sound on my VX2000 has always been pretty good, so I haven't found a big difference with the VX2100. I'd stick with the VX2000 if I were you.

Boyd Ostroff · March 17th, 2004, 08:24 AM

There's a review of the PD-170 in a recent issue of Videography magazine. The author says he can see an actual improvement in the quality of the image vs the PD-150. That's really the first time I'd heard this. I have not seen or used a VX-2100 or PD-170, but for those of you that are familiar with them, do you think there's any truth to this?

Brian Standing · March 17th, 2004, 12:49 PM

Certainly if Sony's claims that they've increased the light sensitivity down to 1 lux are true, I would expect you'd see a visible difference in image quality in low light.

In good lighting, I'd think any difference would be minimal.

I have a PD-150, and I'm not really thinking about upgrading to the PD-170. All nice improvements (especially for a new buyer), but not enough to make me jump. Including the wide-angle adapter on the PD-170, is a nice touch, but since I just bought a Century .55x, it's not much of an incentive to me.

(NTSC/PAL switchability, true 16:9 chips or full-resolution progressive scan, on the other hand, would have had me salivatin'.....)

Bill Pryor · March 17th, 2004, 01:33 PM

I haven't seen a 2100 yet, but from all that I've read, the improvements are minimal. If you already have a 2000 or a PD150, there's no compelling reason to sell it and get a 2100 or 170. On their professional cameras, Sony comes out with periodic upgrades all the time. In the case of the DSR500, for example, there was the /L1 version, then the 570. None of these upgrades affects the image appreciably. The /L1 fixed a couple of annoyances and the 570 added a CCU. Same with the DSR300/370/390--gradual minor improvements...but they don't make the original obsolete.

Alan Christensen · March 18th, 2004, 01:45 AM

I have done some crude low light comparisons between my VX-2100 and my VX-2000. The best way to describe the result is not that the VX-2100 can film things at light levels where the VX-2000 would be completely black. The difference is that the VX-2100 has slightly less noise at those light levels where noise becomes an issue. The difference is not huge, but it is definitely there. I believe that in candlelight environments you would perceive a slightly cleaner picture from the 2100. At higher light levels the cameras quickly become indistinguishable.

Frank Granovski · March 18th, 2004, 02:24 AM

Lou, I wouldn't upgrade if I owned a VX2000. But I would get the audio fixed. On the other hand, one member here upgraded because he shoots the Northern Lights up in Alaska, and enters these contests. So for him, upgrading was a must.

Glen Elliott · March 18th, 2004, 08:47 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Frank Granovski : Lou, I wouldn't upgrade if I owned a VX2000. But I would get the audio fixed. On the other hand, one member here upgraded because he shoots the Northern Lights up in Alaska, and enters these contests. So for him, upgrading was a must. -->>>

Audio fixed? What's wrong with the VX2000's audio?

Dave Largent · March 18th, 2004, 02:59 PM

Alan, I noticed your comment about preferring the
2000 viewfinder. I feel the same, even though
the 2100 is suppose to be an improvement. Why do *you* like the 2000's better?

Greg J. Winter · March 18th, 2004, 10:04 PM

If anyone is interested in finding out more about the "audio fix" that works for both the VX2000 and the PD150 go to http://www.gregjwinter.com/modification2.htm

If you want to "cut to the chase" be sure to look at this page:
http://www.gregjwinter.com/compare.htm

Thanks. -Greg.

Lou Bruno · March 19th, 2004, 10:09 AM

I decided to upgrade to the VX2100 because I got an extremely good deal on the camera and because I had little use on my VX2000, I didn't take a beating.

All in All, same picture quality and very little noticable lux sensitivity. I like the handle but am not too pleased with the larger EVF.

I know.............I know................Then why did you upgrade you ask?

BECAUSE I AM ADDICTED TO VIDEO :-)

March 16th, 2004, 06:57 PM	#1
Lou Bruno Go Cycle Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Huntington, NY Posts: 815	Would you upgrade? I would like to "throw" a question out for discussion: If you (or do) own a VX2000 would you upgrade to the VX2100 for the extra features and sell your VX2000? __________________ Lou Bruno

March 16th, 2004, 07:51 PM	#3
Lou Bruno Go Cycle Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Huntington, NY Posts: 815	I just threw out the question to get a feel on how important the upgrades to the VX2100 are to current owners of the VX2000. I personally agree with you that the loss does not justify a new VX2100 but others may disagree with us and have good reasons to upgrade. <<<-- Originally posted by Boyd Ostroff : Personally I would not upgrade (I do own a VX-2000). None of the new features look that compelling to me, although they certainly enhance the camera. Considering the hit you would take selling your used camera, I don't think it would make sense. Since you're asking the question it would imply that you don't find any of the new features are "must haves" either... or do they address some specific problems you have with the VX-2000? -->>> __________________ Lou Bruno

March 16th, 2004, 11:11 PM	#5
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	I'd take the delta and spend it on another camera or another goodie. Or maybe (really?) just bank the diff. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

March 17th, 2004, 08:24 AM	#7
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,802	what about image quality? There's a review of the PD-170 in a recent issue of Videography magazine. The author says he can see an actual improvement in the quality of the image vs the PD-150. That's really the first time I'd heard this. I have not seen or used a VX-2100 or PD-170, but for those of you that are familiar with them, do you think there's any truth to this?

March 18th, 2004, 10:04 PM	#14
Greg J. Winter New Boot Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Rochester, NY Posts: 21	PD150 and VX2000 Audio Fix If anyone is interested in finding out more about the "audio fix" that works for both the VX2000 and the PD150 go to http://www.gregjwinter.com/modification2.htm If you want to "cut to the chase" be sure to look at this page: http://www.gregjwinter.com/compare.htm Thanks. -Greg. __________________ Greg J. Winter Electronics Engineer www.gregjwinter.com

March 16th, 2004, 07:45 PM	#2
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,802	Personally I would not upgrade (I do own a VX-2000). None of the new features look that compelling to me, although they certainly enhance the camera. Considering the hit you would take selling your used camera, I don't think it would make sense. Since you're asking the question it would imply that you don't find any of the new features are "must haves" either... or do they address some specific problems you have with the VX-2000?

March 16th, 2004, 10:03 PM	#4
Bryan Beasleigh Trustee Join Date: May 2002 Location: Barrie, Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,922	I just had my VX2000 audio modified, that oughtta hold me for another year. maybe by that time Sony will have put a decent audio chain in the VX/PD series. There's very little to be gained at this time, I'd wait.

March 17th, 2004, 01:09 AM	#6
Alan Christensen Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: California Posts: 139	I have both a VX2000 and a VX2100. I actually prefer using the 2000 because I prefer its viewfinder. The sound on my VX2000 has always been pretty good, so I haven't found a big difference with the VX2100. I'd stick with the VX2000 if I were you.

March 17th, 2004, 12:49 PM	#8
Brian Standing Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Madison, Wisconsin Posts: 621	Certainly if Sony's claims that they've increased the light sensitivity down to 1 lux are true, I would expect you'd see a visible difference in image quality in low light. In good lighting, I'd think any difference would be minimal. I have a PD-150, and I'm not really thinking about upgrading to the PD-170. All nice improvements (especially for a new buyer), but not enough to make me jump. Including the wide-angle adapter on the PD-170, is a nice touch, but since I just bought a Century .55x, it's not much of an incentive to me. (NTSC/PAL switchability, true 16:9 chips or full-resolution progressive scan, on the other hand, would have had me salivatin'.....)

March 17th, 2004, 01:33 PM	#9
Bill Pryor Contributor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 4,449	I haven't seen a 2100 yet, but from all that I've read, the improvements are minimal. If you already have a 2000 or a PD150, there's no compelling reason to sell it and get a 2100 or 170. On their professional cameras, Sony comes out with periodic upgrades all the time. In the case of the DSR500, for example, there was the /L1 version, then the 570. None of these upgrades affects the image appreciably. The /L1 fixed a couple of annoyances and the 570 added a CCU. Same with the DSR300/370/390--gradual minor improvements...but they don't make the original obsolete.

March 18th, 2004, 01:45 AM	#10
Alan Christensen Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: California Posts: 139	I have done some crude low light comparisons between my VX-2100 and my VX-2000. The best way to describe the result is not that the VX-2100 can film things at light levels where the VX-2000 would be completely black. The difference is that the VX-2100 has slightly less noise at those light levels where noise becomes an issue. The difference is not huge, but it is definitely there. I believe that in candlelight environments you would perceive a slightly cleaner picture from the 2100. At higher light levels the cameras quickly become indistinguishable.

March 18th, 2004, 02:24 AM	#11
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	Lou, I wouldn't upgrade if I owned a VX2000. But I would get the audio fixed. On the other hand, one member here upgraded because he shoots the Northern Lights up in Alaska, and enters these contests. So for him, upgrading was a must.

March 18th, 2004, 08:47 AM	#12
Glen Elliott Wrangler Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Philadelphia, PA Posts: 2,898	<<<-- Originally posted by Frank Granovski : Lou, I wouldn't upgrade if I owned a VX2000. But I would get the audio fixed. On the other hand, one member here upgraded because he shoots the Northern Lights up in Alaska, and enters these contests. So for him, upgrading was a must. -->>> Audio fixed? What's wrong with the VX2000's audio?

March 18th, 2004, 02:59 PM	#13
Dave Largent Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 1,483	Alan, I noticed your comment about preferring the 2000 viewfinder. I feel the same, even though the 2100 is suppose to be an improvement. Why do you like the 2000's better?

March 19th, 2004, 10:09 AM	#15
Lou Bruno Go Cycle Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Huntington, NY Posts: 815	I decided to upgrade to the VX2100 because I got an extremely good deal on the camera and because I had little use on my VX2000, I didn't take a beating. All in All, same picture quality and very little noticable lux sensitivity. I like the handle but am not too pleased with the larger EVF. I know.............I know................Then why did you upgrade you ask? BECAUSE I AM ADDICTED TO VIDEO :-) __________________ Lou Bruno