VX9000 / DSR200 / DSR250 various topics

Jun Galinato · October 10th, 2003, 12:10 PM

What tape are you using? Are you using a miniDV tapes? I haven't tried loading five tapes in one event since I am using a large DVCAM 184 tapes and that will finish the entire occasion for the day.

Allan Gordon · October 10th, 2003, 03:43 PM

Jun, sorry to confuse.

Its one full size dvcam tape. Loading possibly one a week, I can load for 2 or 3 weeks no problem.

Then the following week it spits it back out. I can reload it and it goes in fine.

Cheers.

Mike Rehmus · October 10th, 2003, 04:06 PM

Really a bad practice to leave tape in a transport except when you are using the system.

Springs remain stretched, tension arms are left loaded as are some of the bearings in the transport. Sometimes tape is left in contact with the drum and heads, etc. And part of the tape may be left out of the cassette.

My buddy from Sony R&D in San Jose has a fit whenever anyone leaves a tape in their transports. Says it lessens the life of the transports more than anyone realizes.

Steve Sawtelle · October 11th, 2003, 07:30 PM

I'm on the fence on this one. On the one hand, Mike's suggestion makes sense (and I've seen this mentioned elsewhere). On the other hand, the only reference I can find to removing tapes is buried on page 158 of my VX2000 manual (and it basically says to do so when your camcorder is "...not to be used for a long period of time."). If someone in Sony R&D get excited about removing tapes from the transport, it begs the question why the Sony technical writers and product support specialists don't mention this in big bold letters on page 2 of the product documentation?

For the time being, I'll probably err on the safe side and remove tapes when I'm done recording. However, it sure would be nice if Sony would formally acknowledge this practice - either in an errata or addendum to the production documentation or some sort of formal announcement on their website. At the very least, it sounds like there is room for Sony to improve their internal communications.

Mike Rehmus · October 12th, 2003, 02:33 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Sawtelle : On the other hand, the only reference I can find to removing tapes is buried on page 158 of my VX2000 manual (and it basically says to do so when your camcorder is "...not to be used for a long period of time."). -->>>

Anytime a manufacturer places something negative in their printed literature, no matter how buried, I pay attentiion.

Steve Sawtelle · October 12th, 2003, 03:19 PM

I think you're missing my point. How many people do you think have ever read page 158 of the VX2000 manual (or any other technical manual for that matter...)? On page 7 there is a section entitled "Precautions on camcorder care". If removing the tape from the transport is so important for the longevity of the tape transport, it seems like the technical writers would include in in this section. Further, on page 16 there is a section which actually leads the reader to believe it's in their best interest to leave the tape in the camcorder if they want to ensure smooth transitions from one recording to the next. I'm not trying to be argumentive here - rather I'm merely suggesting there is an opportunity for Sony to more clearly state their position on this issue and/or improve their product documentation.

Mike Rehmus · October 12th, 2003, 04:58 PM

My point is that they never will do that. If and when they mention something negative, it usually has to be a serious issue before they do so. Burying it is SOP.

I agree with you and did understand your point. But Sony will never do what you suggest.

Law Tyler · March 19th, 2004, 06:39 AM

Anybody heard anything on the next generation of DSR-250? I am needing to get another 250, obviously don't want to just get the "old technology" although I find not much difference between the two, other than the excellent lens cap design.

Lou Bruno · March 19th, 2004, 10:06 AM

Forget it! Sony is going over to HD.

Mike Rehmus · March 19th, 2004, 12:15 PM

Maybe Sony is but the world has not yet gotten there since the price of entry for the least expensive 'monitor' is still way up there compared to the cost of SD television.

DVDs didn't take off until the players got down in the $100 region. Most people cannot afford to spend even $500 on a television set if they don't have to .

So while we will probably get HD before it is an issue with our customers (we, on the other hand may very well want it for ourselves) I'm not certain ANY of my customers want HD right now. I reluctantly started offering DVDs just 6 months ago. I never lost a sale because of no DVD offering.

BTW, given the expense of the JVC HD camera with a single chip, what do you think the equivalent of a PD170 with 3 HD CCDs and the much higher quality lens will cost? If the camera is at all good, it will be pricey.

Law Tyler · March 19th, 2004, 08:54 PM

Yeah, and it (HD) has to be a shoulder-mount camera, else it would not fly in wedding videography -- the "look" of the setup is more important than the result, ironically.

I could use HD, it will be like having two cameras simultanously shooting at the same thing same time, for output as conventional 720x480i. Do the "zooming" in post, you can get a wide view or a closeup view depending on how you do the crop, presuming the quality is there due to the 1080i, and the glass and everything else is fine at that level. Hey, we can even get "idiots" to shoot then, as long as they can point in the general direction, ha, ha.

BTW, I am serious, does the above logic work if 1080i is available?

But PD-170 size is probably no-go.

Mathew Evan · March 21st, 2004, 12:04 AM

If you feel you have to show up at a wedding carrying a 12lb. camera just to make an impression you are wrong. Some of the best work that I've seen has been done with palmcorders. Those guys are also getting upwards of 3K or more a gig. Bride's book videographers not on camera size but their work and referrals. What size camera you use probably rarely enters their mind.

Sony's HDV cam that they are revealing is indeed similar in size as the pd-170.

Mike Rehmus · March 21st, 2004, 03:42 PM

Guys, I split this thread and moved the wedding business issues portion to "Taking Care of Business," where I think it will get a LOT more attention.

It is a good discussion and more people need to hear/participate in it.

Jun Galinato · May 15th, 2004, 08:57 PM

DSR250 price at B&H went up by $600.00, wonder why?

Law Tyler · May 15th, 2004, 10:43 PM

It sure did.

Well, guess I was lucky to get my 2nd DSR-250 before the price goes up.

If Sony is going to coming out with a DSR-270, by logic the price would go down instead of up. Perhaps Sony is discontinuing this "middle" model? You either have to go DSR-390 or 170?

October 10th, 2003, 12:10 PM	#106
Jun Galinato Major Player Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Auburn, Washington Posts: 231	What tape are you using? Are you using a miniDV tapes? I haven't tried loading five tapes in one event since I am using a large DVCAM 184 tapes and that will finish the entire occasion for the day. __________________ Sony Z7U, Canon 5D Mark II, Canon 24-105 F4L, Canon 70-200 F2.8L, Canon 580 EXII, Zoom H2.

October 10th, 2003, 03:43 PM	#107
Allan Gordon New Boot Join Date: May 2003 Location: Scotland Posts: 12	Tape Loading Jun, sorry to confuse. Its one full size dvcam tape. Loading possibly one a week, I can load for 2 or 3 weeks no problem. Then the following week it spits it back out. I can reload it and it goes in fine. Cheers.

October 10th, 2003, 04:06 PM	#108
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	Really a bad practice to leave tape in a transport except when you are using the system. Springs remain stretched, tension arms are left loaded as are some of the bearings in the transport. Sometimes tape is left in contact with the drum and heads, etc. And part of the tape may be left out of the cassette. My buddy from Sony R&D in San Jose has a fit whenever anyone leaves a tape in their transports. Says it lessens the life of the transports more than anyone realizes. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

October 11th, 2003, 07:30 PM	#109
Steve Sawtelle New Boot Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Storrs, CT Posts: 6	Sony - please take note. I'm on the fence on this one. On the one hand, Mike's suggestion makes sense (and I've seen this mentioned elsewhere). On the other hand, the only reference I can find to removing tapes is buried on page 158 of my VX2000 manual (and it basically says to do so when your camcorder is "...not to be used for a long period of time."). If someone in Sony R&D get excited about removing tapes from the transport, it begs the question why the Sony technical writers and product support specialists don't mention this in big bold letters on page 2 of the product documentation? For the time being, I'll probably err on the safe side and remove tapes when I'm done recording. However, it sure would be nice if Sony would formally acknowledge this practice - either in an errata or addendum to the production documentation or some sort of formal announcement on their website. At the very least, it sounds like there is room for Sony to improve their internal communications.

October 12th, 2003, 02:33 PM	#110
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	Re: Sony - please take note. <<<-- Originally posted by Steve Sawtelle : On the other hand, the only reference I can find to removing tapes is buried on page 158 of my VX2000 manual (and it basically says to do so when your camcorder is "...not to be used for a long period of time."). -->>> Anytime a manufacturer places something negative in their printed literature, no matter how buried, I pay attentiion. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

October 12th, 2003, 03:19 PM	#111
Steve Sawtelle New Boot Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Storrs, CT Posts: 6	I think you're missing my point. How many people do you think have ever read page 158 of the VX2000 manual (or any other technical manual for that matter...)? On page 7 there is a section entitled "Precautions on camcorder care". If removing the tape from the transport is so important for the longevity of the tape transport, it seems like the technical writers would include in in this section. Further, on page 16 there is a section which actually leads the reader to believe it's in their best interest to leave the tape in the camcorder if they want to ensure smooth transitions from one recording to the next. I'm not trying to be argumentive here - rather I'm merely suggesting there is an opportunity for Sony to more clearly state their position on this issue and/or improve their product documentation.

October 12th, 2003, 04:58 PM	#112
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	My point is that they never will do that. If and when they mention something negative, it usually has to be a serious issue before they do so. Burying it is SOP. I agree with you and did understand your point. But Sony will never do what you suggest. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

March 19th, 2004, 06:39 AM	#113
Law Tyler Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Plano, TX Posts: 204	News on DSR-270? Anybody heard anything on the next generation of DSR-250? I am needing to get another 250, obviously don't want to just get the "old technology" although I find not much difference between the two, other than the excellent lens cap design.

March 19th, 2004, 10:06 AM	#114
Lou Bruno Go Cycle Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Huntington, NY Posts: 815	Forget it! Sony is going over to HD. __________________ Lou Bruno

March 19th, 2004, 12:15 PM	#115
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	Maybe Sony is but the world has not yet gotten there since the price of entry for the least expensive 'monitor' is still way up there compared to the cost of SD television. DVDs didn't take off until the players got down in the $100 region. Most people cannot afford to spend even $500 on a television set if they don't have to . So while we will probably get HD before it is an issue with our customers (we, on the other hand may very well want it for ourselves) I'm not certain ANY of my customers want HD right now. I reluctantly started offering DVDs just 6 months ago. I never lost a sale because of no DVD offering. BTW, given the expense of the JVC HD camera with a single chip, what do you think the equivalent of a PD170 with 3 HD CCDs and the much higher quality lens will cost? If the camera is at all good, it will be pricey. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

March 19th, 2004, 08:54 PM	#116
Law Tyler Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Plano, TX Posts: 204	Yeah, and it (HD) has to be a shoulder-mount camera, else it would not fly in wedding videography -- the "look" of the setup is more important than the result, ironically. I could use HD, it will be like having two cameras simultanously shooting at the same thing same time, for output as conventional 720x480i. Do the "zooming" in post, you can get a wide view or a closeup view depending on how you do the crop, presuming the quality is there due to the 1080i, and the glass and everything else is fine at that level. Hey, we can even get "idiots" to shoot then, as long as they can point in the general direction, ha, ha. BTW, I am serious, does the above logic work if 1080i is available? But PD-170 size is probably no-go.

March 21st, 2004, 12:04 AM	#117
Mathew Evan Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: United States Posts: 53	If you feel you have to show up at a wedding carrying a 12lb. camera just to make an impression you are wrong. Some of the best work that I've seen has been done with palmcorders. Those guys are also getting upwards of 3K or more a gig. Bride's book videographers not on camera size but their work and referrals. What size camera you use probably rarely enters their mind. Sony's HDV cam that they are revealing is indeed similar in size as the pd-170.

March 21st, 2004, 03:42 PM	#118
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	Guys, I split this thread and moved the wedding business issues portion to "Taking Care of Business," where I think it will get a LOT more attention. It is a good discussion and more people need to hear/participate in it. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

May 15th, 2004, 08:57 PM	#119
Jun Galinato Major Player Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Auburn, Washington Posts: 231	Dsr250 DSR250 price at B&H went up by $600.00, wonder why? __________________ Sony Z7U, Canon 5D Mark II, Canon 24-105 F4L, Canon 70-200 F2.8L, Canon 580 EXII, Zoom H2.

May 15th, 2004, 10:43 PM	#120
Law Tyler Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Plano, TX Posts: 204	It sure did. Well, guess I was lucky to get my 2nd DSR-250 before the price goes up. If Sony is going to coming out with a DSR-270, by logic the price would go down instead of up. Perhaps Sony is discontinuing this "middle" model? You either have to go DSR-390 or 170?