VX9000 / DSR200 / DSR250 various topics

Mathew Evan · May 16th, 2004, 03:45 PM

Probably more of a supply vs. demand.

I'm surprised there hasn't been a 270 yet. The 250 must still be selling well.

Bill Pryor · May 20th, 2004, 12:13 PM

I've had a DSR250 for about 4 years. So far it's performed flawlessly. I don't use it as much as the DSR500, but there are certain situations where it is the best thing for the job. It is surprising that they are raising the price. I wonder if all the DVCAM stuff is going up.

Lou Bruno · May 25th, 2004, 06:13 AM

All cameras have gone up 5% in the last month.

JVC had a deal last month on their JVC GY DV5000 which included a 16X lens and rebate-price 4600-4700K

It is now 5600K for the same camera. YIKES!

Bill Pryor · May 25th, 2004, 09:03 AM

Even at $5600, that's still not a bad price for a 1/2" chip camera. Of course, you have to spend another $1500 or so for batteries and a charger, but still it's a lot less than a DSR370.

Mike Rehmus · May 25th, 2004, 09:13 AM

The 250 is a 1/3" chip camera, exact same opticals as the PD-150

Mathew Evan · May 25th, 2004, 10:06 AM

The 250 was a decent deal at $4200 or whatever B&H used to price it at but not now. In buying a large camera you're making an investment. I would tend to go for broke and spend the extra on the Ikegami HL-DV7W Professional 2/3" 16:9 DVCAM Camcorder. It's currently $11,000 at B&H and is a significantly better deal than the Sony DSR570 (unless you can find a good deal on a 500). Sure you still have to spend another 5K in a lens and batteries but at least those are transferrable. Also you're getting a 2/3" 16:9 camera that will carry you over for the HD transition. Figure you can get at least 5 years out of the Ikegami whereas the dsr250-dsr390 will be obsolete in 3 years. I wouldn't spend any more than 5K on a 4:3 camcorder right now and that's pushing it.

Bill Pryor · May 25th, 2004, 10:17 AM

I think you may be overly optimistic about the rapid acceptance of 16:9, but I hope you're right. I don't really give a damn about HD, but I would be one really happy camper if the world would convert to 16:9 overnight. Once you've shot 16:9 with a DSR500 or equivalent Ikegami, it's really difficult to shoot 4:3 again (but alas, I have to all the time).

Law Tyler · May 25th, 2004, 11:54 AM

Does anybody know of any camera (the same type we are talking about) that would use my large collections of Nikkor lenses?

I have several "BIG GUNS", too bad can't use them shooting video, yet.

Wouldn't hesitate paying $10K or more for a camera like that. Presume it would be 1/2" or 2/3" CCD of course.

Bill Pryor · May 25th, 2004, 12:03 PM

It is possible to buy Nikon adapters which allow you to use the lenses on a 2/3" chip camera with the standard B4 mount, ie., all of them that I know about. Nikon used to sell two--one for their wider angle lenses and a different one for the longer lenses. Your equivalent focal length would be a lot different than what it says on the lens when using it with a 2/3" chip camera. I can't remember the exact amount, but more than double, I think.

Back when I shot 16mm I had a Nikon adapter for my CP16-R, and I used my 50mm micro Nikkor all the time for tabletop copystand work, and I used the 200mm once for a really long telephoto shot.
Last time I checked, which was several years ago, the Nikon adapters were several hundred bucks. Probably somebody else makes them too. I don't know of any for 1/2" chip cameras, but it's possible there is one.

Mike Rehmus · May 25th, 2004, 12:13 PM

Century Optics makes an adaptor for Nikon to Sony 1/2" mount. It costs around $800 IIRC. You have to call them to get any information.

You do understand that a film-camera lens is not optimized for video, right? That's why they don't use them on HD cameras. The lens are designed for a curved film plane.

That said, since using a 35mm lens on a 1/2" camera only uses the center of the field, they should give OK results on SD cameras.

Law Tyler · May 25th, 2004, 03:06 PM

Thanks, will check it out.

Now if I can find something to shoot with my 800/5.6 w/o being accused of a moral or "John Ashcroft" crime...

Bill Pryor · May 25th, 2004, 03:17 PM

Just don't caught by the Justice Department aiming that long lens at a statue that has bare boobs. Ashcroft doesn't like that at all, y'know.

Law Tyler · June 18th, 2004, 04:32 PM

Anybody has this trouble?

The velcro (for wireless transmitter) on my DSR-250 Sony batteries, BP-L40 or whatever, comes off after a few weeks. Especially if I leave the transmitter there when not in use. But w/o it still come off after a while.

Does anybody use any glue (beyond what's on the velcro) to stick to the battery? I am sure the smooth surface of the battery has something to do with it. I don't really want to put superglue or anything permanet on the item, but can't continue to spend money on velcro.

Mike Rehmus · June 27th, 2004, 01:27 AM

I have industrial velcro on my batteries (the stuff that is not at all soft, sort of like a stiff plastic brush) and it does not come off.

Have to clean the battery surfaces with alcohol before attaching the velcro.

Superglue is not appropriate for this type of application.

Steve McDonald · July 1st, 2004, 02:15 AM

Industrial grade Velcro is a must. You can buy it in random lengths off 2-inch wide rolls at a large fabric and sewing supply store. Don't touch the sticky layer and put it down in the right place on the first try. If you peel it up just once, it'll never stick as well. I use lens cleaning solution to prepare the surface, as common rubbing alcohol has a wax additive that leaves a residue that interferes with the bonding. Make sure that all the old goop from past Velcro applications is removed. Press it down at all points thoroughly for several minutes. If you do it right, it'll stay put for years. When you remove the attached items, use a rotating motion, rather than a straight-up pull, to reduce
strain that might cause it to start peeling.

Steve McDonald

May 25th, 2004, 06:13 AM	#123
Lou Bruno Go Cycle Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Huntington, NY Posts: 815	All cameras have gone up 5% in the last month. JVC had a deal last month on their JVC GY DV5000 which included a 16X lens and rebate-price 4600-4700K It is now 5600K for the same camera. YIKES! __________________ Lou Bruno

May 25th, 2004, 09:13 AM	#125
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	The 250 is a 1/3" chip camera, exact same opticals as the PD-150 __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

May 25th, 2004, 12:13 PM	#130
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	Century Optics makes an adaptor for Nikon to Sony 1/2" mount. It costs around $800 IIRC. You have to call them to get any information. You do understand that a film-camera lens is not optimized for video, right? That's why they don't use them on HD cameras. The lens are designed for a curved film plane. That said, since using a 35mm lens on a 1/2" camera only uses the center of the field, they should give OK results on SD cameras. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

June 18th, 2004, 04:32 PM	#133
Law Tyler Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Plano, TX Posts: 204	Velcro coming Off DSR250 Anybody has this trouble? The velcro (for wireless transmitter) on my DSR-250 Sony batteries, BP-L40 or whatever, comes off after a few weeks. Especially if I leave the transmitter there when not in use. But w/o it still come off after a while. Does anybody use any glue (beyond what's on the velcro) to stick to the battery? I am sure the smooth surface of the battery has something to do with it. I don't really want to put superglue or anything permanet on the item, but can't continue to spend money on velcro.

June 27th, 2004, 01:27 AM	#134
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	I have industrial velcro on my batteries (the stuff that is not at all soft, sort of like a stiff plastic brush) and it does not come off. Have to clean the battery surfaces with alcohol before attaching the velcro. Superglue is not appropriate for this type of application. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

May 16th, 2004, 03:45 PM	#121
Mathew Evan Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: United States Posts: 53	Probably more of a supply vs. demand. I'm surprised there hasn't been a 270 yet. The 250 must still be selling well.

May 20th, 2004, 12:13 PM	#122
Bill Pryor Contributor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 4,449	I've had a DSR250 for about 4 years. So far it's performed flawlessly. I don't use it as much as the DSR500, but there are certain situations where it is the best thing for the job. It is surprising that they are raising the price. I wonder if all the DVCAM stuff is going up.

May 25th, 2004, 09:03 AM	#124
Bill Pryor Contributor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 4,449	Even at $5600, that's still not a bad price for a 1/2" chip camera. Of course, you have to spend another $1500 or so for batteries and a charger, but still it's a lot less than a DSR370.

May 25th, 2004, 10:06 AM	#126
Mathew Evan Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: United States Posts: 53	The 250 was a decent deal at $4200 or whatever B&H used to price it at but not now. In buying a large camera you're making an investment. I would tend to go for broke and spend the extra on the Ikegami HL-DV7W Professional 2/3" 16:9 DVCAM Camcorder. It's currently $11,000 at B&H and is a significantly better deal than the Sony DSR570 (unless you can find a good deal on a 500). Sure you still have to spend another 5K in a lens and batteries but at least those are transferrable. Also you're getting a 2/3" 16:9 camera that will carry you over for the HD transition. Figure you can get at least 5 years out of the Ikegami whereas the dsr250-dsr390 will be obsolete in 3 years. I wouldn't spend any more than 5K on a 4:3 camcorder right now and that's pushing it.

May 25th, 2004, 10:17 AM	#127
Bill Pryor Contributor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 4,449	I think you may be overly optimistic about the rapid acceptance of 16:9, but I hope you're right. I don't really give a damn about HD, but I would be one really happy camper if the world would convert to 16:9 overnight. Once you've shot 16:9 with a DSR500 or equivalent Ikegami, it's really difficult to shoot 4:3 again (but alas, I have to all the time).

May 25th, 2004, 11:54 AM	#128
Law Tyler Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Plano, TX Posts: 204	Does anybody know of any camera (the same type we are talking about) that would use my large collections of Nikkor lenses? I have several "BIG GUNS", too bad can't use them shooting video, yet. Wouldn't hesitate paying $10K or more for a camera like that. Presume it would be 1/2" or 2/3" CCD of course.

May 25th, 2004, 12:03 PM	#129
Bill Pryor Contributor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 4,449	It is possible to buy Nikon adapters which allow you to use the lenses on a 2/3" chip camera with the standard B4 mount, ie., all of them that I know about. Nikon used to sell two--one for their wider angle lenses and a different one for the longer lenses. Your equivalent focal length would be a lot different than what it says on the lens when using it with a 2/3" chip camera. I can't remember the exact amount, but more than double, I think. Back when I shot 16mm I had a Nikon adapter for my CP16-R, and I used my 50mm micro Nikkor all the time for tabletop copystand work, and I used the 200mm once for a really long telephoto shot. Last time I checked, which was several years ago, the Nikon adapters were several hundred bucks. Probably somebody else makes them too. I don't know of any for 1/2" chip cameras, but it's possible there is one.

May 25th, 2004, 03:06 PM	#131
Law Tyler Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Plano, TX Posts: 204	Thanks, will check it out. Now if I can find something to shoot with my 800/5.6 w/o being accused of a moral or "John Ashcroft" crime...

May 25th, 2004, 03:17 PM	#132
Bill Pryor Contributor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 4,449	Just don't caught by the Justice Department aiming that long lens at a statue that has bare boobs. Ashcroft doesn't like that at all, y'know.

July 1st, 2004, 02:15 AM	#135
Steve McDonald Major Player Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Eugene, Oregon Posts: 366	Industrial grade Velcro is a must. You can buy it in random lengths off 2-inch wide rolls at a large fabric and sewing supply store. Don't touch the sticky layer and put it down in the right place on the first try. If you peel it up just once, it'll never stick as well. I use lens cleaning solution to prepare the surface, as common rubbing alcohol has a wax additive that leaves a residue that interferes with the bonding. Make sure that all the old goop from past Velcro applications is removed. Press it down at all points thoroughly for several minutes. If you do it right, it'll stay put for years. When you remove the attached items, use a rotating motion, rather than a straight-up pull, to reduce strain that might cause it to start peeling. Steve McDonald