150/2000 how big are the differences? sorry at DVinfo.net

Adi Head · September 3rd, 2002, 06:38 PM

sorry for bringing this subject up AGAIN. will try to list the "adavantages the pd150 has over the vx2000. i know this has been chewed on forever and has become boring. but what i want to find out is how siginificant these advantages are for my needs.

i'll be shooting docs, outside the US (which means pal). most shoots will be with sound person. this means will be purchasing a small mixer, directional shotgun mic (me66 on sony's cac-12 mic mount), boom and set of earphones.

will be editing on final cut pro and am targeting the material for television broadcast. in some cases might want to make into 35mm.

1. DVCAM. as posted by mike rehmus and others, no advantages there.
2. XLR INPUTS. an xlr adapter on the 2000 and - no problem. true?
3. TC setting. comfortable for editing, but not a big deal.
4. 2 CHANNEL CONTROL. mixer will control mix, not camera.
5. B&W LCD VF. easier for focusing, although same size as 2000's VF. can appreciate the advantage here, but how much of a difference is there? users?
6. i read the following somewhere: "instead of AE-A and AE-S modes, the pd150 allows direct switch-selection of independently adjustable aperture, shutter speed, and gain (the result, though, is that "lock-and-shift" exposure control is more complex than it is with the single-button select on the vx2000 - it requires individually locking down all the variables" - not sure i understand exactly what this guy means. can anyone clearify this for me?
7. THE 150'S COOL BLACK-GREY COLOR. i admit it. looks much better than the shiny silver 2000.

also, i undersood the built in stereo mic on the 2000 is actually better than the mono on-camera mic which comes with the 150.

so is it still worth the extra K?

what have i missed?

please help me out. if i can be satisfied with the 2000, or for that matter, any dv which is up to these standards and no pay more than $2600, i'll be an extremely happy person. i really need the difference in $ for some of the stuff mentioned above.

thanks, adihead

BTW, i know sony fixed the hiss problem on the 150 and refused to do so on the 2000. is this still the situation? or is the 2000 hiss-free?

Mike Rehmus · September 4th, 2002, 11:14 AM

i'll be shooting docs, outside the US (which means pal). most shoots will be with sound person. this means will be purchasing a small mixer, directional shotgun mic (me66 on sony's cac-12 mic mount), boom and set of earphones.

---------------------------------------
I'm not certain that the VX-2000 has a place to mount the CAC-12 like the PD-150. I cannot find a right-side top picture of the 2000 to check.

will be editing on final cut pro and am targeting the material for television broadcast. in some cases might want to make into 35mm.

---------------------------------------
Depending on your final customer, a better camera than either the 2000 or 150 might be in order. Something like a JVC DV5000, Panasonic DV2000, or Sony DSR-370 might well be a better choice because of the higher quality Optical Blocks and available lenses. These cameras also have pro-quality audio systems and much more rugged tape transports.

Obviously the price does go up but if you are contemplating a transfer to 35mm, the difference between the prosumer and the pro cameras will be apparent.

Depending on where and what, a rented rig might make sense.

2. XLR INPUTS. an xlr adapter on the 2000 and - no problem. true?

----------------------------------
My personal take is that you will wish you had the XLR and phantom power at some point. The XLR adapters are a bit of a pain and the minijack input connection on the 2000 is not a very robust connection. It is hard to hurt a XLR connection.

The XLR adapters are not powered (although I have a Studio 1 that I think highly of) and can only attenuate the microphone's signal.

And there are 2 XLR connectors on the PD-150. This means you can have an on-board microphone operating while the mixing board sends the second input.

The PD-150's XLR input can be set for Microphone or Line input. I don't believe the 2000 will allow that although the XLR adapters will often attenuate the input to drop a Line-Level signal down to Microphone levels.

The ME-66 can be powered by an AA battery but that is another item to insure you have plenty of. Most AA-powered microphones have a better frequency response when they have more power available. I'm not where I can check the manual on the 66 but you might find that it performs differently on different power sources.

Furthermore, you may get into a situation where a microphone requires power but does not have a self-power capability. Then you have to haul with you a Phantom Power supply or a mixer that will supply the power. Bad news if you are trying to do it by yourself.

Depends on your available microphone inventory. I use and depend upon several microphones that require external power so this is a Big Thing to me.

3. TC setting. comfortable for editing, but not a big deal.

----------------------------
The settable TC and User Bits only works in DVCam mode. Very handy if you will be editing from multiple tapes and don't want two clips to have identical TC values.

Many editing systems ignore TC though.

5. B&W LCD VF. easier for focusing, although same size as 2000's VF. can appreciate the advantage here, but how much of a difference is there? users?

-----------------------------
I think it is a waste. Not enough resolution to allow critical focus and all the symbols are also monochrome. Means that you can (or at least I do) miss critical information. If it would only zoom in on a picture section, it might be good enough.

6. i read the following somewhere: "instead of AE-A and AE-S modes, the pd150 allows direct switch-selection of independently adjustable aperture, shutter speed, and gain (the result, though, is that "lock-and-shift" exposure control is more complex than it is with the single-button select on the vx2000 - it requires individually locking down all the variables" - not sure i understand exactly what this guy means. can anyone clearify this for me?

---------------------------------
That means that you can program the 150 for a particular environment and then switch to that setup at the push of a button. That button is right on the top of the handle and handy during operation.

The PD-150 allows you the maximum amount of control. You can place one or more of the three exposure variables in manual mode. If you select less than all three, then the automatic variable will be changed by the camera to attempt to deliver the camera's idea of good exposure.

If you place all three in manual mode (did I say aperature, gain and shutter speed?) then you can change one without the others changing. You can always go back to Auto with the flick of a switch. I think this is a powerful tool.

That said, you can do the equivalent with the 150 by turning off Auto which will allow the manual settings you have selected to take effect. A return to Auto will not destroy the settings and you can go back to Manual at any time.

also, i undersood the built in stereo mic on the 2000 is actually better than the mono on-camera mic which comes with the 150.

----------------------------
Perhaps, but the 2000's microphone has been known to pick up camera noise.

so is it still worth the extra K?

Nobody can do the final evaluation for you. My experience tells me to always be prepared. That means taking the most adaptable and reliable equipment with me on a shoot. With that as a criteria, my decision was made for me.

The PD-150 has better manual control of exposure.
The PD-150 has better control of audio, has more choices, can deliver Phantom Power, and the connectors are more rugged.
If my client insists on DVCam, I can deliver that along with a custom TC or User Bits. It does happen.

what have i missed?

please help me out. if i can be satisfied with the 2000, or for that matter, any dv which is up to these standards and no pay more than $2600, i'll be an extremely happy person. i really need the difference in $ for some of the stuff mentioned above.

thanks, adihead

BTW, i know sony fixed the hiss problem on the 150 and refused to do so on the 2000. is this still the situation? or is the 2000 hiss-free? -->>>

I think the hiss problem in the current builds of both cameras is more than good enough for field work. Would I use it for critical sound-booth recording? No.

Understand that everything I've said here is my opinion, sometimes backed up by equipment manuals. Your mileage may vary.

Adi Head · September 4th, 2002, 01:02 PM

thanks mike. i recently stumbled across a string on this forum about a modification for the 2000 done by the BBC (something they apperently did to their own cameras and then offered the service to 2000 owners commercially). the cost is about 200 pounds. as mentioned in the string, the BBC modified 2000 actually surpasses the 150 in sound preformance.
has anyone had experience with this? or other custom modifications for the 2000/150?

Chris Tsamados · September 5th, 2002, 12:09 PM

The VX2000 does have a hot shoe for mounting a mic and also a mic/line selector switch. Beachtek does a new XLR adaptor with built in phantom power the DXA6.

I heard somewhere that the BBC also do a modification that puts lines on the viewfinder (can't remember the technical term) of the VX2000 so you can shoot 16:9 protected.

September 3rd, 2002, 06:38 PM	#1
Adi Head Major Player Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Brooklyn, NY Posts: 642	150/2000 how big are the differences? sorry sorry for bringing this subject up AGAIN. will try to list the "adavantages the pd150 has over the vx2000. i know this has been chewed on forever and has become boring. but what i want to find out is how siginificant these advantages are for my needs. i'll be shooting docs, outside the US (which means pal). most shoots will be with sound person. this means will be purchasing a small mixer, directional shotgun mic (me66 on sony's cac-12 mic mount), boom and set of earphones. will be editing on final cut pro and am targeting the material for television broadcast. in some cases might want to make into 35mm. 1. DVCAM. as posted by mike rehmus and others, no advantages there. 2. XLR INPUTS. an xlr adapter on the 2000 and - no problem. true? 3. TC setting. comfortable for editing, but not a big deal. 4. 2 CHANNEL CONTROL. mixer will control mix, not camera. 5. B&W LCD VF. easier for focusing, although same size as 2000's VF. can appreciate the advantage here, but how much of a difference is there? users? 6. i read the following somewhere: "instead of AE-A and AE-S modes, the pd150 allows direct switch-selection of independently adjustable aperture, shutter speed, and gain (the result, though, is that "lock-and-shift" exposure control is more complex than it is with the single-button select on the vx2000 - it requires individually locking down all the variables" - not sure i understand exactly what this guy means. can anyone clearify this for me? 7. THE 150'S COOL BLACK-GREY COLOR. i admit it. looks much better than the shiny silver 2000. also, i undersood the built in stereo mic on the 2000 is actually better than the mono on-camera mic which comes with the 150. so is it still worth the extra K? what have i missed? please help me out. if i can be satisfied with the 2000, or for that matter, any dv which is up to these standards and no pay more than $2600, i'll be an extremely happy person. i really need the difference in $ for some of the stuff mentioned above. thanks, adihead BTW, i know sony fixed the hiss problem on the 150 and refused to do so on the 2000. is this still the situation? or is the 2000 hiss-free?

September 4th, 2002, 11:14 AM	#2
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	Re: 150/2000 how big are the differences? sorry i'll be shooting docs, outside the US (which means pal). most shoots will be with sound person. this means will be purchasing a small mixer, directional shotgun mic (me66 on sony's cac-12 mic mount), boom and set of earphones. --------------------------------------- I'm not certain that the VX-2000 has a place to mount the CAC-12 like the PD-150. I cannot find a right-side top picture of the 2000 to check. will be editing on final cut pro and am targeting the material for television broadcast. in some cases might want to make into 35mm. --------------------------------------- Depending on your final customer, a better camera than either the 2000 or 150 might be in order. Something like a JVC DV5000, Panasonic DV2000, or Sony DSR-370 might well be a better choice because of the higher quality Optical Blocks and available lenses. These cameras also have pro-quality audio systems and much more rugged tape transports. Obviously the price does go up but if you are contemplating a transfer to 35mm, the difference between the prosumer and the pro cameras will be apparent. Depending on where and what, a rented rig might make sense. 2. XLR INPUTS. an xlr adapter on the 2000 and - no problem. true? ---------------------------------- My personal take is that you will wish you had the XLR and phantom power at some point. The XLR adapters are a bit of a pain and the minijack input connection on the 2000 is not a very robust connection. It is hard to hurt a XLR connection. The XLR adapters are not powered (although I have a Studio 1 that I think highly of) and can only attenuate the microphone's signal. And there are 2 XLR connectors on the PD-150. This means you can have an on-board microphone operating while the mixing board sends the second input. The PD-150's XLR input can be set for Microphone or Line input. I don't believe the 2000 will allow that although the XLR adapters will often attenuate the input to drop a Line-Level signal down to Microphone levels. The ME-66 can be powered by an AA battery but that is another item to insure you have plenty of. Most AA-powered microphones have a better frequency response when they have more power available. I'm not where I can check the manual on the 66 but you might find that it performs differently on different power sources. Furthermore, you may get into a situation where a microphone requires power but does not have a self-power capability. Then you have to haul with you a Phantom Power supply or a mixer that will supply the power. Bad news if you are trying to do it by yourself. Depends on your available microphone inventory. I use and depend upon several microphones that require external power so this is a Big Thing to me. 3. TC setting. comfortable for editing, but not a big deal. ---------------------------- The settable TC and User Bits only works in DVCam mode. Very handy if you will be editing from multiple tapes and don't want two clips to have identical TC values. Many editing systems ignore TC though. 5. B&W LCD VF. easier for focusing, although same size as 2000's VF. can appreciate the advantage here, but how much of a difference is there? users? ----------------------------- I think it is a waste. Not enough resolution to allow critical focus and all the symbols are also monochrome. Means that you can (or at least I do) miss critical information. If it would only zoom in on a picture section, it might be good enough. 6. i read the following somewhere: "instead of AE-A and AE-S modes, the pd150 allows direct switch-selection of independently adjustable aperture, shutter speed, and gain (the result, though, is that "lock-and-shift" exposure control is more complex than it is with the single-button select on the vx2000 - it requires individually locking down all the variables" - not sure i understand exactly what this guy means. can anyone clearify this for me? --------------------------------- That means that you can program the 150 for a particular environment and then switch to that setup at the push of a button. That button is right on the top of the handle and handy during operation. The PD-150 allows you the maximum amount of control. You can place one or more of the three exposure variables in manual mode. If you select less than all three, then the automatic variable will be changed by the camera to attempt to deliver the camera's idea of good exposure. If you place all three in manual mode (did I say aperature, gain and shutter speed?) then you can change one without the others changing. You can always go back to Auto with the flick of a switch. I think this is a powerful tool. That said, you can do the equivalent with the 150 by turning off Auto which will allow the manual settings you have selected to take effect. A return to Auto will not destroy the settings and you can go back to Manual at any time. also, i undersood the built in stereo mic on the 2000 is actually better than the mono on-camera mic which comes with the 150. ---------------------------- Perhaps, but the 2000's microphone has been known to pick up camera noise. so is it still worth the extra K? Nobody can do the final evaluation for you. My experience tells me to always be prepared. That means taking the most adaptable and reliable equipment with me on a shoot. With that as a criteria, my decision was made for me. The PD-150 has better manual control of exposure. The PD-150 has better control of audio, has more choices, can deliver Phantom Power, and the connectors are more rugged. If my client insists on DVCam, I can deliver that along with a custom TC or User Bits. It does happen. what have i missed? please help me out. if i can be satisfied with the 2000, or for that matter, any dv which is up to these standards and no pay more than $2600, i'll be an extremely happy person. i really need the difference in $ for some of the stuff mentioned above. thanks, adihead BTW, i know sony fixed the hiss problem on the 150 and refused to do so on the 2000. is this still the situation? or is the 2000 hiss-free? -->>> I think the hiss problem in the current builds of both cameras is more than good enough for field work. Would I use it for critical sound-booth recording? No. Understand that everything I've said here is my opinion, sometimes backed up by equipment manuals. Your mileage may vary. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

September 4th, 2002, 01:02 PM	#3
Adi Head Major Player Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Brooklyn, NY Posts: 642	thanks mike. i recently stumbled across a string on this forum about a modification for the 2000 done by the BBC (something they apperently did to their own cameras and then offered the service to 2000 owners commercially). the cost is about 200 pounds. as mentioned in the string, the BBC modified 2000 actually surpasses the 150 in sound preformance. has anyone had experience with this? or other custom modifications for the 2000/150?

September 5th, 2002, 12:09 PM	#4
Chris Tsamados Regular Crew Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 36	The VX2000 does have a hot shoe for mounting a mic and also a mic/line selector switch. Beachtek does a new XLR adaptor with built in phantom power the DXA6. I heard somewhere that the BBC also do a modification that puts lines on the viewfinder (can't remember the technical term) of the VX2000 so you can shoot 16:9 protected.