PD170 or DSR-250?? at DVinfo.net

Jeff Toogood · January 10th, 2005, 08:09 AM

I hope you guys are not getting sick of my stupid questions, but I just noticed that the DSR-250 isn't THAT much more than the PD170 at B&H.
Started to consider this camera because of the full size tapes, better audio control & other controls, plus shoulder mount.

Is it worth the extra $1100 over the PD170?

Anybody know if I can use a DSR-250 on a Bogen 3246 with 501 head?

PS, Also noticed that the lux rating for the 170 is better than the 250?? How is that true? Don't they use the same optics, chips etc?

Mike Rehmus · January 10th, 2005, 02:49 PM

The 250 is equivalent to the PD-150, not the 170.

The 501 head isn't too good with a 150 sized camera and will be even harder pressed with a 250.

The question is more what you are going to do with the camera than whether it has $1100 more value.

For locked-down use, the 250 will be much nicer for long events.

For hand-held, the 250 will be more stable and easier on the back. (IMHO).

For portablity and the ability to use it in constrained quarters (like a car) the 170 is superior.

And, of course, to the uninitiated, the 250 is much more impressive.

I'd pick the 250 if I didn't also need to operate in cars.

Rhett Allen · January 10th, 2005, 03:32 PM

I've used them both and "my" personal preference is for the 150. The larger tapes is a nice welcome if you have auxiliary power, but the smaller size, better battery performance and easier handling made the 150 a joy to use in the field.
I was already accustomed to the PD-150 when I rented a 250 for a week (because the rental shop was out of 150's and I needed 3 cameras) so the controls felt out of place to me. And your 501 head will be a little too small for that camera. (that's also the head I was using at the time with it as well)

David Clark · January 12th, 2005, 10:42 AM

I'm looking into those two cameras myself. But, weren't there some problems when the 250 came out, and if so have they been corrected? Such as tape loading or unloading, maybe they were just rumours.

Jeff Chandler · January 12th, 2005, 01:45 PM

There were never really any problems. It was really the lack of a certain feature and that it does a couple of things in the opposite way as you would think it would. The cam actually has a solid history. I would add though, that it's more than $1100 more than the 170, because you have to buy a separate power supply and batteries, which add around a $1000 more.

Mike Rehmus · January 12th, 2005, 01:56 PM

The battery performance, large battery against large battery is about the same between the two cameras.

Of course the large battery for the 250 is around $1,000 list from Sony.

But that battery runs my larger DSR-300 for 4+ hours.

Jeff Chandler · January 12th, 2005, 02:11 PM

I don't know if this is what you were saying or not, Mike, but the battery will last about twice as long on the 250 as it will on the 300, because the power consumption is about half.

Lamar Lamb · January 12th, 2005, 04:42 PM

I considered the 250 but decided against it for several reasons mentioned previously.

I didn't need the bigger tapes so this was not an advantage, but it will accept the MiniDV tapes .
Batteries & chargers cost more.
Size. It takes up more room, is more cumbersome to transport, and is more conspicuous when you are trying not to be.
Light sensitivity is not as good as the 170.

Lisa Larson · March 6th, 2005, 06:14 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Jeff Toogood : I hope you guys are not getting sick of my stupid questions, but I just noticed that the DSR-250 isn't THAT much more than the PD170 at B&H.
Started to consider this camera because of the full size tapes, better audio control & other controls, plus shoulder mount.

Is it worth the extra $1100 over the PD170?
Anybody know if I can use a DSR-250 on a Bogen 3246 with 501 head?

PS, Also noticed that the lux rating for the 170 is better than the 250?? How is that true? Don't they use the same optics, chips etc? -->>>

Jeff. I have a DSR-250 that I'm selling. Actually, I love it, but I sustained an arm injury that has made it a bit bulky for me. The picture is great on it, and the only flaw I've noticed is that you have to watch the audio very carefully or it will distort or have hiss. There's a sweet spot on the audio that you have to learn.

Other than that, I absolutely love it. My favorite thing about it is the professional zoom. I'm told that the mechanics of it are made in Sony's professional manufacturing, as opposed to the smaller camcorders where they are made in the consumer manufacturing unit. That's what I've been told, at least, with regard to why the zoom is so good compared to smaller cameras.

I use it with a Bogen 3021 Pro Tripod with a Pro 501 Fluid Video Head, that I'm selling with it. I don't know the 3246, but I'm guessing, if that's a higher model, it would be fine.

If you're interested, or even if your not and want to ask questions, I'd be happy to answer what I can. Email me at bc@bigcaat.com .

Best,
Lisa

January 10th, 2005, 08:09 AM	#1
Jeff Toogood Major Player Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: St.Thomas, Ontario, CANADA Posts: 428	PD170 or DSR-250?? I hope you guys are not getting sick of my stupid questions, but I just noticed that the DSR-250 isn't THAT much more than the PD170 at B&H. Started to consider this camera because of the full size tapes, better audio control & other controls, plus shoulder mount. Is it worth the extra $1100 over the PD170? Anybody know if I can use a DSR-250 on a Bogen 3246 with 501 head? PS, Also noticed that the lux rating for the 170 is better than the 250?? How is that true? Don't they use the same optics, chips etc? __________________ Toogood Studios

January 10th, 2005, 02:49 PM	#2
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	The 250 is equivalent to the PD-150, not the 170. The 501 head isn't too good with a 150 sized camera and will be even harder pressed with a 250. The question is more what you are going to do with the camera than whether it has $1100 more value. For locked-down use, the 250 will be much nicer for long events. For hand-held, the 250 will be more stable and easier on the back. (IMHO). For portablity and the ability to use it in constrained quarters (like a car) the 170 is superior. And, of course, to the uninitiated, the 250 is much more impressive. I'd pick the 250 if I didn't also need to operate in cars. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

January 12th, 2005, 01:45 PM	#5
Jeff Chandler Regular Crew Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Mesa, Az. Posts: 167	There were never really any problems. It was really the lack of a certain feature and that it does a couple of things in the opposite way as you would think it would. The cam actually has a solid history. I would add though, that it's more than $1100 more than the 170, because you have to buy a separate power supply and batteries, which add around a $1000 more. __________________ Jeff Chandler

January 12th, 2005, 01:56 PM	#6
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	The battery performance, large battery against large battery is about the same between the two cameras. Of course the large battery for the 250 is around $1,000 list from Sony. But that battery runs my larger DSR-300 for 4+ hours. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

January 12th, 2005, 02:11 PM	#7
Jeff Chandler Regular Crew Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Mesa, Az. Posts: 167	I don't know if this is what you were saying or not, Mike, but the battery will last about twice as long on the 250 as it will on the 300, because the power consumption is about half. __________________ Jeff Chandler

January 10th, 2005, 03:32 PM	#3
Rhett Allen Major Player Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Plano, TX Posts: 607	I've used them both and "my" personal preference is for the 150. The larger tapes is a nice welcome if you have auxiliary power, but the smaller size, better battery performance and easier handling made the 150 a joy to use in the field. I was already accustomed to the PD-150 when I rented a 250 for a week (because the rental shop was out of 150's and I needed 3 cameras) so the controls felt out of place to me. And your 501 head will be a little too small for that camera. (that's also the head I was using at the time with it as well)

January 12th, 2005, 10:42 AM	#4
David Clark Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Carrollton, Texas Posts: 145	I'm looking into those two cameras myself. But, weren't there some problems when the 250 came out, and if so have they been corrected? Such as tape loading or unloading, maybe they were just rumours.

January 12th, 2005, 04:42 PM	#8
Lamar Lamb Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Baxley, Georgia Posts: 103	I considered the 250 but decided against it for several reasons mentioned previously. I didn't need the bigger tapes so this was not an advantage, but it will accept the MiniDV tapes . Batteries & chargers cost more. Size. It takes up more room, is more cumbersome to transport, and is more conspicuous when you are trying not to be. Light sensitivity is not as good as the 170. __________________ Lamar

March 6th, 2005, 06:14 PM	#9
Lisa Larson New Boot Join Date: May 2004 Location: Morro Bay, CA Posts: 9	Re: PD170 or DSR-250?? <<<-- Originally posted by Jeff Toogood : I hope you guys are not getting sick of my stupid questions, but I just noticed that the DSR-250 isn't THAT much more than the PD170 at B&H. Started to consider this camera because of the full size tapes, better audio control & other controls, plus shoulder mount. Is it worth the extra $1100 over the PD170? Anybody know if I can use a DSR-250 on a Bogen 3246 with 501 head? PS, Also noticed that the lux rating for the 170 is better than the 250?? How is that true? Don't they use the same optics, chips etc? -->>> Jeff. I have a DSR-250 that I'm selling. Actually, I love it, but I sustained an arm injury that has made it a bit bulky for me. The picture is great on it, and the only flaw I've noticed is that you have to watch the audio very carefully or it will distort or have hiss. There's a sweet spot on the audio that you have to learn. Other than that, I absolutely love it. My favorite thing about it is the professional zoom. I'm told that the mechanics of it are made in Sony's professional manufacturing, as opposed to the smaller camcorders where they are made in the consumer manufacturing unit. That's what I've been told, at least, with regard to why the zoom is so good compared to smaller cameras. I use it with a Bogen 3021 Pro Tripod with a Pro 501 Fluid Video Head, that I'm selling with it. I don't know the 3246, but I'm guessing, if that's a higher model, it would be fine. If you're interested, or even if your not and want to ask questions, I'd be happy to answer what I can. Email me at bc@bigcaat.com . Best, Lisa