VX2000 -- various topics

[Chris Hurd]

Donatello is right. The VX2000, PD150 and DSR250 will all perform equally, as they have the exact same optics and CCD's. Hope this helps,

[Mike Black]

Hi all,
I am on the verge of buying the VX2000 over the GL1 mainly because of the better image but will miss the 20X of the GL1.
Can someone who has used both the Canon 0.7X WD58 wide angle converter and the sony HG1758 1.7X tell how is the image quality. Is there much loss in Quality?
Is there any loss in f stop or does the extra diameter glass make up for the longer focal length?
Also what is the closest distance for macros and which close up converter would you recomend?
Thanks
Mike

I use a lot the sony 1.7X (making video about birds) and in my opinion it does an excellent job. I don't see any noticeable loss in image quality.

Probably the Century 2.0X is better than the Sony adapter; in any case I can recommend to you the sony tele without any doubt...

Hope it helps...

ahhhhhhhhhhhhh....pura vida !........

N

[Brad Simmons]

I personally wouldnt even think of touching any of the digi effects available on a camera. Why? Because then no matter what you are stuck with them. These effects can be accomplished easily in NLE software and it will do a better job in my opinion.

[kgertler]

How would you know they do a better job - if you 'would never touch' the effects. I know the traditional wisdom is to wait until later to add effects - but if you know what effect you're after 'on the day' why not try to dial it in?
I'm interested in non-traditional uses of technology - including the VX 2000.
For example - recently set up the camera on 16:9 and sepia effect - put it 'live' to a monitor in a rehearsal space where an actor friend was working on a monologue. Actor found the 'live' effect definitely influenced, possibly enhanced his performance.

[Chris Hurd]

If you can afford a day off, it might be a good idea to put in a blank tape, take the camera and the manual with you to some favorite quiet place and start exploring all your options, while recording. Be sure to vocalize what you're doing as you go through each setting, so that later on when you play it back, you'll hear exactly what's what as you see all the different effects. A great way to really get to know the camera,

[Brad Simmons]

<<<-- Originally posted by kgertler : How would you know they do a better job - if you 'would never touch' the effects?-->>>

My point is this:

If you arent using an NLE such as Premiere or FCP, then by all means use the digi effects on a camera to see what you can come up with.

The VX2000 has the sepia mode. You can do the exact same thing in Premiere or FCP, except with these applications, you will have MUCH greater control of this effect. You can adjust it exactly how you want from your raw footage. I tried out the effects when I first got the camera, and when I brought them into an NLE, I found that they were hard to mess around with. Starting from scratch and applying the same effects in an NLE that a camera gives you is a much smarter way to do it in my opinion. I realized I can produce the same effects with an NLE, and I can experiment with that effect, along with other effects to get the perfect combination. Thats all Im trying to say.

I recently shot a film where the director wanted the footage to be black and white. He wanted me to actually shoot in black and white. I said, "Hey why dont we just shoot in color, and then make it black and white in Premiere?" After much convincing, he finally agreed. It now turns out he wants part of the footage to be in color, and part to be in Black and White. Good thing I shot in color otherwise we would be screwed!

If you know that those digieffects are exactly what you want, and they appear fine in a monitor, then by all means go for it. Im just trying to let you know you can shoot yourself in the foot if it turns out you want something different thats all.

cheers

[Dan Eggleston]

I know it may be too early to make comparisons, but the sonystyle.com website has some specs listed for the yet to be released US version TRV-950 and I was comparing them with those of the VX-2000. The site mentions "pre-order" for the new 950 in May. Not sure what that means for actual availability.

I have a couple of questions I hope some of you may be able to answer.

Q. When it comes to lux...VX-2000 lists at 2 lux. The TRV-950 is listed as 7 Lux (0 Lux with NightShot® Infrared System). What does this mean as far as direct comparison between the two cameras?

Regarding Pixels both video and stills. You are all going to jeer me here, but I am enticed by the still picture mode on these cameras. I am aware that video enthusiasts and photo enthusiasts alike feel this feature on a video camera is near useless. However, I don't currently own a digital still camera and after purchasing a DV camera can't forsee getting a still camera in the near or distant future! The TRV-950 specs list two memory modes: 1152 x 864 and 640 x 480. The VX-2000 only offers 640 x 480. It would appear the 950 has the edge here, HOWEVER, I am again confused by the specs listed as Video Actual and Still Actual.

Q. TRV-950 lists Video Actual: 690K Still Actual: 1,000K

VX-2000 lists Video Actual: 340K X 3 Gross 380K X 3
Still Actual: 640 X 480 (340K) Pixels

!?!?!?!?! I don't know what this all means! Which will look better!?!

Q. In regard to playing back video. Does anyone use their VX-2000 for home video use only? Once you shoot your video how do you view it? What is the general feeling about using the camera for playback and should that have a heavy bearring on which unit to purchase as far as wear and tear?

Ladies and Gentlemen, the bottom line is I can't come to a decision. I have called several times with the intention to order my VX-2000 and talked myself out of it. $2,400 doesn't part with easily. But it is the thought of the new TRV-950 with enhanced features and lower price tag that bugs me the most. I am buying a DV camera for home use primarily, but I will definately be getting into desktop video and I want a really nice camera.

Sorry this is so long. I just don't believe most retailers know what they are talking about. You all have the experience and the knowledge. Thank you for your feedback as always.

Dan

[Don Donatello]

based on the tape i shot at NAB the pro version of the 950 ( dvx 10) , PD150, jvc streamer, GL ,XL , jvc 500 ...

on viewing the tape at home on my sony 14M2U monitor ...
the dvx10 (950) did NOT perform as good as the PD150 ( vx2000) in low light. the vdx10 had more noise in the shadow area's in the lighting that sony provided at the show. the image is NOT as sharp as the pd150.

the 950 is a mega pixel camera ... it uses the mega pixel's for STILL photo's and should easy out perform the vx2000 ... STILL PHOTO"S taken in the 1152x864 pixel mode will look better then vx 2000 ........

sony claims that when you switch to 16x9 the 950 will use the WHOLE mega pixel ( 1152x864) CCD's to capture the 16x9 image/ i shot tape in the 16x9 mode and it didn't it doesn't stand out on viewing when compared to GL,XL, in their 16x9 modes ...
infact it has a bit more noise in lower mid range ...
the optex 16x9 anamorphic on the GL does stand as BEST when viewing the 16x9's on my tape ...

the 950 has other features : like the direct mpeg to sony memory stick ( something like that) or mpeg output to send out over web ...
..or stills to memory stick ... will you use these features ? sounds like you'll use the still photo ... but will the still photo's give you the resolution you want ? best to test the camera - take blank tape with you and shoot some tape.

based on the tape i shot i would rate the dvx10 (950) last for what i want out of a camera. i'm only concerned with the video performance and IMO the camera performed less then GL ( 2nd to last )

[Dean Bull]

Whats the main differences between the models? I have very little money and I have been seeing the vx1000 close on ebay for well under 1400.00 bucks. So would getting a vx1000 be a good buy against other more expensive 3 chip cameras (gl-1, vx2000, etc.) I mean, I can't afford those cameras anyway but I would like your opinions, thanks!

1. Don't buy one off EBAY!!! (There is slime just waiting to screw you over...)
2. VX2000 better in low light, has viewscreen, memory stick, more
3. Maybe look at TRV900 if you don't have coin for VX2000. Many owners of that cam love it.

Good luck=)

[Dean Bull]

I HEAR YOU ABOUT EBAY! believe me, when I buy anything big off an online auction house I INSIST on using escrow. And the TRV900 sounds like it might be a good choice. I mean, in general the prices between a used vx1000 and a trv900 are about the same so i figure whatever one I find that is the best deal would be a good choice.

Thanks

I just bought a vx2000. When I either switch to vcr or camera mode with a tape inside, I hear a relative loud noise. I think, it comes from the tape motor. Is this normal or is it a camera fault?
In my hometown, I didn't found another vx2000 to compare it with my camera.

[Brad Simmons]

what kind of tapes are you using?

Up until now I have been a passive observer to this forum and have gained a lot of valuable information and insight.
I currently use a Sony TRV110 for mostly family stuff and some work related. I wanted a better camera for some commercial work projects that I am getting started on. My hobby now turned into passion is Interactive Multimedia creation.... Corporate Training CD's, DVD's etc.

After careful consideration and much review on this forum I broke down and purchased a VX2000 over the PD-150 and XL1s. Camera just arrived today. I have been told (now I will find out) that the VX2000 still has audio problems. While surfing the net looking for other related information, I came upon a site that listed a modification done by the BBC. Can anyone with expertise on the VX2000 tell me if this mod will work ? Has anyone in the US done this. And ....would just adding XLR feature by way of a Beachtek Adapter perform the same function.

Look foward to your input and hope to become a regular contributor from here on.

I have posted the information in it's entirety below.
Credit to www.bealecorner.com

******************************************
Subject: VX2000, sound, and the BBC
From: Bill Finch (alioth at ix netcom com)
Date: April 18 2001

Just a few years back, the BBC wouldn't touch DV with the proverbial 10
foot pole. They had a well intended attitude. They wanted to broadcast
only the highest quality image and sound. Perhaps they were correct at
the time, but two things have happened to change their policy. DV
wouldn't go away and just kept getting better. Secondly, they ran out of
excess cash. Less cash - less money for BBC productions. They started
broadcasting more "independent" productions. Many of the independents
used DV and DVCAM.

Now the BBC encourages production with DV - because it's cheap and good.
They still want good images and good sound so they set up an education
service for the independent DV producers. For example:

http://www.bbctraining.co.uk/categories/courseDetails/courseDetails/O005.shtml

will link you to course teaching you everything you need to know about
using a VX2000 to their satisfaction (you pay £713).

One of the things you will learn is that the BBC engineering department
will modify your VX2000 (for a minor fee), bypassing the mic preamp as
John indicates above. It will then be necessary to use an external
preamp, feeding the line out to BBC's modified VX2000 line in. In the US
the preamp to use is the Shure FP24 or the Sound Devices MixPre (they
are the same unit). I've lost the reference for the UK equivalent, which
is slightly less expensive.

The BBC makes no mods to the video. The VX2000 video is good enough as
it stands.

The BBC modified VX2000 (with good preamp) costs about the same as a new
PD150 and works one whole heluvalot better for making top notched
video/sound. With the BBC mods you still have a fully functional (as
delivered by Sony) VX2000. Additionally you have a method for recording
better quality line or external mic sound.

Why didn't Sony do this to begin with? Answer - they didn't want to
compete with their own VERY VERY EXPENSIVE pro products.

Another example of Sony's practical attitude is the WV-DR7 deck. It
records and plays back mini and full size DV tapes as well as S-VHS and
VHS. It is built as well as Sony's pro units sold in the US. It does DV
to S-VHS transfers that look better than any you've seen. It costs about
$2100 (US dollars). It is NTSC only and sold only in Japan. Sony will
not export this unit (dealers will) because it competes with equipment
that costs about $8000 in the US.

If you have a big budget, none of this matters. Buy DigiBeta or a
DSR-500. If you budget is limited, use a VX2000 with pride. Your product
will be limited mostly by your talent, not by your equipment.
----

Date: Apr 19 2001
From: Julian Baldwin (julian baldwin at bigfoot com)

Bill Finch has provided most of the relevant info on the BBC mod to the
VX2000 but I can fill in a couple of the gaps:-
1) The cost of the mod. if you get them to mod your own camera is about GBP
200.
2) The mod. changes the phono sockets from line output to line input and
thus the only output at high level is from the headphone socket.
3) The manual level control option on the INTERNAL mics is lost.
4) The signal to noise ratio when measured using a medium output personal
mic improves from about 45dB on the normal mic amps to about 60dB after
modification.
5) The XLR adaptor which is used with the mod. is the special (high level
out) version of the adaptor made by GLENSOUND (see their website) called
something like NT1. This has been designed for the job and incorporates an
active limiter (well 2 actually - one per channel) which is vital when
operating with manual level control on the camera (same applies to the
TRV900 / PD100 for which the regular version of the Glensound box was
designed). The Glensound box costs about GBP 260.
6) The BBC will sell the VX2000 together with the mod. already done plus a
Glensound adaptor at a package price which is a saving over the cost of
buying the items separately and then having the mod. done. They also provide
a guarantee to replace the Sony one.
7) The modified VX2000 is considered to be superior (certainly as far as
sound is concerned) to the PD150 with its hiss problems and in some respects
the operational features of the picture department are preferred.
8) VAT (sales tax) is extra on EU sales.

All that is needed now is a source of individuals who are skilled directors,
knowledgeable reporters, talented camera(wo)men, experienced sound
recordists and able to work 14 hours a day without their brains exploding!


Readers may be interested to know that much of BBC TV news output is shot on
DVCAM cameras (principally DSR500 - chosen for its 16:9 capability (and
cheap price!)).

Cheers,
Julian

-----
I believe that there is no problem carrying out the mod. on NTSC cameras
since the mod. only involves the sound circuitry.
Incidentally, when you contact them about mods. make it clear that you are
talking about the SOUND INPUT mod. because they also do other mods including
a graticule marked for 14:9 framing and you (probably) don't want to pay for
that in addition by mistake!. (Yes I do mean 14:9 because that is the
framing in which BBC programmes are shot - i.e. nothing too close to the
edges).

The BBC do not keep NTSC cameras in stock but might be able to get one to
special order. Take care to check that the cost of this option is not
excessive though because the cost of cameras in the US is probably much less
than the UK.
The normal charge for the mod. includes a replacement 12 month guarantee
(because that is the normal guarantee period in Europe) and since you might
not wish to ship a camera back to the UK for repairs you could ask if they
would make a lesser charge and not offer a guarantee.

For full information contact:-
Roshan Herath at the BBC's Media Technology centre in London
roshan.herath@bbc.co.uk

Best wishes,
Julian

------
>How bad is the audio noise on the VX2000 and PD150? I've been thinking of
>buying a PD150 to go alongside my TRV900, but these comments about noise
are
>making me think twice about the idea... and while this mod sounds good, I
>don't really want to lose the line-out capability.
>
> Mark

You don't really lose the high level output because you can take an output
from the headphone output and that has the advantage that it is similar
quality (to line-out) and variable level.

There is an excellent article written by Alan Barker entitled "VX2000/PD150
Audio problems" which I found on the Web but I can't remember where I found
it. Maybe another list member can help with the URL.

I don't have further figures for the noise on the VX2000 beyond those quoted
in 4) below but I do know that on the PD150 the main problem is in the
Manual Gain position whilst the Auto gain is not so bad. Apparently much of
the problem lies in the fact that an IC in the Manual gain circuitry has not
been decoupled properly and it picks up shash from other parts of the
camera's circuitry. The original batch of PD150s was dreadful but later
batches were adjusted by SONY to improve the situation. My understanding is
that they turned up the gain on certain stages and turned down others to
compensate. This results in less 'headroom'. Early issued models can
apparently be returned for correction.
I do not know how good the later/corrected models are but personally I
would not consider buying one without thoroughly checking that the signal to
noise was satisfactory for the purposes I need. The BBC seems to think that
the modified VX2000 is the favoured option together with the high-level
version of the Glensound GSTN1 XLR box.

Maybe someone with personal experience of the VX2000 and the PD150 would care to comment.