My good Ole GL1

[Bill Grant]

I posted this message on the Canon forum at Video University, but I thought I would like to see what the Sony forum has to say...

Ok here is my question. I am currently using a Gl1 in conjunction with an awesome little panasonic gs-120 to shoot weddings. I have had decent enough results thusfar, but I am starting to book more and more high priced weddings, and I am afraid my poor GL1 (not to mention gs120) will not cut it for much longer. I have considered selling my GL1 to get a Sony VX2000 or trying to add a VX2000 to the family. Can anyone give me a proper perspective on my advantages with the Sony? Is it worth the investment at this point to change? I am looking at about a $400-$600 difference in cameras with nothing at all budgeted for the change. I could scrape together the difference easily but probably not the 1200-1400 to add a used VX2000. Should I wait, or is there another option that maybe I haven't considered. I do recognize a stark difference in image quality from what I see others shooting on this site. Thanks in advance. Check out the sample below for reference.

www.grantphotovideo.com/highlights.wmv
Grant Photo & Video
www.grantphotovideo.com

[Ian Thomas]

Hi Bill

watched your link, very good really enjoyed it,

Keep up the good work

[Ian Thomas]

Bill

The VX2000 is better in low light and the build quality is better, doesn't feel as plastic, but you have got a longer zoom on the canon.

You might consider one of the new HDV cameras, and although not quite as good as the PD+ VX's does very well in the gloom, and this could be the way forward as HDV becomes more widespread.

[Mike Rehmus]

The VX is a wedding camera workhorse.

In almost all the weddings I've done, my PD150 was always pushed very hard when they turned the lights almost off. Nothing else would have done as well. From what I've seen of GL1-type cameras, they cannot perform without lights in the dark environments. And most brides don't want lights.

HDV is, in my opinion, a long way off from being a significant consumer market. If you aren't doing very high-end weddings, I don't believe you need it. Furthermore, there are no delivery capabilities for HDV unless your client has their on HDV camera to use for playback.

Joe Six-pack just doesn't have the money for a $700 (minimum) TV and what will be (probably) a ($500) DVD playback unit (assuming he picks the one that's compatible with the very expensive burner unit (that isn't available) you will have to have.

If your wedding business is at all active, you will pay for the VX acquisition cost long before HDV is a commercially viable medium.

It is just my opinion and everyone is entitled to their own too. But no flames allowed.

[Ian Thomas]

mike

yes HDV is in the early stages but you can still shoot in SD with these cameras and when the time comes you also have a HDV camera too,

It could be just future proofing yourself, and off course they are a nice camera to work with

[Bill Grant]

Thanks Ian for the comments on my sample. I am still really learning this business... I think HD is far off from being in my budget. If I those dollars I would get a PD-170 or Panasonic 100A but I digress. I am concerned about my GL1 tkaing care of business, and was wondering about the viability of the VX2000 regardeless of its current status with sony. I have used them, and know they were the gold standard for weddings in their day... 3 years ago! It's still amazing to me not only how quickly this industry moves, but how relatively young it is. Anyway, thanks for the comments...
Bill

[Mike Rehmus]

They really are still the gold standard. One can simply not afford to give up 2 or more stops of sensitivity to run one of the HDV bretheren. A good used but solid 2000 or 150 will make your life a lot easier when the lights go down.

HDV today is at the gen 1.25 stage. By the time HD is really here in the consumer sense, the HDV cameras will have moved on as well.

[Georg Liigand]

Buy for today, not for the future. As already said above, new and better HDV cams will be out by the time that format becomes standard (if it does).

I think that a VX2000 would be a very good choice for you. If you can get one with not too many hours, go for it.

[Tom Hardwick]

I'd back the VX2000 guys. I bought one new for my wedding shoots and then went out and bought another second hand as my second cam. Why?

Well, the VX and the PD are one and the same in reality, and you've got to spend maybe three times more to get a camera that sees better in the gloom. And as the guys have said, brides like it 'romantically lit'.

There are other good reasons for going after the VX rather than sticking to the GL. The bigger Sony chips and much faster lens at full tele make differential focus a delight, and after all, weddings are a lot to do with 'moving portraits'. There's a manual zoom ring, excellent info lithiums and a proper two stage ND filter. It does need a Beachtek box for XLR mics though.

But would I recommend the VX2100? Not really. A second hand VX2k, yes, but if you're buying new then a 16:9 chipped camera is the way to go today. Tomorrow it's HiDef, but today really is 16:9, and the VX isn't really the cam for that.

tom.

[Chris Barcellos]

I ve shot the VX 2000 at weddings, in the dark, and have come out with useable wedding footage. My style is unobtrusive journalistic, so the VX2k serves that well without need of lighting. I ve just purchased the FX1 and it has a lot of features I love, but the VX and PD 150 still has it on anything out there in the dark. I did look at the VX2100, but if the VX2000 was still out there, and it was a choice between 2100 and 2000, I would go with the 2K because it seems to have a more rugged construction.... I didn't seriously look at 2100, though, so I don't know if new features there were worth going to 2100 from 2000

[Georg Liigand]

There shouldn't be any difference at all between the construction of these cams, but if you can choose between the two with VX2000 being not too tired, it might be a wise choice to take it because of its lower price, for example.

[Zack Birlew]

A good step up if you're in need of a better low light performer. The VX2000 should serve you well, there really isn't any other camera in its class that can perform in low light as well as it does for the price. If you could afford it, I'd say a PD150 or even a PD170, but I wouldn't use say a DVX camera for weddings, that'd be kind of a misuse of the camera's purpose. Plus, the DVX isn't as good in low light either, a lot better than the GL1 but still not VX2000 quality.