real low-light difference? at DVinfo.net

Alex Kanakis · February 26th, 2006, 09:10 AM

I sometimes have to shoot video in low-lit, really low-lit, clubs to cover bands. And since I'm using a GL-1, the results are often poor. Is the VX2100/PD170 so much better in this type of environment to justify the purchase of one? I havn't been able to use one to find out myself, and I realize my discription of the club as "low-lit" is vague, but hopefully someone can hep me out a bit. By the way, the video is used for website only (TexasGigs.com).Thanks.

Don Bloom · February 26th, 2006, 04:12 PM

The short answer to your question is YES! I have done a bit of club work in the past and I use my old beatup PD150 instead of my JVC5000. Obviously it's samller and easier to get around with but the main thing in those situations is the low light capability of the camera and for a dimmly lit night club the 150/170 is tops.
Of course that's just my opinion ;-)
Don

Robert M Wright · February 26th, 2006, 10:13 PM

In addition to camera performance, you also really need to look at your business as a whole also (revenues, profit, projected growth, etc.), to make a good determination as to whether it's "worth it."

That said, you might consider renting a VX2100/PD170 for a day, and try it out in one of the clubs. You might also consider more alternatives, like a GY-DV300 (not as good in low light as a VX2100/PD170 perhaps, but lower in cost and I believe it would offer an improvement in low light situations, as well as in good lighting).

Chris Barcellos · February 26th, 2006, 10:53 PM

I have shot in the VX2000 at lowlight levels in clubs, against cameras like XL1S and it clearly outperformed and gave much better rendition of the performance than the Xl1s. I don't think there is any doubt that you would be very happy with the capture in that situation through the VX or its Pro alternative Pds.

Robert M Wright · March 1st, 2006, 01:46 PM

I could be wrong, but I think a DV300 would keep up with a VX2000/PD150 in low light and perhaps offer a slightly better image (a VX2100/PD170 would outperform a DV300 in low light though).

Robert M Wright · March 1st, 2006, 01:48 PM

Any of the cameras mentioned (DV300, VX2000/PD150, VX2100/PD170) should outperform a GL1 in low light, considerably.

Mike Rehmus · March 1st, 2006, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert M Wright

I could be wrong, but I think a DV300 would keep up with a VX2000/PD150 in low light and perhaps offer a slightly better image (a VX2100/PD170 would outperform a DV300 in low light though).

No it won't, Robert. The only difference between the 2000/150 and the 2100/170 is a slightly better DSP/Amp combo that reduces the noise a little bit. They all use the same CCDs. In low light the picture detail is the same between the two generations of camera.

Robert M Wright · March 1st, 2006, 05:32 PM

I had been under the impression that low light performance was improved with the VX2100/PD170.

Mike Rehmus · March 1st, 2006, 06:08 PM

Only the noise level was improved and that by not a whole lot.

Robert M Wright · March 1st, 2006, 06:32 PM

Got me thinking, just wait until there's a few dozen different HDV cameras out there. Then things will really get hard to keep track of.

Nick Weeks · March 1st, 2006, 06:33 PM

As a VX2100 owner, I am extremely impressed with the low light. I wish I could tell you how it compared to the GL1, but I have never owned nor used one. I do, however, own an XL1s, which has really good low light performance, but the VX2100 far surpasses it in sensitivity and clarity.

The noise level is much better on my VX2100 than my XL1s, but its still noise

Bill Grant · March 3rd, 2006, 08:15 AM

As a current VX2100 user and former Gl1 user, I can tell you that the results are amazing. I shot a band in a club with my GL1 and it came out well because of the lights. In well lit situations the 2 are not worlds apart, but in a dimly lit wedding reception it is like magic. You really think your eyes are playing tricks on you, the difference is that noticable. I got my VX2100 for 1900 used. It is totally worth it. I will say, so far, that I still prefer the audio on the GL1 but I haven't had much play ith the vx2100 audio.

Bill

Robert M Wright · March 3rd, 2006, 07:09 PM

I got my DV300 for under a grand (enough under to take my girlfriend out for a really nice dinner), with only 20 hours on the drum. I'd love to have a VX2100 for shooting in really dim light, but bang-for-the-buck, this DV300 is just an amazing value for a hand held 4:3 SD cam. I kind of doubt I'll ever buy another SD camera though.

David Ennis · March 4th, 2006, 09:04 AM

The VX2100 virtually lightens a dim scene. That's desireabe sometimes and not others. I'd take my VX to a club, but I'll take my GL2 over the VX to a stage production where lighting design is an important part of the show.

Mike Rehmus · March 4th, 2006, 10:30 AM

But the degree of 'lightening' is a matter of where you set the controls on the camera. You can set the Sony's to perform at the same levels as the Canon, All you have to do is reduce the gain and close down on the aperature.

February 26th, 2006, 09:10 AM	#1
Alex Kanakis New Boot Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Plano, Texas Posts: 15	real low-light difference? I sometimes have to shoot video in low-lit, really low-lit, clubs to cover bands. And since I'm using a GL-1, the results are often poor. Is the VX2100/PD170 so much better in this type of environment to justify the purchase of one? I havn't been able to use one to find out myself, and I realize my discription of the club as "low-lit" is vague, but hopefully someone can hep me out a bit. By the way, the video is used for website only (TexasGigs.com).Thanks.

February 26th, 2006, 10:53 PM	#4
Chris Barcellos Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Elk Grove CA Posts: 6,838	I have shot in the VX2000 at lowlight levels in clubs, against cameras like XL1S and it clearly outperformed and gave much better rendition of the performance than the Xl1s. I don't think there is any doubt that you would be very happy with the capture in that situation through the VX or its Pro alternative Pds. __________________ Chris J. Barcellos

March 1st, 2006, 06:08 PM	#9
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	Only the noise level was improved and that by not a whole lot. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

March 3rd, 2006, 08:15 AM	#12
Bill Grant Major Player Join Date: May 2005 Location: Columbia,SC Posts: 806	Well As a current VX2100 user and former Gl1 user, I can tell you that the results are amazing. I shot a band in a club with my GL1 and it came out well because of the lights. In well lit situations the 2 are not worlds apart, but in a dimly lit wedding reception it is like magic. You really think your eyes are playing tricks on you, the difference is that noticable. I got my VX2100 for 1900 used. It is totally worth it. I will say, so far, that I still prefer the audio on the GL1 but I haven't had much play ith the vx2100 audio. Bill

March 4th, 2006, 09:04 AM	#14
David Ennis Fred Retread Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Hartford, CT Posts: 1,227	The VX2100 virtually lightens a dim scene. That's desireabe sometimes and not others. I'd take my VX to a club, but I'll take my GL2 over the VX to a stage production where lighting design is an important part of the show. __________________ "Nothing in the world can take the place of persistence..." - Calvin Coolidge "My brain is wired to want to know how other things are wired." - Me

February 26th, 2006, 04:12 PM	#2
Don Bloom Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 6,609	The short answer to your question is YES! I have done a bit of club work in the past and I use my old beatup PD150 instead of my JVC5000. Obviously it's samller and easier to get around with but the main thing in those situations is the low light capability of the camera and for a dimmly lit night club the 150/170 is tops. Of course that's just my opinion ;-) Don

February 26th, 2006, 10:13 PM	#3
Robert M Wright Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Minnesota (USA) Posts: 2,171	In addition to camera performance, you also really need to look at your business as a whole also (revenues, profit, projected growth, etc.), to make a good determination as to whether it's "worth it." That said, you might consider renting a VX2100/PD170 for a day, and try it out in one of the clubs. You might also consider more alternatives, like a GY-DV300 (not as good in low light as a VX2100/PD170 perhaps, but lower in cost and I believe it would offer an improvement in low light situations, as well as in good lighting).

March 1st, 2006, 01:46 PM	#5
Robert M Wright Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Minnesota (USA) Posts: 2,171	I could be wrong, but I think a DV300 would keep up with a VX2000/PD150 in low light and perhaps offer a slightly better image (a VX2100/PD170 would outperform a DV300 in low light though).

March 1st, 2006, 01:48 PM	#6
Robert M Wright Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Minnesota (USA) Posts: 2,171	Any of the cameras mentioned (DV300, VX2000/PD150, VX2100/PD170) should outperform a GL1 in low light, considerably.

March 1st, 2006, 05:32 PM	#8
Robert M Wright Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Minnesota (USA) Posts: 2,171	I had been under the impression that low light performance was improved with the VX2100/PD170.

March 1st, 2006, 06:32 PM	#10
Robert M Wright Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Minnesota (USA) Posts: 2,171	Got me thinking, just wait until there's a few dozen different HDV cameras out there. Then things will really get hard to keep track of.

March 1st, 2006, 06:33 PM	#11
Nick Weeks Major Player Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Birmingham, AL USA Posts: 722	As a VX2100 owner, I am extremely impressed with the low light. I wish I could tell you how it compared to the GL1, but I have never owned nor used one. I do, however, own an XL1s, which has really good low light performance, but the VX2100 far surpasses it in sensitivity and clarity. The noise level is much better on my VX2100 than my XL1s, but its still noise

March 3rd, 2006, 07:09 PM	#13
Robert M Wright Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Minnesota (USA) Posts: 2,171	I got my DV300 for under a grand (enough under to take my girlfriend out for a really nice dinner), with only 20 hours on the drum. I'd love to have a VX2100 for shooting in really dim light, but bang-for-the-buck, this DV300 is just an amazing value for a hand held 4:3 SD cam. I kind of doubt I'll ever buy another SD camera though.

March 4th, 2006, 10:30 AM	#15
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	But the degree of 'lightening' is a matter of where you set the controls on the camera. You can set the Sony's to perform at the same levels as the Canon, All you have to do is reduce the gain and close down on the aperature. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!