Camera advice

Perrone Ford · January 17th, 2009, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lou Raguse

How many hours of use on a used DVX100B would you consider too much to buy?

Depends on how you plan to use it. If you are going to use tapes in it (god forbid), then plan on getting the tape transport inspected and cleaned as a price of buying. If you plan to shoot to hard drive, then I wouldn't worry how many hours are on the unit.

A unit like mine that is kept bagged, and shot nearly exclusively indoors in controlled settings will show remarkably little wear. And I moved off tape early, so my unit shows VERY low hours. A unit that was used for mostly outdoor pursuits in harsh conditions may show a lot of wear in less than 100 hours.

Just have to know what you're buying and from who.

Stephen J. Williams · January 17th, 2009, 01:09 PM

Lou,

Check this place out if you haven't came across it yet. MarketPlace / Buying Gear - DVXuser.com -- The online community for filmmaking
This is where i bought my DVX100B with 44 hours for a pretty decent price. Most of the people on this forum board are legit sellers (but I still advise you to do your homework).

I had the GL2 for about a year and half. Thought it was awesome until I handled some of it's competitors models. It's not great for low light....

I've used the VX2100 before. defiantly better then the GL2 and works well in low light.

I own the DVX100B, and i'll quote Perrone and say that I would not honestly trade it for 2 of any other camera that you mentioned. Having the option to record in 24P means a lot to me and makes a huge difference in my work. It handles well in low light (especially in 24P). The image looks great... audio's great... It's just a great camera...

Check out the site I mentioned, they must sell at least 1 or 2 cams a day.... Good luck.

Lukas Siewior · January 17th, 2009, 01:24 PM

Have to agree that DVX is a better camera if you want to use its manual features. I'm sure it'll last longer on the market as far as its potential use in other projects. After that it might be wise idea to smoothly upgrade to HVX-150/170/200 - all accessories will work, also easier usage due to the same/similar controls.

Just bare in mind one rule - try to stick with one brand/model lineup. It's will be cheaper in a long run.

Lou Raguse · January 17th, 2009, 01:36 PM

Hey guys, thanks so much for the advice. I work in television news, so it is hard for me to choose after learning to shoot on $50k betasx cams.

But i like the panasonic dvx100 after all this research and advice.

One more question... is there a big difference between the 100a and 100b?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen J. Williams

Lou,

Check this place out if you haven't came across it yet. MarketPlace / Buying Gear - DVXuser.com -- The online community for filmmaking
This is where i bought my DVX100B with 44 hours for a pretty decent price. Most of the people on this forum board are legit sellers (but I still advise you to do your homework).

I had the GL2 for about a year and half. Thought it was awesome until I handled some of it's competitors models. It's not great for low light....

I've used the VX2100 before. defiantly better then the GL2 and works well in low light.

I own the DVX100B, and i'll quote Perrone and say that I would not honestly trade it for 2 of any other camera that you mentioned. Having the option to record in 24P means a lot to me and makes a huge difference in my work. It handles well in low light (especially in 24P). The image looks great... audio's great... It's just a great camera...

Check out the site I mentioned, they must sell at least 1 or 2 cams a day.... Good luck.

Tom Hardwick · January 18th, 2009, 01:26 PM

Search out the B and forget the A, Lou - as Panasonic did. The A had no slow shutter speeds - a huge omission in my view, and was only on the market for a short time - whereas the B was on sale for something like 3 years.

The three cameras you list are all strangled by their inability to shoot native (i. e. sharp) 16:9 though, so you've got to ask yourself if this is important to you or your clients. Don't be swayed by Panasonic's talk of 'anamorphic' widescreen, or Sony's letterboxed v'finders.

These three cameras are cheap on the secondhand market right now not because of their failings (they're all very good cameras) but simply because their pictures don't fill modern TV screens.

tom.

Todd Clark · January 21st, 2009, 12:05 PM

Sorry...double post

Todd Clark · January 21st, 2009, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Todd Clark

These three cameras are cheap on the secondhand market right now not because of their failings (they're all very good cameras) but simply because their pictures don't fill modern TV screens.

This is my problem also. Everybody is buying widescreen TV’s now and the only way to combat this is to go HD. I guess you can always buy 16x9 adapters but that is just a bandage that can cause more issues then it's worth. I think if you buy an SD camera now you will regret it in the future thinking that you could have used that money to invest in HD.

I am really struggling with which camera also. It sucks to see all of your hard work "stretched" on your clients TV. At least with HD clients with 4x3 TV’s will get letterboxing with the correct PAR.

I am thinking maybe the FX1000 for me because of its low light capabilities. But I am struggling with the hot shoe problem. If you use a light you cannot get the LCD open or closed. I don't get it.

Let us know what you decide. I will be interested in what your final thoughts are.

Perrone Ford · January 21st, 2009, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Todd Clark

I think if you buy an SD camera now you will regret it in the future thinking that you could have used that money to invest in HD.

I think this really depends on what you're doing. I pulled my DVX100 out of mothballs to test how the footage holds up for streaming. Honestly, it's NICE. Even with the 16x9 extraction. If the idea is to go to broadcast (DVD, BluRay, etc.) then by HD. It's where the market is going. But honestly, good SD Cams like the DVX hold up just fine for web work and can save you a fortune.

Todd Clark · January 21st, 2009, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Perrone Ford

I think this really depends on what you're doing. I pulled my DVX100 out of mothballs to test how the footage holds up for streaming. Honestly, it's NICE. Even with the 16x9 extraction. If the idea is to go to broadcast (DVD, BluRay, etc.) then by HD. It's where the market is going. But honestly, good SD Cams like the DVX hold up just fine for web work and can save you a fortune.

I think we are mainly talking wedding videography.

Perrone Ford · January 21st, 2009, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Todd Clark

I think we are mainly talking wedding videography.

I tend to forget that the Wedding/Event videography tends to steer heavily toward wedding.

Adam Haro · January 21st, 2009, 06:47 PM

I'm going to resurrect this thread with one more question. It seems the majority of the replies advised getting a better SD cam to get through this season as opposed to a cheaper HD cam. I came accross a GL2 with very low hours, the guy has only used about 10 tapes through it, and he will sell it to me for $1K. I understand its not the best low-light camera but I am used to using camera lighting anyway.

It seems like a pretty good deal, comes with widescreen lens, shoe mount Canon XLR adaptor, 1 battery and charger.

Every other thread I read on this site seems to state that I'd be better off with a cheaper HD camera.

So is this deal worth jumping on?

Ethan Cooper · January 21st, 2009, 07:45 PM

I'll chime in here with my bit of advice. For $1,500 you can get a lightly used FX7 whose major drawback is low light performance, but I've done 20+ weddings with my FX7's and as a former VX2000 owner I've never looked back. The image quality difference between the two is night and day except for in the worst lit situations and I've learned to compensate in those situations either by dropping the shutter speed to 30 or turning on an on camera light (receptions).

Sure there are situations where I'm shooting +6 or +9db with the FX7 as opposed to 0 or +3 with the VX, but by the time you take it down to SD on the final DVD output much of that noise is virtually lost and the added sharpness and overall image improvements are more than worth this trade off to me.

Now if you've got a computer that can't handle HDV editing, then an old SD cam might be the way to go, and I've never found anything in the DVX100's image to complain about, especially when shot in 24p, but for me I haven't looked back since switching to HD even with the tradeoffs I have to make with my FX7's.

Another thing to consider with the DVX100 vs the FX7 is if XLR audio inputs mean anything to you or not. For the way I work, not having XLR's isn't a problem, but for you it might be a deal breaker. I tend to use my cameras as imaging devices and nothing else.

Bryan Daugherty · January 21st, 2009, 07:51 PM

Adam,
I have shot with the Canon XL1, XL2, GL2, and XHA1 but own Sony PD170 and HVR HD1000U. In my experience, the GL2, XHA1, and XL1 do not produce as rich a color gamut as the Sony line of cameras and Sony cameras do not compete with the optics on the Canons (probably why high end Sony broadcast cams have mounts for Canon and Fujinon lenses.)

All that aside, I am currently competing for a contract that, if it goes through, will result in me upgrading my PD170 to either an FX1000 or Z5U at which point I will be selling my PD170 with all accessories in original box and Mack warranty (still has 2 yrs and is transferable.)

My Pd170 hrs meter currently reads
45 x 10H -operation
17 x 10H -drum time
14 x 10H - tape run
43 x 10 - Threading

It will probably be around May when I am ready to sell and I will put it up on the classified section here, or sell to B&H used department when that time comes. If you are interested or can wait. Thought I would throw that out there and see if you are interested.

For what it is worth, my market segment doesn't have much in the way of HDV interest right now either. I bought my HD1000u to begin learning the HD workflow and test my systems capability for HD delivery. However, I have booked 2 event jobs that i got specifically because i was able to deliver HD, that I would not have been able to get otherwise. In my experience it is best to learn a new skill before it becomes job critical. FWIW...

Best wishes, i am sure you will be happy with your purchase no matter what you decide.

Ethan Cooper · January 21st, 2009, 07:59 PM

Bryan - my apologies on buying the HD1000u, the FX1000 should kick that thing squarely in the teeth.

Bryan Daugherty · January 21st, 2009, 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ethan Cooper

Bryan - my apologies on buying the HD1000u, the FX1000 should kick that thing squarely in the teeth.

Actually, i love my Hd1000U. I am very happy with my purchase, like any camera you have to work around it's limitations, but i have shot it side by side with a Canon XHA1 and had customers prefer it every time. When I pick up my FX1000 or Z5 the 1000U will be the b-roll but it really does a great job in my experience as long as you take time to learn it. And you should hear clients when they see it. The body impresses even if i know it is just a shell...

So your apologies aren't needed I am happy as could be with it. It does not replace my PD170 but compliments it nicely on anything but dark shoots. Thanks for your sentiment.

January 21st, 2009, 12:05 PM	#21
Todd Clark Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Parma, Oh Posts: 172	Sorry...double post Last edited by Todd Clark; January 21st, 2009 at 12:08 PM. Reason: double post

January 21st, 2009, 07:45 PM	#27
Ethan Cooper Trustee Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Houma, La. Posts: 1,400 Images: 5	I'll chime in here with my bit of advice. For $1,500 you can get a lightly used FX7 whose major drawback is low light performance, but I've done 20+ weddings with my FX7's and as a former VX2000 owner I've never looked back. The image quality difference between the two is night and day except for in the worst lit situations and I've learned to compensate in those situations either by dropping the shutter speed to 30 or turning on an on camera light (receptions). Sure there are situations where I'm shooting +6 or +9db with the FX7 as opposed to 0 or +3 with the VX, but by the time you take it down to SD on the final DVD output much of that noise is virtually lost and the added sharpness and overall image improvements are more than worth this trade off to me. Now if you've got a computer that can't handle HDV editing, then an old SD cam might be the way to go, and I've never found anything in the DVX100's image to complain about, especially when shot in 24p, but for me I haven't looked back since switching to HD even with the tradeoffs I have to make with my FX7's. Another thing to consider with the DVX100 vs the FX7 is if XLR audio inputs mean anything to you or not. For the way I work, not having XLR's isn't a problem, but for you it might be a deal breaker. I tend to use my cameras as imaging devices and nothing else. __________________ ∅ -Ethan Cooper

January 21st, 2009, 07:51 PM	#28
Bryan Daugherty Major Player Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Lexington, Ky - USA Posts: 552	Adam, I have shot with the Canon XL1, XL2, GL2, and XHA1 but own Sony PD170 and HVR HD1000U. In my experience, the GL2, XHA1, and XL1 do not produce as rich a color gamut as the Sony line of cameras and Sony cameras do not compete with the optics on the Canons (probably why high end Sony broadcast cams have mounts for Canon and Fujinon lenses.) All that aside, I am currently competing for a contract that, if it goes through, will result in me upgrading my PD170 to either an FX1000 or Z5U at which point I will be selling my PD170 with all accessories in original box and Mack warranty (still has 2 yrs and is transferable.) My Pd170 hrs meter currently reads 45 x 10H -operation 17 x 10H -drum time 14 x 10H - tape run 43 x 10 - Threading It will probably be around May when I am ready to sell and I will put it up on the classified section here, or sell to B&H used department when that time comes. If you are interested or can wait. Thought I would throw that out there and see if you are interested. For what it is worth, my market segment doesn't have much in the way of HDV interest right now either. I bought my HD1000u to begin learning the HD workflow and test my systems capability for HD delivery. However, I have booked 2 event jobs that i got specifically because i was able to deliver HD, that I would not have been able to get otherwise. In my experience it is best to learn a new skill before it becomes job critical. FWIW... Best wishes, i am sure you will be happy with your purchase no matter what you decide. __________________ 3x-HD1000u - Ikan 8000HD- custom i7 PC - Vegas Pro 13 and 11 64 bit - Premiere Pro CS4 - and a whole mess of other equipment...

January 21st, 2009, 07:59 PM	#29
Ethan Cooper Trustee Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Houma, La. Posts: 1,400 Images: 5	Bryan - my apologies on buying the HD1000u, the FX1000 should kick that thing squarely in the teeth. __________________ ∅ -Ethan Cooper Last edited by Ethan Cooper; January 21st, 2009 at 07:59 PM. Reason: i'm a moron

January 17th, 2009, 01:09 PM	#17
Stephen J. Williams Major Player Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 768	Lou, Check this place out if you haven't came across it yet. MarketPlace / Buying Gear - DVXuser.com -- The online community for filmmaking This is where i bought my DVX100B with 44 hours for a pretty decent price. Most of the people on this forum board are legit sellers (but I still advise you to do your homework). I had the GL2 for about a year and half. Thought it was awesome until I handled some of it's competitors models. It's not great for low light.... I've used the VX2100 before. defiantly better then the GL2 and works well in low light. I own the DVX100B, and i'll quote Perrone and say that I would not honestly trade it for 2 of any other camera that you mentioned. Having the option to record in 24P means a lot to me and makes a huge difference in my work. It handles well in low light (especially in 24P). The image looks great... audio's great... It's just a great camera... Check out the site I mentioned, they must sell at least 1 or 2 cams a day.... Good luck.

January 17th, 2009, 01:24 PM	#18
Lukas Siewior Major Player Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Lyndhurst, NJ, USA Posts: 408	Have to agree that DVX is a better camera if you want to use its manual features. I'm sure it'll last longer on the market as far as its potential use in other projects. After that it might be wise idea to smoothly upgrade to HVX-150/170/200 - all accessories will work, also easier usage due to the same/similar controls. Just bare in mind one rule - try to stick with one brand/model lineup. It's will be cheaper in a long run.

January 18th, 2009, 01:26 PM	#20
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	Search out the B and forget the A, Lou - as Panasonic did. The A had no slow shutter speeds - a huge omission in my view, and was only on the market for a short time - whereas the B was on sale for something like 3 years. The three cameras you list are all strangled by their inability to shoot native (i. e. sharp) 16:9 though, so you've got to ask yourself if this is important to you or your clients. Don't be swayed by Panasonic's talk of 'anamorphic' widescreen, or Sony's letterboxed v'finders. These three cameras are cheap on the secondhand market right now not because of their failings (they're all very good cameras) but simply because their pictures don't fill modern TV screens. tom.

January 21st, 2009, 06:47 PM	#26
Adam Haro Regular Crew Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Fresno, CA Posts: 171	I'm going to resurrect this thread with one more question. It seems the majority of the replies advised getting a better SD cam to get through this season as opposed to a cheaper HD cam. I came accross a GL2 with very low hours, the guy has only used about 10 tapes through it, and he will sell it to me for $1K. I understand its not the best low-light camera but I am used to using camera lighting anyway. It seems like a pretty good deal, comes with widescreen lens, shoe mount Canon XLR adaptor, 1 battery and charger. Every other thread I read on this site seems to state that I'd be better off with a cheaper HD camera. So is this deal worth jumping on?