DVX100A suitable for shooting weddings? at DVinfo.net

Bob McCarthy · October 9th, 2004, 06:19 PM

I'm shopping for an event camcorder; weddings and Bar Mitzvahs. Is the DVX100A a good tool for capturing weddings?

I'm concerned that the lens' zoom range is insufficient in a large church. Also, given the lack of exterior space on the camcorder, what's best place for a wireless receiver, camera light and battery?

And finally, if the DVX100A isn't a good tool, what other camcorders are good for weddings? I've used the DVC200...a wonderful camcorder for weddings...but my budget isn't that generous.

Any help would be appreciated.

Thank you.

Bob

Mike Rehmus · October 9th, 2004, 06:54 PM

Since almost all the weddings I've done ended up in a dimly lit reception hall with the admonishment to not use much or any light, I'd have been in deep trouble without my PD-150. It always brings back good images in bad situations.

Giroud Francois · October 9th, 2004, 07:02 PM

depends the way you are working.
shoulder camera is far superior in situation where you have to move.
on the other hands you can buil a shoulder support for any camera, including advantages (wheigth, enhancements) not found in bigger model.
While the pana is among (if not) the best camera, it gives its best in controlled environment, when you got some time to master the setting. As far as i know, weddings like all real life/real time event are not a place for "all manual " behavior unless you knows very well your camera.
That is why a would suggest a PD150/170 , who provides better automatism, while keeping an excellent picture and offers excellent low light sensitivity.
Add some wide angle (canon WD58) a wireless mic (the sony one -UWP... i do not remember the model) and let's go.
If you need a better tool, the next step would be a sony 250 or 300 but the range of price is totally different.

Glen Elliott · October 9th, 2004, 11:27 PM

If your doing soley wedding videography there NOTHING better than the PD-170 and/or VX2100 in it's price range...period.

Shawn Mielke · October 10th, 2004, 03:46 PM

I occasionally shoot weddings with a fellow. He uses a DVX and I a PD170. His 24p gamma stuff in good light is so often stellar, it's hard not to swoon (with a little bit envy), but so too is he clearly happy to be working with me in those cavernous churches, and during those evening reception parties (even after he has switched to the more light sensitive 60i setting). So perhaps it can be said that in less than controllable lighting situations, the DVX will often give you exceptional images, while the PD170 will more often deliver very good images.

And then add on top of that a longer zoom, a more favored stabilization system, and an LCD screen that can be seen in daylight.

Glen Elliott · October 10th, 2004, 04:50 PM

<<<-- So perhaps it can be said that in less than controllable lighting situations, the DVX will often give you exceptional images, while the PD170 will more often deliver very good images.
-->>>

The point that the PD-170 is much more sensitive to light is a fact.

The point that, in controllable lighting situations, the DVX will give you "exeptiona"l images while the PD-170 will offer "good" images is an opinion.

Before purchasing the 170 and VX21k I shot with a DVX100 and I firmly feel the 170 produces a more favorable image with more neutral color rendition...to my eye at least. The look of cinegamma is easily reproduced using color curves in post. Lastly in cinegamma there is a small amount of highlight compression. The really bright highlights seem to overexpose a bit early.

Even though it IS opinion I'll post stills captured from my 170 footage to compare against stills from the DVX w/ cinegama any day of the week. That way others can make their subjective opinion.

Shawn Mielke · October 10th, 2004, 05:28 PM

Well, I did mean "very good" and "exceptional" mostly with regard to light sensitivity, and that the DVX is much more tweakable than is the 170.
Also, opinions count too here, but thanks for your concern.

Andre Andreev · October 11th, 2004, 12:19 PM

I am shooting weddings with the DVX100a and have been very happy.

A few things which helped:

- modified one of the 24p cinegamma scenes to 60i while keeping the cinegamma color settings. This gave me the best of both worlds - fast 60i autofocus and light sensitivity and the incredible colors of the cinegamma.

- I am in Southern California and the built-in ND filter proved to be very valuable.

- made sure to have the iris on manual to avoid it being confused by quick changes in light intensity (this is not specific to this camera, but important for events with lots of uncontrolled light).

Regards,
-- Andre

Bob McCarthy · October 11th, 2004, 05:44 PM

To capture weddings, many of you suggested the PD170 yet I understand that the manual iris is controlled in steps. Is that correct?

Bob

Glen Elliott · October 11th, 2004, 07:04 PM

Every camera's iris is controlled in steps. However it is indeed visible if tweaking your iris while shooting. Less as much compared to the 150 though- they supposedly added twice the amount of steps for the iris dial on the 170 to help smooth the transitions when dialing the iris.

Bob McCarthy · October 12th, 2004, 06:55 AM

Does the DVX100A also have a stepped iris in manual mode?

Outside of controlled situations, I always ride the iris to manage the continuously changing light levels in weddings and other events.

It would be my preference to shoot with a seamless iris control.

Bob

Greg Thompson · October 12th, 2004, 09:10 AM

The manual iris on the DVX100A is about as seamless as it gets!

Bob McCarthy · October 12th, 2004, 07:20 PM

I'm considering a DVX100A to capture weddings. Can a wireless mic receiver be attached to that camcorder? And what are options for using a separate camera light with battery?

Thanks,

Bob

Glen Elliott · October 12th, 2004, 08:32 PM

Bob, a wireless reciever can be attached to ANY camcorder really. Some of them offer a shoe-mount like my Sony UWP-C1 system and the new Senheisser system. If not they either velcro it to the side of the camera...an idea I've never been fond of...or buy a bracket that connects to the bottom of the camera and extends to the side for the mounting of the reciever.

If your sole use of this camera will be shooting weddings the PD-170 is a much better choice...and I doubt many will argue that fact. It's the most popular camera in event/wedding videography for a reason. I've shot with GL-1s, XL-1s's, DVC-80's, and DVX100's and the PD-170 is BY FAR the best suited for this genre bar none.

John DeLuca · October 12th, 2004, 09:01 PM

****DVX100A suitable for shooting weddings?*****

Suitable yes, ideal, no.

October 9th, 2004, 06:19 PM	#1
Bob McCarthy New Boot Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Ridgefield, Conn. Posts: 23	DVX100A suitable for shooting weddings? I'm shopping for an event camcorder; weddings and Bar Mitzvahs. Is the DVX100A a good tool for capturing weddings? I'm concerned that the lens' zoom range is insufficient in a large church. Also, given the lack of exterior space on the camcorder, what's best place for a wireless receiver, camera light and battery? And finally, if the DVX100A isn't a good tool, what other camcorders are good for weddings? I've used the DVC200...a wonderful camcorder for weddings...but my budget isn't that generous. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you. Bob

October 9th, 2004, 06:54 PM	#2
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	Since almost all the weddings I've done ended up in a dimly lit reception hall with the admonishment to not use much or any light, I'd have been in deep trouble without my PD-150. It always brings back good images in bad situations. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

October 10th, 2004, 03:46 PM	#5
Shawn Mielke Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Santa Rosa, California Posts: 745	I occasionally shoot weddings with a fellow. He uses a DVX and I a PD170. His 24p gamma stuff in good light is so often stellar, it's hard not to swoon (with a little bit envy), but so too is he clearly happy to be working with me in those cavernous churches, and during those evening reception parties (even after he has switched to the more light sensitive 60i setting). So perhaps it can be said that in less than controllable lighting situations, the DVX will often give you exceptional images, while the PD170 will more often deliver very good images. And then add on top of that a longer zoom, a more favored stabilization system, and an LCD screen that can be seen in daylight. __________________ Breakthrough In Grey Room

October 10th, 2004, 05:28 PM	#7
Shawn Mielke Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Santa Rosa, California Posts: 745	Well, I did mean "very good" and "exceptional" mostly with regard to light sensitivity, and that the DVX is much more tweakable than is the 170. Also, opinions count too here, but thanks for your concern. __________________ Breakthrough In Grey Room

October 11th, 2004, 12:19 PM	#8
Andre Andreev Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 98	My experience I am shooting weddings with the DVX100a and have been very happy. A few things which helped: - modified one of the 24p cinegamma scenes to 60i while keeping the cinegamma color settings. This gave me the best of both worlds - fast 60i autofocus and light sensitivity and the incredible colors of the cinegamma. - I am in Southern California and the built-in ND filter proved to be very valuable. - made sure to have the iris on manual to avoid it being confused by quick changes in light intensity (this is not specific to this camera, but important for events with lots of uncontrolled light). Regards, -- Andre __________________ It is not because things are difficult that we do not dare, it is because we do not dare that they are difficult. -- Seneca

October 9th, 2004, 07:02 PM	#3
Giroud Francois Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: switzerland Posts: 2,133	depends the way you are working. shoulder camera is far superior in situation where you have to move. on the other hands you can buil a shoulder support for any camera, including advantages (wheigth, enhancements) not found in bigger model. While the pana is among (if not) the best camera, it gives its best in controlled environment, when you got some time to master the setting. As far as i know, weddings like all real life/real time event are not a place for "all manual " behavior unless you knows very well your camera. That is why a would suggest a PD150/170 , who provides better automatism, while keeping an excellent picture and offers excellent low light sensitivity. Add some wide angle (canon WD58) a wireless mic (the sony one -UWP... i do not remember the model) and let's go. If you need a better tool, the next step would be a sony 250 or 300 but the range of price is totally different.

October 9th, 2004, 11:27 PM	#4
Glen Elliott Wrangler Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Philadelphia, PA Posts: 2,898	If your doing soley wedding videography there NOTHING better than the PD-170 and/or VX2100 in it's price range...period.

October 10th, 2004, 04:50 PM	#6
Glen Elliott Wrangler Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Philadelphia, PA Posts: 2,898	<<<-- So perhaps it can be said that in less than controllable lighting situations, the DVX will often give you exceptional images, while the PD170 will more often deliver very good images. -->>> The point that the PD-170 is much more sensitive to light is a fact. The point that, in controllable lighting situations, the DVX will give you "exeptiona"l images while the PD-170 will offer "good" images is an opinion. Before purchasing the 170 and VX21k I shot with a DVX100 and I firmly feel the 170 produces a more favorable image with more neutral color rendition...to my eye at least. The look of cinegamma is easily reproduced using color curves in post. Lastly in cinegamma there is a small amount of highlight compression. The really bright highlights seem to overexpose a bit early. Even though it IS opinion I'll post stills captured from my 170 footage to compare against stills from the DVX w/ cinegama any day of the week. That way others can make their subjective opinion.

October 11th, 2004, 05:44 PM	#9
Bob McCarthy New Boot Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Ridgefield, Conn. Posts: 23	PD170 stepped iris To capture weddings, many of you suggested the PD170 yet I understand that the manual iris is controlled in steps. Is that correct? Bob

October 11th, 2004, 07:04 PM	#10
Glen Elliott Wrangler Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Philadelphia, PA Posts: 2,898	Every camera's iris is controlled in steps. However it is indeed visible if tweaking your iris while shooting. Less as much compared to the 150 though- they supposedly added twice the amount of steps for the iris dial on the 170 to help smooth the transitions when dialing the iris.

October 12th, 2004, 06:55 AM	#11
Bob McCarthy New Boot Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Ridgefield, Conn. Posts: 23	DVX100A stepped iris? Does the DVX100A also have a stepped iris in manual mode? Outside of controlled situations, I always ride the iris to manage the continuously changing light levels in weddings and other events. It would be my preference to shoot with a seamless iris control. Bob

October 12th, 2004, 09:10 AM	#12
Greg Thompson Tourist Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Lakeland, Wis. Posts: 2	The manual iris on the DVX100A is about as seamless as it gets! __________________ Outer space doesn't care about you

October 12th, 2004, 07:20 PM	#13
Bob McCarthy New Boot Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Ridgefield, Conn. Posts: 23	DVX100A, wireless receiver and camera light. I'm considering a DVX100A to capture weddings. Can a wireless mic receiver be attached to that camcorder? And what are options for using a separate camera light with battery? Thanks, Bob

October 12th, 2004, 08:32 PM	#14
Glen Elliott Wrangler Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Philadelphia, PA Posts: 2,898	Bob, a wireless reciever can be attached to ANY camcorder really. Some of them offer a shoe-mount like my Sony UWP-C1 system and the new Senheisser system. If not they either velcro it to the side of the camera...an idea I've never been fond of...or buy a bracket that connects to the bottom of the camera and extends to the side for the mounting of the reciever. If your sole use of this camera will be shooting weddings the PD-170 is a much better choice...and I doubt many will argue that fact. It's the most popular camera in event/wedding videography for a reason. I've shot with GL-1s, XL-1s's, DVC-80's, and DVX100's and the PD-170 is BY FAR the best suited for this genre bar none.

October 12th, 2004, 09:01 PM	#15
John DeLuca Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: Akron, Ohio Posts: 496	**DVX100A suitable for shooting weddings?*** Suitable yes, ideal, no.