XLR adapter for VX2100 at DVinfo.net

Ed Space · July 3rd, 2009, 11:10 PM

Couldn't find an XLR adapter for this out of production camera. What make and model was ever available and where can I find one. I want to buy a used VX2100 for a 2nd camera and deck. Thanks, Ed

John Wiley · July 4th, 2009, 12:30 AM

Any of the Beachtek's ones should work - DXA-2 or DXA-4 if you have battery powered mics or the DXA-6 if you need phantom power.
Also try Juicedlink... i can't find them anywhere in australia so don't know how they compare to the Beachtek.

Jeff Harper · July 4th, 2009, 05:27 AM

Juiced link is better, and I like mine. I'll tell you though you are better off ditching the 2100 and getting a PD 150 or PD 170 if possible.

The XLR boxes throw the balance of the camera off a lot, and you are adding a layer of complexity to your setup that I don't care for.

It works, but I strongly dislike it. You cannot set your camera down on the floor or ground without it tipping over when you go handheld.

For wedding ceremonies another option is to buy a small inexpensive camera like the canon hv30, putting it on the Juiced link and leaving it there. I run an HV 30 with the Juiced Link and I run two wirelesses off of it. Now I have a balanced FX1000. for the reception I do not need xlr anyway

Ed Space · July 4th, 2009, 08:00 AM

Thanks, Jeff. Juicelink seems to be the best bet.

Ed Space · July 4th, 2009, 08:08 AM

Thanks, John. I'll look into the PD's

Jeff Harper · July 4th, 2009, 08:29 AM

I found the PD 150s actually have a better picture than the VX2100. I had two of the PD150s and I still miss them. The PD150 can often be had for under $900. You could sell your VX2100, and you'd end up with a better cam and have your XLRs.

Tom Hardwick · July 4th, 2009, 08:36 AM

Can't agree with Jeff, and the DXA-4 under my VX2k gave me not the slightest balance or stability worries in many a year. Also the PD has exactly the same picture quality as the VX series (bar production tolerances).

But I would agree with him the fact that you should move to a native 16:9 camera, even if you only intend to shoot SD.

tom.

Jeff Harper · July 4th, 2009, 09:16 AM

Tom, I used a Juiced link, not a Beachtek as you do/did. When off the tripod it cannot be set on the ground to a table, etc without tipping over, which is a restriction when going for certain low angle shots.

Your experience may be different with a Beachtek.

The PD 150 (as I said I had two) has been said by others to have a warmer picture than the VX2100, but your experience may be different. The chips are not the same, which you, as a veteran cameraman, know. From my limited experience I did prefer the PD150.

I shot around 100 weddings with the 2X PD150 VX2100 combo and they were usually able to be matched nearly perfectly, but if any camera of the three was off, it was the Vx2100 every time. Initially I thought the issue was with the viewfinder, but it wasn't. White balance usually matched them, but I still liked the image from the older camera best.

It is possible I had a defective VX2100, but I don't think so. I sold it to someone who is still quite happy with it.

Tom Hardwick · July 4th, 2009, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Harper

The PD 150 (as I said I had two) has been said by others to have a warmer picture than the VX2100, but your experience may be different. The chips are not the same, which you, as a veteran cameraman, know. From my limited experience I did prefer the PD150.

Ah - that explains it Jeff - your Juice and my Beach are quite different.

But what isn't different is the VX and PD imaging quality. In fact the whole lens / chip-block assembly is completely interchangeable between the two cameras (VX2k & 150; VX2k1 and 170).

Your 150 and the newer VX2k1 are indeed different in the spec sheets (the latter being a 1 lux, the former a 2 lux camera), but I've always reckoned it was smoother post amplification from chips to tape that was allowing Sony to claim this, whereas in fact the chips were unchanged model to model.

tom.

Ed Space · July 5th, 2009, 07:23 AM

Thanks, Jeff. Ilooked into used PD150's and your right-much better solution.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Harper

I found the PD 150s actually have a better picture than the VX2100. I had two of the PD150s and I still miss them. The PD150 can often be had for under $900. You could sell your VX2100, and you'd end up with a better cam and have your XLRs.

Jeff Harper · July 5th, 2009, 07:38 AM

I don't know what it was Tom, it was weird, as it would seem "logical" that the newer VX2100 would be better.

But as I said I still miss those old cameras, they were amazing. The FX1000 just isn't the HD equivalent. Not even close in my book.

Recently I showed a potential customer videos made with the older cameras and the newer ones.

I never even brought up the subject of cameras, except to say that "this video was made with our newer cameras and the other was made with our older cameras."

She asked if she could opt for the older cameras.

An HD camera is of no advantage when it gets grainy in low light, which the FX1000 does much more than the older cameras.

Jeff Harper · July 5th, 2009, 07:39 AM

It would be a smart Move Ed.

Ed Space · July 5th, 2009, 02:36 PM

Good info, Jeff. Interesting how well the price has held for VX2100's

Ed

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Harper

I don't know what it was Tom, it was weird, as it would seem "logical" that the newer VX2100 would be better.

But as I said I still miss those old cameras, they were amazing. The FX1000 just isn't the HD equivalent. Not even close in my book.

Recently I showed a potential customer videos made with the older cameras and the newer ones.

I never even brought up the subject of cameras, except to say that "this video was made with our newer cameras and the other was made with our older cameras."

She asked if she could opt for the older cameras.

An HD camera is of no advantage when it gets grainy in low light, which the FX1000 does much more than the older cameras.

July 3rd, 2009, 11:10 PM	#1
Ed Space Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Campbell, California Posts: 62	XLR adapter for VX2100 Couldn't find an XLR adapter for this out of production camera. What make and model was ever available and where can I find one. I want to buy a used VX2100 for a 2nd camera and deck. Thanks, Ed __________________ uwrite

July 4th, 2009, 08:00 AM	#4
Ed Space Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Campbell, California Posts: 62	XLR adapter for VX2100 Thanks, Jeff. Juicelink seems to be the best bet. __________________ uwrite

July 4th, 2009, 08:08 AM	#5
Ed Space Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Campbell, California Posts: 62	XLR adapter for VX2100 Thanks, John. I'll look into the PD's __________________ uwrite

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

July 4th, 2009, 12:30 AM	#2
John Wiley Trustee Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Byron Bay, Australia Posts: 1,155	Any of the Beachtek's ones should work - DXA-2 or DXA-4 if you have battery powered mics or the DXA-6 if you need phantom power. Also try Juicedlink... i can't find them anywhere in australia so don't know how they compare to the Beachtek.

July 4th, 2009, 05:27 AM	#3
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	Juiced link is better, and I like mine. I'll tell you though you are better off ditching the 2100 and getting a PD 150 or PD 170 if possible. The XLR boxes throw the balance of the camera off a lot, and you are adding a layer of complexity to your setup that I don't care for. It works, but I strongly dislike it. You cannot set your camera down on the floor or ground without it tipping over when you go handheld. For wedding ceremonies another option is to buy a small inexpensive camera like the canon hv30, putting it on the Juiced link and leaving it there. I run an HV 30 with the Juiced Link and I run two wirelesses off of it. Now I have a balanced FX1000. for the reception I do not need xlr anyway

July 4th, 2009, 08:29 AM	#6
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	I found the PD 150s actually have a better picture than the VX2100. I had two of the PD150s and I still miss them. The PD150 can often be had for under $900. You could sell your VX2100, and you'd end up with a better cam and have your XLRs.

July 4th, 2009, 08:36 AM	#7
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	Can't agree with Jeff, and the DXA-4 under my VX2k gave me not the slightest balance or stability worries in many a year. Also the PD has exactly the same picture quality as the VX series (bar production tolerances). But I would agree with him the fact that you should move to a native 16:9 camera, even if you only intend to shoot SD. tom.

July 4th, 2009, 09:16 AM	#8
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	Tom, I used a Juiced link, not a Beachtek as you do/did. When off the tripod it cannot be set on the ground to a table, etc without tipping over, which is a restriction when going for certain low angle shots. Your experience may be different with a Beachtek. The PD 150 (as I said I had two) has been said by others to have a warmer picture than the VX2100, but your experience may be different. The chips are not the same, which you, as a veteran cameraman, know. From my limited experience I did prefer the PD150. I shot around 100 weddings with the 2X PD150 VX2100 combo and they were usually able to be matched nearly perfectly, but if any camera of the three was off, it was the Vx2100 every time. Initially I thought the issue was with the viewfinder, but it wasn't. White balance usually matched them, but I still liked the image from the older camera best. It is possible I had a defective VX2100, but I don't think so. I sold it to someone who is still quite happy with it.

July 5th, 2009, 07:38 AM	#11
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	I don't know what it was Tom, it was weird, as it would seem "logical" that the newer VX2100 would be better. But as I said I still miss those old cameras, they were amazing. The FX1000 just isn't the HD equivalent. Not even close in my book. Recently I showed a potential customer videos made with the older cameras and the newer ones. I never even brought up the subject of cameras, except to say that "this video was made with our newer cameras and the other was made with our older cameras." She asked if she could opt for the older cameras. An HD camera is of no advantage when it gets grainy in low light, which the FX1000 does much more than the older cameras.

July 5th, 2009, 07:39 AM	#12
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	It would be a smart Move Ed.