PD150 vs. JVC GY-DV300U
 

I own 2 XL-1 and I have decide that it is time to sell them and get a couple of new cameras.

The PD 150 has always looked like an impressive cam (I have handled the VX2k but never actually had my hands on the 150). Anyway, I have heard from 2 people how I shouldn't waste my time with the PD150. I was told that the JVC-DV300U is a far better cam because it boast 750 lines and the image looks so much better. They both said it was a better camera and it is cheaper - therefore that should be my camera of choice.

I have never been a big fan of JVC and I think the 300 looks like a plasic toy - but if it shoots giving 750 lines and the looks that much better maybe this is a camera I should consider? I was wondering what the folks in this forum thought about both the 300 and the PD150 - Should I really consider the JVC as the beter camera?

If you were buying new cameras now what would you get?

Any help would help....

Mat Cain

You won't get 750 lines. That's internal capture. ALL cams have higher internal capture. The MX300 captures over 1500 lines, but only plays back 500 lines. The PD150 also plays back 500 lines. I don't know what the JVC does. Why not look at the DVX100, DV500 and DVC200 as options? The DV500 has 1/2" CCDs, a fine camera and cheap as far as 1/2" CCD cams go.

Mr. Granovski -

Thank you for your response. I suspected that your explination of the 750 lines was the case. However, I am still curious about the claim that the JVC delivers a better image... I was hoping someone here might have experience with both cameras and might be able to give some insight.

As for the 1/2" CCD cameras that you mentioned: Those are a little out of my price range. The 1/3" CCD cameras fit my range a little better.

That said - any other suggestions?

Thanks Again -
Mat Cain

You are going to have to get ahold of each camera and use it in a typical manner before you can make a judgement. You can rent the 150's relatively inexpensively.

I don't know about the 300. I would be surprised if the 300 has a noticably better image. Different, yes. Better? Maybe. In low light? No.