I would like to "throw" a question out for discussion:

If you (or do) own a VX2000 would you upgrade to the VX2100 for the extra features and sell your VX2000?

Personally I would not upgrade (I do own a VX-2000). None of the new features look that compelling to me, although they certainly enhance the camera. Considering the hit you would take selling your used camera, I don't think it would make sense. Since you're asking the question it would imply that you don't find any of the new features are "must haves" either... or do they address some specific problems you have with the VX-2000?

I just threw out the question to get a feel on how important the upgrades to the VX2100 are to current owners of the VX2000.
I personally agree with you that the loss does not justify a new VX2100 but others may disagree with us and have good reasons to upgrade.

<<<-- Originally posted by Boyd Ostroff : Personally I would not upgrade (I do own a VX-2000). None of the new features look that compelling to me, although they certainly enhance the camera. Considering the hit you would take selling your used camera, I don't think it would make sense. Since you're asking the question it would imply that you don't find any of the new features are "must haves" either... or do they address some specific problems you have with the VX-2000? -->>>

I just had my VX2000 audio modified, that oughtta hold me for another year. maybe by that time Sony will have put a decent audio chain in the VX/PD series.

There's very little to be gained at this time, I'd wait.

I'd take the delta and spend it on another camera or another goodie. Or maybe (really?) just bank the diff.

I have both a VX2000 and a VX2100. I actually prefer using the 2000 because I prefer its viewfinder. The sound on my VX2000 has always been pretty good, so I haven't found a big difference with the VX2100. I'd stick with the VX2000 if I were you.

There's a review of the PD-170 in a recent issue of Videography magazine. The author says he can see an actual improvement in the quality of the image vs the PD-150. That's really the first time I'd heard this. I have not seen or used a VX-2100 or PD-170, but for those of you that are familiar with them, do you think there's any truth to this?

Certainly if Sony's claims that they've increased the light sensitivity down to 1 lux are true, I would expect you'd see a visible difference in image quality in low light.

In good lighting, I'd think any difference would be minimal.

I have a PD-150, and I'm not really thinking about upgrading to the PD-170. All nice improvements (especially for a new buyer), but not enough to make me jump. Including the wide-angle adapter on the PD-170, is a nice touch, but since I just bought a Century .55x, it's not much of an incentive to me.

(NTSC/PAL switchability, true 16:9 chips or full-resolution progressive scan, on the other hand, would have had me salivatin'.....)

I haven't seen a 2100 yet, but from all that I've read, the improvements are minimal. If you already have a 2000 or a PD150, there's no compelling reason to sell it and get a 2100 or 170. On their professional cameras, Sony comes out with periodic upgrades all the time. In the case of the DSR500, for example, there was the /L1 version, then the 570. None of these upgrades affects the image appreciably. The /L1 fixed a couple of annoyances and the 570 added a CCU. Same with the DSR300/370/390--gradual minor improvements...but they don't make the original obsolete.

I have done some crude low light comparisons between my VX-2100 and my VX-2000. The best way to describe the result is not that the VX-2100 can film things at light levels where the VX-2000 would be completely black. The difference is that the VX-2100 has slightly less noise at those light levels where noise becomes an issue. The difference is not huge, but it is definitely there. I believe that in candlelight environments you would perceive a slightly cleaner picture from the 2100. At higher light levels the cameras quickly become indistinguishable.

Lou, I wouldn't upgrade if I owned a VX2000. But I would get the audio fixed. On the other hand, one member here upgraded because he shoots the Northern Lights up in Alaska, and enters these contests. So for him, upgrading was a must.

<<<-- Originally posted by Frank Granovski : Lou, I wouldn't upgrade if I owned a VX2000. But I would get the audio fixed. On the other hand, one member here upgraded because he shoots the Northern Lights up in Alaska, and enters these contests. So for him, upgrading was a must. -->>>

Audio fixed? What's wrong with the VX2000's audio?

Alan, I noticed your comment about preferring the
2000 viewfinder. I feel the same, even though
the 2100 is suppose to be an improvement. Why do *you* like the 2000's better?

If anyone is interested in finding out more about the "audio fix" that works for both the VX2000 and the PD150 go to http://www.gregjwinter.com/modification2.htm

If you want to "cut to the chase" be sure to look at this page:
http://www.gregjwinter.com/compare.htm

Thanks. -Greg.

I decided to upgrade to the VX2100 because I got an extremely good deal on the camera and because I had little use on my VX2000, I didn't take a beating.

All in All, same picture quality and very little noticable lux sensitivity. I like the handle but am not too pleased with the larger EVF.

I know.............I know................Then why did you upgrade you ask?

BECAUSE I AM ADDICTED TO VIDEO :-)

Sounds like a good opportunity for somebody to pick up a very nice VX2000 cheap.

It is a done deal, I got a good price for the camera and only added a couple hundred to get the upgrade. The VX2000 sold 1 2 3 and the buyer got a good camera with low low hours.

Looks like you got a great deal, then. The upgrade is definitely worth 200 bucks.

Interesting. if you were able to upgrade to the VX-2100 and sell your VX-2000 without much of a loss then that would imply the market does not see much of a difference between the two cameras either....

That is correct. The upgrades are miniscule. I will probably have a higher resale value as it is the latest version. ALSO-the camera I sold is pristine and has very few hours.


Now-which warranty should I get? Mack? GE?

I'd not think you can get a warranty post-sale. Let us know if it works.

Will do, Mike.

Yeah I don't think it's going to jive either...it's like trying to get a new Insurance carrier and them not inspecting the car. MACK, for example, has no idea what condition the camera is in when it's used, thus I doubt they will cover it. Though....if it does work more power to you!

Lou, what don't you like about the EVF?
You know, it's new and improved.

The VX2100 was not used. It is a long story I would rather not get into but it was about 400 dollars cheaper than what it is being sold for. Yes, it was a very legitimate sale involving horse trading etc. A long story :-)

Therefore, I am considering a warranty and I can get a Mack Warranty.

I was wondering how their service is?


I never liked the new EVF. They placed a magnifier over the internal LCD (not a CRT) thus when the user moves the EVF slightly to the left, the picture appears overexposed. Yes, I did "play" with the internal menu as it relates to the EVF but to no avail.


Here is the bottom line: I was lucky to upgrade for 200 US dollars to a NEW camera as the resale value will be higher. I can not see anyone selling their VX2000 at a greater loss as the improvements are just incremental/miniscule.

The magifier on the VX-2100 makes the EVF system very sensitive to eye position. When you move your head slightly when looking through the viewfinder, the EVF will go out of focus as your eye moves from the precise center of the magnifier focal length to a position slightly ahead or behind it. I personally find it difficult to maintain a sharp EVF when shooting, and this is very annoying. The VX-2000 viewfinder, although appearing slightly smaller, does not have this problem.

I often wonder if there is a way to replace the VX-2100 viewfinder with a VX-2000 model, but a cursory examination makes it look as if they wouldn't be interchangeable.

The situation is livable, but I definitely think that Sony took a step backward when they added the magnifier to the VX-2100.

<<<-- Audio fixed? What's wrong with the VX2000's audio? -->>>

Read my posts on the "Now Hear This " Forum . Like night and day, what a difference!

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=23133