I have not got my pdx10 yet, but as the v/finder is small i wonder is there a rubber cup you can buy for it, something like the big one that comes with the 170, it would make it better in bright light.

Tom,

Just read your review in computer video (feb 2004) on the pdx10, seems the the ccd smear was a big thing in your view, Also read the one in camcorder user (uk) and it said that useing a 1/50 shutter setting it was not blighted by this phenomenon.

After much debate i ordered one last week and they said that it was on back order, they said selling like hot cakes, in the time that the pdx has been out is it possible that sony have done something about the problem.

It seems very popular with the vendor iam buying from, next to the 170 and yes although reasonbly priced, there are some other good models in that price bracket, or is it just the 16:9 thats the main selling feature.

I must confess after reading Tom's review i hope that i have not made a big mistake.

My personal experience is that smear isn't much of an issue. You can force it to happen if you shoot directly into a REALLY bright light - like the sun. Keeping the shutter at 1/50 and avoiding overexposure through the use of manual controls will solve most of your problems. The smear is worse at high shutter speeds.

Browse back through our forum, we've sorta beaten this topic to death, and there are plenty of satisfied PDX-10 users that don't feel this is really an issue. I don't think Sony has made any changes to the CCD's to reduce smear. Rather, I think that the problem was exaggerated by people who were new to the camera in the beginning.

But yes. I think the main advantage to the PDX-10 is the 16:9. If you aren't particularly interested in 16:9 then the 170 would be a better choice. Not sure about your local vendors, but here at B&H the PDX-10 sells for about half the price of the PD-170 though ($1,600 after rebate). It's a great value, considering that some of us (like me) paid $2,200 a couple years ago. But no one camera can be right for everybody of course. I also have a VX-2000, and if for some reason I could only keep one then I'd get rid of the VX-2000. It's a great camera, but the 16:9 quality and better audio on the PDX-10 are worth much more to me personally.

Your mileage may vary...

Be aware of light sources falling within or just above the frame.
This can include windows, headlights, stadium lights, and candles... You will get used to what sets off the smear, and you will know how to shoot appropriately. It really is a minor thing.
(It's also a you-get-what-you-pay-for thing)

Thanks Shawn, Boyd,

The main reason for getting this camera is the true widescreen, a backup for my 170 for weddings and other promotion video's that iam hopefully starting to do, more portable.

The low light thing may not be such a big deal, but the ccd flare will have to be worked around.

Shawn,

You say you get what you pay for, when the camera first came out it was not cheap, and even now you have got to be serious before you buy one, there,s plenty more now and cheaper (panasonic) and the Canon Xm2 could give the pdx a run for your money, and yet the vendor say's there is nearly a 2wk back order for it, so eitheir sony is slowing down production or there is still a big demand for it?

Just have to echo what Boyd and Shawn have said here--I personally have not had any problems with smear in day to day usage. I know it's there (because people say it is) and I know it can be induced, but I've never actually seen it. And the examples of it I've seen (shot by others) didn't turn me off, really. I guess I don't do much shooting in marginal/extreme situations--like shooting directly at the sun, or at klieg lights. Just a personal quirk. ;^)

It's easy to go back through the forum archives and become alarmed by the recurring theme of "smear", but really, in everyday usage, and with a small amount of common sense, it's not a problem. CCD smear may be the WMD of the PDX-10....

All good points here, as Mr Hardwick would say. The smear is tough for me personally, though, because I love my fast shutterspeeds, which are a challenge to use in normal daytime situations.

Ian. You bet, there are other cameras, but the PDX is still special for different reasons (high quality 16:9, a closest cheapest match to other higher end Sony cams, combined with high quality native XLR sound).

In conclusion, it's a great little cam with idiosyncracies that can be worked around.

<<<-- Originally posted by Shawn Mielke :
In conclusion, it's a great little cam with idiosyncracies that can be worked around. -->>>

Amen.
Now...about that damned zoom lever/focus ring/info readout... ;^)

Solution: Ignore it and it will go away! :-]

Think: LANC controller... :-)

Think: dead reckoning! ;>

I was tough on the little PDX10 because when I tested it the VX2100 was available for a few dollars more, and a lot of the PDX's 'specialties' are cured by going for the VX. The VX has a few downsides too of course, and I'm happy to tell you what they are.

But you're not making a mistake Ian. It's a great little cam that had its limits (as they all do) but it has its strengths too, and has them in abundance. If you're going to be shooting 16:9 and don't want to lug about an FX1, it's the camera for you. If you're not going to be shooting 16:9 then it's not really such a good deal. Without the widescreen mode the wide-angle coverage is useless, too.

I'm sure the current model is unchanged from the one I tested a year ago, and Sony are much more likely to replace it than upgrade it. And whatever's said here, the camera exhibits huge amounts of horrendous CCD smear, and you don't need 'bright lights just inside or outside the frame'. I shot kids on a huge trampoline at 1/1000th sec and the footage was unusable, and all I had was some grey sky above the background hedges.

So keep to the default shutter speed and accept the wobbling ND filters and the footage it records will blow your socks off. It's not really a camera for the button-twirling experimenter, and my biggest complaint was that Sony were selling it as a professional piece of kit and yet didn't even tell you what aperture you were shooting at.

tom.

Still waiting for my pdx10,

First thankyou all for the advice this is a great place,

I was just thinking today after reading alot of the posts on this site about the quirkes on this little cam, you would think that Sony would have come in with a few tips and advice on how to work round them, after all they made it, and you would think that they would want sales to do well, yes for the price this is a fine cam but a little help from its designer would help!


Anyway in the advent of HDV please don't let this forum die on this little gem.

You're thinking it would be nice for Sony to admit that work-arounds are necessary to get the best out of their camcorders? This ain't gonna happen. The beauty of this www is that manufacturers have nowhere to hide, and the truth will out. So will the conspiracy theories too, of course, but overall the www works in all our favours.

Sony have never ever admitted to the fact that the PDX employs automatic in-built ND filters, but that's no surprise as Panasonic have been doing it for years and they have only just started making mention of it in their advertising blurb. Sony (as usual) does it better in my view - at least they have three of them, and Panasonic have only just gone from using a single ND to two.

tom.

That's why we're here Ian, to tell you all the stuff that Sony doesn't ;-) Rest assured that this forum isn't going anywhere. BTW, I merged your new thread with your previous one since they both had the same title and covered the same ground.

Well it arrived 3 day's ago!

And today i had a good play with it and must say iam pleased with it.

Through the custom presets in good light it matches my 170 very well, the 16:9 is awesome, and yes Boyd the digital zoom at 24x is the best ive seen,

I know this will have been asked but what wideangle do i need, and is there a good 2x converter out there.

<<<-- Originally posted by Ian Thomas : and yes Boyd the digital zoom at 24x is the best ive seen -->>>

Shhh!... don't let Tom hear you say that! ;-)

Well, at last I've got it!

It's my strong advice, if you can, to go to B&H and try all the cameras they have ready for testing and playing around. It's worth a thousand words and a thousand threads.

You can watch every camera on a professional monitor, so you can really see what the differences are. Some are minor, some are not, but it will all depend on your budget and what you are going to use it for.

Right now, in 16:9, nothing can beat the PDX10 if you can use Sony's rebate. It's a giant of a little machine.

Next comes the Panasonic DVC30, which is very good in 4:3. Pity it's not that good in 16:9, because its LCD screen is great. No XLRs if you want to compare it with the PDX10 price-wise. It's $150 more though.

Surprisingly for me the next in the choices for less than $2,000 was the JVC DV300, which you can really compare it with the PD170, because it has 1/3" CCDs and XLR inputs.

My problem with JVC is that I am not sure of their products reliability, as my past experience with mine or other's was not very good. If you live in the US (I don't) it's an excellent choice for $ 1,949.95 at B&H right now. Very professional but not too small.

I agree with Boyd that the smear is absolutely no big deal on the PDX10. I shot several interviews in NY and also some external shots in the city, and got excellent images.

My concerns with it are:

1) Limited choices in filters at 37mm. My must-have grad NDs are non-existent in that size, as well as any kind of contrast type. Will have to use an adapter ring to go to a larger size.

2) Connectors seem to be a bit fragile: both the PDX10 and DVC30 had intermittencies on their S-video outputs at B&H. It probably needs a cable that you never unplug and a sturdier connector on the other end. The firewire connector probably suffers from the same problem.

3) LCD screen is a bit contrasty and you can't adjust that. You better use a gray-scale for serious lighting and an external LCD screen. I bought a 7" one. The B&W viewfinder can be trusted there, but it's too small. Any suggestion for a rubber or foam cup?

4) It has no carrying handle to hold the camera from. Is there any type around you can use for that? As I bought a Bracket 1 mount I plan to use it for that, but a handle should be better.

5) Using external adaptors can be a pain to screw in if you use the large lens hood, as threading them is hard. Pity they are not bayonet types.

The options for 37mm WA adaptors is large, and I tried two. As my top budget for that was $90, I tried one of the Century models, but it's not zoom-through. So I exchanged it for a Sony VCL-0637S which costs $30 and did quite good on the shots I used it. Though I still have to see those shots on a pro monitor screen. Going to full zoom it seemed to be pretty sharp on the LCD screen and viewfinder.

Do get an external battery charger and at least two large batteries. Having to use the camera to charge the batteries is an awful choice, and I wonder why that seems to be the only way nowadays. In my case I got two Power-2000 NP-QM91, which are 5.4 Amp type batteries and last pretty long. They also balance the camera better.
Do get a Petrol hood for the LCD: it's only $20 but you will need it in daylight.

One thing that I left standing by was a Cavision 3 x 3 matte-box I was going to buy. You can't return it if you don't like it, and B&H doesn't stock it, so you can't try it before buying. I might go for it though, as their filter package has a pro-mist and a grad ND. But do get the Tiffen 37mm enhancing kit.

Hopefully this list will help others as a starting point. There are more things I got though.


Carlos

<<<-- Originally posted by Carlos E. Martinez : I agree with Boyd that the smear is absolutely no big deal on the PDX10. -->>>

Ssshhh! Ssshhh guys! Tom might be eavesdropping ;-)

That's a good report Carlos, sounds like you had a fun shopping trip. You're right about the absence of a carrying handle, it is a little awkward but I suppose I've gotten used to it.

Personally I've never noticed a problem with either the s-video or i.Link connectors on my camera, but I don't use them all that often. They seem pretty comparable in quality to the connectors on my VX-2000 which has seen heavy use of s-video and firewire for over 3 years without problems.

There are two things which I do dislike about the PDX-10's connectors however. I really hate that stereo mini-plug which carries both composite video and L+R audio. That's what I expect from a cheap single chipper, but I do understand the need to reduce the size of things on a small camera like the PDX-10.

The other thing is the hotshoe connection for the XLR box. As you have probably already learned, you have to push it REALLY hard until it clicks in place. A number of users have commented on this here, and several people thought there were problems on their new cameras because they weren't pushing hard enough to snap it in place. Now I've taken mine on and off frequently, and never had a problem, but I just don't like the way it feels personally. Guess it's no big deal, haven't seen any reports of them breaking or failing.

Well i have shot some footage with the pdx in 16:9 and now i have set the custom settings i must say this little cam is becomeing awesome, My Tv moniter has widescreen were it crops both the top and bottom and my footage shot in 4:3 looks the same as that shot in true widescreen with the pdx10,


How do you see the difference between true widescreen and the 16:9 shot with the likes of the 170, and is my moniter just masking the top and bottom of the screen to give the widescreen affect.

Hey guys, I AM eavesdropping but I'm laughing too loudly to type straight.

But to the point. Great post Carlos, with some well observed details.

Might be worth pointing out that although the filter thread is only 37 mm, you'll still need a good wide-angle converter to cover the entire frame. Remember that you should view the results of any wide-angle lens test on a PC monotor, with any filters you intend to use in place, at full wide-angle, in the 16:9 mode and with Steadyshot turned on and the camera moved about. This will shift the image on the chips and any vignetting that's going to appear will be shown up.

Ian - your TV monitor should come with all sorts of aspect ratio options available via the remote control. Read the book to find out what's on offer, because it sounds to me as if something's seriously up.

Now, about that CCD smear... Ho ho. Have you read my surprise on the VX2000 forum about the XL1 smear?

tom.

well i have had the pdx10 for a few weeks now and i must say that iam very pleased with it, yes i have seen the ccd flare but this can be avoided.

The cam is very portable and the picture it gives either in 4:3 and 16:9 is pretty awesome and i think all this talk about the flare issue as deflected all the good things about this little cam, i think that you have to get to know the cam and learn the best way round things.

I think this is why sony have not replaced it and may i add still selling here in the uk like hot cakes.

Thanks to you all for you dedication and helpfulness you are the champs, and lets hope this little marvel will be around for a while yet it deserves to be.

Glad things are going well for you. I'm very curious as to what Sony may have in mind for the future of the PDX-10, maybe we'll find out at NAB? Elsewhere there was a link posted that indicated Sony has stopped making the Infolithium QM-91 batteries for the PDX-10. This makes me think they don't have a lot of future plans for the line...