Hello everyone,

I am in the planning stage of a larger aquisition for my church. After reading tons on this forum (plus some hands-on experience) I have narrowed it down to a Sony PD-170 for main camcorder (mainly for the DVCAM format required by TV stations). As for the other two camcorders or cameras I am thinking about either two VX2100s or two pan/tilt cameras with remote control – my church is pretty conservative, we don’t want three operators, one is enough for distraction… And the lighting is not what we would like it to be, so sensitivity is a must.

What do you think about the VX2100 versus pan/tilt cameras and do you know of any good ones, with the same basic characteristics and same price range (including the pan/tilt base and remote control)?

Please don't waste your time talking me into high definition.

Thank you,

Please don't waste your time talking me into high definition.Hi Ervin, unfortunately you posted this in our General HD / HDV Acquisition category, so for that reason alone, you're bound to get recommendations to talk you into high definition. So to save you the trouble I'm moving this to our Sony PD170 / VX2100 forum.

Strange things happened when I posted this question... I thought I was in the right forum, that's where I clicked, but the page title in the browser head said otherwise. Then, when I hit the "submit" button, it went to the DV category... Later I came back and there was my topic in the PD170/VX2100 forum, so this is a duplicate, apparently the system recorded it in both forums? Either one of them can be deleted.

Hey Ervin - I think what you probably saw was a "re-direct" and not a duplicate post. When we move posts from one forum to another we often leave a re-direct so that a link to the moved post appears in your original forum. That way you'll be able to find the moved post without knowing what forum we moved it to.

If you want the footage to match, you should purchase the same or very similar cameras. I don't know (although there may be) of other cameras that match the 170/2100 family. You can get tilt and pan mounts for this class of camera so I'd stay with the 2100's for the secondary cameras.

Are you phase-locking the sources at the switcher or are you recording all three streams and switching in Post?

I should mention that the 170 will shut the drum down after 5 minutes, the 2100's shut off unless (I think) you keep the tape door open.

What you might consider doing is buying a couple of used PD150's or 170's that have worn-out transports. They should still work very well as pure cameras and will cost about 1/5th to 1/3rd the price of a new camera. Or buy all used cameras. You should be able to get three with bad transports for the cost of one new camera.

the pd 170 and vx 2100 are essentially the same camera. think of the pd 170 as a 2100 with pro audio inputs, dvcam recording, in addition to DV, black paint and a much higher price tag. The picture quality is almost identical. so I would say buy vx 2100 or 2000 if you can find them and save yourself some money.

For his purposes, unless he is going to leave the tape doors open, the 2000/2100 cameras will not work.

Btw, VX2100 does not shut down if there's no tape in and the door is closed.

You are correct, my mistake.

Jay, you say,"The picture quality is almost identical'' but in fact the VX2100 has the edge in low light in the shutter priority mode (which we should all use as a matter of course).

The VX2100 will add the bare minimum amount of gain up when maximum aperture is reached, whereas with the PD170 you have to select a gain up amount and then let the iris work to that gain figure.

It's a small point, but worth making.

Other than that both cameras (bar component and build tolerances) give exactly the same picture quality.

tom.

so i thought i'd read somewhere that one of the differences between the 170 and the 2100 was that the 170 was native 16:9... is this correct or not?

No, the pd170 is not native 16:9.

Tom my pd170 does not work that way as far as I know. I suppose it depends on what setting you have on manual and auto.

I never set the gain and let the iris adjust to a gain setting.

Typically in low light I have the iris at 1.6 and the gain in auto but capped at 12 with the custom preset.

I've heard that the pd170 has more iris increments than the 2100, easier manual controls, better audio, and comes with a screw on wide angle lens.

Whoops Richard, you're right, and I stand corrected. My brain was working on the FX1/Z1's method of working with gain and apertures.

You're also correct in that the 170's iris control has more steps along the way, so making exposure adjustments (iris and gain) almost invisibly smooth on screen. The half stop exposure bumps the VX2000, 2100 and PD150 put up on screen are legendary.

I couldn't say that the 170 has 'better audio' though. It certainly allows XLR mics to be directly connected and then allows individual channels to be balanced, but I suspect the camera's audio electronics is not inherrently better than the VX's.

And yes, the 170 comes with a 'free' 0.7x wide-angle converter. It's too mild in my view and the barrel distortion is pretty laughable, but there you go.

tom.

The wide angle lens is a good for wedding receptions, bridal preps, small churches, etc. The barrel distortion is not noticaeble in these instances unless you are looking for it in the backround on some distant wall corner.
I wouldn't call it laughable at all.

However, the barrel distortion is more noticeable on the LCD than on the TV.

Anyhow, for beginners who are just getting started, it is a perfect camera to get you up and running. Professional mics with professional hook-ups with an accessory lens gets you well on the way.

Not quite sure what you mean by the distortion being more noticeable on the screen than a TV, Richard, but I conceed - the lens' distortion is not laughable.

Barrel distortion is a real problem with the Z1, as distortion has been traded for sharpness in the design of the Zeiss 12x zoom. The distortion is enough to make me wary of using max wide-angle as I track through buildings, because door frames that bow outward as I pass through them do not look good to my clients. If you've got a flat-screen TV, try this: stand in front of the TV with your camera perfectly perpendicular to the screen. Zoom to wide-angle and move so that the TV frame fills your v'finder frame. I’ll bet the results surprise you. As you move further away though and zoom in, things begin to look better and the barrel distortion lessens. On the Z1 you've got to go to 12 on the 00>99 zoom scale to get zero distortion. All is not lost though. My single element Bolex aspheric (a 0.5x) actually cures the Sony’s barrel distortion to some extent. At full wide-angle it’s still barrel distorted, but zooming in a bit gives perfectly straight lines.

The problem with a spherical lens like the 0758 supplied with the PD170 and the 0.8x designed for the FX1 is that they exaggerate the barrel distortion inherent in the original zoom lens. The distortion may well be acceptable for general photography, but if you double the distortion by using a 0.5x converter, it will become pretty noticeable. It's for this reason that Sony wide-angles are pretty mild, generally.

tom.

Thanks for clarifying.

I could see how the barrel distortion is more noticeable when shooting buildings. I shoot mostly weddings, so it is not so bad.

I just started using the wide angle and I am smittened. I love framing the 1st dance and seeing the dancers from head to toe without having to use a bright light or shooting the toast and being able to frame the couple and the person giving the toast without being far away. This stops people from walking in front of me and gives me better audio because people hardly ever talk into the mic.

The bolex lens seems like a godsend and a good investment.

Thanks

If the barrel distortion is a bother, there are digital filters that can be applied in Post to straighten the lines. And there are filters (sometimes the same one) that can correct the width distortion that you see at the sides of the frame.

I am about to buy my first serious camcorder and I'm wrestling with choices. I've enrolled in the Duke University Documentary Certificate program and I'll be taking classes for about two years. During that time I'd like to have a camera that will let me learn, and one that I won't outgrow. For these reasons I've become very focused on the Sony PD-170. BUT, as you can imagine, the HD crowd is very obvious and vocal in such a setting and they are strongly suggesting that the HDV format is where I need to be and that I should get the Z1 instead.

I read the Sony White Paper describing the HDV format and the GOP capture and compression process seems to me to have some significant potential problems. Having said that, I own a Sony HD TV and I love the 1080i look.

Most of my documentary shooting will be as a raw beginner. I have an iMac G5 computer with Final Cut Express HD 3.5 installed along with 512MB memory and a 160 GB HD. The chip speed is 2 GHz. I'm pretty sure it will be fine for SD, but I fear an upgrade is needed for HDV. I don't mind the investment, but I also remember buying a Beta VCR and finding that the world didn't like it as much as I did.

So, do I buy the PD-170, about $2700 after Sony rebate, or go the Z1 route, $4500 without a wide angle lens that is included with the PD-170? By the way, I believe I will be shooting in low light conditions, part of my documentary is focused on the terminally ill in hospice care, and having a candid way to shoot video without outside lights is important. I almost sold myself on the Sony HVR-A1U, but I'm concerned about the low light needs, and the fact that some of the functions I may need quickly will be buried in a deep menu format.

Thanks for the help, this site is terrific!!

Len, your post really deserves to start a new thread. But here goes: good on you for including so much background information - few people do this, simply asking' '' what's best?'' and leaving gaping holes a mile wide.

First thing to ask yourself is what does the client want? If it's 4:3 material your choice of the PD170 is bang on, top notch, nail-on-the-head aiming. If however you feel that 16:9 is the way ahead then it has to be said that the PD170 was designed in the VX2000 days of the year 1999, when 16:9 was good enough to be added as an image degraded add-on.

The PD170 sells for the same price as the FX1, and this sure makes punters wobble at the shop counter. But again, your background description leads me to believe that the 170 is right for you. Your pc will fly with the edit and you'll be able to output SD DVDs that all can play.

To calm you. The MPEG2 compression of the HDV format has not produced the horrendous dropout problems that many predicted. It's best to stick to nice clean tape and use the supplied head cleaner now and again, but fear not on that front.

The 170 sure does need the supplied wide-angle converter, whereas the Z1's 12x zoom is much more wide-angle right out of the box. It can still use one (I have a 0.52x with mine) but the unaided 32,5 mm (equiv) is pretty usefull.

You're right to consider the low light capabilities of these cameras. If you go the 170 route you'll have hand-on-heart knowledge that no-one surpasses you. The A1 is dire in the gloom, and the Z1 is not in the same league, though I must say the gain-up mode is very useable.

tom.