People see my PD170 now and say "is that HD?" I have to be apologetic when I tell them it's not.

You, too?

That tells me the end is near. When are you upgrading?

Six months ago. :D

I just bought my VX2100 a few months ago. I don't see myself switching to HD until at least Feb 2009 (The date the FCC has scheduled for the SDTV to HDTV switch). And then, we'll see what demand there is for HD.

By the way, when I was shooting SVHS (Panasonic AG450), people would come over to me and assume it was a DV camera.

Ezra

I have both VX2000 and FX1. FX1 is a great education, and I am using it that way.

I made the move from my 170 to a Z1U last month. I'm kinda late to the party, but that was by design :) I was just thinking last weekend after having shot a decent amount of footage with it, that my Z is the standard def cam I always wanted. The quality of the high def downconverted to 16:9 standard def in Vegas is what I always dreamed I would have. To be honest, if for whatever reason I never burned a HD-DVD or Blueray disc in my life, the quality of the standard def I get out of this camera was well worth every penny I spent on it.

John

I'll switch, after the 2nd or 3rd generation of sony HDV cameras are released and when some clients start asking for it.

ditto richards comments.

until i see hd tv's in ordinary peoples houses (incl friends in the business), i don't think it's worth the investment, even for the great pics they produce in sd. heck, i hardly know anyone who's actually bought a 16:9 display for home.

with petrol and the cost of living rocketing, i think it's only the reckless, or very rich who will spend big on displays at the moment. a great deal of what you read and hear at the moment is hype from manufacturers, and those in the trade who want a bigger one than yours....

that said, i'll repeat myself yet again - the pictures are great.

leslie

ps. most of the people who see my 170 and ask is it hd know the buzz words and little else. i always ask if they have a hd set - none have, and none have any idea where they'd obtain programs other than free to air or cable. and NONE have any means of playing back hd disks.....

I just bought my VX2100 a few months ago. I don't see myself switching to HD until at least Feb 2009 (The date the FCC has scheduled for the SDTV to HDTV switch). And then, we'll see what demand there is for HD.

By the way, when I was shooting SVHS (Panasonic AG450), people would come over to me and assume it was a DV camera.

Ezra

I think what you are talking about is the switch to all-digital transmission. To my knowledge, there is not and never has been a mandate for HD.

I don't feel appologetic about not driving a Ferrari to go to the store. Same with shooting/viewing SD television. Truth is there isn't much HD available in any media. Joe six-pack cannot normally affort to pop two to five thousand on a screen and then have to pay a lot more for the limited programming that is available. There is still a lot of life left in SD.

Those are good points Mike. But putting aside the HD vs SD debate, The Z1 really does offer a lot of nice upgrades from the PD-170 in terms of image adjustment and manual control. Last weekend I spent awhile with my Z1 connected to a monitor, digging deeper into what some of the controls do. Between WB shift, black stretch, cinegamma, color correction, skin tone detail, color phase and other things I'm probably forgetting, you can really do a lot of cool things on the Z1. And of course there's the issue of high quality anamorphic 16:9 DV which John mentions above. But the PD and VX series are great if you need to shoot in dark places and only need 4:3.

Of course, if you are happy with your current camera then there isn't a lot of reason to switch. There will always be a newer model just around the corner which is cheaper/better/cooler. :-)

There's two parts to this really. HDV is a much greater expense than the camera itself. It's the potential added workflow time and a setup where you can accurately color correct HD. When my clients will pay more for HD then I'll get it. They're NOT going to get HD at SD prices. I won't give away my services.

On the other hand, as some have pointed out, the HDV cameras are actually significantly improved SD cameras too. I have a hunch the low light noise issue will be improving in the next generation although I understand the obstacles.

I don't like the motion artifacts with HDV, especially since I do slowmo shots. I just don't know how to sell that to a client as an improvement after they've spend thousands on an HDTV and eventually on a HDDVD/BluRay player too.

Add to that, that many production people want shooters to do 24p in camera (vs the 1080i of the Z1).

My fantasy is that Sony comes out with a 1/3" chip version of the F350 which uses 35mbps VBR encoding, 24 and 60p, records to a BluRay Disk (XDCAM) for $8,000 with lens to one up Panasonic's HVX-200 (and it's P2 record time, archival dilemma).

I don't want to have to buy a new camera every year so until I see a longer term viable camera and format, I'll hold my breath.

I currently have VX2100 and it's certainly one awesome camera. I would say one of the best in its class with PD170. 4:3 is fine for me right now and I don't see HD taking over the standard in the next year or two. As long as there is no reasonable way to deliver the HD content, I am not getting a new camera.

It would be great to have FX1 or Z1 just for widescreen SD shooting and I really like those cameras. However, I don't feel like I want to switch the VX for anything at the moment.

My feeling is, that if someone sees such a "standard" camera as the PD150/170 and asks whether its HD, it's most likely a case of them simply following buzzwords they don't really know much about, rather than showing a true understanding of the differences between SD and HD anyway. If you said "yes" and showed them the output, would they believe you? Probably.

James, I have thought the same thing.

I'll switch, after the 2nd or 3rd generation of sony HDV cameras are released

Hmm, I suppose it depends on how you count but an argument like this might be made:

1st generation: FX1 and Z1 (3 CCD)
2nd generation: HC1, HC3 and A1 (1 CMOS)
3rd generation: FX7 and V1 (3 CMOS)

:-)

I don't think any of those cams are a replacement to the z1.

I meant the z2 or z3 when and if.

until i see hd tv's in ordinary peoples houses (incl friends in the business), i don't think it's worth the investment, even for the great pics they produce in sd. heck, i hardly know anyone who's actually bought a 16:9 display for home.

Over in the UK (and Europe I imagine) 16x9 is now really popular. i think the majority of people purchasing a new TV of more than 21" now would go for a 16x9 model, and a large proportion of those seem to be budget LCD (imo - yeuch, but hey!). I think the amount of anamorphic programming over the last 7 or so years has been a really good boost, plus DVD of course. I'm really surprised that widescreen DVDs have taken off so well in the states given the complete lack of 16x9 SD tv sets, and the obvious "i'm losing picture with those ugly black bars!" feeling a lot of non-cinema heads have.

Besides not being able to afford to go hd while in in College again. I would wait at least until people have a way to play back hd reasonably. sub $150 blu-ray players.
Besides, things are just going to get better and prices will come down.

I am very happy with my VX2100 as well but would love to go HD. Is this a good choice currently, I don't believe so. The move to HD is entirely too expensive for production and editing unless your are making some serious coin in the industry. Now if I had the money to throw at HD for my own personal thrills, I would.

Why not HD yet?

1. HD-DVD/BlueRay Players are currently great expensive dust magnets
2. HD-DVD/BlueRay burners are still unavailable OR way over priced
3. HD-DVD/BlueRay media??? Expensive and hard to find?
4. HD-DVD/BlueRay movies, still scarce and unpopular
5. How many people out there have HD TVs and STILL don't understand the technology? For instance, I know 4 individuals that don't have HD cable service but think they are watching actual HD format!!!
6. Ready to purchase faster larger drives, faster multi processors, more RAM just to capture/edit HD? Nope.
7. Ready to jump into the codec, HD standards, and DRM wars? Nope.

So when the world + dog is on the HD wagon, rather than just us enthusiasts, I'll go HD. My estimated move to HD is toward the end of 2007 to the middle of 2008.

I am estimating the same myself. Marco, you brought out very good points.

I'm with Marco. I am actually in the market for an additional camera now. It will likely be a PD170, to go along with the VX2100 I have now. I am kind of a gadget freak and a video enthusiast (part time videographer), and I don't even own an HD TV. Until my 52" SD TV quits again, I probably won't even purchase an HD set. I am not in a financial position to stay with the
(b)leading edge stuff, so I do applaud those that are, to help fund the R&D for the future products.

My VVX2100 and PD170 are still doing great for me. I may start looking at HD next year, but I am not in a rush to upgrade.

As of today, I am officially in the market for an HD camera. I just sold my VX2000 to another forum member. It was hard to see it go as it has been, and still is, a great camera. I really wish there was an HDV camcorder with similar light sensitivity as the VX/PD cameras.

I think I am going to explain my personal position using Marco's list of 7 questions:

1. I'm not worried about HD optical players yet as I am planning to master to whatever HD format the local film festival accepts - probably HDV transfered to HDCAM.

2. It's okay that HD-DVD/Blueray aren't ready yet. I can always down-convert to SD.

3. See above.

4. By the time my movie is ready next year, I expect that may have changed.

5. I'm not shooting for the Least Common Denominator...yet...

6. A new editing system upgrade will cost me less than $1500.

7. I don't see any reason why that will have any effect on me. I'm sure HDV will be around for a few years and the next acquisition format will probably be compatible in some way.

If I were still doing a few weddings a month, I would keep something with good light sensitivity like a VX/PD. As it is, the last wedding I did was on an FX1 and the ceremony was projected in quasi-HD at the reception. That and a few extra dollars in my pocket cemented my decision.

Now, I'm seriously looking at the Sony V1U as exposure latitude is one of my primary considerations. Actually, I think I'm more interested in latitude than resolution but I like the 16:9 HD format and the useability features on the new Sony cameras. What I will really miss is the low-light sensitivity, but I have developed my lighting skills quite a bit over the last two years.

If you are still consistently selling SD content, keep the PD/VX or maybe the XL2 or DVX if you want to do 16:9 work. If you are shooting something that you would regret that it would never be seen on HD, it may be time for you to switch.

Bravo! I like your explanations. Again, If I had the cash I'd do the same. AND it looks like I may be doing the same. The comedy special I shot last week was done primarily in HD by the Universal crew. They had 2 VX2100s in their line up as well though. That made me feel good capturing the behind the scenes and promotional footage with my VX2100. Now it looks as though I may be shooting a few more of those shows. I want to keep the VX and grab and HD cam as well. Now it's just a matter of putting the money together, lol...

Well guys and galls, I sold off the two VX2000s this year and went for a Z1 and FX1. Here's a couple of reasons.

The two cameras were pretty easy to sell as the VX2100 can still be had, so the 2000 didn't look too out of date. Next year it'll get harder by the day to sell them as HDV cameras proliferate. Remember Sony have 7 HDV models out right now.

The form factor and ergonomics of the Z1 is streets ahead of the VX/PD. The top screen is a revelation (bin your Hoodmen), the exposure control a delight and the 16:9 - even in SD - is lovely.

Lots of other reasons like a more useful zoom range, takes the same batteries and so on Now iss the hour, good people.

tom.

Same battery! Really! I just bought an 8 hour for the VX2100, it would be a pleasure to take that expensive battery to the next camera.

The newest models (FX7 and HVR-V1) also use the same batteries. But that's about all you can keep... the filter threads are different sizes on all these camera...

The newest models (FX7 and HVR-V1) also use the same batteries. But that's about all you can keep... the filter threads are different sizes on all these camera...Yep thats true : V1 is 62mm thread, and Z1 etc are 72mm thread.

But to me, that sounds like a perfect opportunity to use a step-up ring of 62-to-72mm. So i think all the Z1 filters and attachment lenses could be used successfully on the V1.

Marco - I do kinda agree that the cost of moving to HD can easily be underestimated.

but just on a few of your points:


1. HD-DVD/BlueRay Players are currently great expensive dust magnetsThe Toshiba HD-A1 is now down in price to $419 and it has been almost universally praised to the skies. It can not only play HD-DVD's really well but almost every other type of DVD or CD in existence. OK $419 is still pricey but it was $500 just a few weeks ago..


3. HD-DVD/BlueRay media??? Expensive and hard to find?
Blu-Ray disks have been available for months and months at B&H :
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=422012&is=REG&addedTroughType=search
Only $17.95 for 25Gb of burnable storage.
OK standard 4.7Gb DVD-R's are only $1.49 from B&H but you do get 5.3times as much storage on a Blu-Ray disk, and prices of Blu-Ray media are likely to drop in time. Plus 50GB dual-layer burnable and rewritable BluRay disks are fully available at the same store.



4. HD-DVD/BlueRay movies, still scarce and unpopular
Scarce-ish i guess, but a quick check at Amazon shows there are 155 HD-DVD movie-titles currently available for purchase.
(note : i'm not recommending you buy from that store, just using it as an easy to see count of HD-DVD titles!)

People have generally been astonished at the quality and so i think for those who are lucky enough to have a HDTV and a HD-DVD-player, the HD-DVD movies aren't really "unpopular" at all (in that sense).

This is just my opinion on those points, not looking to start a bunfight or anything!!

warm regards

Many of the responses in this thread were made one year ago--and most said they'd wait on HD.

One year later, I wonder how many have changed their tune?

I'll be lucky if I go HD in 2009, but I'll probably switch in 2010. Hopefully, the 2nd generation of the Sony XDCAM EX will be out when I make the switch.

However, I wonder if buying Sony DSR-400L 2/3" 3-CCD Professional DVCAM Camcorder with 920 lines of resolution would look better than HD since it has so many lines of resolution and the low light ability.

However, I wonder if buying Sony DSR-400L 2/3" 3-CCD Professional DVCAM Camcorder with 920 lines of resolution would look better than HD

Regardless of the sensor resolution, you will be limited by the 720x480 maximum resolution of the DV format as compared to HDV's 1440x1080...

Interesting to know. Thanks for the clarity.

Well, here's my four pennies worth...

I shoot mainly DVCAM with a DSR-450 and DSR-250s. Until last week, I had a PD150 on a steadicam JR, and decided to upgrade to a Z1 on a merlin.

The Z1 is a much better camera than the PD - why? - well the ergonomics are much better with dedicated buttons or switches for all manual functions. Whilst not as flexible as the DSR-450, the switches are generally in the right place, and the "personal menu" function certainly minimises the usual menu trawl common to most small cams.

The LCD panel is far higher quality than the PD (or the DSR-450 for that matter!) and the native 16:9 ability is much better than the pseudo-mode on the PD150/DSR-250 - useful as most of my stuff is now delivered 16:9 SD. The footage from the Z1 cuts together much better with the 450 as well, the baility to tweak white balanmce also helps to match shots "in-camera" with less need for grading in post.

The Z1 is not as good as the PD in low light, but seems to be more forgiving of gain which compensates somewhat. Most of my shoots

You'll notice that so far there's been no mention of HD... The Z1 is my first dip into the HD market as no clients are asking for it at the moment. I'm really waiting to see whether XDCAM truly succeeds DVCAM as the lower "pro" format before committing to it, so the Z1 gives me a chance to play with HDV without losing SD compatability.

So, in summary, the Z1 is better in use than the 150 and certainly less future-proof - I would recommend the upgrade!

Hope this helps

I agree whole-heartidly with everything you say about the 150 and the Z1 Graham - but didn't you mean to say the Z1 is more future proof?

Sounds like you too have two assign buttons given over to incremental white-balance control. I find this so very useful (missing on the FX1) and it allows me to stay in the daylight white bal setting all the time, but just fine tune it as the light changes.

And strangely enough, if I push Assign button 5 five times (easy to remember), I find I'm at the manual artificial w/bal setting. I'm kept aware of what setting I'm in by the on-screen display, and I really feel some photographer had input on this one in the R & D at Sony. Excellent.

tom.

There seems to be two minds on this one. On one side, we have the people who tout the improved 16x9, manual control and such of the Z1 or whichever new HDV cam they have bought. Then, they say, there is also the bonus that you can shoot in HDV if needed, or to just future proof your shooting. All of these are valid reasons.

On the other side, you have people like me. I have received absolutely zero interest in HD from my clients. Also, when I upgrade I will need to upgrade my computer, disk drives, buy a new deck, figure out some way to monitor HDV (as my current setup of computer-firewire- DSR-11 deck - JVC NTSC monitor won't work.) I'm a Mac shop, so there is also the fact that there is no inexpensive way to deliver to clients in HD yet (still waiting for an HD-DVD/Blueray DVD burning drive). All this will be expensive....and I am not going to upgrade all this only to charge clients the same rate as I did in SD editing. It just doesn't make business sense to me. "Fine, but why not buy the Z1 and shoot DVCAM for now and have the option of HDV later?" Sounds valid on the surface....BUT doesn't work for me for the following reason. When I buy a camera, I need it last for a long time (I bought my PD-150 in 2000 and it's still going strong)....when I say last for a long time, I mean the FORMAT and such lasting for a long time. MiniDV is still accepted widely....will HDV be in 5 years? Probably, but I really don't know. My personal philosophy on this, is to wait as long as possible to let some of the HD standards, and formats sort themselves out. I am not getting demand for HD now so no reason to buy. I am hoping that by the time I do get some demand, there will be more of a clear picture on where the low end of the HD market is headed. At the very least, I should be able to buy far more of an HD camera for the same money, than I would if I jumped in now....for an example look at the Sony EX cinealta cam...that one is tempting me greatly. So my personal philosophy is to wait as long as possible,......then buy the biggest and best you can afford to make it last as long as possible.

Tom - yes - I would agree the Z1 provides a degree of future proofing. I think the UK is still a way behind the states on HD - perhaps because PAL SD has better resolution than NTSC SD? I think for the wedding guys this will be great because you can offer SD versions on DVD now and offer "remastered" HD versions later.

Gabe - I take your points - I also have no clients demanding HD at the moment so made the decision to upgrade based on the 16:9 ability of the Z1 and the fact the footage cuts together with my DSR-450 better.

I guess it's horses for courses - most people, whether they've upgraded or not, will defend their decision!

The PD-150 is a fine camera and still has plenty of life in it - I just find the Z1 more usable in SD mode...

I think HD formats will change a bit over the next few years, with XDCAM and HDV both featuring strongly - I agree that the EX range looks interesting, but still probably a long way off? I notice that a DSR-250 HDV replacement using full sized tapes was announced at NAB.

Graham....

I wasn't saying you were wrong by any means. The fact that you are able to afford a 450 as well as a Z1 puts you in a different class than me right there. You have a business that obviously can make more money and afford to get new cameras more often. The Z1 is a great camera, a friend of mine has one and let me play with it, and I really liked it. My point was only, that for some of us.....it just doesn't make business sense. For others it does. I am one of the people that waits as long as possible to upgrade (I try not to get caught up in the manufacturers ploy of getting us to upgrade every year....I have a old 1.5ghz G4 Mac and Final Cut Pro 4.5 for goodness sakes). I also don't believe in credit and pay cash for everything, so I need to actually be able to come up with real money for anything I want to buy. So no disrespect intended to your choice....I'm sure that you made the right choice for you and your situation.

If my PD-150 gets run over by a truck tomorrow, sure, I'll probably replace it with a V1u or maybe an XDCAM EX.

But, seeing as my 7-year old PD is still going strong, (and earning me money!) I will upgrade only after:
- a client asks me to produce something in HD;
- a film festival rejects one of my works because it isn't in HD; OR
- customers start asking to buy one of my original works in Blu-Ray or HD-DVD.

So far, none of these things have come to pass.

I can understand that no-one has asked for an HD film from you, but surely they're simply *assuming* that it will be shot in 16:9 these days? If that's not so where you live, it's most certainly so here in the UK.

tom.

Nope, no one's asked me for 16:9. Everyone's been happy with 4:3 on this side of the pond.

Nope, no one's asked me for 16:9. Everyone's been happy with 4:3 on this side of the pond.

In Belgium I saw a clear switch from 4:3 to 16:9 between 2005 and 2006. In 2005 80% of my clients had a "plain" 4:3 screen, in 2006 only 50% with 4:3 and this year 90% of my clients have 16:9.
Acually stores don"t sell 4:3 screens anymore, it's all 16:9 since this year.

Untill now not one client has asked for hd material though, I am still working with sd (Sony vx2100 and a pana dvx100b) and nobodies complaining so far. I must say that these big widescreen lcd's which I see more and more when I visit my clients have a big difference in image quality. Some time ago I saw some of my demo footage on a bigscreen fujitsu and it looked awfull, it looked like images from a vhs tape and yesterday again a lcd bigscreen from jvc and I was surprised how nice it looked, the tv produced sharp images and nice looking colours, only the image was somewhat distorted because the tv seem to have problems getting the right aspect ratio.

Most people here don"t even know what hd is actually, that's why i'm still waiting for an upgrade to hd, normally I was planning to go to hd by the end of this year but I'm not sure about that anymore. I expect a real change by the ending of next year. The prizes of blue ray recorders will continue to drop, people will have playstations 3 with the blue ray player and xboxes whith hd dvd's.

I'm also a bit concerned what the future wil bring, especially with all those different formats, people with blue ray, hd dvd and regular dvd players. Imagine having to sell 100 copies of a recording to 100 different customers, you have to ask in advance what type of recorder they all have.

Noa, your take on the 16:9 switchover in Belgium sounds to be very like here in the UK, and any TV shop will have 95% of sets on sale being 16:9 with only the smallest portables 4:3 now.

What you didn't explain was how you use your DVX and 2100 though. If all your clients are watching on 16:9 displays, surely you're not making them 4:3 program material? If you are, then that's the best way of ensuring it'll be squashed, stretched and distorted every which way.

tom.

Plain old 4x3 here too with no one asking for 16x9. I actually prefer the 16x9 ratio but until I get asked for it....

I wonder if most places here in the US are still using 4x3 or if it is just because I am in a more 'rural' area than most...?

What you didn't explain was how you use your DVX and 2100 though. If all your clients are watching on 16:9 displays, surely you're not making them 4:3 program material? If you are, then that's the best way of ensuring it'll be squashed, stretched and distorted every which way.


With the sony I just use the letterbox option in the camera and for the dvx the squeeze option as that works best on 16:9 tv's. In premiere pro (1.5) I allways set the project settings to 16:9 pal widescreen and every tv I have seen my footage on has the possibility to change aspect ratio so it's displayed correctly. There is just a rare case were it's not 100% correct like the Jvc bigscreen I saw my footage on, this one stretched the image horizontally on the left and right side of the screen and in the centre it compressed the image horizontally. It actually looked real strange but the customer seem to be used to it because they thought it was normal eventhough I pointed out the "problem".

I do notice a quality drop when I letterbox because you loose some pixels anyway and your image gets stretched, with my older 4:3 recordings the image looked noticably sharper on a big screen.

I've seen a lot of 16:9 TV sets here in the U.S., but almost all of them are showing stretched and squashed 4:3 material. Looks awful!

I've seen a lot of 16:9 TV sets here in the U.S., but almost all of them are showing stretched and squashed 4:3 material. Looks awful!

That's because most people don't even see the difference, I think it is a side effect of us videographers seeing all the details, good and bad. If I visit a customer I immediatly see if the aspect ratio on their tv is wrong, they even stretch, as you pointed out, 4:3 images to 16:9 making everybody look like elephants. I'm allways amazed that if I mention this (Not the elephant part ;)) they are not aware about it. I think if would put my image upside down they also won't notice :D

That's because most people don't even see the difference, I think it is a side effect of us videographers seeing all the details, good and bad. If I visit a customer I immediatly see if the aspect ratio on their tv is wrong, they even stretch, as you pointed out, 4:3 images to 16:9 making everybody look like elephants. I'm allways amazed that if I mention this (Not the elephant part ;)) they are not aware about it. I think if would put my image upside down they also won't notice :D

Same here, and the squished 16:9 on a 4:3 tv is just as bad!

Well i have been shooting weddings for 18 months with a XLH1 with no complaints,
I shoot in HD edit in HD and then Avid 7 converts it into DVD's and i think you loose all the benifits of HD, So i bought a 2nd hand 170 to do weddings and checked some weddings i shot 4 years ago with the same camera and to me they looked great

And for me at this point in time until blue ray disk players are main stream and |HD disks drop in price and the public start asking for it i think i will stick to the 170 its still a fine camera and is still comanding a good price ( £2500+ new) so it must be in demand


Yes if you see HD from camera to a HDTV vi the HDMI cable its stunning but how many couples do or for that matter can not many me thinks, yes it will come but not just yet
Long live the 170

Just did it. Sold my trusty old PD150, and bought a used JVC HD100. So, now, I'm only two or three generations behind the times instead of four or five. I wanted to make my next doc in 24p, and to learn how to use a broadcast-style cam. The HD100 was in the budget, so here I go... jumping blind.

Hope it all works out... and hope I don't miss my old axe too much!