Matching to JVC DV500 or DV300:

Go into CP Custom Pre-set located under the handle.


Move the sharpness to about 75%

Lower the COLOR SATURATION two clicks to the left.

Move the WB shift one or two clicks to the left. You will be introducing a little green to the picture.

USE A MONITOR FOR ABOVE STEP!!!


AE-ONE click to the left. ONLY one click.

MAIN MENU-shut AUTO SHUTTER to OFF

The Color should match the JVC colorometry.


Lou Bruno

Outstanding tip. Thanks as usual Lou.

Hi
In a few weeks we would be shooting a short movie...
The short is going to be shot mainly with a Sony Pd-150 but the director wants to to shoot the fight scenes (it has some) with two cameras...
the other camera being my canon XM2..

Any suggestions? Experiences? trying to match colors?.. anything else that I should be aware of?

(this post is also on the Gl-2 forum... I didn´t know where to put it??)

You can adjust the 150, not certain about the Canon. So make the 150 match the Canon. You may want to do it for the entire shoot just so the difference is glaring when you get to the fight scenes in the finished piece.

Or you could adjust the Canon to fit the 150 in post.

Hi...
Putting together a short flick using 2 cams shortly.
Intending to use the Sony pd150 with century 16:9 lens and the Sony DSR 570 WS.

Quick question...
Are the 2 cameras easily matched as A/B?

Thanks

Yes and no.

The pictures are quite similar but the 570 has better image processing and you will find the 570 handles extreme contrast better than the 150, is a bit sharper, and true 16:9 mode is better than an anamorphic setup.

Record your audio to the 570 as it has a substantially quieter audio chain.

Thanks.

I'm intending to have the 570 on the wide end with the pd150 more on Close Ups. Yes?

That's certainly how I run my 150 & 300. You will find the 570 handles faster than the 150 by a significant amount. So if you have a lot of action or lighting changes in close-up, you may forgo the 150 in favor of the 570 and shoot Hollywood style.

Thanks a lot for your help, Mike.

I recently bought a dvx100a with the intention of independent filmmaking. However, I now also want to get into event videography, so I plan on purchasing a pd-170.

If I were to use the dvx as a second camera during a wedding ceremony, how well would the footage match up to the pd-170?

I cringe because, as an editor because I've had to try to do this. Certainly one can match colors but the cine gama settings can be a killer.

Best bet is when you shoot, make sure gamma is "standard" video gamma on the 100A. Shoot 60i of course too.

You'll also find the PD170 handles low light with less noise than the DVX100A. This becomes obvious when shooting dark receptions, bands in dark clubs, docs in dark places where you can't use lights. Not sure if you want to add noise to a 170 though to match the noise in the 100A.

I'll probably only use the dvx during the ceremony since there's usually more light than the reception (at least at the wedding I've been too).

If people ask for two camera weddings, It's usually during the ceremony that matching two cameras would be most critical. It can be done but you really have to watch the settings, gamma in particular.

I am looking to upgrade my two vx2000 cameras but I can only afford to do this one camera at a time. Ultimately I would like a vx2100 and pd170. My first step is to get the vx2100. Will there be any trouble matching the image of the vx2100 with the vx2000? I use my cameras for wedding videography. I only use one camera for the reception (that will be the vx2100) but I need to match the two cameras for the ceremony coverage.

Thanks for your help.

Chris

I can understand you wanting to upgrade to a PD 170, but why bother spending good money on a 2100 when you already have a 2000? The differences between the 2000 and 2100 are marginal, and in my opinion not worth the expense. Why not sell one 2000 and get a PD170 now, and then decide whether to replace the 2nd 2000 with another PD170 at a later date.

I probably should go that route and upgrade to the pd170 first. My question remains the same since the image of the 2100 and 170 should be the same. Besides the 170/2100 performing slightly better in low-light situations, is there any noticeable difference in the image quality between the vx2000 and the pd170/vx2100? Is anyone using this combination of cameras, and if so, have you had any problem matching the image?

Chris

I still think you will be wasting your money purchasing a VX2100 when you already have a very similar camera in the VX2000. See this posting on these boards:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=31153

Given that both of your options will be "mismatched" (and I say that in the loosest of terms), why not take advantage of the major benefits the pd170 will give you.

I have a VX2000, VX2100, and PD170. I purchased them in that order, with the PD170 being a recent purchase. I'd recommend the PD170 as your second purchase as the audio is just so much more versatile.

The video shot with all three cameras is identical if you manually white balance them under the same light and if the custom presets are adjusted similarly or turned off completely.

I have a TRV-22 that I also use as a backup camera. The color matches pretty well with it, but the color saturation and general quality of the picture is not on the same level as the other three cams. Thus I can spot the TRV footage even when I play around in post to trim up the differences. It is however, much closer to the VX series than our old Optura Pi which couldn't be made to match no matter what you did in post.

You shouldn't worry a bit about matching the video from any of these three cameras.

For those that own both these cams and do wedding events. How do you guys match these two cams before shooting the reception?

I usually WB both of them with the same card at the same distance. Sometime I set it to auto WB. Both cams has the same setting. On the PD170 I use to have the ire setting to 7.5 but recently change it to 0. The VX2100 seems to have blacker black than the PD170. Does anyone know what the ire setting on a VX2100.

My problem is during the reception when the house lights dims and I have to use manual gain and exposure. The PD170 has independent control and sometime set it to F1.6 and 12dB as an example. But as everyone knows, you can't set the VX2100 the same way. It's OPEN and 12dB. So it is much brighter than the PD. How do you guys deal with these? How do you guys set your PD and VX.

Also, as a test I put both on auto mode and the VX has blacker black. Is it just the LCD?

TIA,
JR

The IRE setting does nothing to the recorded signal. DV is 0 IRE. The setup is if you want to drive an U.S. based NTSC receiver.

You cannot use the flip-out LCD for accurate work even if you calibrate it. If you look at the outputs on a calibrated CRT monitor, they should look the same (try flipping the IRE setting on the 170 either way . . . one should make it match the 2100).

With my uncalibrated eyes, I much prefer to look at a waveform monitor when matching cameras. I know, they are hard to carry on a wedding, eh?

According to what I've read, the VX2100 has slightly more sensitive CCDs than the PD170. The VX2100 was given these CCDs as an upgrade from the VX2000, but the PD170 has the same CCDs as the PD150/VX2000.

You could always do some extensive practicing with these two models while they are wired live to the same monitor. Keep trying various settings at different light levels, while you switch between the two. Eventually, you could learn to work them so you could choose balanced settings. Play them like musical instruments, instead of by the numbers, like you would with high-end pro models, that have full manual controls with fine degrees of adjustment. Or, borrow a wave-form monitor and see if you can match them better with that. Probably, using both methods
would be best.

<<<-- Originally posted by J. Stephen McDonald : According to what I've read, the VX2100 has slightly more sensitive CCDs than the PD170. The VX2100 was given these CCDs as an upgrade from the VX2000, but the PD170 has the same CCDs as the PD150/VX2000.


That isn't what Sony said at the introduction IIRC. And as far as anyone can tell, and what Sony said early on, the CCDs aren't more sensitive, the post-processing system is more noise-free.

The low light images I've seen from both 'sets' of cameras shows images with no difference in luminance but a noticable difference in image noise.

I have a VX2000, VX2100, and PD170.
Alan,

Your post turned up in a search I did on VX2100 and PD170. Since you own both cameras, can you comment on the video quality between the two cameras?

It has been reported by some that the VX2100 produces less video noise. Can you confirm/refute this report?

TIA.

Best Regards,
Pete

Another one of those floating myths. It would cost Sony more to downgrade one over the other, and for what possible gain?

I have all three cameras, a 2000, a 2100, and a 170. I think the 2000 takes some of the best video of the three. It seems just a bit sharper than the other two when all three are in default settings. I sometimes wonder if maybe Sony's lens quality has declined a bit from the early days...

The VX-2000's only problem is that it has a tendency to overexpose in bright outdoor lighting. The 2100 does this less, and the 170 least of all using default settings. I typically compensate for the slight tendency to overexpose on the 2000 by dialing back the custom preset on the 2000 by one notch.

The differences that I am noting are very slight, and shouldn't be taken as a reason to buy one vs another.

I do find it very easy to match the colors of the cameras by doing a manual white balance with all three cameras at the same spot under the same lighting. Once I have done this, the resulting video from all three cams can be edited together and you won't notice any color shift at all when switching from one to another.

I haven't compared the cameras in candlelight type conditions. My guess is that the 170 and the 2100 would do a bit better than the 2000 in this situation.

Interesting, as both my VX2000s have to have their exposure settings dropped by two notches in the custom presets. This does two things - it means smaller apertures are used outside in strong sunlight, so that even with both NDs in place I often have to double the shutter speed to keep away from f/8 and smaller.

Next, it enables the camera to work in darker places before gain-up is applied. This is quite a bonus.

So I get less washed out footage, less burn-out of the highlights and all's well.

tom.

How hard would it be to use footage from both of these cameras and match it up in post?
The reason I ask is because I just got an insane offer to buy a friend's complete XL1S kit, the deal is SO good I can't pass it up.

Apparently not too easy. Do a search on the forums for 'matching cameras' and see what you find. This discussion has been captured here several times.

As an exercise, I matched up my FX1 with the XL1s a few weeks ago with no problems.
I just used the colour correction tools in Avid, but you could do the same with Vegas or FCP (and others...)
It really didn't take very long; but in reality, I don't think that I could really be bothered to have to render a lot of footage ;-)

Robin

What about the sharpness of the images? I had tried to mix images btw 170 and GL2 and I found out that images produced by GL2 looks much sharper than the 170s. Do ppl use the custom preset and pump up the sharpness setting on the 170 to match better with Canon's camera, specifically GL2?

For those that own both these cams and do wedding events. How do you guys match these two cams before shooting the reception?

My problem is during the reception when the house lights dims and I have to use manual gain and exposure. The PD170 has independent control and sometime set it to F1.6 and 12dB as an example. But as everyone knows, you can't set the VX2100 the same way. It's OPEN and 12dB. So it is much brighter than the PD. How do you guys deal with these? How do you guys set your PD and VX.


TIA,
JR

Hi, what does this mean you can't set the vx2100 the same way? I thought vx2100 had the same manual controls the pd170 has. Is this not true?

Some info about the cameras in question. The PD170 and the VX2100 use the same optics and post-processing hardware as each other. Likewise the PD150 and the VX2000 use the same optics and post-processing hardware. The PD150 and the PD170 are not the same as the VX2100 and the VX2000 are not the same. The main advantages of a PD over a VX are XLR audio and separate iris and gain controls, not to mention the VX has auto shutoff (not a preferred feature IMHO). The PD is from Sony's Professional line of cameras and the VX is considered high end consumer by Sony. Completely different levels of support. The Z1U and the FX1 follow along these lines too.

We shoot with a PD170 and a VX2000 for our weddings. Not an ideal mix but in decent light and white balanced, the differences between the two are negligable. The hard part comes when the lights go down. The noise is much more prevalent on the VX as expected. Not much you can do about it except know the limitations of the camera and when and where to use it. You can compensate for the difference in light sensitivity between the two in post somewhat but that can only go so far.

John

John Laird's spot on, as anyone who knows anything about mass production and quality control will testify. The VX2k1 and the PD170 share the same lens, chip-block and processing electronics, and to make it otherwisde would cost Sony dear.

With that out of the way, you can believe that when both cameras are allowed to use f/1.6 and 12dB of gain up they'll match one-another, barring production, build and assembly tolerances. So I'm not quite sure what Ray's seeing when he claims 'better blacks' as I'm sure he's not leaving that observation to the crude side-screen output. And f/1.6 means 'open'. They're one and the same when (and only when) both camera zooms are set to maximum wide-angle.

tom.

The vx2100 has 3 x 1/3" CCD 380,000 Pixels (340,000 Effective Pixels)
Advanced HAD CCD Technology.

The pd170 has 3-CCD, 1/3-Inch Interline Transfer-type
380,000 Pixels Each.

Are these the same ccds?

I too shoot weddings and for the ceremony I would like to use 2 cameras. I own a pd170 and I am considering a vx2100. Is the vx2100 a good choice to pair with the pd170?

They'll pair well together Richard because they're one and the same camera, barring audio, menus, aperture control wheel and a few other things.

I've been using VX2100. Great camera.
As I don't want to reinvent the wheel and .... i'm being lazy. Does anyone have specific suggestions as to the settings to match it to a JVC GY5000 camera?

Ezra

Hello,

Can someone tell me the best way to match these two camera so that the video clips are similar in post? One seems to be more vivid than the other.

Thanks,
Troy

The 2100 is probably more vivid I would guess. Try playing with the Custom Presets a bit on both cameras to get them closer-you actually should be able to get a virtually perfect match.
I recently did a job with 2 other guys I used my 150, 1 guy used a 170 and another used a DSR250-the footage came out about as close as you could get without it being shot on the same camera BUT we got together BEFORE and set the cameras with the CP before the shoot. It certainly helped in post.

Don

Hi there, has anyone here tried to match the images generated by the PD-170 with those from a DSR-400? If so, how do they hold up? How big a difference is there in quality. I'm thinking in terms of a two camera shoot where the PD-170 is doing a wide shot and the DSR is shooting cut aways (or the reverse if that would be better). The situation would be shooting seminars in a hotel ballroom.
Thanks

Just finished a shoot with a DSR-450, a DSR-250 and a PD-150 - the editor says its cutting together fine although some clips do require some colour correction, but I haven't seen it myself. As you'd expect, the outside shots in good daylight are best, and we were quite careful white balancing the shots...

Also, we did a quick test a week or so before the shoot, so it may be worth trying to arrange this

Hope this helps

I shoot and own both the PD and the VX, and untill recently I decided that it was too much effort to play and match up the sound between the 2 cameras in post. So I decided to put the shotgun mic that came standard with the PD on a boom and run that to a cheap mic-splitter ( splitcom ART mic splitter/combiner) with a built in transformer, and then XLR cable to both cameras, (I found an XLR cable, with a mini jack plug on one side of it, for the VX). This allows me to record sound from the shotgun on both cameras. Alot easier to edit in post!

Well, this is the first time I did it this way and I was really dissappointed with the humming and static on the raw footage. I got rid of the humming with a de-hummer, but sound is still crap! The interference is definately comming from this setup and not from any outside sources, like A/C, refrigerators, ect...

I just wanted to see if anyone else on this forum had a simular problem in the past, and hear from them, or anyone who would have any suggestions how I can achive what I am trying to do, in a better quality mannor. I was trying to avoid purchacing a unit like the beachtec, but unsure if it will work for what I am trying to do, since the PD is supplying 48V. to the mic already.

I am trying to record the same sound on both cameras from 1 shotgun mic, minus humming, and static, and without a big box attached underneath the VX. The mic splitter that I purchaced is manageable since it lies on the floor and out of our ways. It would be nice if I can find something similar or, something smaller altogether that I can attach to the camera. I do plan on upgrading the shotgun mic at some point, but its pointless having an expensive mic with static and humming.

Thanks

Hi Jason. First, I don't think that one mic for two cameras is a good idea. Most of us go out of our way to have more than one audio track for two main reasons, good coverage and backup. Aligning the tracks is easy in any good NLE as long as you keep both cams running for the whole event, rather that hit pause/record on them independently.

What is the purpose of having two copies of the same audio track anyway?

But having said that, your technical problem is probably the XLR cable going to the VX. It's not a balanced run if it has a built in mini plug going into the camera. You need to have a cable with XLR connectors at both ends, then a transformer based XLR to miniplug adapter at the camera end.

Running both cams on battery rather than AC power, if that's not what you're already doing, will help reduce hum also.

Thanks for your post. Thats going to be the next thing I try, finding an XLR to mini with built in transformer. I figured I didnt need one of them because the splitter had a built in transformer.

We shoot 95% of the time indoors. We just purchaced the PD so we can get a different angle of coverage of the same action. 1 hour of raw footage on both cameras, edit in post for a final output of 20 or so minuets. Having the same sound on 2 tapes helps alot, for me, when trying to match these clips up. So when you watch the final video, you cannot tell 2 different cameras captured it. I can tell the difference as well as any camera guru, but its close enough, the sound was my real problem.

I have seen the term "NLE" before, but never looked into it or know what it is. I will do some reasearch to see if thats a better option for me, but I can tell you, we do stop/start the cameras independantly, 10-20 times in that 1 hour of recording. Thats something we cannot get around.

Any suggestions on a good XLR to mini w/transformer, that doesnt mount to the camera?

Thank you

NLE stands for non-linear editor. Like Sony Vegas or Premier Pro. Your approach to editing with two cams is entirely different than mine. Actually, I tape with three cameras. They all tape the whole event without stopping. In Sony Vegas I align them one above the other on the timeline, which is easy in Vegas because you get a visual of the audio peaks. Then I have complete flexibility in choosing which camera angle and which of the three audio audio tracks (or two of them or all three) will be used moment to moment in the final edited version.

Here's a transformer adapter:
http://www.samash.com/catalog/showitem.asp?ItemID=58062&ovchn=NXT&ovcpn=Sam+Ash+TL&ovcrn=58062&ovtac=CMP&AffiliateID=615

Well after talking to my partner, we are going to invest in a Sennheiser Evolution Wireless system. This will get rid of my wires, with a camera mounted reciever (EK100G2) on both cameras, and a (SKP100) transmitter on a battery powered shotgun, this seems like the easiest, efficient, and convenient route for us to take.


Thanks again

If I gather correctly that you weave together clips from each camera where the audio stays with the video, then I can see your point. You'll like the Sennheiser. I love mine.

Another "positive" vote on the Sens! In addition to my work with video, I also own an audio production company and we have 6 of them. 4 HH and 2 lavs. Excellent choice! Very stable. I've worked with better sounding lav mics, but they were not even close to the price range of the Evolutions! The two receivers and one mic set-up should work well for you. I agree on it being the best way based on your stoping and starting each camera. (Especially for the money)

Best,

K Fox

... I've worked with better sounding lav mics, but they were not even close to the price range of the Evolutions ... And for a few $hundred the kit's strictly functional stock ME2 mic can be upgraded to a much better sounding mic like the Countryman B3.

Is there anybody out there who uses the pd170 with the sony fx7/v1 and if so, how easy is it to match the footage in post production?

We mainly want to do corporate work and some weddings on the odd occasion.

Thanking you in advance.

Maybe I should just mention that I am planning to shoot with the pd170 in 4x3 and also in 4x3 dv mode using the Fx7/V1.