Yes both can shoot 24p, and the DVX is NOT better in getting a filmlook, it's just easier to get a filmlook with it (so I have heard).
But the XL2 gives you real 16/9 and other extra features (interchangible lens system, 4 channel audio recording,...)
I think the XL2 is the better cam of the two, but that doesn't mean it's the right cam for you, only you can decide that. The XL2 ofcourse comes with a 'better' price too.

Good luck choosing!
Maybe you can go to a shop and try both out?

Yes both shoot 24p, and the XL2 CAN get that filmlook, it's just not as easy as with a DVX (so I have heard).
People say the XL2 is a more difficult cam, but once mastered, you should be able to get better pictures with an XL2 then with a DVX.
And the XL2 of course has real 16/9, which is important for you, next to the interchangible lens system and other features.

I think the XL2 is the better cam, but that doesn't mean it's the better cam for you. If you don't want such a big size, and/or a LCD screen and an easier cam, then the DVX could be right for you.

Good luck choosing!
I would advice to go to a shop and try both out.

(I accidently posted this 3 times because of an error I got while typing. the moderators can delete the other 2 posts)

Thanks for the responses. The ones listed where on my short list. Does anyone know where I can find video samples of the above listed? I found a couple of HD for the FX1 a little while back, but I am looking more for the SD version of each. Also...low light comparisons between the FX1, 10 and a1?

Thanks again to all

Mike

See the following for some info on low light shooting:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=49518

Last night I shot my first full performance in SD mode using the Z1. My initial impression is that low light performance is very similar to the PDX-10 with a couple caveats. First, the gain boost is very clean. I haven't edited the footage yet, but it seems that you can add as much as 15 db gain and still get acceptable results. Second, you could pick up a full f-stop by shooting in SD at 1/30 shutter speed. On the PDX-10 you can use 1/30 shutter but at the expense of lost vertical resolution since the camera uses field doubling at slow speeds. On the FX1/Z1 the HD chips allow this without noticeable quality loss in SD mode.

Rather than looking at footage you really should try to get your hands on these cameras before choosing if at all possible. They are vastly different and you may have strong feelings about these once you've played with them. A field trip to B&H would be one way to do this...

Actually a JVC GRHD-1 is an excellent value for around 1900 bucks. Some say that it offers better color reproduction than a Sony HDR-FX1 even though the Sony is a 3 chip camera. This is because even though the Sony can shoot 3 CCD footage it cannot record 3CCD footage because of the limitations of the MPEG-2 codec. The reason is that after compression only a 4:2:0 color space is allowed so that means only 720 X 540 pixels of color information are recorded which is only a quarter of the total HDV resolution of 1440 X 1080. JVC rather than wasting resources on 3 CCD technology that will never get used gives you a camera thats truly light and affordable as well as givng you excellent color reproduction,.

SONY HDR-FX1. My first professional camera, and I love it!

High-Def is the future, so I'd suggest you go there.

Jesse

I would love to take a field trip and handle the camcorders. B&H would be awesome to visit if I did not live in TX :-) I am going to try to locate video stores in the Dallas area. I am still a ways away from there, but it is the closest viable option. I have been leaning towards the FX1 with Blue-ray and other technology on the way that will bring HD to more households. My 3 top choices are now.

1) FX1 (Will have to down sample for most items)
2) PDX10
3) A1U (would love to see more on hands experience with this camera since I am intrigued by the cmos)

Need some input on buying new cam
 

Hey guys. I am looking at buying a new camcorder. Usually I make my own decisions with no help, but I am still not sure.....So here goes. I now have a Sony TRV18 mini DV. I like it. I make horror shorts and music videos and skits. This is for a hobby only. I have a career job. Some day it'd be nice to make something worthy of selling on DVD, but not important. So I have narrowed it (I think) to 2 cams. Panasonic DVC30 or Sony VX2100. The Panny seems like it may have more of a "film" look than the Sony. Yes I know ALL the specs on both of these as I have read read and reread reviews on them. The only time I see people saying they use the Sony is for weddings or interviews. No one seems to use it for "indy movies" or shorts. I don't want to spend too much $ (that's why I ruled out the DVX100a, can't justify the cost for a hobby). With the Sony, will it look that much better than my TRV18? (one 1/4" ccd at 340,000 pixels vs. VX2100's 3 - 1/3" ccd's at 340,000 pixels / same count). Like I said, our main usage is horror shorts. I just didn't even know if it's worth the money at all. I do want manual features (I'm an SLR photographer). Anyways enough ranting. Any help is appreciated.

The DVC30 has a little bit tinier chips than the VX2100 (1/4 vs 1/3) so the 1/3 chips give you a short DOF and better low light sensitivity.

People always prefer the Sony cams for interviews and wedding because:
1. for interviews you don't need a film mode or a frame mode or 24p
2. the Sony's are the kings of low light, and that comes in handy at dim lighted receptions at weddings.

But for a filmlook, the pannys could be more suitable.
But as I don't have any of the two cams, maybe somebody with more experience of the two cams can give you other, maybe better advice.
good luck!

I'd agree that the main reason to get a VX-2100 would be for shooting in very dark places. But there is another issue with both of these cameras for shooting films.... do you want to work in 16:9? Neither of these cameras has a true 16:9 mode because their CCD's don't have a high enough pixel count to capture the full 480 vertical lines. I'm not familiar with the TRV18, but I know that some of Sony's less expensive cameras actually have high resolution 16:9 modes.

If you want good 16:9 you might look at the Panasonic GS-400 or the Sony HC-1000 if you're on a tight budget. They can shoot "real" 16:9. And many of the less expensive Canon camcorders can do this as well.

If you want to spend a little more (but still under $2,000) consider the Sony PDX-10 which has high quality 16:9 and other pro features like XLR audio and DVCAM recording. The Sony HC1 might be another one to look at; it shoots HDV but has limited manual controls.

Try browsing through our forums for these various cameras to learn more. None of these cameras will really give you "film look" all by themselves, but there are software solutions to the frame rate issues and of course you need to learn how to properly use any camera to get professional looking results.

Rugged Multipurpose Camera?
 

Im starting a project soon, and Im in a need of about 6 cameras, but Im not really sure what would be the best choice. Maybe you guys can suggest something for me.

Its gotta be miniDV (don't need HD)
Very fast set up times
Rugged (will be used on the street/indoors around the clock)
Good nightime shooting quality without any extra lighting equipment
External mic port

As for the budget, I'd prefer to spend under $2000 per camera, but feel free to suggest anything.

Thanks

external mic port in which flavour? if you need 6 cameras, you could go for 1 PD150/170 and 5 VX2000/2100s... not sure of current pricing stateside, but it'd be a little bit more than your budget.. but they're cracking cameras, and rugged to hell (they're used a lot in iraq for that reason.) pretty much the best in their pricepoint for low light shooting, the PD has XLR inputs, the VXs have standard minijack inputs for microphones, and as fast as flicking the switch and hitting record (bar about a second or two of lag).

Surprisingly small and lightweight for the quality too, 8 hour battery packs are still only about the size of two miniDV tapes (not like the massive packs on larger shoulder based cams).

The 6 cameras won't all be at the same location, but Im wondering why you suggested 1 PD150 and 5 VX200s. Does it have something that VX doesn't?

The PD150/170 has XLR microphone inputs and the VX2000/2100 doesn't. There are some other small differences, but that is the main difference.

I probably won't need XLR mic anyway, standard mini-jack shotgun mic will do just fine. VX2100 is just a newer version of VX2000 as I udnerstand. Is it worth the extra $900?

What about XL2? I know they are pricy, but how do they go up against VX2100?

I bought a VX2100 recently and am very satisfied. I also needed a heavy and rugged cam and as I had done a few projects with PD150, I knew that VX2100 is a good choice. Basically I could have also bought a used VX2000, but I wanted brand new and there were no used VX2000 available in my region when I was looking for one.

I think you can't go wrong if buying a VX2100 and if you find a nice 2000, then not a bad choice either. 2100 is indeed an update of 2000 and there are not too many things different. For example, VX2100 has low light rating of 1 lux while 2000 has 2 lux. However, people say that the difference can't be normally noticed - both are awesome in low light. Additionally, 2100 has a built in lens cap, zoom rocker and rec button on the handle, the handle itself is made higher compared to PD150/VX2000, bigger eyecup for viewfinder and the LCD monitor is better in sunlight. The color is also dark grey compared to the silver of 2000 so maybe looks a bit more professional to some.

XL2 is also a very good camera, but I believe it's not as rugged and maybe more suitable for lower-budget movie shooting because of its features. XL2's low light is not as good as VX's, it doesn't have a LCD monitor, but it has great progressive scan mode for film look and changeable lenses.

Im curious about this XLR connection. Is it really required? I mean what does it have that a mini-jack doesn't (other than the size). Is there a noticable quality difference between mini-jack mics and XLR ones?

Lack of 24P is kind of a drag, but I can live with it. What about GL2, it kinda falls into the same class as VX2100. Nobody mentioned it.

XLR indeed has some advantages over mini-jack as all the professionals use that type. However, as much as I've worked with different microphones I haven't seen any real difference. I believe that firstly XLR is a lot more reliable, because it's heavy and has a built-in locker mechanism which prevents the plug coming out from the jack by mistake. The main concern for you would be that whether you want to use mini-plug or XLR microphones. If you can accept only miniplug, then your options for good mics will be rather limited.

Don't get us wrong here, you don't need a PD170 or DVX100a simply because of the XLR. You can buy extra XLR adapter for VX or other miniplug cameras and the best known manufacturer of those is www.beachtek.com . I've used the DXA-2S with Panasonic GS400 and it was an amazing accessory, I'll be getting DXA-4 or similar for my VX2100 soon.

GL2 (XM2) is also a good video camera, but most prefer VX2100 over GL2. VX is certainly much more rugged design and heavier. It has two rings instead of one compared to the GL2 and a lot better low light performance (GL2 has 1/4" CCDs while VX have 1/3"). The most important feature the GL2 has over VX is 20x optical zoom - Sonys have 12x. If you need a bit smaller and lighter camera that still produces great video, then this is maybe the one you should go for.

You can find some GL2 vs. VX2100 topics in this forum so feel free to search.

Interesting. This is more of a guerilla project, so Im thinking XLR setup will be too bulky for very fast deployment and wrap up.

Does VX2100 support live FireWire capture?

I'm not sure what you mean by live capture. I didn't know it before, but recently I saw somewhere that some cameras have a delay in firewire port, but others send instant signal. If this is what you mean then at least on my system it does have some kind of delay, although very small.

I dont mind the delay, I just wanted to know if I could capture what I record in real time to a laptop/workstation.

Yep, ofcourse it has firewire capture possibility to your computer so that you can take the footage from your tape directly to the workstation. It plays back the tape and your capturing software saves the footage to hard drive at the same time.

Yes, I realize that you can do it from tape, but Im talking about sending it to a computer as its shooting. WIthout any tape at all.
I realize its not a thing to do when you are shooting video, but my circumstances are quite different.

I see now. Yes, you can have pretty much real-time picture from the camera via firewire if in camera mode.

Compact Dig. Video Cam. Suggestions
 

Hi Friends,

I'm downgrading from a GL-2 and just want something very compact, but
still high quality video for documentary video, traveling, etc.

Something which could take a good quality digital photo would be nice too so I don't have to carry more than one camera.

I am leaning toward Mini-DV format again. Any better suggestions? I don't care, but I just want to archive a high quality copy.

Thanks very much!!!

:)
Dan

I just saw a magazine with a Panasonic ad showing the worlds smallest 3CCD camera. Fits in palm of your hand. The picture looked really cool. But the moron who wrote the ad never put any identifying info like a model number in the ad, so I can't help you there...

dvd camcorders
 

Thanks for the reply.

In my search for a compact digital camcorder, should I consider a DVD camcorder?

Someone recently told me that the digital video archived on a DVD is not the high quality you would get with a Mini-DV tape, so I thought I'd stay clear. Is this true?

Thanks,
Dan

MPeg2 recording, I don't know the bit rates.

Compressed data needs to be uncompressed and re-rendered frame by frame

Discs are expensive and hard to find at times.

Discs only hold 20 minutes.

I am not sure about disc finalization processes required.

Any tapeless camcorders on the market for
$1,000 or less ?

And, at the same time, a camcorder which would take at least a nice still image...

Check out the Optura 600. (that's the 600 not the 60). There are links to reviews in the Optura FAQ

Though it's still advisable to get an inexpensive digicam for what you want to do.

Probably good advice to get a separate digital camera instead
of trying to double dip.

What inexpensive mini-dv would you suggest?

The Canon Optura 50 or Optura S1

thanks Michael, I'll check those out.
I'm downgrading from a GL-2, so I want something which still has some digital video quality so I can use it for some Video Documentaries if I'd like to. Doesn't have to be as good as the GL-2, but you know what I mean..

Looking for a tough and rugged camera
 

We have a Outdoor Hunting and fishing show and to say the least we are not easy on our equipment. We are using a GL2 at the time and are looking at getting another camera. We have not had good luck with the GL2. It is less than 2 years old and we have spent 1000 in repairs. Any opinions would be appreciated on GL2 and others in that price range.

Thanks

I would look at the Sonys (PD170) I know from personal experience they can take some rough handling. Not to mention that the 150 was the camera of choice for the embeded journalist during the beginning of the Iraq war. Talk about some rough conditions!
Don

if the camera is for shooting only and not audio, i'd recommend the vx2100 or vx2000 for sake of saving money. if you need a combo of video and audio power, get the pd series, 150 or 170. Definitely hardcore, reliable cameras, no doubt about it.

i wonder if it isn't your particular unit. my GL2 has been all over the place. up mountains (13 - 14,000 ft. peaks), at beaches, camping. i've put it through all kinds of torture. mine seems very sturdy, compact, and rugged.

i recently bought an fx-1 and think it is a pretty sturdy unit. i bought it lightly used for just about the same price i paid for my original GL2, and it has magnificent HDV quality. i would probably not buy the old sonys, not when you can get HDV at these prices. shooting landscapes and outdoor footage is where HDV really dazzles. and you can always downconvert out of the camera to SD. the fx-1 gets a bad rap for lowlight performance, but i don't think it is all that bad. you should check it out. the ergonomics on that camera make it very fun and easy to operate.

Choice of camera
 

Don't know if this is the right place to post but I was wondering if someone could give me some tips on wich camera to buy.

I'm going to buy the DVX100b or the FX1 this week but even after reading alot of information I found on these forums I'm still not sure wich one.
HDV ain't really important to me yet, only in case of resale this might be important, and neither is 24p / or at least I think ,I prefere faking the so called "cinema look" in post production.

I really liked the z1u wich I had placed at my disposal for a couple of months, and I really liked the design and options of the camera.
But I still don't know whats the best choice in picture quality wich is the most important factor for me but with picture quality I do mean best looking, and not most pixels ccd.

I will be using the camera to film shortfilms etc. Not weddings or other, mostly short fiction films.

Thanks already,

Daniël

If you are going for shorts, and for the most filmlike quality, and not perse resolution or pixels, I think the DVX would be the best choice.