Panasonic DVC80 vs Sony PDX10 vs JVC DV 300

Steve Nunez · October 29th, 2003, 08:16 AM

Frederic,

I'm really shocked you found the Streamcorder to be a poor performer as many people feel it has the greatest dynamic range and shadow detail abilities of any of the consumer grade 3ccd cams available. It also is boasted as a sharp shooter and super adjustable......it's biggest drawbacks are plastic construction (externally) and non-removeable lens hood......it never became a popular camcorder but i did allot of research on it and it consistently impresses reviwers who test it.
(that plastic body killed it)

I myself just picked up a DVC80 as I really like the form factor, large LCD and Leica lens- but I would respect any videographer holding a JVC Streamcorder.

Frederic Segard · October 29th, 2003, 06:50 PM

Steve, perhaps I had a lemon then? I've had other similar coments from colleages that tried it. Although not as harsh as I on the "poor performer" part, but we all agreed as you did, that the Fisher Price constuction of the Streamcorder really doesn't do it justice.

Scott Shaffer · October 31st, 2003, 09:22 AM

Thanks to everyone for the input.

Given the price, I think I'm leaning toward the DVC80, but let me ask one more question.

For my intended uses (which do not include converting the footage to film) how beneficial would progressive shooting (versus interlaced) be?

George Loch · October 31st, 2003, 09:36 AM

24P does give a distinctive 'look' that can apply to more than film production. The DVX also offers more image controls than the DVC80. These controls, however, require more setup in my opinion. The DVX100 is a tweakable camera in that you can really adjust the image a lot more than other cameras in it's range but, this requires time and more effort. Therefore, If "run and gun" is your typical application then a lot of the DVX100 features will be lost on your application. The DVC80 would work fine for that.

GL

October 29th, 2003, 08:16 AM	#16
Steve Nunez Trustee Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Pembroke Pines, Florida Posts: 1,418	Frederic, I'm really shocked you found the Streamcorder to be a poor performer as many people feel it has the greatest dynamic range and shadow detail abilities of any of the consumer grade 3ccd cams available. It also is boasted as a sharp shooter and super adjustable......it's biggest drawbacks are plastic construction (externally) and non-removeable lens hood......it never became a popular camcorder but i did allot of research on it and it consistently impresses reviwers who test it. (that plastic body killed it) I myself just picked up a DVC80 as I really like the form factor, large LCD and Leica lens- but I would respect any videographer holding a JVC Streamcorder. __________________ Steve Nunez-New York City www.stevenunez.com

October 31st, 2003, 09:36 AM	#19
George Loch Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: . Posts: 105	24P does give a distinctive 'look' that can apply to more than film production. The DVX also offers more image controls than the DVC80. These controls, however, require more setup in my opinion. The DVX100 is a tweakable camera in that you can really adjust the image a lot more than other cameras in it's range but, this requires time and more effort. Therefore, If "run and gun" is your typical application then a lot of the DVX100 features will be lost on your application. The DVC80 would work fine for that. GL __________________ http://www.motoxpress.com

October 29th, 2003, 06:50 PM	#17
Frederic Segard Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Montreal, Canada Posts: 209	Steve, perhaps I had a lemon then? I've had other similar coments from colleages that tried it. Although not as harsh as I on the "poor performer" part, but we all agreed as you did, that the Fisher Price constuction of the Streamcorder really doesn't do it justice.

October 31st, 2003, 09:22 AM	#18
Scott Shaffer New Boot Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Novato, CA Posts: 8	Thanks to everyone for the input. Given the price, I think I'm leaning toward the DVC80, but let me ask one more question. For my intended uses (which do not include converting the footage to film) how beneficial would progressive shooting (versus interlaced) be?