VX9000 / DSR200 / DSR250 various topics
 

I understand that there have been a few design flaws with this camcorder. I also understand that Sony has fixed them on the latest production run(?) Any info on this, plus tips on getting the best out of this unit would be appreciated.

Chris, there's a guy I met at NAB (same week I met you, heh)...
his name is Anthony Burokas and he has a web page at

http://ieba.com/research/DSR250problems.html

which covers his view of DSR-250 problems. I've been reluctant to link the Companion to it until I could hear of similar findings from other users. My good Belgian friend Jan de Wever has a copy of this report on his site at www.abcdv.com

Hope this is what you're looking for -- let me know what you think,

Dsr-200
 

Hi -

Does anyone have an opinion regarding the Sony DSR-200? I have the opportiunity to purchase a used one, and am wondering how it compares to the PD-150 and DSR-250.

Thanks -
Allan

The DSR200 is basically a shoulder-mount version of the venerable VX1000. Not much I can say about it, other than it has been discontinued by Sony. If it's in good condition, it should serve adequately.

Dsr200??
 

I recently was given the opportunity to buy my friends DSR 200 off him for $2000 Canadian. This includes a big Pelican case, batteries, and a few other accessories. The camera has low hours on the heads, so that should not be a issue. My question is, are they’re any issues, or problems I should no about with this model? Is this package worth what my friend wants?
If you guys have any other comments you’d like to make, feel free to share them


Alex

PS: $2000 Canadian is about $1000 US

Buy it before he changes his mind. THey are going for over $2,000 US on ebay.

The 200, not A had a bit of a low-level light problem IIRC. Thats' why the A version came out so early on.

Still, for that price, put a light on it when necessary.

Make certain there are no dark or bright pixels at any of the gain settings. I'd also check an make certain everything is operational. If the batteries are as old as the camera, they may not have much capacity left and you may have to buy new ones.

For those who may not be familiar with the older DSR200, it's basically a VX1000 on steroids; a shoulder-mount DVCAM format camera with the ability to accept the large-size cassettes plus a large battery capacity. A very nice deal for this price, by the way.

VX9000 / DSR200 / DSR250 various topics
 

I am considering purcahsing a DSR250 and a PD150. The DSR will be the main camera, with the PD as a second / spare. Some of the work we do involves training videos, motorsport and weddings. I would like to be able to use the PD as a second camera, but I am concerned that the images may look different. Can anyone comment on the suitability of this combo in terms of image quality, colour, etc. The alternative is to buy 2 x DSR250, but that's more money than I would like to spend at this stage.

Thanks

They are nearly a perfect match as they use the same CCDs and much of the same electronics.

The only thought is if, in your training and motorsport videos, you will want to have a much more direct and rapid control of lens functions. If so, you may want to contemplate a camera with a removable lens for your big 'gun.'

There are cameras available now, like the Panasonic DV200 (street price from a reputable dealer is slightly under $4,000 for the body) which can be had in operating condition for around $7,000.

Just a thought but the 200 (or any other recent 1/2" camera with a reasonable lens will be sharper and deliver more resolution than either the 150 or 250.

I've got a VX-1000, PD-150 and a DSR-300 and there are definite times when one of the two is appropriate. The VX-1000 is only hauled out when the 150 would work OK, the audio requirements are relaxed, and the lighting will be adequate.

DSR250 battery life
 

Talking to a vendor yesterday, he claimed that the DSR250 would only manage about 40-60 minutes per standard battery. Given the cost of batteries, this is a big cost implication if I buy one - can anyone confirm or deny this?

Look for the posting I made recently about on-line camera manuals. You can look up what Sony says.

I personally think the guy is talking about the dumb choice Sony makes when they include a battery with a new camera.

I freelance for a company here in Michigan called Superior Productions. We've been using a DSR250/PD150 combo on weddings for over a year and it works just fine. Same CCD's and lens elements means pretty much the same picture. The 250 is useful for it's longer record time (it can handle full sized DV tapes) and battery life. The PD150 is excellent for taking candid shots, moving around during a reception, and shooting unobtrusively.

-Dan Ballmer

I can't find anything in either the manual or the brochure about recording times, however the brochure quotes power consumption at 10.5w or 12.5 with the LCD screen open on the DSR250. The BP-L40 is rated at 43wH, which would appear to indicate that one battery should be good for 3.5-4h. Obviously this depends on how much zooming etc you do in the real world, but a figure of 2-3h should be achievable. The dealer quoted 40-60 minutes, the only way I could see that would be if you had a light on the camera. I'm interested to see how all this theoretical musing stacks up in the real world - anyone?

Not sure what "dumb choice" you're referring to Mike - maybe it's different in the US, but on this side of the pond the DSR250 comes without any batteries. I was just surprised (and still sceptical) that I would have to pay about $400 for a battery that lasts less than an hour.

The DSR250 batteries we use last for about 3 hours apiece.

-Dan

Which batts do you use Dan? Cheers.

Graeme,

In the US, Sony sends the smallest battery they make with anything from the PD-150 downward. I purchased a DSR-200 some time ago (in the US) it came with a battery that seemed powerful enough to only light up the viewfinder, not actually deliver any run-time. I assumed that the 250 was also shipped with a small battery. Different country, different Sony policy I guess. I bought it new directly from a Sony employee who ordered it specifically for me.

Like you, I would expect the 40 battery to run it for a long time. At least the 3 hours Dan speaks of because of the 250's internal similarity to the PD-150. The PD-150 (5.4 watts with LCD open)will run for over over 4 hours (real world experience and I've never had the time to run one to exhaustion) on the largest battery (NP-960) sold for it. That battery will supply 38.8 watts when new and at its optimal operating temperature.

Looking where I suggested in my last post, the searchable on-line Sony manuals, I found a run-time estimate of 190 minutes for the BP-L40 battery. The 60 is listed at 420 minutes and the 90 at 700 minutes. The power consumption is listed at 12.1 watts with LCD. Wow! What a difference a larger transport and viewfinder make, I guess.

Given that these numbers are for batteries in new condition and at the optimum temperature (LiON batteries, especially the 40, according to Sony, suffer significantly lower capacity as their temperature drops) and allowing for a bit of Sony optimism, I'd not expect the 40 battery to be able to run out a full 3 hour DVCam-mode tape load.

I agree that the Sony battery prices are incredibly high. Even knowing that LiON battery packs need to have expensive internals to insure that they don't burn up when they are charged, the prices seem excessive.

What Sony wants, in the US, for a pair of 60 batteries and the charger will eat up $1500 or so. I'd look at IDX, Frezzi (E.U. source I think) and maybe even Anton Bauer for batteries. Even AB isn't much more expensive for their best. An alternative, if you don't need extreme mobility, is a battery belt. I think one can still get a 14.4 volt NRG belt with spare clip-on battery set and a rapid charger for around $1,000 U.S.

Guess I'm glad the PD-150 will run so long on much less expensive batteries.

<<<-- Originally posted by Graeme Brown : Which batts do you use Dan? Cheers. -->>>

I called the other camera man to ask what sort of batteries he uses (since he owns the DSR-250 and I the PD150) and he replied "I use the 40's". Hope that helps.

:)

-Dan

It sure does, thanks Dan. I was pretty sure that the dealer was trying it on, and I had already decided to spend my money elsewhere anyway - this just confirms it.

When I bought my DSR-250 earlier this year the dealer sold me a battery setup made by a Chinese company called Swit. The batteries were a little cheaper than the BP-40's but are 56w units.

I recently did a family wedding using up two 124min tapes but only one battery ( and for at least 25% of the time I was using the LCD display without turning off the viewfinder )

I have to say that I was impressed and think the DSR-250 is the most frugal power user I have come across.

OK guys, other than battery life, how do you like the 250 and 200 in general? I run a Canon XL1 now, and am looking for a camera to give me the capability to do a 2-camera shoot. I am attracted to the more conventional, over-the-shoulder form factor of the DSR250 or 200, versus the "all 6.5 pounds are resting on your right hand" style of the XL1. Any suggestions/opinions?

Steve - thanks for the info. Sony quote 190 mins for the 40's, which agrees with what everyone (except a certain London dealer ) says.

TGG - I ordered a DSR250 yesterday, so I'll let you know soonish.

Mike - took your advice and ordered the IDX batts & charger. THe price was about the same as for the Sony stuff, but the IDX batts are 50w and I prefer the charger. Price for either IDX or Sony was about $1050 plus tax ($1275 in total)

I'd take the image of a DSR 250 over that of the XL1 any day. You may find that if you mix the footage of the two cameras you'll be spending a good deal of time doing color correction in post. It has been my experience that you'll also have one really crisp image (the 250) and one kind of muddier image (the XL1). This occurs mostly in wide shots as the XL1 handles close images considerably better than it does distance images. In low light situations the 250 and XL1 images are going to be extremely different (with the 250 looking much better).

That's been my experience, anyway.

-Dan

Is that a back focus issue on the XL1? I know I have been really impressed with its closeup work.

Is the 200 close to the 250? I have a chance to get a low-mileage 200 is why i ask.

I've never seen or used a 200 so I can't answer that. But I'm sure someone else can. The XL1 closeup footage has always looked fine to me, it's distance shooting where I've seen it suffer (and, of course, low light). I'm not a techie, so I can't say if it's back focus or not. I only know that I've shot plays, weddings, and construction sites using both camera and the XL1 footage has been sub-par (compared to the 250) in non close-up work.

By sub-par I mean the XL1 footage has been darker, granier, and not as sharp. I've heard it said that the XL1 can deliver a better picture if you take time to reset the manual settings everytime you move the camera but on many of my shoots there is simply no time for this.

-Dan

When one starts thinking about the price point over $5000, then I start looking at all the alternatives.

For that amount of money, I want a step up in sharpness and color clarity from my PD-150.

At the community college where I was, until recently, the Cinema and TV Lab Tech, we had 1000's, 900's, a 200, and a JVC DV550.

Of all those cameras, the 550 is the most impressive to me.

I recently purchased a used DSR-300 to which I added my old Fujininon 14X lens.

The difference between the my 150 and the 300 is subtle but real.

Low light - I think the 150 is a match for the 300 in low light in most regards.
Black levels - The 300 delivers subtle diferences in black that the 150 misses. This applies to well-lit scenes too.
Overall sharpness - Images of distant objects tends to be crisper as well.
Handling - The DSR-300 just handles faster with the manual lens.

And at the $5000 level, you should get added goodies like skin tone detection for smoothing out wrinkles, An ability to change the skin color without changing other colors, black compression and expansion, fairly good audio, lots of options on how the video will look, etc.

Guess what I'm saying is that as soon as you get to that level, you should look at a few more cameras.

To answer your 200 vs 250 question, NO, the 200 and the 250 are world's apart. Sony brought out the 200A fairly quickly but now I cannot remember what the issues were other than poor performance in low light levels. I haven't compared the 200 to a VX-1000 in really low light so I don't have a reference for you.

That said, in good light, the 200 is an adequate performer. I'd just not use it for weddings where I know the light will be low unless I can use an on-camera light.

OK so we have 2 cams with low-light issues, the DSR200 and the Canon XL1, but just one with clarity problems on the longer shots (the Canon which is what I now have). And the 200 at least solves the weight-and-balance problem of the XL1, since the 200 is a true over-the-shoulder config.

Actually, I always keep a Frezzi on top of the cam, it's just a matter of plugging in the battery belt. I haven't really seen any cam that I liked in poor lighting. Resetting every time I move it is hard for me too, since a lot of what I do is run-and-gun like Dan.

So, is the 200 enough of an improvement over the XL1, or do I need to hold out for a 250 or even a 300 (might be overkill for corporate video)

Learning Curve on DSR250 From DSR200
 

I currently shoot on DSR-200 and love the camera (I think IM the only one). In the next month, I am hoping to shoot a peace with a local television DSR-250. I am just wondering what is going to be different, and if there is a steep learning curve up to it.

Thanks in advance
Alex

In terms of performance, you will see a tremendous improvement in difficult conditions. The ole 200 was OK with enough light. But not so good in dim light. Which is why they brought out the A version so quiclky IIRC.

Go get the manual on-line before the day of the shoot and you can discover the differences fairly easy. This URL should get you close: http://bssc.sel.sony.com/Professiona...SC&p=2&d=10001

You shouldn't have any trouble. The 250 is probably closer to a fully professional camera than it is to the old 200. One of the exceptions being the way you have to set time code in the menu. That's not vey intuitive. You will need to spend a little time with the manual.

I used mine right out of the box, after adjusting the sharpness up a bit. It was cranked down way too low. You need a good monitor to adjust this; you don't want to get it too high or you'll get the dreaded edginess. Later on when I began using it for b-roll type shots with the DSR500, I went into the menu again and cranked down the color saturation and got the colors to match very closely. I don't know if they all come with the saturation cranked up too high or if that's just the way mine was.

Hey gang. Thanks for the tips. I downloaded and red the manual. According to the station they have pre calibrated the cameras to the broadcast standards.

The event I am covering for them is the Premier showing, and after party for Final Destination 2. The Highway scene was shot right hear in good old Campbell River (pout 3 million into our economy over the 3 weeks). Therefore, this is a big event for the town. I get to follow the head of our regional Film commission doing a “day in the life of’ type Documentary (I will be shooting that part with the DSR. 250). Then later in the day/night I am going to be covering the red carpet, entry, and after party with the good old DSR-200. So it should be a fun night for me, and thanks for the tips, and information

Alex

Sony DSR200
 

I've been offered a second-hand (about 4 years old) Sony DSR200 about which I know very little indeed. Do you know anything about the camera and would you recommend that I go take a look at it with a view to shooting weddings with it?

Any thoughts will be greatly appreciated.

tom.

I understand that it is basically a shoulder held version of the VX1000. Roughly akin to the relationship between a PD150 and a DSR250.

I have never shot with a 200 but am told that it has the same problem with low light that the V1000 has. (I own a VX1000.) There are two models of the 200. I beleive the 200A is somewhat better in low light but still not magic.

For weddings the low light problems might reach up and bite you.

Now any and all with direct experience with the camera please jump in and tell me where I've got it wrong.

Many thanks Rick. Just as I thought.

THere are still probably more weddings shot with cameras that have the VX1000 light sensitivty or worse than not. An on-camera light solves the problem and of course, for the daytime bits, the camera works as well as the VX1000 which is to say, well.

You get the obvious XLR connections, better audio management and the larger cassette capability. The camera used to use a kit of 3 NP950 Lithium Ion batteries although I think it could take the pro batteries too.

At the right price, this could be a good camera if it doesn't have too many hours on it.

I do tend to believe that the camera is over 4 years old as I think they were selling the A version 4 years ago.

I'd guess it might be worth $1500-$2000 although I could be off base there.

Thanks for your input Mike. I was suspicious of the "4 years old" when I found out it had NPF-930 batteries - which were the first generation Li-ions I believe. As I already use the VX2000 for weddings I've grown accustomed to its wonderful low light ability, and I'd not want to loose that - or resort to lighting. For DVD production it's important to avoid the gain-up situations, so I'll probably pass on that one.

tom.

Tom,

seems like you got the info you needed, but i thought i'd throw my two sense in. we have the 200s at my school and i can tell you if you've already got the vx2k you won't be particularly pleased with one of them.

the batteries don't last very long. it's a larger shoulder camera, yet it's not very ergonomic to hold. the low light quality is not as good as your vx2k and i'd say in regular lighting conditions, the two are pretty much dead even in quality, seeing as they have the same chip size. i haven't actually done a comparison though. plus the camera only takes the big DVCAM tapes which are about $35 at the local seller.

that being said, you do get a few nice features out of it, mostly easier manual control with dials on the side rather than screen menus and sweet audio controls (xlrs, individual channel adjustment & display).

this camera is getting antiquated fast. no flip out lcd, DVCAM only, crappy batteries. spend the $ on another vx2k or some nice audio stuff like a minidat and mic. wait to see what happens at NAB and the vx2k prices might start coming down fast. you might even afford a pd150 at that point.

-justin

ps

the department at school is supplementing (replacing) our 200s with pd150s next fall.

Many thanks for your thoughts too Justin - all very much appreciated. I'd thought initially that the DSR200 was a 1/2" chipped beast and I was going to get lovely differential focus - but now I know it'll be no different from my VX2k. What a great list - you've all stopped me making not only an expensive mistake but more importantly, a hardware mistake.

tom.

I shot a film using a PD150 and a DSR200 as the B camera. Low light was noticeably worse on the 200, but since this was a film with proper lighting it didn't matter to us that much. If I were shooting low-light weddings, it would be a different matter. But even in full daylight, the 200 had a noticeably noisier picture than the 150, and it was more contrasty. It wasn't able to hold the saturation of colors as well. With all image-enhancement controls put to the middle setting, and both cameras white balanced to the same white card, the 200 had a color shift to it, more yellow. The 150 had a shift to the red, more "warm," which might have been a shift that Sony made to counter the "warm" reputation the Canon's were getting at the time. Most of these differences were minor, and I doubt it would be noticed by an audience, but I noticed it. It would require some color correction if you wanted to match the cameras.

Michael Tyler