Bet the bottom loading is not seen as a gain Laurence.

Hi,

I'm new here and came across this thread.

I am considering buying a PD170 as my first camers for film-making.

I thought you guys may be interested in this list:

http://www.nextwavefilms.com/ulbp/bullfront.html

It shows a lot of films which have been made with a PD150 or similar (sometimes lower spec) and had good artistic and cinematographic merit.

Hope this helps!

No question that these are great cameras; but put things into perspective. All of those films appear to be a few years old. You have to look at what's currently on the market and compare to what your needs are. If you want to work in 16:9 then I feel the PD cameras are going to be pretty far behind some of the other options today.

At least for me, neither 16:9 nor HD are approaching me or the national TV too fast yet and many PDs are still being used. Basically it just depends what you are targetting... For certain productions like films, music videos and so on, the 16:9 format and HD are great to use. You can add great extra lighting for your needs and the results are awesome. However, PDs and VXs are anyways better in low light conditions and there are some reasons why many places still use them for news gatering, documentaries etc. I know that lots of professional production companies are not planning to upgrade their camera park with the FX1s or Z1s yet and are considering doing it with the next HD family when it arrives.

I think that for a lot of people, it's not the latest time today to move over to 16:9 (or HD) and there's plenty of time to prepare everything. Consumers who don't watch TV too often will indeed keep their good old 4:3 TV sets for at least 2 years.

I'm just expressing my own views and opinion right now so feel free to reply :)

Georg, I don't particularly disagree with any of that. However when you started this thread you entitled it "Professional use of PD170 in 16:9".

The PD-170 is arguably the best camera for shooting interlaced 4:3 video. But if you wan't 16:9 then it's showing its age...

Yep, it went a bit offtopic :) 16:9 is certainly rather sad with PDs and VXs which is ofcourse unfortunate. If it's very necessary, then they can do it, but the results are not something that can compete with FX1, Z1 or other dedicated 16:9's.

For the price, I would suggest a DVX100/A/B. It would be better suited to filmmaking. The PD cameras have always been the do-it-all camera of choice. But for filmmaking, the DVX should be what you're aiming for. They should be around the same price if I'm not mistaken. The DVX should have better, if slightly better, 16:9 options. The PD would be better suited for low light, true, but then there's a lot to consider. Heck, a Canon XL2 could be down to the $2,500-$3500 range next year with all of these new HD cameras coming out. If you need one now, go for what you think is best for you, but if you can wait, hold out and see what's coming and how it's going to affect the pricing on everything.

Thanks.

Just for the record it's interesting that David Lynch is shooting his new film with a PD170 - his films always look great, it will be interesting to see what kind of results he gets. Then again, the rest of his equipment is sure to be top notch...!

Is VX2100 highest qual 3ccd 16:9 cam?
 

Just a quick question- not being a VX owner, would it be correct in assuming the VX2100 is pretty much the highest performing 16:9 MiniDV 3CCD camcorder produced? ( By high perf. I mean optical IS, true 16:9 CCD's, low light perf, sharpness & color rendition)

I've owned the DVX100 awhile back as well as GL2, PDX10 and XL1s and a few HDV cams- but have heard so much about the VX2100's and was wondering what the general consensus was amongst users of the VX series. I know the PDX10 has true optical 16:9 but didn't like the smearing/streaking I experienced- and was wondering what's the "best" (highly subjective of course) in MiniDV was in widescreen mode.

~~ I'm aware this question might lead to some 'debate' over some issues- but was just hoping to hear from people who have owned or used the VX series and has compared it to other miniDV cams ~~

The VX2100 has all virtues you mention except one--it's not a 16:9 cam.

Fred,

that completely caught me off-guard- I thought it was a native 16:9 camera? B&H describes it as:

16:9 Widescreen Recording
Allows the user to record in a widescreen or letterbox aspect ratio. When used with a 16:9 widescreen compatible TV, the camcorder is able to display a similar aspect ratio to that of popular films - without having to crop off the top and bottom and losing important data and resolution.

I thought it was native?
I guess i was wrong. The consideration ends here for me!

It's actually rather poor 16:9 too. The PDX10 is native 16:9, but worse low light, but lovely picture.

For the best DV camera for true 16:9, probably the HDV FX1 or Z1U in DV mode :-) Seriously.

Graeme

I just purchased the VX2100, waiting for it to arrive. When you say poor 16:9, what do you mean exactly? I planned on using that feature and am now concerned.

The internal scaling to produce 16:9 anamorphic creates artifacts. You're far better off cropping and scaling in post to produce widescreen, or use a anamorphic lens, but that's a pain.

Graeme

So you mean taking the 4:3, enlarging it, and then cropping the top and bottom?