Camera Hunt

N

Nick

i might be getting a new camera by the end of this year (depending on grades). I've been looking at a lot and so far a like the Sony DXC 537 & PVV-3 BetaCam SP, SONY PRO Digital Video DSR-250, and Sony DSR PD150. I'd like some input on these choices, i'm at a loss. :hmm:
 
Last edited:
Sort by date Sort by votes
What sort of things do you plan to do with this camera and what sort of budget do you have? It seems like it must range a fair amount with the cameras you list.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Shaw said:
What sort of things do you plan to do with this camera and what sort of budget do you have? It seems like it must range a fair amount with the cameras you list.
Click to expand...

true...there is somewhat a price range but, my plan is to choose one, use to film at a school that i'm attending during the summer for film classes in NYC. Its not mandatory to have one but, I'd like one of my own before i go. Here's the website for the school its pretty neat. www.socapa.org
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
all i know is that i have to pay for half of however much the camera is, and my parents have to pay the other half...but i honestly still need to set a budget for myself.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Go with the sony PD170.

1. $3000.00 great price compared to the $5000.00 cannon XL2 (For an additional $800.00 you can buy a true 16x9 lens for the Sony PD170)
2. Has the best low light capabilities of all mini DV cameras.
3. Tons of manual controls. (Shutter speed, f-stops, zoom, focus, etc)
4. Uses the same non-digital stabilization system as Cannon
5. High res viewfinder plus flip out LCD.
6. Comes with a quality wide angel lens.
7. 2 XRL Inputs and shotgun mic (although I replaced mine with a better mic)
8. Sold metal body
9. Very professional looking.
10. Can save personal presets

I could go on and on, go to this review they give it a more in-depth review.

:)http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/sony-dsr-pd170-camcorder-review.htm
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
Christopher said:
Go with the sony PD170.

1. $3000.00 great price compared to the $5000.00 cannon XL2 (For an additional $800.00 you can buy a true 16x9 lens for the Sony PD170)
2. Has the best low light capabilities of all mini DV cameras.
3. Tons of manual controls. (Shutter speed, f-stops, zoom, focus, etc)
4. Uses the same non-digital stabilization system as Cannon
5. High res viewfinder plus flip out LCD.
6. Comes with a quality wide angel lens.
7. 2 XRL Inputs and shotgun mic (although I replaced mine with a better mic)
8. Sold metal body
9. Very professional looking.
10. Can save personal presets

I could go on and on, go to this review they give it a more in-depth review.

:)http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/sony-dsr-pd170-camcorder-review.htm
Click to expand...

I'm like in love with camera now... :P yayea.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
rizien... what does the 100a have that the 100 doesnt? I understand it has a onboard button menu instead of the LCD jog.

Also, though it has wonderful features like 24p.. is it worth the money? It has low lux but so does the Panasonic 120 i just bought. Im asking because its not a true 1080 camera. its only 720x480 and seems a bit out dated for a newer camera.

Im not putting it down, I know 28 Days Later was filmed with it but I think it's over priced.

I think 1500 bucks should be a fair price for a prosumer camera. if they just sold a shitload of 100a to the consumers they could bring it down to under 1000 bucks. But I guess most people dont want to pay more then 200 or 300 bucks today for a video camera.

My first Video camera costed me 1200 bucks. that was 1989 and was a Toshiba movie Maker VHS. i still have it. It has a small hairline fracture in the lens but the picture is Beautiful. its got less light noise in low light then the Panasonic i own (The night vision one) i payed 900 bucks for.

I think 1989 dollar value was worth about 2-3 times more in 89 then now. It would be like paying 2500 bucks for a camera.


I might wait until next year near christmas to buy a 1080 i camera. Hope they will be cheaper.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
King Goldfish said:
rizien... what does the 100a have that the 100 doesnt? I understand it has a onboard button menu instead of the LCD jog.

Also, though it has wonderful features like 24p.. is it worth the money? It has low lux but so does the Panasonic 120 i just bought. Im asking because its not a true 1080 camera. its only 720x480 and seems a bit out dated for a newer camera.

Im not putting it down, I know 28 Days Later was filmed with it but I think it's over priced.

I think 1500 bucks should be a fair price for a prosumer camera. if they just sold a shitload of 100a to the consumers they could bring it down to under 1000 bucks. But I guess most people dont want to pay more then 200 or 300 bucks today for a video camera.

My first Video camera costed me 1200 bucks. that was 1989 and was a Toshiba movie Maker VHS. i still have it. It has a small hairline fracture in the lens but the picture is Beautiful. its got less light noise in low light then the Panasonic i own (The night vision one) i payed 900 bucks for.

I think 1989 dollar value was worth about 2-3 times more in 89 then now. It would be like paying 2500 bucks for a camera.


I might wait until next year near christmas to buy a 1080 i camera. Hope they will be cheaper.
Click to expand...

there is over 10 new settings on the 100a that the older 100 doesn't have. 28 days later was shot with a canon xl1s --pal i think.

i don't have the panny but i have used it and its sweet. the new xl2 is sweet also. rent until you own. thats what i do.

TheThing
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
TheThing said:
there is over 10 new settings on the 100a that the older 100 doesn't have. 28 days later was shot with a canon xl1s --pal i think.

i don't have the panny but i have used it and its sweet. the new xl2 is sweet also. rent until you own. thats what i do.

TheThing
Click to expand...

Oh, i thought I read the 100a was used with a special adapter and lens.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I'm pretty sure it was shot with a canon XL1s.

You are quite right Mr. Goldfish. The panasonic is a simple standard definition camera. What sets it apart though is it's ability to shoot progressively (full frame as film is). Whether that is worth the extra money is of course up the person buying. Several advantages the DVX has over lower cost cameras:

1) More realistic manual controls
2) 1/3" CCDs
3) Built in Gamma curve settings
4) Other image contols in Camera
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Shaw.. I was asking this tech guy who works on cameras about How Progressive works. he said its capturing the entire frame as opposed to creating a bunch of horizontal lines to make up a picture.

So.. I dont really know anymore then that. But vegas and premier have a function to convert to Progressive. But Im guessing it loses data by doing so. or it never picked up data it needed to make it true Progressive scan.

But he made it sound like all the higher resolution camera does is double the line resolution. it just basically mirrors the line below (Making it 1440?). I dont know how that works since you would think your eyes would see that. but 720 lines is alot of line.. each line is very very small and the brain doesnt notice it as a repeated image. unless its on a big Giant screen.

Well.. I have never seen video on a theatre size screen as most of you have. and thats where you guys know that the 100a is in fact better because true progressive at 24frame emulation must look really awsome compared to interlaced.


So thats what I want to know. Is the hidef HD cam gonna make a differences with an extra 360 horizontal lines of resolution.. but at interlaced? or should I just go ahead an invest in the smaller resolution camera but at progressive scan?

I could always crop it or mask the top and bottom as most cina modes do.

i just want input.. and since most indie film makers havnt had a chance to experiment with the Sony coming out or the JVC, Im guess I should put off until there is more input.

-dicuss please.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The tech guy is correct. Progressive captures the entire frame at a single instance in time. Interlaced captured two half frames and then "interlaces" them to create a full image. The problem with interlaced is that these two half frames are not captured at the very same instant so fast moving objects will be in slightly different places in each half frame.

You can indeed convert interlaced to progressive footage. My guess is that the option built into the NLEs just drops one of the two half frames. There is software which will interpolate the two half frames to create a full frame but you do indeed lose resolution.

Regarding the Sony: I do not know if it does line doubling. I don't *think* it does line doubling but that's not based on any hard facts.

I would say hold off on buying a camera if you don't need one very soon. The DVX tends to be a noisy camera (image noise) especailly in low lit situations where you have the camera modifying the image in camera for a cinema look. The XL2 is an absolutely prisitne camera. No visible noise but there is some strong chromatic abberation (purple fringes on the edge of high contrast areas). Panasonic will be releasing a HD camera sometime in the future that should go for about the price of the Sony. Rumor has it that the Panasonic will be able to capture 60p, 30p, and 24p! Right now HDV is just barely starting to get steady on its feet. If you can, give it some time and you will start to see some cameras with the options we want.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top