Videomaker – Learn video production and editing, camera reviews › Forums › Cameras and Camcorders › Other Camcorders › Your pick for a camera?
- This topic has 1 reply, 5 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 5 months ago by Anonymous.
- January 30, 2006 at 10:36 AM #42361AnonymousGuest
Alright, this is open to anyone’s personal opinion (i’d also want more than just “i’ve used and its cool”) I’m having trouble picking out the best choice for a minidv cam. there are so many choices and a very large price range..
I dont have a lot of money for a camera and I’m looking for one in the 2,000 range. I’d like to be able to do 16:9 (a good 16:9 not a fake one..) and i’d also like to have a xlr box (or camera with the ability to buy one for it)
and a adjustable frame rate would also be nice (24 and such) to look alittle more like film (and so on)
I’d like to hear any recomendations? Thanks.
- January 30, 2006 at 11:20 AM #178044alohreyParticipant
well, for that price range I don’t think you are going to be able to really find a 3 chip camera that has 16:9 chips. And you really must get a 3 chip cam. I would suggest saving up some money and going with either the canon XL2, since it has true 16:9 chips or one of the HDV cams that shoot 16:9.
The XL2 will give you all that you mentioned, XLR audio connectivity, 16:9 resolution, and 24p recording. And it is really a very nice dv camera. That’s about double your price range, but the truth is you will have to forego one or more of the options you mentioned to get in the $2000 range.
I own a canon GL2, it does what you would call a cheesy 16:9 it’s not true 16:9 resolution, and it doesn’t do 24p either so you probably shouldn’t get that. Same with the sony vx2100, pd150, pd170 although very nice cams, they do not have those features. Almost any camera can use a beachtec audio XLR box if they don’t have xlr built in.
If those features are really important to you, you can either take a loan and get a more expensive camera now, or save up and get one later. My advise though is don’t sacrifice quality and important features, you will regret it later.
- January 30, 2006 at 12:08 PM #178045AnonymousGuest
Well when i say $2,000 im saying $2,000 – $3,000 (but still alittle low for the XL2 ;)) since i last posted i’ve been looking through different cameras and i’ve come down to these two cameras. the AG-DVX100 and the DSR-PD170.
while the AG-DVX100 offers true 24p, the pd170 offers better video performance in lower light conditions (according to some reviews)… I’m having trouble figuring out what i want.. but those two seem closer to what I’d want
and considering i was about to buy a PD100 those would be a bit of extra 😉 haha any recommendations? which of those two cameras would you recommend? x100, pd170?
or based off those cameras price range any other ideas? thanks.
- February 2, 2006 at 7:40 PM #178046AnonymousInactive
I was thinking about purchasing a xl2….. i know this is a great all around camcorder and all but has neone herad nething bad about it???? I know sony makes really sollid cameras and i cant decide if i want to go with the vx2100 or the xl2… i know they are kinda of in seperate leauges but they caught my eye and have many great features……… lemme know what yalll think
- February 27, 2006 at 7:19 PM #178047suwanneeredheadParticipant
I have an XL2, bought it after extensive research like you are doing. We wanted true 16:9 AND 24p capability, and that and the Panasonic AG-DVX100 and 200 (and the HD cameras, of course, but they are way too expensive right now) were the only ones that offered them (in that price range). I love it and have had no problems with it.
This past weekend I had another videographer help me shoot a band against a green screen. He has a Panasonic AG-DVX100 and while it was much lighter than the XL2 and boasts the 24p and 16:9 features, when I got the tapes home and started to capture, i was SHOCKED at the difference in quality! The Canon is HANDS DOWN a much better camera despite the similar features and specifications. The Panasonic, while set to 16:9, actually shot at 4:3 so the footage is not even usable for me, so i’m not sure if something is wrong with the camera or the cameraman didn’t know that he hadn’t set it right. When capturing there were many, many errors on the tape and the audio was awful, with pops and spits and drop-outs.
I definitely recommend the XL2 over anything else (although I do have my eyes on the Sony HDR-FX1 HDV which costs less than this camera and it is only 4.5 pounds AND high-definition). If you can deal with the weight of the XL2, its nearly 10 pounds with the 20x image stabilization lens on it, plus if you use it a lot in action situations you really should counterweight it, meaning it will be about 20 pounds or more.
Anybody have any experience with the Sony HDR-FX1 HDV?
- February 28, 2006 at 1:33 PM #178048Captured-FilmsParticipant
Anybody have any experience with the Sony HDR-FX1 HDV?
I have an FX1 and it shoots amazing footage. I’ve never used an XL2 so I don’t know how the footage compares between the two. I shoot motocross races so a lot of its hand held its nice that the camera is pretty light. It doesn’t have XLR plugs so if you need that kind of mic you would have to get a beachtek adapter or something like that and it doesn’t have the interchangable lenses like the canon. Overall I think its a great camera especially for the price.
- March 9, 2006 at 1:30 PM #178049AnonymousGuest
Thanks for the feedback and sorry for the extremly slow respond.. i didnt get a reply email so i assumed i wasnt getting replys.. Thank you suwanneeredhead for your input i think thats all i need to make up my mind. i also looked into the FX1 but the XL2 seems like a better camera for what i need (although allot of amiture film makers use the FX1 so i dunno)
but the XL2 seems like the best pick for me as for now. thank you all 🙂 helped allot
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.