DVX102B Vs SONY PD170

[plainman007]

Whats the difference of pict quality between the DVX100 and a sony PD-170. I dont know if this is the right section. But i figured this is where the quality comparisions take place so i decided id post here. Your feedback would be helpful.

[Bezakor]

oo oo oo! let me answer um ..... ah, dont have a clue?. I just love my DVX :) sorry, you'll get a detailed answer soon, the guys here know thier shit!

[Plumhead]

I have a DVX 100B and a Sony DCR VX2100 (which is exactly the same as the PD170 except without the xlr mic) and the quality on the DVX is much higher than the PD170. If I am correct the ccd size on the PD170 is 1/4" while the DVX is 1/3". Another thing is that the DVX has the 24p feature on it which gives your product more of a film look while the PD170 does not. I hope that this helps.

[Policar]

Both have 1/3'' CCDs. In different situations, each is better. It depends what you want it for, but the dvx is better for most situations, imo.

[epsilonbass]

The general consensus seems to be that both are pretty decent cameras. However the documentary types seem to prefer the PD170 where as the indie shorts and features types like the DVX100. I know sometimes its hard to do this, but your best bet would be to try both cameras. But honestly you will most likely love which ever camera you get, neither should be dissapointing.

[Vampiresoup]

The DVX is better Id say just for the wealth of information you can get off this website. People will still help you with the pd170 of course but there are so many dvx users here that are willing to help that it is almost a dealmaker.

[plainman007]

I am also leaning towards the DVX only. But i want to shoot mostly live events. Also i will want to run what is happening live to a projector with a giant screen so that the audience will get a closer view (face shots etc) of the performers on stage. Are all these possible ? With this scenario which cam would be more ideal.

Also in the DVX102B, will i be able to set up all the internal settings such as gamma etc. And then lock these settings allowing a not-so-experienced camera man to shoot the show zoom or some simpler functions ?

[Policar]

Get the new Canon. 4 grand, HDV, huge zoom range (20x wide angle).

[MalcolmOng]

Comparing the DVX and the PD170 alone, for your use of live event coverage, I'd say the sony wins because it has a better zoom, and since i doubt quality isnt much of a concern, it performs better in low light, imo. I've used both the sony pd and the dvx102b in a recent short that i shot, and one of the scenes was set at night. We hadn't thought to bring lights as the shoot was supposed to have wrapped two hours earlier. Anyway, the sony was a clear winner in low light performance thanks to its massive gain(i hated the noise, but in the position i was in, it was more important to just get the picture)

I felt the DVX was a more ergonomic camera as the sony was front heavy due to a heavy lens assembly, which was rather irritating to me. However, if shooting short films is your primary concern i'd say that the dvx wins by a mile - I never really understood what people meant by the over enhanced edgy 'video' look until i compared footage by the DVX and the PD170.

If you dont absolutely have to get those two cameras, then i'd say maybe get a canon XL1 or 2, as the 20X zoom is massive, and seems pretty useful for you. Policar's got a good suggestion too, with the new canon hi def cam if its within your budget

-mal

[plainman007]

We wont need much of zoom. Its a stage illusion act. So more of hand shots etc for the close up magic sequences. Other than that we need to shot music video styled magic sequences that look very movie like, so that they will be projected on giant screen. We are also looking at producing tele-episodes for satellite tv broadcast and retail dvds. Most of our earlier shows were shot on sony PD170. The low light scenes have too much noise and grain. Exactly like you said, edgy and videoish. The dark areas seem to be showing a running noise kinda thing. Like an ond vhs tape. In your last line you said

"I never really understood what people meant by the over enhanced edgy 'video' look until i compared footage by the DVX and the PD170"

Can u elaborate more on that...which of them had the edgy video look and which didnt ? i cant make out from that line !

[MalcolmOng]

The PD170...I don't have any examples right now, and anyway if i post screenshots it won't be very obvious...you gotta see it in motion. The PD170 screamed video to me. Now I'm not saying its a bad camera or anything, and I'm sure there are people who've managed to do great things with the PD170. However, my experiences with it so far weren't very good.

[OliverM]

The DVX is a far better camera then the PD170 unless you do a lot of low-light. And even then, the Sony is going to lose it's colour while the DVX will be grainy but still verry colourfull. The DVX has more settings to tingle with, the 170 just lets you focus, whitebalance and set exposure realy. Better ergonomics and pro style switches on the DVX, none of that on the 170. Useable manual focus and zoom (true crash zooms :) ) with the DVX, crap manual zoom and like Scott Billups said: focus ring from hell for the PD170.
Seriously, a lot of menu- and formfactors where adopted in the Sony HDV handycams because of the DVX. It's a true little pro-cam to me, the PD170 just misses out. It's not a bad camera, but if those are your options you should go DVX.
I worked professionaly with a PD170 from the local tv-station for four months, then bought my own DVX. Never looked back. And the odd time that I have to work a PD170 again, I find the lack of control quite irritating.
But try to get your hands on both for a day, you'll see. ;)

Best,
Oliver

[plainman007]

Weve worked with PD170s only so far. And im not happy with the results. Very noisy. And colorless. Pale videos in fact. So i was planning to buy our own DVX100 to shoot with.

Will it suit my live event needs ?
And does it have an out to send to the projector live ?

[OliverM]

Sure you can do live events with the DVX. You can use the RCA-video or the S-videoto send to the projector. Or get some kind of wireless device. But expect to see noise aswell. All the little cams show noise in low light. But the DVX still shows beautifull colours in low light. Like I said, try to get a loaner or rent one and do some testing. That way you'll know for sure. But I think you'll kinda like it. I shot several concerts at night with my DVX100A and the image is really nice. A bit grainy, but like I said: with small ccd's that's just the way it is...

[floatingtrem]

I've done a bunch of work with the PD150 which is the older model of the same camera (not much too has changed) and I was not very impressed with my results. As OliverM says, there really isn't much control with it, which can be frustrating when trying to get things to look good.

And even under fairly bright lighting the PD150's footage came across as grainy, especially compared to what I've seen from a DVX under similar circumstances.

[miamivideo]

I have a pd-170 all i can say its a good camera and the image it is not grainy at all, i've been shooting weddings and other events for a while now and i'm satisfy with the results. just take in cosideration that the dvx is a totally differet camera and better depends on what you use it for, ex: for shorts and movie making no doubt it is the best dv camera, for live events I think the pd-170 is better and again IT IS NOT GRAINY at all even at 12db the image is good, and not much grain is visible, just remember 1 lux(pd-170) vs 3 lux(dvx). I agree that colors in the dvx are better than the pd-170.

[TimurCivan]

The PD170 is a GREAT camera. But it shoots only Interlaced video. (its 15P is useless unless youre doing special effects)

VERy good interlace video. But its edge enhancement problem is user error not the cmeras fault. you can turn the sharpness down and it looks very organic. Sonys tend to be factory set up with alot of sharpening active, it jus takes 30 seconds and a few menu changes to turn the sharpening down.

I personally think the PD170's Image looks like a GREAT "Prosumer/ high end Home video" Camera. where as the DVX looks more like a large broadcast interlace camera, you might see used in a news broadcast or soap opera, because of its gamma curves, highlight handling, Dynamic range, color accuracy ( not saturation.... Accuracy), which is all still avilable in interlaced mode. Then the PRogressive options make the DVX a knock out.

If i were making interlace only projects, ( docs, event coverage) in low light, PD170 wins. but if its a controlled envorinment (interviews, shooting commercials), i would still use a DVX as an interlace camera.

Also, as a later note, The PD 170 is NEARLY NOISELESS. Even with Gain on. DVX cant do that at all.

[OliverM]

Like I said, in low light a PD170 wins. But on everything else the DVX has the edge. And while I am at it. The Sony loses much colour when you throw the gain all the way up. Sometimes it's like monochrome (well, not really of course). Oh well...

[vocare]

We wont need much of zoom. Its a stage illusion act. So more of hand shots etc for the close up magic sequences. Other than that we need to shot music video styled magic sequences that look very movie like, so that they will be projected on giant screen. We are also looking at producing tele-episodes for satellite tv broadcast and retail dvds. Most of our earlier shows were shot on sony PD170. The low light scenes have too much noise and grain. Exactly like you said, edgy and videoish. The dark areas seem to be showing a running noise kinda thing. Like an ond vhs tape. In your last line you said

"I never really understood what people meant by the over enhanced edgy 'video' look until i compared footage by the DVX and the PD170"

Can u elaborate more on that...which of them had the edgy video look and which didnt ? i cant make out from that line !


Just to share something honestly on both camera.
PD Does shoot better in low light. but to a limit.
PD not so powerthirstry as dvx.
sony lense , video light are mroe afforadable

dvx win by design of the camera .
viewfinder and LCD - you wil love it.
Progressive take a while to learn how to use.
scene file, preset, audio control. wide angle lense
Possible to be the best SD camera for this generation.
Even the current Z1 design from sony you will find
that it trying very very hard to copy from the
dvx design. If you need a SD camera, i think
that this is definitely the best buy right now.
if you are looking at HVX ..this is the definitely
will be a good buy ..as you can shoot it
together with sync in sd mode.
Just read about it...best of all..
borrow one and try if you can.
Never regret buying it.
right now in Singapore, i am training people on how to use
the dvx for their production.