Sell DVX for D90?

J

jpastuch

Carbonite Member
I've been fishing around here recently and reading up on this DSLR business. I actually bought a used DVX100 in very good condition (and low hours) for 1100 dollars recently, but now I feel like I probably could have just saved that and shelled out a few hundred more for a D90.

Anyway, while I have no plans to sell my DVX100 now (I've shot stuff and want to shoot a bunch more stuff come summer- I do like the camera), would it be wise to sell it within a year and use the money to invest in the D90? I only say this because I don't have the cash to afford stuff like the HVX, which if I did, I would invest in. While DSLRs seems like the new bandwagon to jump on, it also seems like the most bang for my low bucks. I realize the problem of needing dual-system recording and also that fast movements tend to mess the picture up (which is fine, since my stuff is almost always composed of static shots or slow pans).

Basically, what i'm wondering is, in the next year or so, is selling the DVX100 for a grand and using the money on a D90 silly and knee-jerk or probably wise, seeing as I don't have $5000-$6000 for a hi-def video cam? Selling a hi-def HVX seems like one thing, but selling a SD DVX for hi-def capablities seems like it could make sense for the time being.
 
jpastuch said:
Basically, what i'm wondering is, in the next year or so, is selling the DVX100 for a grand and using the money on a D90 silly and knee-jerk
Click to expand...
if you're talking about a year from now, I would say things are so much more different.
I could easly say you wouldn't even want the D90 anymore.
look at all the dslr coming out with great images. and imagine a year from now what they will offer. there will be no comparrison.
 
Quite understandable that a year from now everything will be much much different. But price influences %50 of the question. Will these new, killer DSLRs be around $1200? Probably not, especially if this becomes a major trend (which it is already).

My main question is, if I have $1500 or less to spend on a camera, would selling my Dvx100 by next year for a hi-def DSLR worth it? From everything I'm reading (except for the porblems like lack of image control, jelly, and sharp edges), it seems like "yes, certainly". Just the idea of selling my highly customizable camcorder for a still camera that happens to shoot pretty movies seems like a knee-jerk. I don't know. I know this is an ongoing discussion and many wouldn't trade-in their DVXs for a DSLR, but any money I save up from now to then I'd rather spend on a seperate audio recorder than buying a D90 and keeping both. From my eyes, one of the biggest things about DSLRs is the price range. If I had the money, I'd spring for an HVX like I said. But I do not, therefore...
 
why not sell ur dvx and add some $$ for an HMC150 ? its like $3500 or is that out of ur price range? hi def...cheap cards...similar to the dvx, full controls.
 
I wouldn't leave the beauty of MANUAL CONTROLS for a DSLR... Although, it already has an SLR lens for shallow DOF and it also can take really nice images, I would go for an actual HD camera. Like jambredz said, you could save up for an HMC-150. I haven't used one yet, but it sounds pretty nice. Plus, you get that new AVC HD format, even though I have no clue what the difference is between it and normal HD... But I like the idea of solid-state random access recording rather than MiniDV which you will get wither way. I guess it comes down to what you will actually be shooting. I am perfectly happy with my DVX100B and I am not planning on changing cameras any time soon...
 
Over at the GH-1 forum they'll tell you that this new DSLR kills all other HD cams around,,,,, why buy an HVX, HPX or HMC when you can buy the stealthy little GH-1. Its gonna take over the world in terms of image quality and usability you know!
 
I always figured the three big factors between the DSLRs and actually HDCAMs is the price, lens options, and small size, since they seem to have a lot of downsides. Since I don't have HDCAM money, that's why I was asking to begin with.

Either way, I think I'll just wait and see.
 
I also own a DVX100a and would love one of those shiny new video DSLR toys. But for me it's worth holding onto my DVX and playing the waiting game to see what kind of advancements are made in the DSLR world over the next year or so.

I should also mention that I already own a Nikon D70s and various Nikon lenses. So I'm really holding out to see what Nikon dishes out so I can still use all my Nikon gear down the road. So what I think I'd be more likely to do is replace my D70s with a new DSLR and hold onto the DVX100a.
 
It depends on what kind of stuff you shoot. I have both right now and wondering the same thing, but for an easy camera that I can plug the mic in and GO, the dvx can't be beat. For really nice filmic images and great stills, the d90 rocks. My next film will be on the d90.

Don't forget about the post workflow. My ancient computer has a little trouble handling the d90 stuff, and I cringe to think about editing AVCHD or some transcoded footage from the GH-1 on it.

I would say if you're doing documentary/ corporate work, stick with the dvx, but if you want stylized shorts and narrative work and are willing to put up with the annoying quirks, go for the d90 or wait for the Gh-1.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top