sorry, some more questions... DVX100A/PD170

Raoul

Member
Hi Everyone!

This is the first time I am posting something to this forum. I am trying to get a grip on dv technology to make up my mind whether to buy a Panasonic AG-DVX 100 A or the Sony DSR PD170. I am aware that this discussion has been in this forum before, yet after all the reviews, forum discussions, I read there are still some questions,where it would be great to get some answers to. There are actually quite a few...

I am an independent documentary but also short film filmmaker, very much interested and fascinated by technology, into cinematography (which I think points me again to the DVX 100 A with all its image options, 24p...from all that I feel more convinced about the DVX 100 A). I am based in the UK, so will be using PAL, edit on Final Cut 3.

It might well be that some of my questions are not making 100% sense in terms of understanding the subject, as I said I built up my knowledge and understanding of the cameras only by reading in the net. Also they might have been asked before, I tried to browse the archive to exclude this, but sometimes I couldn't find quite the right answers...

I hope it's ok to quote some experts statements from their websites as I quoted some people to give some more in depth background to my questions contexts.
Any advice, feedback, or answers are very much appreciated!
Many Thanks!
Raoul

1) How does the inbuilt stereo mic of the DVX 100 A compete against the shotgun mic of the PD170? What is the quality of the inbuilt mic of the DVX 100 A, to what extend is it necessary to buy an additional shotgun mic, would this then be the AG-MC100G, is this the equivalent to the PD170's shotgun mic? Adam Wilt says in a review of the DVX 100 on http://www.adamwilt.com/24p/index.html:

'The auto focus motor makes a lot of noise as it locks in on a focus point. You'll hear it through the built-in mics, and you'll hear it by ear in a quiet room. It's noticeable because it's intermittent and because most other cameras are quieter in this regard, but usually the auto focus motor isn't much louder than the zoom motor or the tape transport. '

In a later review on dv.com of the dvx 100 A he adds:

'The camera is slightly quieter in operation than the DVX100. Both the zoom and focus servos have been muted somewhat, though neither is silent.'

2) What is the general meaning/advantage of mechanical control of the lens, without engaging the motor? In a PD170 review, Tony Fonseca mentions this as a special feature that the PD170 does not have.

3) Also the PD170 has a 12xoptical zoom and the DVX 100 A a 10xzoom, another review says that the "tempo/speed" of the zoom of the PD170 is 7, and the DVX 100 A only 5, is it right that this statement refers to the 12x, respectively the 10x?

4) Both cameras aren't native 16:9, and have 4:3 ccd chips; does the added squeeze mode of the DVX 100 A embody a real advantage to the PD170's options?
Has the PD170 like the pd150 a built in 16:9 and what does this mean, compared to the DVX 100 A's 16:9 possibilities?

5) Is it true that the PD170 does not feature a time interval recording function?

6) The DVX 100 A's standard lens goes down to 32.5 mm in the 35mm equivalent, I couldn't find mm details about the wideconversion lenses anywhere, does anyone know what it covers in 35mm equivalent mm? The PD170 standard lens is f 6.0 to 72.0mm, in 35mm 43.2 - 518.4mm, the wideconversion lense details I found say it 'Features an ultra high quality 58mm thread and a 0.7X wide angle converter' Does this mean 0.7 x 43.2 = 30.24mm as the widest 35mm equivalent? If that's the case, does the DVX's wide conversion lens go lower/wider?

7) Does the DVX100A have a LANC port? And what is LANC port?

8)
Mark Foley comments on: http://web.archive.org/web/20021101152118/www.uemedia.com/CPC/article_2468.shtml
about the unpractical location of the XLR connectors, that they stick out and that the cables get in the way, he states a 'fiddely' way to work around it, how do other people feel, or think about/experience the XLR set up? Did this change on the 2nd generation, the DVX 100 A?


9) The PD170 has a hybrid LCD, is the LCD of the DVX 100 A hybrid, too? And how big/effective is the difference of the PD170's high-resolution monochrome viewfinder? Does the EVF DTL option of the DVX 100 A represent an equally good/useful alternative and I found in the Specifications details of both cameras that they both have 180.00 dots (are dots and pixels the same?, Pana says pixels and sony says dots), so is the difference the amount of lines?
 
Re: sorry, some more questions... DVX100A/PD170

sorry, my post was too long, but I have even more questions...

hope this in not going to anoy anyone/break rules...

Cheers!

Raoul

10) On http://www.adamwilt.com/24p/index.html Adam Wilt also reports about some problems with the auto exposure function namely that the auto iris changes in small jumps escpecially if the light change is slow. I found in a PD170 review that it actually performs with far less options when set in auto exposure, that it will use one constant F stop and only adjusts raising or lowering the gain levels. So it seems that the DVX 100 A is more advanced in its possibilities anyway, but what do other people think about these auto iris jumps?

11) From what I found about the shutterspeed option of the two cameras, it seems that the PD170 goes as fast as 1/10000, but the DVX 100 A only 1/2000, then again the DVX 100 A has more options with the slower shuterspeeds and it has a synctro scan function to film of a screen/TV, which the PD170 has not got. How essential (in the opinion of others...) is a shutterspeed faster then 1/2000? When would it be necessary, useful?

12) I found lots of reviews/comparisons that repetitively state that the PD170 has the better lowlight performance, starting with the simple juxtaposition of 1 lux/ PD170 and 3lux/ DVX 100 A. The most detailed one I found was by Tony Fonseca, it tests both cameras in auto and manual mode, and basically concludes that the PD170 wins in lowlight performance, but that the DVX 100 A especially when used manually comes very close, but that it has a tendency to produce a muted color palette.
I belong to the people that rather work manually, but for documentary work, will sometimes be in 'available lowlight situations', where I might even be forced/urged to use the auto functions. Are there any advice/ comments/ experiences about this subject regarding the DVX 100 A?
From Tony Fonseca's review, the differences aren't that big, I found lots of comments of people that say the PD170 is better for shoot and run, documentary work and the DVX100A for filmic, controlled lighting stuff, is there anyone who uses the DVX100A for docs, shoot and run, who is satisfied with it's lowlight performance?

(http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/sony-dsr-pd170-camcorder-review.htm)
 
Re: sorry, some more questions... DVX100A/PD170

First of all, welcome to DVXuser.com. This is quite the long post and you ask alot of questions. :o I suggest you hang around and start reading the posts. More or less, everything you have asked has already been addressed umpteen times.

I can sum it up for you. You state you want to make films and/or docs. On the DVX it will look very close to film and filmic in nature. The PD 170 will look like a video camera.

Hang around. Read some posts. :)
 
Re: sorry, some more questions... DVX100A/PD170

Hi John,

I've spend about two weeks, reading reviews, forums, posts.

I learned a lot and enjoy it, have found a lot of answers since and will continue reading...

It's just that I am kind of trying to reach an end in this research procedure, to go and by a camera.

Thanks anyway for your response!

Raoul
 
Re: sorry, some more questions... DVX100A/PD170

[quote author=Raoul link=board=Links;num=1085595424;start=0#0 date=05/26/04 at 11:17:04]but also short film filmmaker...[/quote]

This is what it all boils down to. The camera for you is the DVX100A. All the questions you asked are really moot, the differences in features are very small between the standard interlace modes of the two cameras. The DVX can essentially do everything the 170 can do but a whole lot more.

I'll try to answer some of your questions later when I have the time, but they really are irrelevant when it comes down to it, according to your requirements there's really only one choice.
 
Re: sorry, some more questions... DVX100A/PD170

Oh, and I wouldn't trust ANYTHING from Camcorderinfo.com, their bias for SONY is greater than our bias for the DVX100 here.
 
Re: sorry, some more questions... DVX100A/PD170

Sony Superfans will tell you that we're biased because we're on this forum. Nope. It's the opposite -- we're on this forum because we all were where you are, weighed the facts, and made the only real choice.
 
Re: sorry, some more questions... DVX100A/PD170

yeah you need to look even at the marketing side of things to see where the chips fall. Panasonic wont team up with anyone or sponsor anyone (that I know of at least) by giving them cameras to shoot... even when George Clooney wanted to shoot that Street thing they asked Panasonic for free cameras, and they said no. George bought them anyways.

On the otherhand, CNN and NBC etc. got a truckload of Sony cameras, I believe they gave 50 pd150's to iraq journalists.

THere are strengths and weeknesses to every camera, but in the end it doesnt really matter, nobody (except most of us here) watch an incredibly well done broadcast show or even movie for that matter and ask "mmm I wonder what camera they used?"
 
Re: sorry, some more questions... DVX100A/PD170

I'm agreeing with everyone here. Just a quick note, I sell camera's unfortunately at the consumer level...

#7 Lanc is useless unless you're doing underwater video. Lanc is a port for wired control of all the camcorders functions without touching the actual camcorder. I.E. remote zooms and underwater housings. There are other uses, but are they really notable?
 
Re: sorry, some more questions... DVX100A/PD170

[quote author=TheAmateurPro link=board=Links;num=1085595424;start=0#8 date=05/26/04 at 13:35:33]I'm agreeing with everyone here. Just a quick note, I sell camera's unfortunately at the consumer level...

#7 Lanc is useless unless you're doing underwater video. Lanc is a port for wired control of all the camcorders functions without touching the actual camcorder. I.E. remote zooms and underwater housings. There are other uses, but are they really notable?[/quote]

Well, there's a remote zoom control on the arm of your tripod, for one thing, and whatever other functions your controller and camera can work together for. Lots of people use them.

The DVX does NOT have a LANC port. It has a remote control port, but it's not a LANC.
 
Re: sorry, some more questions... DVX100A/PD170

the only drawback the DVX has is the lightsensitivity. even in 50i mode the DVX needs more light than the PD-150/170.
but we have betacms here that are about as "bad".
so if you run into many dark spots without any light get the sony. if you will have either light or can bring somne for your docus...then get the DVX
 
Re: sorry, some more questions... DVX100A/PD170

Ok I was in your exact same spot a couple months ago. First off, I have used the PD-150 and the original DVX100 both for over a year. What I mean by this is that I have used them both at the same time or different times in the same week. I got to know both of the cameras well. The DVX100 and especially the 100a can do exactly what the sony can do. But here is the catch...it can do more too. The DVX100 is not bad in low light compared to the 150 or 170 if you look at it this way; the 150 and 170 both get extremely grainy without gain in low light. The video really becomes useless...The DVX100 may seem like it does not do well in extremely low light but it really does...the picture stays clean with no artifacts. Go with the DVX100a, you will really be happy with your decision. Plus you have DVXuser...the best community on the net!
 
Re: sorry, some more questions... DVX100A/PD170

I think Jarred should code it so that Sony or Canon typed out actually turns into **** and Crap.

That way when people come on and ask "Should I buy the Sony over the DVX" it would read as "Should I buy **** over the DVX?"

or

"Im thinking of spending $3000 on Canon." it will really read as "Im thinking of spending $3000 on crap"

Just a thought.
 
Re: sorry, some more questions... DVX100A/PD170

Note: I own a DVX100 (not A), and have worked a lot with PD150s and VX2000s (not PD170/VX2100). That being said, I still feel I can speak to most of your questions . Alrighty, some of these are debatable I'm sure, but here goes:

1) The mics are probably about the same quality. They are ok, but not great. If you're serious about sound, you'll want to get a better shotgun mic and get it away from the camera. The DVX's servos are louder than the PD170s. especially the zoom (when in auto mode).

2) Not sure what you're asking. Manual control is often the preferred method of zooming and focusing, because if gives you full control.

3) Tempo/speed has nothing to do with the optical zoom power. It has to do with how fast or how many different steps it can zoom.

4) I'll defer to someone like Barry on this one for the technical analysis in the interlace modes, but I will say that squeeze in the progressive modes of the DVX can not be touched by any 16:9 setting on the PD170.

5) not sure if the 170 does or not, I didn't think it did but the guy that jsut posted says it does. Either way, a rarely used option.

6) not sure

7) no. THe only advantage LANC would give you over Panasonics remote control is focus control. Panasonic's is a simpler (and cheaper) design, there's even threads here explaining how to make your own zoom/remote control.

8) IMO, I like the XLR placements on the DVX better than the 170. I don't have to stare at them like on the Sony, but I guess it's a personal preference. Either way, it doesn't matter one hill of beans in terms of performance or convenience.

9) Don't know if DVX LCD is a hybrid. I do know it's bigger, and possibly a little brighter, and works better (mainly b/c of size) than the Sony (IMHO). Also, I rarely use viewfinders so can't really comment on the differences between them.

10) I rarely use auto-iris, but the DVX definitely has the Sony beat in terms of steps and smoothness of the auto-iris.

11) The original DVX can only go to 1/2000, not sure if the DVX100A increased that or not. I would say it's not essential at all. You'd have to get some major lighting to even be able to use 1/2000. I have never had a need for anything this high. Heck, 1/500 is probably the highest I'd ever need to go.

12) Alright, this one really gets me sometimes. I don't think there's many people saying the DXV is better in low light, but it sure is close. Close enough that it's not really an issue. I know the 170 claims 1 lux instead of the 2 of 150, but reviews I've read said that they were hard pressed to tell any real difference between the 150 and the 170 in low light. The DVX is probably 97% as good as the 150 in low light. With setup time, you can probably tweak the DVX to get a better image than the 170 because you CAN CONFIGURE the DVX, whereas the Sony is limited with what you can do in settings.

If you consider weddings "run and gun", then yes, from time to time I do "run and gun". I'm very satisfied with its low light performance. Like I said, the 170 is probably a little better (most of the time), but if you're shooting low light your stuff is already going to look bad no matter which camera you use. If you give the Sony a 100, I'd give the DVX a 97.
 
Re: sorry, some more questions... DVX100A/PD170

HAHA JOHN!!! Only assholes use crap and ****! :o get it? ;D
 
Re: sorry, some more questions... DVX100A/PD170

Hudson that is amazing...we should do that...yes..talk to Jarred!! ;D
 
Re: sorry, some more questions... DVX100A/PD170

[quote author=SirAllen link=board=Links;num=1085595424;start=15#16 date=05/26/04 at 19:55:14]
4) I'll defer to someone like Barry on this one for the technical analysis in the interlace modes, but I will say that squeeze in the progressive modes of the DVX can not be touched by any 16:9 setting on the PD170.[/quote]

According to a resolution chart comparison (Boyd Ostroff shot the VX2000, Adam Wilt shot the DVX100A), the cameras perform basically identically in 16:9 mode in interlaced. Of course, as SirAllen says, the DVX will beat the PD170 like a rented mule when it comes to 16:9 in progressive.
 
Back
Top