My thoughts on my DVX100b vs VX2100

J

japollner

Active member
I just picked up a used Panasonic DVX100b with about 100 hours on it. I am coming off a Sony PD170 (professional version of a VX2100), so I know what a high level camera is like. I loved the Sony but coming from a still photography background, and shooting both film and digital, I couldnt deal with not having control over what the "filmstock" looked like. Plus 30 and 24p were attractive to me, which the Sony didnt do..So I got the DVX. After playing with it for about 2 weeks, here is what I think.

Compared to the Sony, the actual camera feels like a toy. Lots of plastic and nothing seems very over built. It just plain feels extremely light. The Sony had a full weather sealed chassis and mostly metal exterior. It could take a beating, while the Panasonic feels kind of chintzy.

Footage wise? The ability to shoot progressive is awesome. The ability to shoot anamorphic 16:9 is awesome. The tons of settings and scene files rock. For getting digital footage that looks like film, this camera is the balls.

But after running through post, both images look pretty good. I was lucky to pay for the DVX what I sold the PD170 for. Had I paid more for the DVX, I dont know if it would have been worth the upgrade.

Bottom line, yes, I am happy with the DVX. But it wasn't the "end all be all" of DV that I have heard it was, and If you have a VX2100 already, be happy with it.

DVX test footage:

[vimeo]4434377[/vimeo]

Sony PD170 Footage:

[vimeo]3583106[/vimeo]
 
This seems like a funny thread for 2009. Not many people are picking between a DVX and a VX right now.

But I do have a DVX and disagree with you completely. I've used both cams (not a whole lot with the vx) and the image quality on the DVX, when the operator knows what he's doing, is way better. The panasonic sensors just kill sony and the depth that the DVX gets compared to the VX is, well, more film like. The vx can only shoot 60i, so the sharpness takes a hit right there.

Not sure what the point in this thread is, but I guess I would say if you have the option between a DVX and a VX2100, go DVX.
 
And you said, "Compared to the Sony, the actual camera feels like a toy. Lots of plastic and nothing seems very over built. It just plain feels extremely light. The Sony had a full weather sealed chassis and mostly metal exterior. It could take a beating, while the Panasonic feels kind of chintzy."

Nothing seems over built? It's just plain light? Those are two positives right there, I would say.

The DVX is super solid, I've skied with it the past two years, it's gotten super wet, frozen once, not dropped obviously but mine still looks brand new. On the other hand, I've seen vx2100s with scratches and what not all over the coating. This is just aesthetic but I just had to put this out there.

There's nothing chintzy about the DVX.
 
Truth. My next upgrade is going to be HD without a doubt. DVX is tempting, but HD without tapes is the way to go...so it seems
 
DVC Pro>Mini DVHa ask Landis about his DVX, he will shoot with it every time hes not shooting for anyone else even though he has an HPX.
 
As a owner of both cameras the sony is definitely better built. I took my vx everywhere and the only damage I ever got was paint wearing away on the edges. I've babied my DVX and still managed to crack it. You're either jaded by your love for the camera or haven't spent enough time with both.
 
The reason for this thread in 2009 was simply to throw some thoughts out there for anyone (amatuers) who may be looking for a high end SD camera. The footage the DVX puts out is phenomenal, and for transfering to film, it is the best SD camera you can shoot with.

However, for skiing and other action sports videography, I was stating that the VX2100 and PD170 were leaps and bounds built better. You could drop the Sony from 20 feet I bet and while the glass, servos, and tape drive would be fucked, I bet it would still power on and try to record. I get the feeling the Panasonic would be in 10 pieces.
 
I have owned all vx's, many of each, a dvx's, gl's and xl's. Sony definitely has the best build. I dropped a 30ft cliff to flat with my vx, d50 and all my gear and I would never think about doing that with the dvx. Yes, it is a great camera but I felt like I had to baby it all the time. As for it being better than the vx, like someone said, it all has to do with the operator. They're both great in their own aspects.
 
Hmm thats actually odd that you say that. Im not trying to prove your theory wrong, but...I had a Sony V1U (decent 3 chip sony HD) for a year and took the best care of it and never dropped it. After about 10 months there was actually a dent and crack in it that actually exposed some of the inner parts of the camera. On another note I have had my Panasonic HVX200 for about 15 months now. That camera has been threw hell. In a 3 day span it went threw a lot. Travis fell with it off an 80 foot gap (see the credits of our movie for more detail), then the next day Tim landed on cameron who was doing a follow cam. When we got back into town that day it fell out of the car immediately when i opened the door. After those three incidents all that happened was the eye piece is a little messed up, Thanks Tim. Oh and in february i fell with it in a lift line putting it down first to stop my fall and all that happened was a temporarily broke battery. Lastly about a month ago I got tackled off my snowmobile drunk and the camera dropped straight to ice.
After all of those incidents the only problems i have is the batteries will fall out sometimes (duct tape works perfect) and the eye piece is a little messed up but hardly noticeable and doesnt effect anything.
Like I said im not trying to prove your statement wrong, thats just what my panasonic has been threw in its life and she still works perfect.
 
^^holy shit.. after reading that Im not sure if I either dont want to buy a movie, because of the lack concern for your camera, of buy 4 movies to help pay for the next camera when you finally break yours for good!
 
13863487:Strange.Journey. said:
As these cameras are pretty relevant in skiing rn what are people current thoughts?
Click to expand...

It's all personal preference. Don't just go out and buy a DVX just cause HG uses one. Personally, I bought a vx2000 3 years ago. Trying to sell it right now because I hate tapes and the process sucks. Though I have a HVX200A and I use it as my B cam and I love it. You can get some really creative/cool shots compared to a DSLR. I only bought a dslr years ago because I couldn't afford a real cinema camera. As far as what I refer to as "Skate cameras", I think there tight as long as you don't have to deal with mini dv. The HVX has P2 cards.

I think it's way more worth it to buy a pansonic hmc-150 or like camera off craigslist than buy a dslr unless your into photos.
 
13863487:Strange.Journey. said:
As these cameras are pretty relevant in skiing rn what are people current thoughts?
Click to expand...

TBH using SD is an art choice for an advanced filmmaker. The guys who made Eat The Guts are great filmmakers so they made the dvx/other sd cameras look good. Beginners/intermediate film makers should just pick up a modern camera, 1000 times easier to use and produces an image that is flexible and tbh beautiful.
 
^I think HMC150 is a good starting point as well, you get what is essentially the same camera body, but it shoots 1080:30, 720:60, and best of all no tapes or pricey p2 cards. I used to have a DVX100b and it was a fun camera, but tape is such a pain that it made editing anything quickly not very fun for me. Like eheath said if you really want that SD look go for it, but it won't make things easier.

There are also 1080:60 camcorders out there but your gonna pay more for those.
 
I have a PD170 right now but its kinda fucked up and I was thinking of getting something different but I think I'm just going to buy another PD170 cuz I have all the stuff for it already and I really liked it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top