I believe what Spot meant was "higher speed/wider track." As you already know, the PD170 is capable of recording in either DV or DVCAM mode. There is absolutely no difference in picture quality between the two modes, but, like Spot said, recording in DVCAM mode lessens the chance of droupouts by writing a fatter track and also using a higher tape speed which places a little more space between the tracks. The faster/fatter of DVCAM mode recording also means a bit better compatibility when playing these tapes on different machines. I've never had a problem with machine-to-machine compatibility using either DV or DVCAM mode, so the "better compatibility" is only theoretical in my experience.

You can record in either DV or DVCAM mode on either MiniDV or DVCAM tape. They are interchangeable. DVCAM tape is made to tighter specs and is simply better tape. You can also get DVCAM tapes which have a built-in 16k Flash-ROM chip which allows you to log shots and some other stuff. I'm sure some people use this feature, but not many and it's probably not worth the extra expense for the average shooter.

So...

A) if absolute recording integrity is a major concern (and weddings certainly qualify), then recording in DVCAM mode on DVCAM tape is what you want to do. However, like you pointed out, you only get 40 minutes of continuous recording time.

B) if recording integrity is still a priority, but you need 60 minutes of recording time, then recording DV mode on DVCAM tape is your best bet. You don't have the advantage of faster/fatter, but you would be using the highest quality tape.

C) If you want the faster/fatter, but don't want to pay for the DVCAM tape and 40 minute loads are enough, then DVCAM mode on regular MiniDV tape is the ticket.

D) If you need the 60 minutes and don't want to pay for DVCAM tape, then DV mode on MiniDV tape is the choice.

You can get 80 and 83 minutes MiniDV tapes, which use thinner tape, it gets you 80 minutes in the DV mode and about 60 in DVCAM mode, but using this tape is perhaps the riskiest proposition of all.

That said, I've never had a problem using either recording mode on any kind of tape, including 80 minute tapes. You mileage may vary...

Finally, there is another theoretical issue and that is locked vs unlocked audio. DVCAM records "locked audio" where there is an equal number of audio samples recorded per frame of video. This ensures absolute audio/video sync. DV records "unlocked audio" which is kind of like having a dog on a leash, the dog (audio) can get a little ahead or a little behind, but it can never stray very far in either direction, so, for all practical purposes, the audio stays in sync. While locked vs unlocked is a consideration, in the real world, it's pretty much a non-issue. After all, we're talking about it drifting a few samples either way, not frames of drift.

John

Thanks for the catch, that's indeed what I meant.

As a wedding guy - watching every buck counts towards profit, so - my vote is to shoot on DVCAM tape (no chip) at DV25 (60 minutes - about $11.50/roll) for the "big" scenes (ceremony, cake cut, grandma dance, etc. and regular mini DV for the rest. You can intercut them with NO worry.

The fact is that you can generally get away with a dropout, by cutting away from your scene (you DO shoot cutaways and close-ups, don't you?).

The DVCAM tape is double coated and more prone to last a longer time. If you're covering the even with two cameras, regualr "premjium DV tape about $6.50 will be fine. I've had very few dropouts (2) in hundreds of rolls of mini-DV shooting.
Now - and I personally adhere to this with no exceptions - I NEVER use any stock but Sony, in my sony cameras - do a search on this, as there are varying opinions - most say at the very least do not switch brands.
Unlike the old days of audio tape, the faster speed and wider track of digital video have NO effect on end quality.
In digital recording, end quality is totally dependent on the chip(s) and the lens glass. Once it's all digitized, it's the same whether you are recording on tape, to a hard drive, flash rom or even (for about 10 seconds) to a floppy disk (no - I'm not recommending this - just making a point.)

In reality, the DVCAM is a vestige of machine to machine linear video tape editing. The stock is stronger, and it's easier to get a clean cut on the wider tracks. Since you will basically be passing the tape only twice (shooting/capture) - (ok - maybe a few more passes for "looks", but not steady shuttle-edit - shuttle-edit) you will be FINE with the quality of regular DV.
The PD170 has a button called "end search" which is WONDERFUL. Press it and the camera automatically plays back a few seconds and then recues the camera to the right spot in time colde. It's the ideal way to see that the heads are clean, no dirt on the lens, and the sound levels are A-OK.

I have a PD150 and PC100. The PC100 also has the end search function. Yes, it is a good feature. I am glad the PD150 has DVCAM. I have received more DVCAM tapes then I have recorded. (Which is only a few)

Thank you for all of the good information and advise. I will more than likley use the Sony DVCAM tapes in my new PD170. I have always used Sony media in my VX2000. I learned that here on this forum, regarding the problems with mixing brands. And yes I do cut aways... It is so nice to have a place like this forum with so many people willing to take the time to help others.

On a PD 150 PAL, I tried recording on DVCAM and DV tape, the DVCAM
comes out with a richer color. Comparing the two, I prefer the DVCAM
tape recording.

Few friends with PD150 and 170 all PAL also tried and have the same
conclusion. Maybe it's happens on PAL camera only.

I've never been able to verify this but I have a suspicion that in PAL the sampling is different for DV and DVCAM. I know for a fact there is NO difference in NTSC due to the higher frame rate.
Just PAL I'm not so certain about. I remember a LONG time ago a raging debate over this and I think the final washup was those who were saying there's no difference were in NTSC and those that said there was a definate difference said there was. This wasn't just anecdotal, it was being checked with scopes and the whole bit to prove the point.
Of course my memory could be bad and/or the whole thing might have been smoke and mirrors stuff anyway.

Farss

I think you are thinking of DVCPro which in PAL uses 4:1:1 colour sampling rather than DVCam, DV 4:2:0. (This all aplies only to PAL)

Hope that helps

Martin