Go to eBay for a used 150 (nearly identical to the 170). You'll no doubt find some at a very reasonable price compared to new.

If you're not really hung up on having XLR mic inputs on the camera body, look for a VX2000 instead. Again, same camera, lots cheaper. I love my VX2000, which came from eBay.

I do need the XLR inputs. Is the PD170 a significantly better camera than the PDX10? I spoke to someone at VideoGuys who said that is will be replaced soon by a new model. Any news on that?

i agree, s/h 150. i shoot with a 170 (documentary work), and as far as i'm concerned, having shot a number of doco's in 16:9. 4:3 is much more intimate - talking heads look ridiculous in 16:9.

yes, i know 16:9 is where were supposed to be heading, and for sport, feature films, and wildlife it's great, but pretty 'cold' when you want up close and personal....

leslie

I know nothing about a 170 replacement.
The PD170 is a very different beast to the PDX10. The PDX10s calin to fame is it shoots native 16:9 except it uses 1/6" CCDs which does mean lower latitude, more smear and less low light performance. The bigger CCDs in the 170 give much better performance in all those parameters however it's 4:3 camera.
If you're on a limited budget then the DVC30E seems a fine choice to me as you can change the camera configuration however again you're limited to 4:3.

We've agonised over this issue fro the last few years. Australia is quite a bit different to the US market. Down here if you want to sell your product for broadcast it's very hard if it's 4:3, obviously the networks would prefer HiDef but if it's good SD 16:9 it seems they're still interested, they can always upscale it to "HiDef". If it's 4:3 that's just too big an ask.

If you're only shooting outdoors then the PDX10 might do you proud until you can afford something better. I know outfits that have got many PDX10s and they seem to turn out acceptable footage but they're only shooting outdoors (sports events etc).

Just one thing though, for some reason it seems there was an issue with Vegas and audio from the PDX10, might pay to do a search as I don't recall anyone saying it was fixed.

Bob.

Thanx farss. But according to Sony the PDX10p uses 1/4" CCDs, which is the same as the Panasonic?

Any ideas?

It's all down to your intended uses over the next few years.

I had a PD170 in my sights six or more months ago, and would have bought it and probably have been happy, but then I heard about HDV.

Now, I honestly don't need to produce anything in HDV right now, and I can continue to earn a very nice living using standard DV.

But I have some ideas on my creative back burner which would benefit from being HDV, and when I read that the FX1 or Z1 can be used for SD work, my mind was made up. I don't buy cameras very often - my current 3CCD Mini Dv dates from '96, so I'm hanging out for the Z1.

Ooops, I think you're right except the PDX10 has a higher pixel count being 16:9. But I'd agree with what Peter has to say, it's going to be hard to justify not buying a HDV camera. If you really don't want / can't afford to I suspect there's going to be a few 2nd hand 3 CCD cameras on eBay pretty soon.
Getting back to the PDX10, there's certainly quite a few in use but it just never seems to rate a mention for any serious consideration. I'm told it doesn't doesn't do well at all in the smear / latitude department. But as I've never even had one in my hands it's only hearsay.
Bob.

I've got to agree that HDV will be the standard in a short time, so I'd be very hesitant to buy any DV camera right now.
If you're desparate, and need 16:9 why not consider a used DV (like the PD150) and pop on a Century Anamorphic lens?
Any ideas here about that?? I have no experience in that area in video, but when we shot widescreen film, that was the rule.
You'd have to look into some decompression codec to unsquoosh the image. I'm curious what the forum comes up with for this alternate plan.
v.