Sony DV pro Camera

OldSmoke wrote on 5/29/2014, 4:15 PM

Not sure about that camera.
I had a Sony HDR-FX7 which is a 3CMOS HDV camera and it shot great HDV and SD footage to tape. I had it for 5 years before I moved to the US and had to sell it, it was a PAL version. You can still get new ones at B&H and maybe even pre-owned ones. I liked the 20x Carl Zeiss lens. You get both worlds, great SD and HDV.

Tom Pauncz wrote on 5/29/2014, 4:25 PM

@FPP..

I have the pro-sumer version of that camera - the VX2000. It has the exact same chipset and lensing. Just has few more bells & whistles. It was a great workhorse until I got into HD.

Still have it and it works just fine - getting on to 15yrs old.

You can't go wrong with it, especially at a decent price, if you have no need for HD.

Tom

John_Cline wrote on 5/29/2014, 4:30 PM

The PD-170 is an updated version of the PD-150, both are legendary for their low light capabilities. It shoots either DV or DVCAM, the only difference being that DVCAM ran the tape at a higher speed and the video track on the tape was a little wider to help prevent tape dropouts, otherwise, what comes out of the Firewire is identical between the two modes. I'm not sure why you are "loyal" to standard definition recording, but the PD-170 was certainly among the best looking SD camcorders available. Since the output is standard DV, Vegas will have no trouble whatsoever dealing with the files.

videoITguy wrote on 5/29/2014, 4:34 PM

It is a well made camera that has stood the test of time. Keep in mind that a mechanical system as it is - would be seriously aged at this point and subject to wear as well as catastropic failure.

It is a good SD camera sensor. Just keep in mind that if you buy it for $200.00 today - the image quality out of it will be bettered by a cheap $200 HD sensor of today. So that means you could get a rugged camera and a phenomenon in camera tech of its time, but it is easily bettered by a throw-away ( 1year use) camera of today's breed.

FPP wrote on 5/29/2014, 4:51 PM

John Cline-
My loyalty to SD is derived from my learning curve in this field.. I have found that Standard is easy to work with and it gets along with other standards fairly well.
When it comes time to "Post" , I find myself editing more than trying to figure out some technical difficulty..
I figure if I'm going to be "out of the box" as a video Producer, I should make it work in the best possible way.
Besides, I like how properly done SD footage looks.. Great chance to find the artist in you.

musicvid10 wrote on 5/29/2014, 5:07 PM

The Sony DVCAMs of that era had great glass.
As an aside, I watched a corporate infomercial today for someone I am thinking about contracting for; it was shot in glorious SD 4:3 interlaced, then presented in 1080p, the deinterlace job being a total disaster, and the aspect was stretched to widescreen.

As touched on in another thread, anything HDV-or-better puts the DV format to shame, and better tape cameras are available at sometimes-modest prices.

John_Cline wrote on 5/29/2014, 5:14 PM

"Besides, I like how properly done SD footage looks.."

Ummm, OK.

"Great chance to find the artist in you."

I "found the artist" in myself for 25 years using SD cameras, I have since moved on to HD and haven't looked back. I own a PD-150 which I have not used for shooting in years, I just keep it around for those rare occasions when need to play one to play the hundreds of DV tapes in my archives. (In fact, I did that just yesterday.) I don't miss the severely limited resolution, 4:3 aspect ratio or tape. Obviously, your experience is different and there's nothing wrong with that.

In the menu system of the PD-170 there is an "hours meter" which shows (a) the cumulative total hours the camera has been turned on, (b) the total hours of head drum rotation with the tape threaded, (c) the total hours of tape running and (d) the total number of tape unthreading operations. The tape heads have an approximately 2,000 hour life (assuming that it wasn't abused), so look at the figure for "Drum Run" and "Tape Run" and see how much head use is left.

set wrote on 5/29/2014, 5:32 PM

I have vx2000s and newer vx2100s (straight consumer version of pd170), and I can say it is the best choice of its' class in SD era, optimized in 4:3 aspect ratio.

If you are looking for 16:9, then you can have PD177, which is a 'cut version' to hvr-z5.

FPP wrote on 5/29/2014, 6:16 PM

musicvid10-
So not presenting in 1080p would improve the visual?
I won't render to anything except 1920x1080 ratio , not minding the bars on the left and right.
I try not to disturb the original dimensions like stretching the image to the point of disturbing the natural look of the object in the image.
I understand that my videos won't look so yummy on larger screen HD tvs.
I'm trying to compensate with different artistic applications.
I do like to produce the vintage black & white video too.

FPP wrote on 5/29/2014, 6:39 PM

John Cline-
The info I have pertaining to usage is 170 hrs..
Not sure if it is the drum or what.
I would consider that low by that number.
I'm thinking the tape head usage would be pretty close to that 170 number.

musicvid10 wrote on 5/29/2014, 6:42 PM

Presenting SD at 1080p would not improve the visual quality.

John_Cline wrote on 5/29/2014, 6:49 PM

"So not presenting in 1080p would improve the visual?"

Shooting in 1080 would improve the visual. If I get it right, you're going from 480i to 1080p for your renders? You're having to deinterlace the SD video, which reduces the already limited amount of vertical resolution and then you blow it up to 1080p? I just can't imagine that looks very good. You can always shoot HD and crop it to 4x3 or apply a blur filter to simulate the lack of resolution of SD, or you may find that you actually like how "properly done" HD footage looks.

FPP wrote on 5/29/2014, 7:31 PM

John Cline-
What I really aim to do is leave SD just the way it is at the end of the Production chain.
I just like that "Low Budget" look to it.. And sometimes I like it in black & white.
As far as HD Video.. How long can you stare at a shiny nickel before you realize that it is still a nickel?
I don't mean to waste anyone's time on this forum but It's something that I just dig man.
"Old School"

videoITguy wrote on 5/29/2014, 7:41 PM

There are several workflows in VegasPro specifically that can bring 4:3 SD footage into a special light...
1) Place the footage in a HDV 1440x1080 timeline such that the DV SD frame fills only about 75% of the screen area. This is a standard matte style for broadcasting old SD footage in HD broadcast.
With your own project artistic skill you can place this SD center of the overall frame, or move it around to whatever part of the frame you want to accomplish. You can embelish with graphics, titles etc - because you have a widescreen to design in. Render out to to your widescreen format of choice.
2) Do all of step 1 previous - but render out to Blu-ray disc template video and audio streams for authoring Blu-ray disc. What is least understood about this workflow - is that due to the design and encoding codecs included with VegasPro - this workflow produces very high-quality output to a final media product.

musicvid10 wrote on 5/29/2014, 7:43 PM

DV as nostalgia?
Now I know I'm getting old.

FPP wrote on 5/29/2014, 8:10 PM

As you might expect, I burn standard dvd's.
Can I still use the Blue Ray setting for the aforementioned results.

videoITguy wrote on 5/29/2014, 8:56 PM

read my post above again

ushere wrote on 5/29/2014, 10:24 PM

my old sony vx1000 is STILL shooting video regularly - weekly talking head for intranet.

riredale wrote on 5/29/2014, 10:30 PM

I see no reason to use DV, but what the heck, artists use oils, watercolor, charcoal, pencil, and a dozen other methods to get the results they want.

BTW one way that an earlier imager was vastly superior to the current crop--they used CCDs, so no "Jellocam" effect. I HATE the Jellocam effect.

FPP wrote on 5/30/2014, 7:03 AM

Yes.. Art being the point here.
I feel like too much of the modern approach tends to hide the real feeling of an artist.
What's going to happen when the "Tech Brains" come out with something better than High Def?

John_Cline wrote on 5/30/2014, 7:23 AM

Movies have been higher-than-high-definition for close to a century, have the "real feelings" of these artists been hidden?

musicvid10 wrote on 5/30/2014, 7:28 AM

I'm getting a yearning for my old 8-track music tapes . . .

John_Cline wrote on 5/30/2014, 7:57 AM

"I'm getting a yearning for my old 8-track music tapes . . ."

I doubt that.

I will admit that I thread up my two-track reel-to-reel machine just to watch the reels spin, or even better yet, my 1" type-C reel-to-reel video recorder, it makes some glorious mechanical sounds when the heads are spinning and you're shuttling the tape around, it's one noisy beast. In neither case do I yearn to use them again for recording.

FPP wrote on 5/30/2014, 8:00 AM

I know slowing down the speed and soaking up the image more like a dry sponge gives you that "Higher than High definition" thing.
But if everyone waited until they had enough funds to keep up with the "JONES" in this field and just rely on expensive techniques as the only way to do their project, you could cut half of the movies and such out of the stock because they would not have been made.
High Def is a preference in my mind and if that makes me inferior to other producers, then I'll just be me.
I'm happy for those who have been able to get onboard with the modern approach but for someone like me who is self taught I rather get there when I don't have a choice.
If Vegas Pro was around before I dropped out of School I would have been in a different frame of mind today.
I actually work for each second of video I produce with due diligence and absorb the finer details of film/video making.
Will I ever jump up to High def as a way of doing things? I never rule that out..
If I work on a project that calls for it, I would be open minded..
But I am happy with my "Yesterday Kind Of Life" in my digital workstation.
I do appreciate the pointers on that render setting and will try it directly.
My bank account tells me that if I try and go beyond my current capabilities I will not be able to sustain any kind of usable work flow.