[Art Z angel]

First, I agree that the HVX200 is the only HD camera I would consider. As far as HDV is concerned, on the horizon is ACVHD. Jointly developed by Sony & Panasonic, ACVHD offers variable bit rates while HDV is a constant bit rate. On of the drawbacks to HDV is that scenes with a lot of motion do not compress well (keeping in mind that both HDV and ACVHD use long GOP compression). Using a variable bit rate should give scenes with a lot of motion smoother playback. Of course ACVHD will still have all the drawbacks of long GOP editing; which is why I like the HVX200!

Mike

[Art Z angel]

This clip is certainly making the rounds at the various forums! And while I do agree with it in principle, I am torn about the recital. In the past we have taped dance recitals. We typically used two to three cameras and multiple microphones (including boundaries on the stage) as well as a recorder at the mixer. It took us a few weeks to edit, create title and closing sequences as well as credits. The first year we did this we received a lot of complaints that there were too many cut-aways to different cameras (at most 3-cuts/song, usually two: camera A-camera B one cut; but parents were use to one camera and didn’t like the cuts) and that it took to long to receive. The next year we did it, we took away one camera, simple title, simple credits. Done and out in less than three weeks. Still not fast enough. No complaints on camera cut aways, no praise either. After expenses, I would have much rather taped a wedding on that weekend than do a recital. A wedding allows for far more creativity and the bride loves you. Parents can’t be pleased. We don’t do recitals anymore. My understanding is that they (dance school) have a guy taping the recitals using one-camera at the back. So what I am saying is that it may have been a little early to “blame” the videographer.

Mike

[Art Z angel]

17″

We have owned both the 15″ and now a 17″. I never understood the traveling = smaller screen paradigm (unless you want to opt for the MacBook). The 17″ goes in the same case we had for the 15″. Hardly takes up any more noticeable room than the 15″… the 17″ is 1.3 inches physically wider than the 15″. But the extra screen real estate is well worth it.

Mike

[Art Z angel]

I hope you realize how that sounds… a PRO camera under $2300?

In any event, for starters you could look at a Sony 2100. If you move up to XLR inputs you could look at the Sony 170 (or add something like a Beachtek adapter to the 2100) and the 250 uses full size DVCam tapes. After that, it’s the Panny HVX200 hands down. Of course one of those with hard drive is about $7,000. Other than the Panny, I would stay with Sony: excellent in low light situations. Also keep in mind that the camera is only a small part of the equation. You will need decent microphones, tripods with fluid heads, back up and so on.

Mike

[Art Z angel]

[Art Z angel]

IMHO- the Sony DCR-VX2100, hands down. I have used the Panny 100, the Canon’s (GL1-2 & XLS’s) & the Sony’s 2000, 2100, 150/170 & DSR 250 and NOTHING beats the Sony in a low light situation such as a wedding reception. The Sony will record a more accurate image while the Canon’s generally record a warmer image that some prefer. The GL 2 also has a 20X zoom which is nice, but I will take the low-light over the zoom any day for a wedding. The difference between the PD-170 and the 2100 is that the 170 has XLR inputs. However, you can always add a Beachtek adapter to the 2100 for XLR inputs as needed. I also use a small Bescor lamp on my 170. I generally point it slightly up so that in doesn’t bother anyone on the dance floor but it makes a big difference.

Mike