Quite often I notice many reviewers associate the word "professional" with this camcorder, which is frustrating since this camcorder is not "professional"; it is a professional consumer (prosumer) camcorder. I own this camera by the way, but I am neither a consumer (respectively) nor am I a professional; I have been to Radio-Television-Film school, which has allowed me to become a photojournalist, but I would never consider myself a professional I have chosen to be this way because becoming a truly professional videographer slash cinematographer requires some extensive knowledge and experience two things which I don't have, and two things which you probably don't have either since your on Amazon's website looking at the Sony DSR-PDX10, and reading a review on the camera from someone who is on the job, but obviously has nothing better to do at the moment.Nonetheless, I will attempt to divulge your wonders about this camcorder. As of the current, I have owned a PDX10 since the spring of 2004 which I suppose is something like a year and-a-half to be not exact. And since I am much better at noticing negative things, I will start with those bad things about Sony's little three-chip camcorder, the biggest problem being the chips themselves. The three charged coupling devices in this camera are all 1/ 4.7 inches in diameter (almost 1/5 inches in diameter) making these chips the smallest ones in the prosumer market. What does this mean exactly? Well it means that the camera is absolutely terrible in low light shooting conditions. It also means that the image is highly susceptible to noise a thing which wouldn't seem so bad if it were as aesthetic as film grain, but alas, this is interlaced digital video the farthest thing from celluloid. Small CCD's also mean that the range of optimal exposure levels for this camera is about as narrow as the mind of a narrow-minded person; thus, the image will yield the best quality when the lighting is bright and even. Because of this, the PDX10's image will look its best when the camcorder used for outdoor shooting situations (except at night).
This seems like a terrible camera now doesn't it? Not very professional at all, you say. Well, before you write this camera off, I must mention that the PDX10's image at its best is quite incredible for this amount of money. And to mention the unmentioned, this is the only camera in its class that will record in true widescreen (16:9) ratio the PD170 (Sony's next-best prosumer DV camcorder [$3,500]) can't even do this. Most cameras which claim to record in 16:9 either crop the top and bottom of the 4:3 image, or they squeeze the initial recorded image by electronically changing the aspect ratio (but not the physical aspect ratio) of the pixels, which will later be "stretched" out when viewed on a 16:9 television this process is physically degrading to the recorded image. Personally, I always record in 16:9 because when viewed on a 4:3 ("full screen") TV via DVD, the over-sampled image looks great, and is also future proof for viewing on 16:9 televisions in "full screen". In fact, the PDX10 has been a choice camera for underwater photographers who want to have the ability to shoot in 16:9 while keeping a small form factor; because of the ambient lighting found underwater, this camera will yield an exceptional image in such conditions (during the day, of course).
When I purchased the camera, I also purchased both wide angle and telephoto lens adapters that thread on to the front of the camera's fixed lens quite annoyingly. With the 2x telephoto lens, there is serious chromatic aberration (a condition which is best described in words as blue-ish slash purple-ish hazes of light around subjects displaced in the depth of the image) that worsens the further you "zoom" in. This condition is not so apparent, if at all, wile just using the fixed lens, but then you will be limited to a 12x optical telephoto range. Digital zoom is available, and is broken up into two areas of intensity; the first level is 24x, which isn't so terribly bad as other digital zooms, mostly because the CCD's have roughly one million pixels scattered about each of their tiny 1/ 4.7 inch surfaces, and the resolution of NTSC DV only asks for about half of those pixels to show a proper image. The second level of digital zoom is available also, but I wouldn't advise using it unless you're spying on somebody whose one eighth of a mile away from you.
A wide angle adapter is nice to have, but I wouldn't suggest using it if you are planning on zooming in a lot, otherwise you will have to be constantly adjusting your focus. Particularly helpful when using these fixed-lens cameras is an auto focus feature, or more importantly, a push-auto focus feature. For example, you may set the camera to manual focus, and if you don't feel like messing with the focus ring on the front of the camera, you may push a button on the side of the camera that will automatically adjust the focus without having to switch into auto focus mode. There is even a third way to focus, and that is via the LCD flip-out screen, which happens to be touch-sensitive. Just hit tap the screen in the area you want the camera to focus and it will do so makes rack focuses easy as h-e and two hockey sticks. All three modes of auto focus are very fast; Sony is known for having the best auto focus for video cameras, and this camera is no exception as it was originally designed to be Sony's flagship consumer model. Probably my second overall disappointment with the camera is the manual focus ring that has a naturally sluggish feel to it; I much prefer the precise auto controls found on Panasonic's fixed-lens cameras, which closely mimic the feel of a mounted lens. The PDX10's focus ring gets even more sluggish in cold weather, as the back side of the metal ring is coated with an anti-abrasive lubricant whose viscosity decreases congruently with the clime's temperature.
Since I'm on the subject of temperature and climate affecting the performance of the camera, I'll have you know that even the most extreme conditions for humans will not affect the performance of the PDX10. It is known that both altitude and temperature affect electronics in general, and when exposed to the most extreme conditions, they might cease to even operate. Such was not the case when I went skiing in Colorado during late December of last year. I decided to take the PDX10 on the slopes one day, and mindful of the temperatures, loaded the camera with a DVCAM cassette just to test what the medium was all hyped up to be. Somewhere between 12,000 and 13,000 feet at single digits Fahrenheit, I blasted down the slopes holding the small camera close to the ground with idle-as-possible hands; it was fun. Sometimes when you're skiing, within all of those layers of clothing, you kind of loose perspective on how cold it really is outside. Well, looking down at the PDX10's flip-out LCD, I noticed that something was wrong it looked like the shutter speed was low. But after skiing a little bit more, it finally hit my mind it was so cold that the pixel refresh rate had increased, or the liquid in the crystal display was getting too cold. That's cold. One of my friend's digital cameras wouldn't power up that's cold. I began to wonder whether or not my footage would come out ok, but when we all got back to the lodge and played the tape, it was just perfect. Maybe DVCAM does have some redeeming properties whenever you're 12,000 feet above sea level, freezing your rear end off, and happen to be taping something.
On other issues of durability, I would like to in fact mention more issues of durability. It just so happened that this camera, in an unfortunate series of events, was catapulted to the ground in such intensity that the lens hood became permanently distorted, the corner of the LCD flip-out panel gouged a scar into the side of the camera body, the original shotgun microphone was rendered snapped-in-half, the high capacity battery was dislocated from the camera body, and the optical sensor for the focus ring was knocked out of place from the impact. Fortunately, I was able to re-attach the battery and continue filming. I was able to fix the focus ring problem myself by taking apart the camera and doing some rudimentary drilling. I don't have any problems with the camera to this day (this happened a year ago). I have worked with other cameras of the like, and can say in confidence that the PDX10, and all Sony prosumer video cameras, feel more durable than the Canon GL series cameras, as well as the Panasonic prosumer cameras not to say that it is more durable, it just feels durable and has proven to be so. So if you have any doubts of durability, I can tell you in all honesty to not have any doubts of durability when considering the PDX10 and its durability.
What you are buying when you in fact buy a PDX10 is a very high-end consumer camcorder that has the ability, in some applications, to be a quasi-professional video camera. If you are interested in filming extreme slash outdoor sports, I would highly recommend this camera for its durability, portability, great auto features, great image stabilization, and better-than-consumer results which will impress the people who see your footage, and might even trick them into thinking that it was a professional camera. If you're in the market for a camera to use for event videography, I would suggest investing in a camcorder that is shoulder-mounted (Canon XL series are a bit front-heavy by the way) and looks good in various lighting conditions (look for a rating of 1 lux or lower), and has readily accessible manual controls. If you're just a very wealthy or eccentric person who would like a video camera to document their own realities, you'd probably be attracted to the new HDV camcorders. If you are buying this camera to make a bloody film or documentary, find out how much it will cost to rent a professional camera and hire a professional to operate it that will give you the best results. Final word: the Sony DSR-PDX10 could be akin to a very large sink with a disproportionately small drain, if that makes any sense.
The best feature of the PDX10 is the dual-XLR audio inputs and good quality microphone normally included with the camera. Cheaper consumer cameras often don't even let you adjust audio levels, even if you did add an third-party XLR input.
Video quality is both great and poor--that is, great when there's plenty of light and poor when you're in low light or even not-so-well-lit ordinary indoor situations. I shot a well-lit scene with the PDX10 and, right next to it, a $20,000 Sony camera with a $5,000 lens, and nobody yet has been able to tell which is which when I show them the footage. (Interestingly, the more expensive professional camera also did poorly in low light conditions.)
I've heard some people say they preferred the old Sony PD-100A, which was the PDX10's predecessor. However, I have both and appreciate the many improvements to the interface and slightly better color quality of the PDX10.
The closest competitor to this is the Panasonic AG-DVC30, which has better low light performance but doesn't have as good 16:9 support. More importantly to me, the PDX-10 records in DVCAM format (on regular mini-DV tapes) which puts more data on the tape for each minute of recording. I have found to my great dismay that the regular DV format is VERY prone to errors, dropouts, and rapid tape degradation. I can't tell you how many of my projects have been ruined or nearly ruined by problems with DV! Since I switched to DVCAM-only hardware in my studio, I have NEVER had a visible dropout or data error, even when re-using previously recorded tapes (which saves money, and which only a suicidal videographer would try with regular DV).
Bottom line: Buy the PDX10 unless you need to shoot in low light, in which case you should get a Panasonic AG-DVC30 (and splurg on best-quality tape) or save up the extra money for a Sony PD170, which also has good low-light performance. The PD170 also has more bells and whistles (such as selectable frame rate and more switches so you don't need to use menus as often), but for my money I'd much rather have two PDX10's (or a PDX10 and a thick stack of hundred-dollar bills) than one PD170.This camera is great if you are on a low budget. In fact, as of this date, it doesn't get better. Everyone has mentioned the greats... tons of digital controls over your image, a touch screen, and xlr ins. That's great. If it makes a huge difference to you, the CCD chips are small, and thus a low lux camera. So if you are planning lots of low light, it may be worth it to spend more on more. The digital controls are great, but they are nothing like manual shutter speed and fstop. This is a great camera for the price. It has captured beautiful images for me.The Panasonic performs much better in low light and has more accessible manual features, and it's cheaper. I'm not saying that the Sony is a bad camcorder, though.ESTA CAMARA DE VIDEO SONY PDX 10 ES MUY BUENA, PARA FILMAR EN CONDICIONES DE POCA LUZ, SUS MICROFONOS SON DE BUY BUENA RECEPCION, SU PANTALLA GRANDE PERMITE VER SON MEJORES DETALLES LAS IMAGENES, LOS COLORES DE LAS IMAGENES PERFECTAS. NO LE PIDE FAVOR A LA PD150-PD170.
MUY BUENA VIDEOCAMARA.
Marcelo Mullo Torres.
Ecuador
Save 20% Off
