Which would be better, this, or the hd-2000 for a d7000 with a sigma 17-50 and maybe a rode videomic. Is the extra price for the hd2000 worth it?
1382712
I would advise you to like at the weight of the whole thing. If it is below 1-1.3 kilos, hd-1000 is enough. If not, tou will need the hd-2000.
1382713
I use the 1000 with a T3i, battery grip, and mic and it works like a charm. The only difference is size, and lots of people online say they work best when you load them up a bit. I would try the 1000, you can always return.
1382714
Hi Michele. I'm not really sure about those other brands. I use my HD Glidecam for home movies and basic films for marketing projects. It is a bit expensive, but it is nice to have steady motion in my filming and shots. However there is a bit of a leaning curve to using the rig properly. The more practice you have, the better your shots get. I've had mine for about a year now and I'm still learning how to use it properly. But I like it a lot and I'm glad I got it.
34236
The sigma 24-70 is also for full frame (DG), but yes, it'll work with the d5000 and it's cheaper than the nikon.
767158
I too am looking at the HD, but for a different main purpose. I will be using it to capture my 3 and 1-year olds and editing videos on iMovie. What do people think about the MinoHD vs. Mino vs. Ultra for this purpose?
758026
If you afford it, go with the 2000. I have a Canon 5D MKII and it's been nice to have some growing room. Eventually, you may want a monitor or rails, or a follow focus.
1669169
I use Nikon d700 with the same 70-200. Works great for me but then all I use it for is sport shooting. I don't get too aggressive with my equipment. Usually stand and shoot. Not really into jumping around or running with it.
1118342
David, you should keep an eye on nikonrumors [dot] comThey monitor all of the word on the street. Current consensus is that there is not going to be a refresh for the D700 this year.I have owned one for a year and a half, and am absolutely thrilled with it. I will keep it for a very long time. The overall sensor performance (low-light, etc.) is still one of the best in the world. see dxomark [dot] com
1645974
J. Perez --There is a lot of fanboyism going on at the beginning of this thread... and it's passed off as fact to be worse.If you're looking at these two cameras consider your needs. You already have nice canon glass so you may be better served going with the 5d II. What do you shoot? If it's sports I would definitely say lean to the D700 or look at the 7d (or 1d III as you mentioned). I personally think the 5D II has the best IQ of the bunch, but that is an opinion.Really, the two cameras mentioned here are a different beast. It's like comparing mac laptops to windows desktops. First decide if you use your camera more for sports or portraits then decide if you want the canon or nikon. J. Perez --There is a lot of fanboyism going on at the beginning of this thread... and it's passed off as fact to be worse.If you're looking at these two cameras consider your needs. You already have nice canon glass so you may be better served going with the 5d II. What do you shoot? If it's sports I would definitely say lean to the D700 or look at the 7d (or 1d III as you mentioned). I personally think the 5D II has the best IQ of the bunch, but that is an opinion.Really, the two cameras mentioned here are a different beast. It's like comparing mac laptops to... » Read More J. Perez --There is a lot of fanboyism going on at the beginning of this thread... and it's passed off as fact to be worse.If you're looking at these two cameras consider your needs. You already have nice canon glass so you may be better served going with the 5d II. What do you shoot? If it's sports I would definitely say lean to the D700 or look at the 7d (or 1d III as you mentioned). I personally think the 5D II has the best IQ of the bunch, but that is an opinion.Really, the two cameras mentioned here are a different beast. It's like comparing mac laptops to windows desktops. First decide if you use your camera more for sports or portraits then decide if you want the canon or nikon. « Show Less
2049328
Considering Sony's new models came out, The Sony HDR-CX760v blows away the HF G10.. If you plan to get a Camcorder I'd say go with the CX760v..
12781
HD 2000 or HD 4000. Devinsupertramp will use hd4000 in windy conditions and the 2000 in all else. Here is a video for balancing an HD 1000(applies to all glidecams tho) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAz5yTw81Ns&feature;=youtube_gdata_player
1543306
A D70 is worth it if you're new to DSLR's and/or you only want to pay $200 - $400 (no more than that). Besides, it's the lenses that make the most difference. And besides THAT, the camera just takes pictures. The photographer makes the images...good or bad. I started my photography business with the D70 and did quite well.
194933
Bill, there are a few variables... Do you plan to go to a FX sensor in the future (D700, D3)? Do you plan on hand-holding or will you be using a mono/tripod? Are you someone that must have the latest and greatest things? Personally I'm going for the VR II, I shoot a D90 now but want to have room to move to a FX camera without worrying about vignetting and edge sharpness. Plus after looking at some of the review pictures that people have posted, especially the side by side shots, I think the VR II is worth the extra $500
829843
I don't own the JVC, but I did take a look at it. The reviews were not all that great for the unit. I didn't like the format of the files it stored (I use Linux, the Sony files are immediately usable). I liked the 6MP still picture feature... AND I believe the build quality of the Sony is a bit better than the JVC. There are some reviews out there for the JVC. Not too many for the sr300 yet though. If I had to do all over again, I'd choose the SR300. IMHO there isn't a good (well one that I like well enough) HD HDD camera out there yet. You get the Sonnar*T lens with the SR300... that might be well worth getting it over the SR200. If there was a $400 price difference, I'd get the SR200. Camcorders retain their value, so don't expect to see too much drop in price.
1779372
I have used the MB-D10 with the D700 on a tripod and it is very sturdy. I don't even worry about it.
909215
If you don't mind the expensive motorized lenses, the D60 and D40 are light and handy. Avoid the D70, lots of error codes, the CF card is unreliable and it's 6mp. Get the D50, best value for the buck and you should get one for $250 or so. Best is the D90 but it's 3x the price.
1046019
The link for the comparison at cameralabs.com is not applicable because it tested the Sigma 18-200 DC prior to the release of the OS version. The OS version is much better optically than its predecessor and also includes HSM (High Speed Motor). I have read test reviews and comparisons at other sites such as popphoto that indicate the Sigma is sharper and has less distortion than the Nikon 18-200 VR, but they also state it is slightly louder. I just received my Sigma 18-200 OS today and have done limited testing, but I can tell you the AF and OS noise are not bad (the OS chirps when it turns on and off). The Sigma AF is louder than my Nikon 18-135 (w/SWM), but quieter than the AF on my Nikon 50mm 1.8 prime (wo/SWM). The HSM AF seems just as fast as my Nikon lenses. The build quality feels better than the Nikon 18-135; the zoom is smooth and solid. The first things I tested today were barrel distortion and OS functionality. Barrel distortion is present at the wide end on ALL wide-range zooms, but the Sigma controls it better. The Sigma has noticeably less barrel distortion at 18mm than my Nikon. This benefit of the Sigma is moot really, because barrel distortion of both lenses can easily be corrected with software. The OS functions very well, I can shoot hand-held down to 1/10th of a second with no blur. I will post again after I have time to do more testing.
911344
I did not have HD70. I researched HD70 and found this: "HD70 is no longer available, customers are now selecting HD65" I researched HD65. Result: HD65 is no longer available (?) So I think HD66 is the best option for you now. You can check http://www.projectorcentral.com/optoma_hd66_projector_review.htm
702488
J. Perez -- There is a lot of fanboyism going on at the beginning of this thread... and it's passed off as fact to be worse. If you're looking at these two cameras consider your needs. You already have nice canon glass so you may be better served going with the 5d II. What do you shoot? If it's sports I would definitely say lean to the D700 or look at the 7d (or 1d III as you mentioned). I personally think the 5D II has the best IQ of the bunch, but that is an opinion. Really, the two cameras mentioned here are a different beast. It's like comparing mac laptops to windows desktops. First decide if you use your camera more for sports or portraits then decide if you want the canon or nikon.