I agree with Seth. Even though I appreciate you taking the time and incurring the expense to provide this great comparison, are there cameras at or below these camera price points that perform well while filming people? I would have loved it if you added anything moving about in each of those dark environments.
i did this a while back. I think the JVC 170u can still be had new, but the others I imagine are discontinued and can only be found used. There definitely other cameras sold at those older price points that will produce better image quality and low light performance. The canon m50 is less money and is better. Not by too much but better. Certainly something like a panasonic g85 or 95. Also the sony a6400. In terms of camcorders, more money would have to be spent.
I red that if you set the AX-33 and the AX-53 in manual mode and change one of the three principale settings, the internal software balanced the others, so you haven't the same total control of the other prosumer (Canon HF G40, for example) and pro cam. Instead, in the AX-100 you can do "what you want". How is the CX-900? Great Video!
I would stick with the 70d. You have to light really well to make the 170u look good. I feel like the 70d is more forgiving. I suppose if you have a good lighting setup, the 170u would work well. I told another person, they could always buy it new, and if they didn't like it, return it. Why not?
It is pretty good. I just published a complete review of the sony cx900 with some more low light tests if you want to check it out. th-cam.com/video/OZn0LHNmcNM/w-d-xo.html
![⭐ฮิตในTikTok!! ( มะมะมะหมูเด้ง MooDeng ) Ver. แดนซ์ ReMix BY [ ดีเจกิต รีมิกซ์ ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4noyAoMa7bQ/mqdefault.jpg)
I agree with Seth. Even though I appreciate you taking the time and incurring the expense to provide this great comparison, are there cameras at or below these camera price points that perform well while filming people? I would have loved it if you added anything moving about in each of those dark environments.
i did this a while back. I think the JVC 170u can still be had new, but the others I imagine are discontinued and can only be found used. There definitely other cameras sold at those older price points that will produce better image quality and low light performance. The canon m50 is less money and is better. Not by too much but better. Certainly something like a panasonic g85 or 95. Also the sony a6400. In terms of camcorders, more money would have to be spent.
VERY VERY GOOD TEST. THANK YOU !!!
Not a problem. Thanks for watching!
Sounds about right. Even low light beasts like the A7s cameras still benefit from properly lit frames
Thanks Michael!
No problem. You're welcome!
I red that if you set the AX-33 and the AX-53 in manual mode and change one of the three principale settings, the internal software balanced the others, so you haven't the same total control of the other prosumer (Canon HF G40, for example) and pro cam. Instead, in the AX-100 you can do "what you want". How is the CX-900?
Great Video!
hey I currently own a 70d and im thinking of getting the JVC would u recommend that pr should I stick with the 70D?
its for TH-cam
I would stick with the 70d. You have to light really well to make the 170u look good. I feel like the 70d is more forgiving. I suppose if you have a good lighting setup, the 170u would work well. I told another person, they could always buy it new, and if they didn't like it, return it. Why not?
lol, the problem is that I am in Guatemala, so its not that easy to return it! Yeah im guessing im staying with the 70D
what lense u used on the 70d
MrComicstudios Sigma 17-50mm f2.8
CX900 quite good!
It is pretty good. I just published a complete review of the sony cx900 with some more low light tests if you want to check it out. th-cam.com/video/OZn0LHNmcNM/w-d-xo.html