Zaxcom QRX100 vs QRX200/235

[Trey LaCroix CAS]

I might have a good deal on a qrx100. I’ve read the manuals and researched them both a bit and the technical differences, but I’d like to hear from people who have used both.

 

I would be using it with my 742 and zmt phantom. Not interested in using it as a camera RX. Just for use with 1 or 2 boom/talent TX. I am also not sure I need a wideband receiver as I only really use it in one block.

 

Is there any reason I should consider one of the newer RX?

[joinwooHK]

The Zhd mode help in some shooting 

[John Blankenship]

According to Zaxcom the dual receiver mode is noteably improved in the 200 series. 

 

[KGraham045]

4 minutes ago, John Blankenship said:

According to Zaxcom the dual receiver mode is noteably improved in the 200 series. 

 

 

With that being said. I use both QRX200 and QRX100. And they are both great units.

[osa]

32 minutes ago, KGraham045 said:

 

With that being said. I use both QRX200 and QRX100. And they are both great units.

I agree i also use these units side by side. I did a number of tests early on with mine both tuned to 2x trx's. in dual mode on a qrx 200 i get more consistent reception with just whips whereas on a qrx100 i found to employ micplexer and dipoles yielded similar results in my experience. In single mode i noticed equal reception in both units. If you have the ability even just dipoles on the qrx100 would go a long way. But this being said, might not be neccessary depending on your environments. I use my qrx100 all the time to this day along side 200's and would never sell it so i say go for it if its a great deal it is still a worthy investment 

[ramallo]

I have a QRX100 and a QRX200 and usually I have better reception with my QRX100 (both with whips, dual mode and XR), is a bit baffling 🤨

[Trey LaCroix CAS]

Well, I guess that settles it! Looks like the QRX100 would be a good way to go. Thanks everyone!