|
|
Posted by Specs on 10/26/81 11:45
Thank you John. Appreciated.
I am torn between the Canon XL-H1 and waiting to see when Sony will release
the much rumoured shoulder mount HDV. Apparently they've released a deck
already so it can't be too far off. I have a feeling it will beyond the
price I can go. I have a pet project that I want to get up and running but
I have short arms and deep pockets.
I am pleased to hear about the A1. I think I might have to get a demo of
this and could take the place of my much used and favoured PD-150. The
older I get the more relaxed I get about fly by wire cameras.
Lots to ponder.
Many thanks
>
>
> It's a case of what you lose on the roundabouts you gain on the swings.
> All three have their pros and cons. The JVC is actually a personal
> plaything of one of my associates. I would not have bought it but it's
> actually quite a nice bit of kit.
>
> I like all three for their superior high definition picture and ability
> to provide top notch 16x9 images in standard definition too.
>
> JVC HD101
>
> I like;
>
> The full bodied metal chassis, the potential of the lens system,
> pleasing high definition picture. Shoulder mounted ergonomics, Clear
> Scan or Variable Scan as JVC calls it. 720p/24 and NTSC compatible
> 720p/30
>
> I don't like;
>
> The limitations of 720p, (1080i can be converted losslessly to any
> interlaced or de-interlaced format, whereas 720p doesn't do so well
> converting up to 1080i) The camera is well suited for acquisition for
> film transfer but not so great for television.
>
> Whilst the lens system offers potential, with adapters, the standard
> 16x5.5 lens is definitely more useful than the fixed types but no better
> in optical quality. To really exploit the system the cost is such as to
> question the whole premise. Similarly the standard battery set up is
> very thirsty requiring the PAG option for practicality and improved
> balance for that matter, but again it all costs a lot extra,
> particularly with Sony's HDV version of the DSR450 offering all the
> progressive and interlaced modes with Super HAD 2/3rd inch CCD's due
> soon.
>
> No Y/C interface.
>
> Z1
>
> I like;
>
> The compactness for low profile shooting and logistical handiness,
> proven durability in rugged locations, 1080i picture quality, HDV,
> DVCAM as well as DV. Cost effectiveness. Compatibility with UK
> broadcasters. Very long battery life using standard batteries. LCD
> picture quality and location, clean sound quality in both PCM and MPEG 2
> (only when using an offset suspension mic holder as the silly mic holder
> provided picks up motor hum).
>
> 1080i/60 NTSC compatibility.
>
> I don't like:
>
> Rather plasticy construction compared with the JVC and other Sony
> cameras, though seems rugged enough in the field.
>
> In certain settings there's an occasional tendency to 'breath' or make
> unasked for half a stop exposure adjustments despite all functions being
> set to manual.
>
> A1
>
> I like;
>
> Excellent metal build quality is redolent of the PD170. Picture quality
> that compares well in all but very low light with the Z1, with the
> implication that like the Z1 it's capable of cutting seamlessly with
> HDCAM, astonishing for the price and size. Compact design is
> aesthetically pleasing. Unit construction allows break down of the fully
> featured professional audio module for ultra low profile filming while
> still retaining useful audio recording via the in built stereo mic.
> Relatively accurate auto functions (just as well seeing as how the
> manual controls are tiny and lack the ergonomic latitude of other
> professional cameras). DVCAM option.
>
> I really like to have the A1 in my tool bag even though it only gets
> used for perhaps less than 5% of footage on a typical Z1 shoot.
>
> I don't like:
>
> No manual over ride of the auto gain (though mitigated by the fact that
> at 0db the single CMOS device is only good for lux 7. The gain is
> effective though and relatively noise free to 12db, even at 18db the
> noise levels are not totally beyond the pale.
>
> No 1080i/60 mode
>
> Small lens limits creative camera work though considering the give away
> price and microscopic specifications it would seem churlish to
> criticise.
>
> Too many controls only selectable in the touch screen menu. Again
> though, what does one expect from such a small body? In mitigation of
> which is the fact that it provides most of the control set ups expected
> on a professional camera.
>
> Whilst I'm certain that many good looking documentaries and even
> features will get shot on these, it's really more useful as a second
> unit on location or for any high definition work where only such a tiny
> camera can get the shots.
>
>
> --
> John Lubran
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|