|
|
Posted by mv on 04/21/06 15:03
In message <hM%1g.924$bf.372@fe08.lga>, Jack P
<vidpro40@optonlineDOT.netX> writes
>I'd have to agree with some of the guys above: it sounds like you just want
>to be talked into
> the XL-2.
>
>I'm sure it's a pretty good rig --- and you have a few more options using
>interchangeable lensesand true 16x9.
>I sure hope canon fixed the soft-focus problems that plagued the XL-1 and
>XL-1S .
>That said -- I prefer PD-150's and PD-170's --- not as sexy but superior
>low-light quality and I dig that
>sony look ---- and it matches my 300A and to some extent my 600.
>
>I think that these small DV cameras have legit applications and there are
>dozens of TV shows and movies that utilize PD cameras and DVX100's as well.
>It's a load of bollocks so say that DV and DVCAM are outdated -
>compared to HDV
Depends on where you're targeting your aspirations.
>
>Z1U's are pretty cool -- but they are LIMITED by weaknesses --- like (in the
>US 30fps, soft looking DV, crappy low-light abilities and digital artifacts
>with camera motion and certain compositions--- I'm waiting for a Z1U B or C
>model
Simply untrue and underlines the fact that you don't actually have much
experience with Z1's
We've been shooting with Z1's, FX1's and A1's and have literally
hundreds of hours from them. We shoot DVCAM 16x9 for UK broadcasters
with the Z1's, because that's what they ask for. The SD pictures are
noticeably better than the PD170's we used to use for these jobs. In
fact the Z1 in DVCAM mode is virtually indistinguishable with the DSR
500 until one pushes the lens envelope. Mostly now we shoot HDV even if
it's for SD mastering, not only for archiving purposes but also because
we detect better colour and contrast latitude even when down rezzed to
DVCAM.
As for the motion artifacting so often reported by the half baked it's
usually down to a monitor issues during editing. You really do get what
you pay for. The High Def images from HDV are not tolerant of stupidly
slow refresh rates that cheap LCD's offer. In this High def age LCD'd
need to have a refresh rate of less than one millisecond. If your
supplier can't tell you the refresh rate of an LCD it usually because
it's slow, often over six milliseconds, hence the lag and blur at high
def. given a decent monitor with what Sony calls 'LMD' technology or a
true HD Cathode Ray Tube those much gossiped about motion artifacts
disappear.
>
>Manufacturers are pushing HDV ---- let's wait and see what happens --- I
>need a small camera that I can depend on in ANY situation --- my DVX100A and
>my VX2000 still make beautiful video
Not as beautiful as HDV no matter how much your investment induces
denial.
--
John Lubran
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|