|
|
Posted by PTravel on 01/07/07 22:46
"Jim S" <Jim S@jimsplace.com> wrote in message
news:45a160ae$1@clear.net.nz...
>
> "Mike Kujbida" <kujfamNoSpam@xplornet.com> wrote in message
> news:50ca3mF1fgnr9U1@mid.individual.net...
> snip
>
>> I've edited a lot of miniDV footage that has been displayed on 8' x 10'
>> (or
>> larger) projection screens. The quality of the projector and, to a
>> lesser
>> extent, the screen, are the critical factors here. Having a decent 3
>> chip
>> camcorder doesn't hurt either :-(
>
> DVD camcorders have improved a lot, see for example this review of a 3CCD
> DVD camcorder:
>
> http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Panasonic-VDR-D300-Camcorder-Review.htm
>
> It says in the above that:
>
> "At 3000 lux, the Panasonic VDR-D300 showed an exceptionally sharp
> picture - sharpness approached that of the top-end MiniDV PV-GS500. Yes,
> that is the comparison we're making. Of course, it's not quite as good,
> but it's sharper than any DVD camcorder we've seen before."
The PV-GS500 is most definitely not a top-end machine. It's a mid-range
machine introduced by Panasonic in an attempt to cash-in on the 3ccd market.
A VX2100 (or Canon XL2) is a top-end machine, and neither the VDR-D300 or
the PV-GS500 remotely approach the video quality of these machines.
Moreover this subjective judgment is meaningless -- sharpness is measured in
lines of resolution. What are they for the VDR-D300? What about
artifacting, which are inevitable with single-pass, on-the-fly transcoding?
And, finally, note that 3000 lux is encountered outdoors on a bright, sunny
day. What happens under less brightly lit conditions?
>
>
>
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|