|
|
Posted by PTravel on 01/10/07 12:11
"Jim S" <Jim S@jimsplace.com> wrote in message
news:45a4a58e$1@clear.net.nz...
>
> "PTravel" <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote in message
> news:50jh53F1g92p1U1@mid.individual.net...
>>
>> "Jim S" <Jim S@jimsplace.com> wrote in message
>> news:45a480d7$1@clear.net.nz...
>
>>> With regard to the Sony HDRFX1E, it has received excellent reviews, for
>>> example, see this one:
>>>
>>> http://www.videomaker.com/article/10594/
>>
>> Do a google search on FX1 and "digital artifacts." Also search for the
>> artificial bandwidth limitation that Sony imposed on the camera,
>> primarily to ensure that it doesn't compete with its' more expensive HDV
>> and HD models.
>
> There is discussion in this web site:
>
> http://usatoday.com.com/Sony_HDR_FX1/4505-6500_7-31085889.html
>
> about how, in theory, MPEG-2 compression of HDV can lead to compression
> artifacts when extreme detail and motion can overstress the compression
> scheme. However, the article concludes that, despite this theory, the
> reviewers were unable to detect any significant artifacts with the FX1.
USA Today? You can't be serious.
The issue isn't whether mpeg has the potential for creating artifacts -- any
digitization scheme does. The issue is that the FX1 _has_ digital artifacts
(well documented in the video journals) and the problem is exacerbated by an
artificially-limited bandwidth which Sony has done to avoid the camera
competing with its more expensive offerings.
>
> Similar conclusions were reached in these articles:
>
> http://www.videomaker.com/article/10594/
>
> http://hd24.com/hdv_primer.htm
>
>
You need to read the professional journals.
>>> Similarly the 10 megapixel Sony DSC-N2 is reviewed here:
>>>
>>> http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/sony/dsc_n2-review/
>>>
>>> Particularly with shots in bright daylight, you would get great A3 sized
>>> prints with this little camera.
>>
>> Who cares about shots in bright daylight? I shoot under all conditions,
>> and anyone interested in making 13 x 19 prints will want to do the same.
>
> I have managed to get really good A3 prints from a Sony point and shoot
> camera in all lights.
With all due respect, I doubt that your standards are the same as mine.
> The video quality of movies on these cameras is also improving.
So what? There's not a point-and-shoot out there that can produce video
that compares to even a decent mid-range miniDV.
> But I do enjoy the wider angle and better lense quality that more
> professional cameras can give you, so I use point and shoot cameras only
> when it is impractical to lug around my (much) heavier camera gear!
> Anyway, I'm due on a plane very shortly, so I'll leave any further
> discussion to others.
>
> Cheers, Jim
>
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|