Posted by doc on 09/18/05 18:10

not from personal exprience as you indicate but from reviews written by pros
in magazines and online for videography concerns. one who was a fan of sony
cameras (as am i) and who was shocked at the output.

i have been very hopeful that the sony would work for me because as i've
already indicated i'm a big fan of sony products. in fact, if one were to
come to my house they would think that i work for sony because of the 42
different sony products from big screen lcd to walkman (men actually) and
the shock is the same for me. however, in the defense of the writers, when
i see an 1/8" jack i'm thinking as someone has already instructed me, "it
dosen't belong in the studio - - xlr does" i have a audio recording
business and we don't have a single 1/8" jack in the place other than in our
gadget bag in case we were to run into someone who wanted us to capture some
sound that's only available on 1/8" output.

if these writers are wrong and you have some sample clips that can be
seen/heard i'd love to hear them to help solve this delima. one might say,
well why believe the folks who have said otherwise having not heard their
result? simple. better safe to agree that it sux and go some other route
than to avoid the suggestion, buying the product, and then learning they
were right!

btw, thanks for the input and hoping to hear response, sample, or more
input. gotta get this thing resolved or i'm gonna be in a lot of hot water
:o(

doc

"Steve King" <steveSPAMBLOCK@stevekingSPAMBLOCK.net> wrote in message
news:nv-dnfjC6ZoF5LDeRVn-3A@comcast.com...
> "doc" <doc@drdimento.net> wrote in message
> news:lz3Xe.5860$iv5.5707@trndny03...
>> we've given up on the Sony's altogether because we've learned that the
>> sound quality absolutely SUX and that it is somewhere between AM radio
>> and low end (early) FM and our show is going to have singing. moreover,
>> we've also learned that trying to capture the 16:9 ccd material (SD 16:9)
>> from either of the sony's (or any other 16:9 format) into SD 4:3 will
>> result in terrible color distortion and even worsen when exported/output
>> to DVD, tape, etc.
>>
>> thus, looks like we're moving in the direction of native 4:3 like in the
>> Panasonic DVX100A.
>>
>> anyone have any additional thoughts or comments to this conclusion?
>> would be most pleased to hear some conjecture. please feel free to be
>> bold. we want to find as much a pristine result as is possible for the
>> limited budget constraint that we're forced to operate within :o(
>>
>> doc
>>
> I'm wondering if your conclusion that the audio "SUX" was arrived at by
> personal experience or from heresay? I know that many have been concerned
> that the 384 kbs MPEG might not hold up through post. But, all such
> opinions I've read came from people who were speculating rather than
> speaking from hands-on experience. I've now heard audio from the FX1 on
> two occasions. In both instances I was able to listen on good monitors to
> original camera audio as well as the audio in the final edit, after
> various steps of processing including level changes, compression, and EQ.
> I thought it sounded great. But, I've had almost forty years of studio
> experience, so my ears aren't what they used to be. The 'youngsters' in
> the audience thought it sounded pretty good, too. How did you arrive at
> your opinion?
>
> Steve King
>

[Back to original message]