Posted by ptravel on 11/22/06 03:32

Smarty wrote:
> Certainly there has to be some digital DV camcorders out there for $400
> rather than an analog camera. There are many people on eBay and elsewhere
> looking to trade up to DV as well as occasional promotions on the web with
> brand new DV camcorders showing up in this $400 price range.

Not with good low-light performance. Also, the OP wants to do green
screen, which requires good color accuracy and saturation.


>
>
> Smarty
>
>
> "PTravel" <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote in message
> news:4shp2aFvnt0hU1@mid.individual.net...
> >
> > <adric22@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:1164159662.642531.205220@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> >>> Any idea how much light 6 lux is? It's very little. So when looking at
> >>> daylight, it's plenty. The reason that everything looks horrible in
> >>> daylight, is probably because you overexpose your highlights.
> >>
> >> No.. It looks horrible because it can never get enough light. I've
> >> tried every setting on the exposure control, including automatic.
> >>
> >>> That must be an operator problem. Bright lights indoor-lights throw out
> >>> more than 6 lux. Let me give you an idea about lux-rating: Some time ago
> >>> I
> >>
> >> You are dead wrong. The lux rating is more accurately the "minimum
> >> lux" rating. But that is the minimum neccessary to get a picture, not
> >> the minimum *good picture*. I'm currently borrowing a Sony PD-150
> >> which has a lux-rating of 2 and the indoor shots are extreemly clear.
> >
> > The PD-150 is the pro version of the VX2000, a prosumer 3-ccd camcorder
> > with 1/3" sensors. Your D-8 machine is a consumer camcorder with a single
> > sensor, probably 1/4", but possible as small as 1/6".
> >
> >
> >> I also have an older analog hi-8 camcorder which has a lux rating of 3.
> >> It actually boasts a much better indoor image, however, it is a pain
> >> to capture video from that and it doesn't even have S-video so I can't
> >> seperate the chroma (which is bad for green-screen videos)
> >
> > The older hi-8 machines had larger sensors that were also less densely
> > packed, as they didn't try to double as still cameras.
> >
> >>
> >>> A VX2100 would be your best choice, but it's way over your budget.
> >>> You're
> >>> left to an anlogue format, and your best choice would be one of the
> >>> older
> >>> Hi-8 camera's which have a larger CCD, and as such are more
> >>> light-sensitive.
> >>
> >> Yes. I'm familiar with the VX series, but way out of my price range.
> >> And you are correct that the older cameras are more light sensative, as
> >> I mentioned my old 3-lux camera. Unfortunatly, because they are analog
> >> it is difficult to get a good image captured into my computer.
> >> However, I have been meaning to try capturing with that camera to a
> >> hi-8 tape and then playing it back in my digital-8 camera (which will
> >> convert it to digital and stream it over the 1394) and this may
> >> actually give me the chroma/luma seperation I need. But this is a
> >> pain.
> >
> > If you want good low-light performance, it may be your only choice.
> >
> >>
> >> --DavidM
> >>
> >
> >

[Back to original message]