Posted by Smarty on 10/26/07 21:23

The approach of sending things to the office worked perfectly for many
years. Alas, I no longer have an office, and my wife and I spend many
(actually most) days waiting for big events like the mail arriving, or a
truck pulling up to the house. My days of privacy have ended.....On the
bright side, the technique of saying (as you suggest): "Why, no, honey,
that's not new -- you don't remember it because I've been keeping it at the
office." does indeed still seem to work, since she has entirely lost track
of what is old stuff here and what has recently arrived. The only remaining
issue therefore arises when the truck pulls up with a box. The bigger the
box, the more discussion seems to ensue. She knows me pretty well after 40+
years, but the discussions always seem to occur anyway.....

Not so Smarty

;)






"PTravel" <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote in message
news:5oe81pFml9lbU1@mid.individual.net...
>
> "Smarty" <nobody@nobody.com> wrote in message
> news:ZGlUi.3$eD3.1@trnddc03...
>>I know the 'wife acceptance factor' very well. Even after 40+ years of
>>marriage to the same very tolerant wife, I still hope the UPS truck will
>>arrive when she is not home....."
>>
>> ;)
>>
>> Smarty
>
> Always have it sent to the office. Always.
>
> "Why, no, honey, that's not new -- you don't remember it because I've been
> keeping it at the office."
>
>>
>>
>> "PTravel" <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote in message
>> news:5odcksFm4tp3U1@mid.individual.net...
>>> Okay, I just ordered an HV20 from B&H. Don't tell my wife! ;)
>>>
>>>
>>> "Smarty" <nobody@nobody.com> wrote in message
>>> news:np1Ui.2762$qo2.873@trndny06...
>>>> Arny,
>>>>
>>>> I am totally unfamiliar with the "green square in the upper right
>>>> corner" issue you refer to, and suggest you post this question on the
>>>> most active HV20 forum I know of, at:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/forumdisplay.php?f=139
>>>>
>>>> I find it really hard to believe that this is a design flaw in the
>>>> camera, and assume it is more likely a defect in your specific camera
>>>> and would be repaired under warranty.
>>>>
>>>> As regards latency, I am again at a bit of loss to understand your
>>>> comment. Since you are apparently not recording the camera output, but
>>>> merely using the HV20 as a video camera, you may be seeing a delay in
>>>> the HDMI or Firewire output due to the time it takes for the camera to
>>>> encode the video / audio, and then the additional time it takes for
>>>> your monitor to decode them. Having not used the HV20 as a live camera,
>>>> I cannot confirm that this indeed does happen with the HV20, but it
>>>> would not surprise me at all. In this regard, I imagine that both
>>>> Firewire and HDMI output from any of the HD (and SD) cameras will
>>>> exhibit this to a lesser or greater extent. If the lag time between the
>>>> live scene and the monitor display is objectionable, you could see if
>>>> the connection you are is using analog or digital, and if digital,
>>>> whether you are using Firewire or HDMI, both of which the camera
>>>> provides. It would very likely improve the latency if you switched from
>>>> Firewire to HDMI, and further improve it if you switched from either of
>>>> these to analog (component) output. This is a rather simple experiment
>>>> to conduct, and assumes your monitor supports the different input
>>>> modes. Component output should exhibit the least lag, but this may
>>>> still be objectionable.
>>>>
>>>> I have not tried the tele adapter, but frankly think that 10X optical
>>>> zoom and the 200X effective digital zoom, is difficult enough to
>>>> control / stabilize, even with a tripod. High def demands a nice,
>>>> stable image, and my own experience with the 10X optical combined with
>>>> the effective 200X digital zoom makes the need for an extra tele lens
>>>> very unlikely. As an experiment, I would suggest engaging the digital
>>>> zoom and watching how well this "tele adapter" really works in the
>>>> situation you describe. If the view of the now enlarged pulpit at 120
>>>> feet away is stable with the various movement you have in the room
>>>> (footsteps, tripod shake, pulpit and people movement, etc.), then an
>>>> add-on optical tele extender may be the answer. The digital zoom
>>>> sacrifices detail / resolution and I am not suggesting it as a the
>>>> 'final' solution, but rather as a way to anticipate how much jitter /
>>>> shake / movement the scene is likely to undergo before investing in the
>>>> optical tele lens accessory.
>>>>
>>>> Hope these provide some useful help to you.
>>>>
>>>> Smarty
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:9N2dnS2TI-1F4L3anZ2dnUVZ_gmdnZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Smarty" <nobody@nobody.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:2cwTi.27883$DX.13741@trnddc06...
>>>>>
>>>>>> I've been touting the HV20 for quite a while now, and it is really a
>>>>>> true bargain, a joy to travel with, and remarkably capable.
>>>>>
>>>>> We use a HV20 at church, primarily as a 4:3 format camera with video
>>>>> output. We don't use the built-in recorder.
>>>>>
>>>>> The image quality was a fantastic upgrade over its predecessor, but I
>>>>> have two complaints:
>>>>>
>>>>> (1) The green square in the upper right hand corner, which I don't
>>>>> know how to make go away.
>>>>>
>>>>> (2) As a camera, it seems to have a lot of latency.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Also quite surprising to me is the fact that Canon's wide angle (high
>>>>>> def) adapter, made specifically for the HV-20, takes the lens out to
>>>>>> a very respectable field of view but does not compromise sharpness,
>>>>>> chromatic aberration / fringing, or shown vignetting. On a stable
>>>>>> tripod with the wide angle converter, this little camera makes truly
>>>>>> excellent landscape, panorama, and nature shots look as good and
>>>>>> often better than anything I can see here off of commercial BluRay,
>>>>>> HD satellite, cable, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Any experience with the tele-adaptor? We use ours mostly to shoot at
>>>>> a pulpit which is about 120 feet away, and the image quality at that
>>>>> distance is reduced in quality (still worlds better than the
>>>>> predecessor), apparently by operation at max zoom.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

[Back to original message]