Frage von Luce74luce74:
Hello,
I am undecided between the purchase of a Canon XL2 and a SonyHDR FX1. The Canon pleases me because of the interchangeable lenses, which Sonyfür the new HDV recording. What I find s.wichtigsten: high quality of resolution and purpose of film showings at 16 or 35mm film transfer.
1) Does anyone know whether the resolutions of the two cameras are comparable?
2) Does anybody know if Canon's XL2 does not plan to HDV (the superteure new XL-H1)?
3) Which of the two cameras has more future and the market?
Thank you for your answers! Luca
Antwort von MiXMaster:
Hello,
for conversion into Kinformat is certainly the FX1 is the better choice closing due to the higher resolution.
mfg
Leini
Antwort von Jan:
Hello,
1. The Canon XL 2 is a Pal DV camcorder (if synonymous a very good) and thus has the worst Resolutiongegenüber an HDV camcorder such as the FX 1st
The XL 2 writes the Pal Resolution720x576 onto tape (as far as I know, she does not use MPEG 2 compression, such as the JVC GR PD 1 to write to Use Mini DV tape with a higher Resolutionzu.
Although the XL 2 offers a net gain of pixels per 140,000 pixels (3CCD) at 16 / 9 mode, which is unique in the Mini DV SD team to do with HDV Resolutionhat but still nothing.
The FX 1 takes on 1080x1440 and 1080x1920 are made on the calculator.
2. It is assumed, but at the moment pure speculation.
3. HDV will prevail very probably with the time, just like the more recent models with CMOS Chip's will work.
LG
January
Antwort von deepcode:
Hello,
What I find s.wichtigsten: high quality of resolution and purpose of film showings at 16 or 35mm film transfer.
1) Does anyone know whether the resolutions of the two cameras are comparable?
. jein In the pure Resolutiongewinnt the FX1, as the 2 interlaced x 540 lines () resolves compared with 1 x 576 lines of the XL2. This applies only as long as it takes place the FX2 - Film synonymous interlaced, which has the typical look for the video sequence. Deinterlaced to the stream for a progressive 24p/25p output goes some s.Resolutionverloren, so that the advantage for the XL2 is significantly lower.
The XL2 also has a higher received at low light, overall a cinematic look and better contrast processing (latitude).
2) Does anybody know if Canon's XL2 does not plan to HDV (the superteure new XL-H1)?
? The XLH1 IS HDV XL2! and totally overpriced.
Antwort von deepcode:
nochwas: you just look at footage.
There are many very good looking XL2 clips. From the FX1 or Z1, unfortunately I've seen very few attractive things, and then usually in connection with a 35mm adapter and intensive post-processing. Only these works have as a final result Resolutionmehr no higher than a XL2.
And: Motion Picture is fast closing in with the high resolution, because the codec has to reduce due to the low bandwidth Aufllösung, otherwise there would be a bad artifacts. One should not leave because of the dozens knackscharfen Promotion - deceive Steams, showing always flowers etc.. Because the codec can stop shine.
Antwort von MiXMaster:
Although the XL 2 offers a net gain of pixels per 140,000 pixels (3CCD) at 16 / 9 mode, which is unique in the Mini DV SD team to do with HDV Resolutionhat but still nothing. To my knowledge, it'll stay with DV, but always with a maximum of 720x576 pixels.
The FX 1 takes on 1080x1440 and 1080x1920 are made on the calculator. Dasa suggests Sony. In fact, the camera only 1.07 and not 1.56 Mpixel has l. HDTV 1080 compared to a reduction of almost 50%. Only the new Canon useless which only 25% compression of HDV to HDTV 1080th
3. HDV will prevail very probably with the time, just like the more recent models with CMOS Chip's will work. I would wait a little bit what's to come on the market. Who should Incidentally 35mm quality ehofft know that at least 35 mm has 10 million pixels.
Antwort von Jan:
1. Since You look:
Canon Original Page And you have the manual of the Mini DV JVC GR PD 1 on hand, then what for schau mal rein in your Auflösungenstufen possible.
For 1080x1920 some experienced editors here rausgefunden the forum will have the finest detail, at least in the HC 1 1080x1920 and not 1080x1440.
In wild pixels invoices ala Mag A against B Whether I have no desire to s.end that what comes out s.Qualität counts.
Yes, the new Videoaktiv synonymous, I know, wenns it! Everything is in there I would think not necessarily, although I Whether the synonymous and buy one or the other test is good.
That with the CMOS sensor is a tendency, as Sonyand Panasonic - the two giant video camera more s.der development of newer CMOS sensors
. work With the Digi-SLR Canon has been completely converted, 2 Canon is equip with 95% of its 2006 / 2007 new models appear synonymous with CMOS sensors, new Konica MinoltaDigicam will not give it to Olympus and Pentax synonymous weakens much has not yet defined itself - but not before SLR accessory items. The new first SonySLR's are probably like the newer Videocam's work in the coming years synonymous with CMOS sensors.
I think it lately synonymous with fair, not too small knives as an alleged "guest" (coming before nachzuweissen often lately) - true to the motto "I know more than you!" And in a way that offended, as the post will wiedersprochen where every 2 sentence without synonymous 100% verifiable evidence (some of Thread's here from the forum, where opinions about this in other forums quite differently), or as Canon XL 2 ignorance (I must admit that in any forum is a real serious proof could be presented as the XL 2 that controls precisely (many experienced owners feel the 16 / 9 mode as superior), almost no one had 100% knowledge - I do not synonymous in the PD 1 is clear - she works with an MPEG 2 compression.
Again, I am not omniscient, can be any name synonymous excellent professional (I do not call myself a professional - the synonymous've never done ask) a question he can not answer with certainty.
I do not come synonymous newcomers to the stupid way Example: Are you too dumb to capture why you want to take a USB cable or respeak every 2 sentence and add him as a fool.
I think I've given a lot of useful tip's (cameras, converters, Mikos etc) here and do not write as often as other users here a link to contributions of other users.
I hope that it will be similar to here as Bruno vs. Peter. Wolfgang, the user of the with me has a problem, constantly postet against me, was raised publicly.
Nevertheless, LG
January
Antwort von inwa:
1. Since You look:
Canon Original Page For I know the PAL Digital Resolutionauf was set up to 720 x 576 pixels. DVDs with higher Resolutiongibt not there. This could be because even 4:3 PAL compatible and must not pack the 4:3 cases 1024 x 576 pixels. If Canon can save the higher Resolutiontatsächlich was useless, they only slightly Ausbelichtung on film.
For 1080x1920 some experienced editors here rausgefunden the forum will have the finest detail, at least in the HC 1 1080x1920 and not 1080x1440. The JVC GY-HD100 is 1080x1920 can be made even though he only 1280 x 720th
In wild pixels invoices ala Mag A against B Whether I have no desire to s.end that what comes out s.Qualität counts. Normally Resolutionvon cameras is measured in a test. Indicated are the horizontal lines in black white displayable contrast. I have been known to HDVS no such test. Therefore, I have calculated back of the famous film test on the pixels, and taking into account things like the Kellfaktor.
And I made a mistake, however. 35 mm film camera film (24 x 36 mm) has about 10 to about 160 million pixels. 35 mm film has an image area of 21.3 x 18.2 mm (Cinemascope) and thus a Resolutionvon 4,7 until 72 million pixels. Should be cut with about 12 millions pixels (4k). Good optics will create approximately 20 million pixels. HDTV has a maximum of 2.07 million pixels, and usually only 1.56 million since the horzontal Resolutionum 25% will be reduced, or only 0.9 million (720s resolution) and is in the range of 16mm. Super 16's) 1.1 until 17 million pixels.
Yes, the new Videoaktiv synonymous, I know, wenns it! Everything is in there I would think not necessarily, although I Whether the synonymous and buy one or the other test is good. The Videoaktiv I do not know, only the scores of the video. Slashcam has tested the Sonyja synonymous.
Sony HDV sharpness compared with 1.07 mega pixels (left) vs Canon HDV with 1.56 mega pixels (right)
Quote: "For each of the horizontal beams, the sharp-pointed SonyZ1 a disadvantage compared to Canon's new flagship."
of:
http://www.slashcam.de/artikel/Test/Die-Sony-HVR-Z1-im-Test.html[/quote]
I think it lately synonymous with fair, not too small knives as an alleged "guest" (coming before nachzuweissen often lately) - true to the motto "I know more than you!" And in a way that offended, as the post will wiedersprochen where every 2 sentence without synonymous 100% verifiable evidence (some of Thread's here from the forum, where opinions about this in other forums quite differently), or as Canon XL 2 ignorance. I guess you mean someone else. I accidentally posted as guest because I was offline, write me and the forum as a user then rausschmeisst. Besides, I hate threads where it comes to pure superior attitude. The reference to the Cannon is very interesting for me.
Greetings - Steff
Antwort von Kiara Borini:
Who should Incidentally 35mm quality ehofft know that at least 35 mm has 10 million pixels. I think this is a rumor that perhaps it might be true when compared to the master copy of a technical ideally developed film material. Practical from the perspective of consumers, the factory but certainly not.
For the assessment of differences between analog and digital data are other criteria - I think - much more decisive: latitude, grain structure, behavior in the highlights Schwarzschild behavior, manufacturing tolerances, flatness, surface reflections ...
The photograph was later than the Canon 1Ds with the theme of professional small-format photography on a large scale until marginal islands (eg National Geographic) from the table.
In the field of film it is delayed - - one day go the same way. Maybe we'll see film and video merge into a common medium and professional equipment is affordable for any aspiring enthusiasts.
As in the photograph is then no longer the machine used, but the personal ability to separate the wheat from the chaff.
Antwort von deepcode:
The factor Resolutionwird extremely overvalued. The eye reacts to moving images garnicht so much on the actual resolution, but "interpolated". Important in erter line colors and contrasts.
Sharpness is relative - unscharfbereichen a Picture with great sharpness and a dedicated area where it is felt to be particularly sharp, a flat, smooth sharp picture, however, will not generate specific perceptions of sharpness, even if it is technically disbanded much higher.
Again, the FX1 / XL2 and Resolution Talk: Only because current HDV cameras to record lines 1080 is NOT to be held in accordance with the so many details! The charts speak for themselves.
When the FX11 is apparently seems to be an additional 15% - 20% lose image information, because the picture in the viewfinder will be shown underscanned and thus be wasted valuable fringe elements.
Only the Z1 has an overscan mode, which represents the entire image area and thereby harnessing.
Antwort von Jan:
Hello you,
na Pal the resolution debate is currently well under way:
Antwort von inwa:
Who should Incidentally 35mm quality ehofft know that at least 35 mm has 10 million pixels.
I think this is a rumor that perhaps it might be true when compared to the master copy of a technical ideally developed film material. Miniature film (36 mm) is equivalent to a single-chip digital cameras, depending on the material and light conditions Resolutionvon approximately 13 to 200 gross mega-pixels. Excellent Lenses provide 20 million pixels. Slides and negatives are scanned with 9.9 million pixels.
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aufl%C3%B6sung_%28Fotografie%29
Of course, analogous systems with losing s.Qualität each copy.
Equivalent to video formats has 35mm film (Cinemascope 21.3 x 18.2 mm), a Resolutionvon 4,7 until 72 million pixels. Should be cut with 4k or so with 8.8 million pixels with 12.7 million pixels. Thomsen, the Viper has more than 9 million pixels.
Antwort von inwa:
Hello you,
na Pal the resolution debate is currently well underway Somewhere I stumbled over a camera, which was the full 16:9 PAL Resolutionaufnehmen of 1024 x 576 pixels. However, in MPEG4 format.
Yes how many pixels correspond to a miniature film or a roll of film?
Since argue even professors who should be different qualities of Lenses) (resolvable line pairs is synonymous with Inclusive. But this is an endless topic .....
At Wikipedia, there was an approach that I will continue. See:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aufl%C3%B6sung_%28Fotografie%29#Umrechnung_von_Linien_zu_Pixeln
However, it would s.einfachsten, it would make the same photo tests synonymous with the Videokameas.
Antwort von deepcode:
we can not even remember - all the HD TV Case is first line a thing of course Amiland & stands behind the entire industry that hopes to fat profits. And by the way, of course, synonymous to a perfect control-implementation-and espionage chain in all terminals.
The level of suffering in terms of image quality in the U.S. is enormous - who has seen there once NTSC know what I mean. Not only an extremely muddy picture, but incredibly lousy colors. A friend here who was here said "oh - it's HD already!? Pretty cool!" when we had a perfectly ordinary PAL DVD peeped. -* g *
PAL is very much better than NTSC and HD 720p compared to only marginally better, however, lie between NTSC and HD720 worlds.
