Frage von lehrling76:
I look're sorry, but by less and less. Also by googling I've got more confusion than clarity ...
When I look at the detail of the video would look at resolutions of a 300 Camera Sony (SonyHDR-CX116) has a better resolution making as for example a Sony HVR-Z1?
Is, according to the video resolutions all the far right that the purchase of a "tape-camcorder" to the memory card cameras, which makes no sense FULL HD recordings?
Why buy today, people such as the PD150er and Co?
Which device I would have the better results:
Sony HVR-Z1 HDV 1440 x 1080/60i
or
SonyHF S21: AVCHD 1920 x 1080/50i
or
a SonyPD170?
It would be really great if you could help me because next. Happy synonymous Links notify if there is such similar themes have been?
Antwort von Replay:
Regardless of all the rest I would buy today no more tape camcorder.
(!) If it only reduces the sharpness, there is no preference whether or CX115 EX1R (SonyHF the S21 is offered as an HF Canon S21;). The TV is based on the field no one can say that Camera has since recorded.
The differences between consumer, prosumer and professional lie elsewhere. In the professional mills there are such niceties as waveform monitor, knee function, etc. And of course the appropriate format with 4:2:2 sampling (for example, because green screen). And the contrast ratio times to mention.
Today the most important role play the following Resolutions:
720 x 576 or 25/50p 50i (anamorphic for 16:9)
1280 x 720 50i or 50p (750p50 -> German ER channel)
1920 x 1080 50i or 50p
30/60 i or p is NTSC, so hands off.
And nochwas: The resolution alone is far from being technically good picture. Well, for the contents of the camera is not responsible anyway;)
Antwort von Bernd E.:
Comparison of the you get up, has little predictive value because the pixel Resolutionnur is a factor of many - and not just the most important - when it comes to quality. To illustrate an extreme example: Take on one page of any Full HD "Chinese Firecracker" for 80 ¬ from grocery and discount stores on the other one Page XDCAM HD Camcorder with 1440x1080 pixels shoulder for 25 000 ¬. And now consider what the higher of the two cameras Resolutionhat - but which is dramatically better picture ...
... Why do people still buy today as the PD150er and Co? ... Such SD camcorder quality for many purposes ranging from the latest and then when it goes in the direction of low light, they look as some newer high-definition camcorder old. Still speaks in this country - unfortunately - not much for today, to invest in this technology. The sharp fall Prices of these devices to talk on the used market since a distinct language.
Antwort von Jott:
Today the most important role play the following Resolutions:
720 x 576 or 25/50p 50i (anamorphic for 16:9)
1280 x 720 50i or 50p (750p50 -> German ER channel)
1920 x 1080 50i or 50p What's that? 576i50 for SD TV, HD 1080i50 (standard), 1080p25 and according to the latest guidelines IRT synonymous 1080p50. 720p50 is the stations outside - still only exception: the ZDF. The only s.Rande.
Do not be intimidated: the technical Resolutionauf cards, tapes or hard disks says virtually nothing about the image quality - resulting primarily from Optics and sensor, and the real resolution is usually significantly less.
A pure SD-camera, however, who can not even 16:9 (and that would be in the PD-150/170 the case), in my view, today burnt Money. 4:3 is stone dead. If only SD, then please at least one camera, the true anamorphic 16:9 dominated. Since there are only high-definition television and is synonymous with SD on YouTube is hardly anything to start you have when purchasing a SD camcorder already put the question of meaning - unless one works part of one of the many small local stations.
Antwort von lehrling76:
Thanks for your quick feedback ,....
Jott: It makes sense because after you think even a used Sonyz1 buy (1440 x 1080/50i HDV)? or I were there in comparison with a gh2 or CANON hf s21 be better?
Antwort von Jott:
How can we answer that? The Z1's just a classic, but already 6 years old, but still like to be taken as legal professional use. Seen from the fact that it is rarely used to have and if so, at astonishingly high prices.
Opportunity for filmmakers However, on the best camera is the one that can be taken anywhere. For this, the Z1 is too large.
Antwort von Replay:
Today the most important role play the following Resolutions:
720 x 576 or 25/50p 50i (anamorphic for 16:9)
1280 x 720 50i or 50p (750p50 -> German ER channel)
1920 x 1080 50i or 50p
What's that?
[...]
What's this? Um ... Resolutions and fps, many of which cameras are supported? How about that? Ok, 750p50 are a prescriber ^ ^
It was also not asked, which are resolutions / fps for tv's important:) If you bring broadcast the game, the format would be synonymous still important.
Antwort von WoWu:
1280 x 720 50i or 50p (750p50 -> German ER channel) 1280x720 is only progressive HD standard.
Of which there is no (i)
Jott:
and according to the latest guidelines IRT synonymous 1080p50. 720p50 is the stations outside - still only exception: the ZDF. The only s.Rande. Also nonsense. after the last IRT guidelines (Okt.2010) 720p50 is not there.
But not everyone knows the rules, only then you should not rely synonymous.
In total there are 11 HD Specifications: 9 progressive and 2 interlaced.
Antwort von lehrling76:
* Laughs ** ... you see what I mean? .... One is even here, more and more confused :-)
... Is there any links regarding the requirements? Have written to various stations, but have not really given a clear message ...
Antwort von pilskopf:
A transmitter will send you break any material from the hand if it is good enough. BUT if one of the transmitter to your material in the first sights on nem is another matter. I would always produce the highest resolution, count down goes on.
Antwort von WoWu:
@ Lehrling76
It's simple:
The HD format will be set of the SMPTE.
There are two papers: SMPTE 274M and 296M
From this list you can see the current standards.
There you will find a 1080p50, since it is not yet standardized. Therefore probably synonymous tentative push towards the camera support.
It can be assumed, however, that there will be a scalable synonymous 1080p50 codec, which is then part of the standard.
Antwort von lehrling76:
pils head: right-haste! :-) ... I joined the others in your group on facebook! I like:)
Antwort von lehrling76:
Thank WOWu .. same time to print and drop:)))
Antwort von Bernd E.:
...... Is there any links regarding the requirements !?... http://forum.slashcam.de/drehformate-fur-die-tv-produktion-vt81904.html
http://forum.slashcam.de/nur-mehr-2-3-chip-bei-arte-ua-vt85633.html
http://forum.slashcam.de/drehen-furs-fernsehen-vt82471.html
Antwort von lehrling76:
BERND :-)))'re the best! love you :-***
... Did so now what a night reading:)
Antwort von hubse:
Hi,
In the professional mills there are such niceties as waveform monitor, knee function, etc. And of course the appropriate format with 4:2:2 sampling (for example, because green screen). And the contrast ratio times to mention.
Whereby the contrast ratio is actually affected? It depends only of sensor size and intensity? Because of the color space but really should be on all devices the same size.
And what a difference in quality to reach a 4:2:2 encoding anyway? I do not understand what the green screen with NEM could have done, in other words - what exactly do I need to 4:2:2? Do the TV stations to as "data backup" Convert?
Greetings,
Martin
Antwort von WoWu:
The contrast range is associated with the filling factor of the sensor.
But I think you mean the scale does not.
It still needs to look at the contrast curve, ie, whether the curve is transferred linear or curved to allow more scope in a minimum digital values (8 bits) "stuff".
RAW zwansläufig signals therefore have a smaller dynamic range than the signals such as the gamma curve corresponding to 2.2.
Or is it meant, as some parts of the image are scaled so by drawing in dark / bright areas.
Which in turn depend both on the filling factor from because there of course, the amount of degrees is basically set, so if have you a 6, 8, 10, 12 or more bit sensor, as synonymous of the quantization from the signal, because the latter provides the samples and are not always the higher quantization a better solution, because lower quantization sometimes seems synonymous better than low-pass filter, not every signal is useful in 10 bits.
And for some sensors even 8 bits is too much.
All this affects the contrast, or to the impression of the image.
Now transferred sensors so no color, but it will be forwarded only the brightness values for specific colors
As for the subsample know it must be said that at 4.2:0 or less only a quarter of the color information is sampled. But the amount is not as bad as it is often said incorrectly. It's about that interpolates for scanning four color information to a color value, then mixed together. The result is therefore already a figure that has only partly to do something with the original values.
Added to this is that the position of the samples in the signal is unfavorable for a further interpolation of color, and a further scan. This occurs when a signal that in the meantime from 4:2:0 ... about 4:2:2 ... then is converted back to 4:2:0. Unfortunately, this is necessary because it worked in television stations with 4:2:2, but is behind in the broadcast signal are converted back to 4:2:0 distribution.
Then, the color (of course, particularly as regards edges, faces are not as critical) sometimes only slight similarity with the original and synonymous with areas has sometimes arise because the "pig faces."
So you see, 4:2:0 has more to do with the quality of color and with the workflow, the whole matter to the TV viewers.
4:2:0 usually sees in source NLEs still quite good, but if it afterwards through the full editing and transmitting, unfortunately, not often more.
I'm keying on the now no longer, that's another subject.
