Frage von inwa:
I've noticed that usPanasonic in the price range under 1000, - Euro with the Full HD label advertises, for example, it has the 3 chip camcorder HDC - SD5EG - S / - only K 3 x 560,000 pixels, therefore, only slightly more than PAL . What should it be full HD? For real Full HD would need a 3 chip camcorder 3 x 2,073,600 pixels.
Antwort von Axel:
I've noticed that usPanasonic in the price range under 1000, - Euro with the Full HD label advertises, for example, it has the 3 chip camcorder HDC - SD5EG - S / - only K 3 x 560,000 pixels, therefore, only slightly more than PAL . What should it be full HD? For real Full HD would need a 3 chip camcorder 3 x 2,073,600 pixels. Probably
recorded 2 million. "You must versteh'n! From One mach ten, And let geh'n Two, Three And do the same, So you're rich. Four lose! For Five and Six, Sun says the Hex ', Mach Seven and Eight, That's done: And nine is one, And ten is none.
That is the witch-ABC! "
Antwort von wolfgang:
The magic word Pixel Shifting ...
Antwort von Andreas_Kiel:
... to send an initial demand of the Panasonic support to a PDF File that once a statement of the 3 - CCD system contains and then on the second, the Page 3 megapixel explained by the pixel shift come about, quote: "quadruple the pixel by horizontal & vertical shift of the green CCD half a
Pixel Width "
On a second request, so that we could not really understand what beginning, but there were cameras, the pixels needed to already have the chip
now and what was better, I received the following reply:
The high number of pixels is not a calculation by the camera or a PC, but by the optical displacement of the CCD sensor in the camera. This arises when reading the large number of pixels. In a subsequent calculation by a software s.Computer (interpolation) can, however, may contrast and sharpness losses occur. I do not comment on next.
BG, Andreas
Antwort von Axel:
The high number of pixels is not a calculation by the camera or a PC, but by the optical displacement of the CCD sensor in the camera. This arises when reading the large number of pixels. In a subsequent calculation by a software s.Computer (interpolation) can, however, may contrast and sharpness losses occur.
I do not comment on next.
BG, Andreas The reprehensible is not the pixel shift, or a loss of sharpness with this, right? The drain is the reprehensible trade with the buzzword "FullHD". With FullHD I die in the knowledge that the last pixel to be bought, which was technically possible.
With FullHD and Pixel Shift
The soul drifts into the sky '.
Antwort von Bernd E.:
Label advertises ... ... ... In these two words seem to sense of "FullHD" in this context to put a label with which you can catch customers.
Gruß Bernd E.
Antwort von DeeZiD_anonymus:
If yes Panasonic HPX500 by up to nix new: (
Gruß Dennis
Antwort von Andreas_Kiel:
... and unfortunately it seems that the synonymous still legal to be. All technical details are finally public, and the standard says nothing of the fact that the chip had this resolution must have.
Only the ignorant client, who did not bother making an extensive reading (ie 90% of all customers), falls on the nose. Like a "shift of the optical sensor" to work, is still questionable.
Other Manufacturer make synonymous ... but not from such a low pixel numbers out.
According to this model and with some careful wording, it is fully styled synonymous legally existing SD material in Full HD extrapolation thus no preference and no preference as it looks like afterwards, ie not only "to the need" to fill an HDV project, but Hans and Franz
"Your Chance! No matter what kind of miserable movies you have - we do FullHD it!"
This is
the business idea. And I bet someone gets so synonymous series enthusiastic letter of thanks.
BG, Andreas
Antwort von Bernd E.:
If yes Panasonic HPX500 by up to nix neues ... Pixel Shift is by several manufacturers is a common procedure, only the best of my knowledge yes HPX500 honestly not synonymous as FullHD Camera advertised.
Gruß Bernd E.
