Frage von brendan:
Hello!
I did so before, synonymous with poor lighting conditions to make recordings.
'm completely new to the film, therefore, to ask a few ideas;)
Here, in a test trial were pictures of SonyHVR-HD1000E and HDR-SR12E shown. The former is not shoulder mounted camcorder, around 1000 eur, the latter ne smaller hand-cam for under 1000 eur. supposed to be the images of SR12E better?
Canon HV20 is synonymous not be bad, Wolfgang praises the device: http://www.fxsupport.de/01_Canon_HV20.html
But I think it should be in the direction of shoulder camcorder go. What's even more so because the price to 2000 eur?
Extra-wide would be good.
I want to scout the area first and see if what is for me, and will therefore not be equal to EUR 5000 für nen SonyHVR-output Z 1 ..
Thanks for tips!
Greetz, B.
Antwort von tommyb:
Do you think the customers would decrease?
Come with the HDV clear?
Need to HDV?
What do the customers for technical ideas?
That sounds just so s.wie: I turn times incidentally as "journalist" and verscherbel my material s.Sender.
So simple but it is not running.
Before you're in the actual planning of your camcorder is crashing, you should first clarify the customers and their needs. And once the clear voice, I would first start with rented equipment.
Otherwise:
HD1000E is for a ton
SR12E -> AVCHD -> you can process your customers? Which will give you the memory and the will to do what? The tape will be more demanding with (yet) SD material. Then a lot of fun times when you convert.
Somewhat in question would require a SONY Z1, which can still SD and HD and is very flexible. But synonymous expensive.
Antwort von megalutzi:
Hello,
So shoulder camera up to 2000 ¬, because not many left to stay.
SonyHD1000, HDV, and therefore quite easy to edit. Lens Ring
Panasonic AG-HSC1, very good sound, no lens ring, because of poor editing AVCHD, slightly more expensive
alternatively: the SonyVX9000, there are used synonymous in the price range, but SD
I have decided for the HD1000, because I really like the sound of a separate record, so I do not sound good. My calculator can be quite good HDV, AVCHD, but I do not want to.
And the missing lens ring, I would sorely miss s.der Panasonic, I think that's good s.der HD1000 (better course would have been more).
All in all, but you must be aware that the is always a compromise. Otherwise, more money in hand ...
Greeting
Lutz
Antwort von joerg-emil:
Hi Brendan,
I have looked at last week SonyHVR-HD1000E purchased. It lies currently in the best case, however, at around EUR 1500. Since I often turn reports, I really wanted to have a shoulder camera. And since I no longer had money available, there remained only the SonyHVR-HD1000E. Tomorrow is the first time they are used.
The first impression is not necessarily bad. Sure it is for their size pretty easily and has a certain feeling plastic. But you can not stop fry omelet without an egg to break.
Most functions can be reached via the touch screen. It sounds as though it is cumbersome, because it is the menu itself can shape. Also can the lens ring to assign different functions, not just the manual focus, such as synonymous but the exposure.
Otherwise, it offers s.Einstellungen very much, including a reasonable Tonpegelanpassung with display. XLR connections, it has not, I used an adapter.
For my large hands, the inflated housing just right.
If you look at the features look like in detail, click times on the following link, I've since trying the German Manual uploaded:
http://emilsvideo.de/downloads/handbuchhvrhd1000e.pdf
I will report how the first rotation is gone ...
Greetings from the Rhine
Jörg-Emil
Antwort von brendan:
hey guys, thanks for your answer! I think, here I am in the correct forum ...
So it probably looks as if the sony 1000E really is the best compromise - that it for the price of a compromise, was always clear.
tommyb: I can understand your mind, but I will in collaboration with a longtime, experienced video journalist of contacts available on all makes. therefore I do about these "problems" first thing.
he said holding that HD would have been the future, with DV, but you could still at least 1 year work. But since I like to invest a little longer ..
Why call you for HD1000E tonne? what are you doing so?
joerg-emil:'m curious on your report!
Now what I have of his panasonic HPX 500 read, no direct cost, but some of which 15 000 gegoogelt, stimmt das? Because on a Test_Seite he was "cheap strapless version ..." designate. yes you probably can not agree.
Regards, Brendan
Antwort von Login_vergessen:
NO, 15,000 euros for the HPX500 are not too expensive. This is a Camera and nothing official from the consumer sector! And without P2 cards and the appropriate accessories for cutting, etc. do you have something to do not worry.
In the current report or for short posts, for example, "WDR-Local Time", is happy with the Pana DVX100 and now widely synonymous with the HVX200 worked.
The DVX100 had a very good SD picture quality can be 16:9 in "Squeezed-Mode" and the material from the DV tape can be used in all channels are acquired.
The material can be easily cut s.PC and the files can be seen as synonymous MPEG still quite quickly via FTP into the broadcast.
Antwort von robbie:
Journalist, or synonymous video journalist, one is not justified by the shoulder camera. Scary. With a HD1000 you in serious ridiculed stations, nothing more. There is a considerable PD150 still 1000x.
So it sounds silly perhaps, but one should I emerge with a HD1000, then fly out as soon as he came.
The camera has unfortunately not simply what their small Halbzwillingsschwester can do as well. I find the camera, the EB-use, as a pure Imponiergehabe, which started towards the rear. Documentary or wedding she lr their permission.
My tip, if someone is a serious matter with the company wants is still a PD150/170, wenns HD be with my thoughts, in the EB-field crows in the next 3 years, no one then, then if all the times "big" for the archive, then I would take one of the Panasonic-Henkel recommend.
Antwort von Bernd E.:
HPX 500th ... .. on a Test_Seite he was "cheap strapless version ..." designate. yes you probably can not agree ... This agrees very well with the HPX500 because you can work professionally, with the HD1000 can be ignorant to pretend this ;-) Sorry Comparison somewhat harsh, but these are just two totally different types of camcorders: The HD1000 is the technique of her a HC7 (1-chip technology, low cost lens, cumbersome adjustment, low connectivity, etc.), while an adult Panasonic Broadcast Camera with three 2/3-Inch-Sensoren and is Exchangable optics. At most times when the light is no longer optimal, it provides the largest synonymous layman alone is a huge difference in picture quality. The price difference between the two is more than justified (Leistungsfähgkeit the cameras of the HPX500 otherwise cost a lot more), whether it's of course you for your intended use is worth, is another matter. But before I start with a HD1000 applies to journalistic work, I would be synonymous or SonyPD150/170 Panasonic DVX100 take. The may be "only" SD, but they, among others, the sound well in advance of the HD1000 (you are aware how important a good sound for professional video work?) And deliver synonymous with low-light images still usable.
Gruß Bernd E.
Antwort von brendan:
My tip, if someone is a serious matter with the company wants is still a PD150/170, wenns HD be with my thoughts, in the EB-field crows in the next 3 years, no one then, then if all the times "big" for the archive, then I would take one of the Panasonic-Henkel recommend. And this Panasonic Henkel cost synonymous then again 5000-6000?
What itches the transmitter, with which a camera (if the pictures are really good) I watch? I do not run so the transmitter.
If a HD1000 with HDTV Picture worse than ne PD170 with DV? WHERE is the advantage of HD?
Please to enlightenment:)
Brendan
Antwort von joerg-emil:
robbie @
Previously I had a Canon XM1 and was now faced with the problem that I had to deliver 16:9 material. Both the Canon is synonymous to SonyPD150 have chips and 4:3 draw in the 16:9 anamorphic mode on. Unfortunately my Canon on the LCD only a synonymous anamorphic picture, which is for the image design much fantasy and demanded annoying after a short time. I do not know whether the PD150 perhaps auxiliary beams can insert, but it is not just synonymous true 16:9.
I agree with you that HD is not the next time will be in great demand, but 16:9 is the standard nunmal. And true 16:9 cameras you'll find almost exclusively in HD. That's why I grabbed the plastic box in the rest of "Video Active digtial" as "very good" was tested. Its smaller sister is a lot to me Fummel not synonymous and has the same connections or features.
When you speak of Imponiergehabe that each one could accuse the shoulder with its camera rumläuft. There will always be synonymous smaller models, which can be the same ....
Greetings from the Rhine
Jörg-Emil
Antwort von megalutzi:
Hello,
So the HD1000, it is always a cutting and stinging type. It always comes to the target.
You can with an HD1000 just smiled as synonymous admired, depending where one stands.
I myself have a HD1000 and an HC7, so technically both the same cameras. The HC7 comes to my health and will be used for private purposes. The HD1000 comes on the shoulder when the images will not shake (or on the tripod).
Of course, (almost) any shoulder camera better, but synonymous is much more expensive. And since you are a student must turn over every ¬, what else will not necessarily stop in question.
Ich hab ne synonymous and XM2 klasse finde die, now I stop ne shoulder camera as a toy.
Of course, you really want to earn money so, then it should have a "real" camera, not only because of the Optics.
Antwort von tommyb:
Please do not forget that at one station, people are not fun to sit.
Once the technician, the material on their measuring chart, there is a demolition. While this is totally petty act ( "Why, the picture is okay!"), But the need is technically perfect images.
The HD1000 is sufficient for thee an open channel or any Bürgerfunk, because there are often people like to sit synonymous times experementieren. That's okay.
A transmitter is serious - as already mentioned - erupt into laughter and the HDV tape back to back with the reasons they can not handle.
BTW do not make me famous German Channel HD (except the versions of some satellite channels) and this is synonymous still take a while.
To my distaste for the HD1000 still something to lend, this is a small inc Comparison photos with a Canon XH-A1
http://digitalcontentproducer.com/hdhdv/depth/test_drive_sony_hvrhd1000u_0128/
I admit yes synonymous to that of the comparison is somewhat unfair, finally, the Canon costs the multiple, but he shows why no serious HD1000 HD Camera is.
You'd be much better used with a DVCAM camera, such as SONY PD150 / PD170 drive. The only SD but really good.
And if the business runs, HDTV finally on everyone's lips is, the channels in a format preference, then you can watch a good Camera to buy.
Antwort von Login_vergessen:
Then I try a bit to illuminate, from practice for practice:
Which camera you use, probably itches in the editorial the least. The difference between A-Chip (HD) and three-chip (SD), however, especially in situations with "availebel light" (EB), clearly visible. If you have a cell phone with the only the first landing of Mars filmed visitors searched, thus guaranteeing you'll get big. Everything else is more "closely" because the "sharpness" is not everything, beautiful colors and a reasonable Kontrastunfang play a role synonymous for the overall impression of the image, and since I trust a PD170/DVX100 but more than the HD1000 (which Images I do not know that I have to admit).
On it goes with the sound. Now comes another (s) editor (at) with Microphone into the game and you want an O-sound. The Micro will probably have XLR connections, and now you Fummel with adapters on your mini-jack? How do you want the sound levels?
Maybe this is all nothing to be exhilarating, and "you" calls again with the colleagues Eiene PD170/DVX100/DV5000/DSRsonstwas an ...
Antwort von robbie:
@ Joerg-emil
with 16:9 I give you right. This is Sony's something in these unhappy solved. Although this difference in respect to the 4:3 chips now not so bad fails. Consider that there are still 3 chips vs 1 chip!
The usability of you mentioned is probably the only reason, in this segment for a shoulder camera would. Aaaber ... The 1000 has no clever switches and controls, which would be accessible separately.
At least if you are longer with a large shoulder camera with all the functions need to work, you notice the difference, and know why it all does not Imponiergehabe at all.
@ Brendan
"What itches the transmitter, with which a camera (if the pictures are really good) I watch? I do not run so the transmitter."
No, but you walk in the worst case with channel logo on your mill around. Zukünfitigen reputation among colleagues, clients must be interpreted.
"If a HD1000 with HDTV Picture worse than ne PD170 with DV? WHERE is the advantage of HD?"
HDV is still far from HDTV.
And the question to answer briefly, from the Picture of the impression and techn. Quality, yes, there are worse pictures. From Resolutionher it anymore. This is synonymous everything. Here comes your request for enlightenment just right, because you need exactly when the shooting then synonymous. Not the mental, physical.
And yes, those little cameras now cost synonymous times not enough. You want to work off, you have yourself with the market price to settle. Meckerst thou synonymous with the Tripod to 2800, the Microphone to 700, the BAND! increased by 2.50?
Quality costs money. And you get orders as a freelance cameraman
a) on the recording format and the device falls flat in the HD1000.
b) the skill, because you're still s.Anfang.
c) contacts, as you hopefully several.
d) Fortunately, the need to du
Antwort von PowerMac:
(...) HDV is still far from HDTV. (...) Golf is still a long no car, how?
Antwort von brendan:
Tripod 2800th -? It has helped me to really, a couple of 100 I would have expected, but das ..
I will s.Anfang mainly shooting accidents - the photographs I've been 4 years.
Antwort von PowerMac:
The Tripods better all cost over 5000 euros.
Antwort von tommyb:
(...) HDV is still far from HDTV. (...)
Golf is still a long no car, how? Golf is still a long no Porsche.
Antwort von Aljoscha.Niko:
Ich sag nur: PD150/170, good quali SD and most importantly: XLR Connections.
Da:
http://forum.slashcam.de/sony-dsr-pd150-pal-vp299670.html?sid=6d9dd669b8ccc5fece54d56edcb361d4 # 299670
Antwort von Bernd E.:
... Tripod 2800th -? It has helped me to really, a couple of 100 I would have expected, but das ... "2800 Euro" is a fairly arbitrary amount out of you for the beginning should not discourage. A good - in the sense of suitable for your purpose Tripod - for example, would have the Manfrotto 525 with the head 503HDV for around 700 euros. If it's something more to him, you can look for a used synonymous Sachtler Set 8, 12 or 14 look for: This is a man with luck sometimes for about 1000 Euros and then above all, a tripod head, the man with a life many happy.
Gruß Bernd E.
Antwort von Jogi:
Technical PD150/170 are very good SD-CAM and in
any lighting situation well and are still used to have güsntig.
So an ideal solution for entry! With this you'll CAM synonymous accepted!
The HD1000 does not necessarily broadcast material!
Antwort von PowerMac:
I do not know a transmitter, which is accepted or even 4:3 wants.
Antwort von robbie:
But a well-accepted transmitter prefer the 16:9, which is a PD150/170 generated as anything from a HD1000.
Antwort von brendan:
I do not know a transmitter, which is accepted or even 4:3 wants. sigh, that is, the PD170 is good, but does not the 4:3 and 16:9 popular?
ohhhhman!
bid to raise EUR 2000 .. help but probably synonymous nix, s.4000 or so gehts los? :-(
Antwort von raymaker:
Ne-effective alternative would be HD prosumer - and according to ne shoulder brace to buy.
Antwort von robbie:
sigh, that is, the PD170 is good, but does not the 4:3 and 16:9 popular?
but that makes 16:9, only she does not halt 16:9 chips.
About what comes now, it is debatable. I prefer these recordings which 16:9-a 1-chip HDV camera from the consumer class (including the HD1000 doubt counts). [/ Quote]
Antwort von Aljoscha.Niko:
If you raise to 2000, mayest thou not synonymous still one or two out of hundreds of accounts? Then you get the FX1/FX7 needed, but beware: No XLR!
Greeting
Antwort von brendan:
Aljoscha, 2200th .. ok! FX1 and FX7, what's the difference? And what is XLR, I absolutely need? As I found out a connection for an external Micro, is not it? Gehts not synonymous with Jack? From my previous life, I know eh just jack * gg *
I must have a stop grad Image-Lens sale, then I have 2000 EUR .. another 200 which should be found. It needs only a tripod (but none for 800 eur), then I can start, right?
Antwort von tommyb:
Comparison times please themselves (specifications):
FX1
http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&productId=11038608&storeId=10151
FX7
http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=8198552921665258729
Short and scarce:
Differ in size (small FX7) and the image converter (FX1 has 1 / 3 "CCD, FX7 1 / 4" CMOS = worse and less sensitive to light)
Additional features you can anlesen you.
Antwort von robbie:
then I can start, right? jo. I am curious what will rauskommt. as if a new drivers same times NEN tractor in front of the nose to get.
sry the irony ... come just a night of spinning ...
Antwort von tommyb:
then I can start, right?
jo. I am curious what will rauskommt. as if a new drivers same times NEN tractor in front of the nose to get. So it looks. Without high wing want: P
@ Brendan
I advise you to really dringlist an internship in a company with a channel and to absolve yourself with the RIGHT thing to address.
Otherwise, I s.12.7. in the boxing ring against Klitschko. Do so only as boxing gloves ... perhaps so rich synonymous my winter gloves to him really vermöbeln!
Antwort von brendan:
ok, I wanted to hear, then I look after a FX1. The sony site does grad ned, but today is sunday anyway:)
But what is with XLR?
hehe:) - I will this year, no Hollywood film hits, but just a few accidents. The partners said, which makes the already decades, shows me the basic things. Looking for Picture habeich through Fotorgafieren, then missing a few film-specific things like detail on n, then rauszoomen .. is often made. Etc..
I'm excited and delighted me, so a little bit to develop.
The biggest concern I have, however, what the post is concerned ... cutting of the films so erst my accident history for sure not too much significance, but if you want other makes such as weddings etc ...
Mal sehn, the first semi-trailer truck to make my yard :-)
Cheeeers and THANK YOU!
Antwort von brendan:
'm confused, did something researched here in the forum it is, the FX1 will be blurred. Canon XH-A1 better. only slightly more expensive.
Antwort von tommyb:
Unsharp? Naja. SONY would be no camera on the market which would be blurred (from the maximum optical appearance - but that's what fetishists;)
Do not forget that photographs = / = shooting. Since it is not only hold and rauszoomen. But at least you know the basics for the golden section, etc. However, practical training is compulsory if one wants something once and it had only accidents. Agency material must be synonymous realizable on average.
XLR:
Google it out after a XLR Male and shows it to you. If you have a professional connection s.deiner Camera would like to have (to a large number of microphones to use), then XLR DUTY.
If you're satisfied with TRS giving synonymous then please make sure that not coincidentally something rausrutscht while turning, it could be the sound effect of an external microphone.
When you want something higher up (keyword: phantom power) you have you for directional microphones properly synonymous Batteries buy (which are quite expensive), or alternatively a box phantom power rausgibt (only attach where?).
Headphones And do not forget, otherwise the battery is empty, the plug will not latch properly inside and already was the last order.
In addition, there are synonymous XLR to TRS adapter, just give out no phantom power.
Antwort von raymaker:
Hach, a photographer who tried s.Shooting.
I give you 2 weeks. : D
Antwort von brendan:
Hach, a photographer who tried s.Shooting.
I give you 2 weeks. : D .. ichs to it? ;)
Antwort von brendan:
Unsharp? Naja. SONY would be no camera on the market which would be blurred hm, and what is truth? http://www.fxsupport.de/01_Sony_HDR_FX1_Bildschaerfe.html
others in his, he asked "is the FX7 finally sharper than the FX1?" (mutatis mutandis)
XLR:
Google it out after a XLR Male and shows it to you. If you have a professional connection s.deiner Camera would like to have (to a large number of microphones to use), then XLR DUTY.
If you're satisfied with TRS giving synonymous then please make sure that not coincidentally something rausrutscht while turning, it could be the sound effect of an external microphone. ok thanks for the info. I think Jack just perfect for me enough.
Antwort von tommyb:
The FX1 is just like the Z1 sg "Picture Profiles" in which the artificial resharpening may increase before the material on tape lands ...
Antwort von Aljoscha.Niko:
For emergency, you can edit the program's a little sharpen, outcome is likely in my opinion better than the contour thickening (or Kantenaufsteilung) of Cam. Subsequent sharpening is nothing more than increase the contrast between light and dark areas in the near edges.
Greeting
Antwort von immanuelkant:
Hi,
You must be at the FX1 really not afraid of "fuzziness" have!
The make great pictures! Subjective Picture impression is very good!
Antwort von brendan:
good!
still a wonder to the good tone, I have read in the following forum:
"Since the Z1 via XLR connections for professional microphones available, I would use the synonymous. Usden This has advantage that no additional equipment must lug around, the sound of the outset to match the picture and you will be synonymous to less work in the Postpro has. "
I thought the only connection is the connection, the actual impacts to "match the picture"? how can that be? I hope this is so (in my context) is not correct ...
Antwort von Bernd E.:
... has this really impacts on the "match the picture "?... This means that the Z1 has everything s.Bord what is the good sound is needed: You do not have separate audio recorder, which is not only spot very often would be impractical, but also synonymous overhead (eg, synchronized with the picture) when After editing would mean.
Gruß Bernd E.
Antwort von Jogi:
Unsharp? Naja. SONY would be no camera on the market which would be blurred hm, and what is truth? http://www.fxsupport.de/01_Sony_HDR_FX1_Bildschaerfe.html
others in his, he asked "is the FX7 finally sharper than the FX1?" (mutatis mutandis)
XLR:
Google it out after a XLR Male and shows it to you. If you have a professional connection s.deiner Camera would like to have (to a large number of microphones to use), then XLR DUTY.
If you're satisfied with TRS giving synonymous then please make sure that not coincidentally something rausrutscht while turning, it could be the sound effect of an external microphone. ok thanks for the info. I think Jack just perfect for me enough. The test (the above link) in which the FX1 a unschärfe attributed attracts many years by many forums. Cathy always fall back on it inside and the other pushing it to the test always comes back just fine.
But the fact is, the FX1 and the Z1 does not synonymous blurring produced. Both cams are excellent devices with a very harmonious picture still looks her peers. The Lowlight of these cams is in HDV areas still UpToDate. The Z1 is still sold well and many professionals are working with her.
Antwort von r.p.television:
The often quoted with the blur is only partially correct:
Subjectively, the Z1 or FX1 a very sharp picture. But insofar as material to a XH-A1 gegenschneidet - in the worst case, the same motifs in the Picture - Picture of the effect FX1 fairly coarse.
Not blurred, but quite simply that is roughly drawn little detailarm. Here, then, the factory rather exaggerated Kantenaufsteilung unpleasant on the SONY.
If this direct comparison will be away with the pictures of the Z1 but quite happy, especially since the Sony known for its reliable drives are. Furthermore, the FX1 and Z1 a much better display, is synonymous with the times sharp manual can provide. Also the work Lowlightbedienungen fall with the SONY easier.
However, the extra cost of the XLR inputs on the Z1 quite clearly. Here, the XH A1 in addition to the better detail resolution more clearly, because it has the XLRs. You must be synonymous, but noted that since the XH-A1 is missing the opportunity, the material of the internal microphone (Japanese) connected with the XLR Line or MIC to mix or to the Channel 1 and 2 to define.
The argument that many pros use the Z1, it should not get too much attention. Because no professional Canon Camera series offers to buy many professionals in the usual manner, the Sony brand known them - often because of complete packages purchased or financed. I have gehadert long synonymous my backup camera is not as it used to (PD-150) of SONY but of Canon to obtain. I regretted it so far does not in any way. Have just re-equipment of a my FX1 and XH A1 into a and the same timeline to cut and must say that my decision was to sell my Z1 and Canon to move for me personally was the right one.
Antwort von ruessel:
But the fact is, the FX1 and the Z1 does not synonymous blurring produced. Both cams are excellent devices with a very harmonious picture still looks her peers. The Lowlight of these cams is in HDV areas still UpToDate. The Z1 is still sold well and many professionals are working with her. The allegation came blur of me. At that time, 2005 I bought my first HDV camera to SonyHC1. I was almost shocked about the sharp crack Picture and could not believe that this small part of my expensive DVCAM Camcorder shoulder so easily from her picture in the corner played. The HC1 is in daylight shots of the Canon Hv20/30 in nix below.
At that time, in all test magazines (really in all) almost to the absolute Fx1/z1 Überflieger .... the evaluation points are almost überschlugen. When I looked into these "fast" and then bought my filmed material mixed with the HC1, I was almost taken the blow. FX1 The material was easy in the current video to see it was only "blurred" soft "and in my eyes a tough setback HD. Even an exchange of the FX1 was nothing, the second camera was identical in the Picture. From the factory shipped the cameras with a sharpness setting of 12 on a scale of 15 Turn the sharpness a bit higher, you get ugly now wide double edges in the picture.
The FX1 was already in the design too old, the imager must be upscaling the picture, that's my opinion, the image problem of the FX1. I am glad that my FX1 (though with much loss) could sell quickly.
As I maker of a document could learn, the most synonymous of channel Arte now so he is apparently not a Z1 or FX1 material, it is technically too bad for a soon to be broadcast HD. He is filming now with the XHA1 .... there is not synonymous with everything in me satisfied Picture True, but that is another matter again.
Who seriously cheap HD for broadcasters would like to rotate, not s.Picture an EX1 or EX3 gone, so must all cameras today can be measured.
Antwort von immanuelkant:
Well, I can make this supposedly radical difference between sharpness of my FX1 and HC (the successor to the HC1) can not confirm it.
During the discussion many synonymous forget the role of the optics at play Picture.
The images of both cameras are quite different and of both certainly good.
The FX1 has definitely more balanced, more peaceful images. That is about as if the images of a digital SLR in Comparison to the images of a good 10 Mpix digit. Camera sees. Somewhere, there is then but "the small difference."
Antwort von r.p.television:
The FX1 has definitely more balanced, more peaceful images. That's true - but only because the Soft Picture a quieter impression. Where, for example, sometimes when the XH A1 in the fine foliage of a regular "sharpness flicker" disrupts the visual impression, conveys the FX1/Z1 a more pleasant picture.
Often, however, and especially in the direct opposite cut-FX1 look downright cheap shots and grossly out. Sometimes the difference is so clear that we initially suspected, it has crept SD recordings. Is obviously an exaggeration, but it is precisely because, for example, fine texture in the masonry or small leaves at the FX1 completely submerged, you have the pixel shift method at Sony simply show the red card. Because you set the camera on Kantenaufsteilung neutral (not factory-neutral - neutral but accurate) there is a really blurry picture - in terms of HD-understood criteria.
Whoever exclusively FX1-processed material, this deficiency will not feel and therefore you will be satisfied synonymous. But woe unto you come to the embarrassment as I two years ago, when I XL H1 material to a material with my former (now sold) Z1 mix them.
Result was that I spent two weeks later synonymous had an XL H1 and a year later, still an additional XH A1.
With these cameras Bin erstmal very satisfied, but a little liebäugle direction Sonyand Panasonic. Firstly, because my now very elderly DSR-500 WSP wants and needs replacing and Canon of nothing here will come, but secondly I would like a synonymous with real Aufzeichungsformat Full HD with the possibility of over-and Undercranking.
Antwort von immanuelkant:
Now it is here synonymous not argue: I say only that the Picture of the FX1 is very good and I synonymous after a HC9 no purchase necessary "shocked" or am dissatisfied. Quite the contrary.
So with the the - as you're saying - "cheap" looking picture of the FX1 in direct comparison with the XL H1, I can hardly imagine, because I have been almost 2 years of Discovery HD subscriber bin.
As do the pictures in my FX1 Comparison sent there with the HD material is really not a bad figure. Some act as visual Docus technically rather worse than my own recordings with the FX1. Few programs have given the kick, where I say, 'Man, what a crisp sharp picture!
But let's in here .... more yes then this leads to nothing more.
Antwort von brendan:
thank you guys for all your time and reply! this has my interest now for s.der XH A1 Guided. Is not synonymous new much more expensive than a used FX1, and when I needed you, a gift both of which are hardly ever. that I have a sharp image and gain connections. for the future. then I'm not sure and blame, which only half (jack etc) to have bought.
One last question: there are in HD on the distinctive with PAL / NTSC? Because the XH A1 is in the U.S. including shipping (plus 4.9% duty) for 2220 in eur to have.
edit: look at grad http://www.adorama.com/CAXHA1E.html there is a PAL version, which is slightly more expensive ...
Antwort von Bernd E.:
... gibts in HD on the distinctive with PAL / NTSC ... Yes, it does exist. For 400 euros Canon equips you, however, a NTSC XH-A1 so that they can absorb synonymous PAL.
... XH A1 is in the U.S. including shipping (plus 4.8% duty) for 2220 in eur to have ... Think the price comparison truth but that the duty somewhere twelve percent (not 4.8%) and of course, the import turnover tax of 19% is still on top. Then it is worth the price since been virtually never such a camcorder in the U.S. to buy - of the other disadvantages (eg warranty) would grow. If you are interested in this topic further, uses the search times of the Forum: The United States alleged bargain, there are lots of contributions.
Gruß Bernd E.
Antwort von brendan:
everything clear again drüber grad had thought - that's worth garnicht course, about 2750 net (with 12% duty even more ..) would be the cost - the German price is still much anything.
... soon forget:)
needed, the market really so mau out like the stock market here suggests?
Antwort von immanuelkant:
...
One last question: there are in HD on the distinctive with PAL / NTSC? Because the XH A1 is in the U.S. including shipping (plus 4.9% duty) for 2220 in eur to have.
... Yes and no ;-)
The only difference is the refresh rate: the so-called "PAL-Cameras', 50 Hz to NTSC devices" 60 Hz - (thinking with the re-import s.die here reduced warranty and forget 'the import VAT is not!).
*** Edit: While I wrote the answer, some had already answered ***
Antwort von r.p.television:
So with the the - as you're saying - "cheap" looking picture of the FX1 in direct comparison with the XL H1, I can hardly imagine, because I have been almost 2 years of Discovery HD subscriber bin.
As do the pictures in my FX1 Comparison sent there with the HD material is really not a bad figure. Some act as visual Docus technically rather worse than my own recordings with the FX1. Few programs have given the kick, where I say, 'Man, what a crisp sharp picture!
I have subscribed to Discovery HD synonymous and you know of the aforementioned items. Unfortunately, when you sent the picture of not even close to HDV quality reference speak. So here comes inline FX1 material is not synonymous to next unpleasant. The editors, however, these differences are very well exercise.
I do hope I rauszulesen like the FX1 is synonymous not bad talk. I finally had the Z1 itself. Personally, I have the Picture of Canon's better just because it is a natural effect.
Antwort von immanuelkant:
So here comes inline FX1 material is not synonymous to next unpleasant. The editors, however, these differences are very well exercise.
Once again: As a rule, the image of my own recordings with the FX1 is better than those at the transmitter broadcast material. Somehow it seems that the HD broadcast material is not for HD-references to suck ;-)
And if you like the material of your Canon do better, then that's the way things are. Since I will not contradict each other. It is your determination. I have the direct comparison has not yet been made and will therefore not the opposite. The fact that the XH A1 metrologically more details reflect is well known.
I will stay but the fact that after I perceived the FX1 is neither a "Unsharp-camera" is still "cheap" looking shots made. This is really not there now - even if the FX1 to the XH A1 represents fewer details.
Unsharp and cheap is really something completely different!
Antwort von r.p.television:
Once again: As a rule, the image of my own recordings with the FX1 is better than those at the transmitter broadcast material. Somehow it seems that the HD broadcast material is not for HD-references to suck ;-)
Since I will not synonymous contradictory. So I coaxed some aufschneiderische chatter of motion HD CAM is often only gaaaaar nix head. As long as the data processing chain and to send no better quality permits, the Z1, FX1, and all other HVX200 prosumer continue his good tools.
I will stay but the fact that after I perceived the FX1 is neither a "Unsharp-camera" is still "cheap" looking shots made. This is really not there now - even if the FX1 to the XH A1 represents fewer details.
Unsharp and cheap is really something completely different! I wanted my contribution synonymous with stress that the concept of "blurred" here does not really work, because the subjective impression Picture is really sharp. Only in direct comparison, the FX1 footage of the very detailarm and überkonturiert. I would describe it: It works in the visual comparison of contour as raising scharfgezeichnetes DV material. But only in direct comparison and, at first glance. Of course there are many more details than in DV or SD generally.
The Picture of the FX1 is, however, on their own onand I would absolutely synonymous never the opposite. One may compare with the whole do not forget that the FX1 quite good three years to have the hump.
The HVX200 is so synonymous detail a rather poor picture attested. Nevertheless, it is the number 1 at Indy filmmakers. My subjective impression Picture yes synonymous gives a pleasantly quiet sharpness with balanced colors.
The XH A1 so synonymous have little reason to exist if their picture is not visible would be better, after two years later appeared.
Antwort von brendan:
you know that yes, if what has and what else does .. always see;)
Recently, I have on a organizing a videoman seen with a SonyVX 2100 - now I have times hereafter, who is known as "the lovely lowlight" proposition. a PD 170, in HDV .. at the time was with my XH A1 of battery (I filmed it on the side just for fun or try) - so I had only my LCD Picture-in memory, which is +6 or +12 dB roughly equal to the VX 2100 picture WITHOUT gain was increased ...
can that be, the VX 2100 really better than the XH A1 (which is basically synonymous for lowlight their properties will be praised)
Antwort von minidv:
The VX2100 is not an HDV camera. For journalism, the 4:3-chip likely for me but a NoGo ists today.
Antwort von raymaker:
you know that yes, if what has and what else does .. always see;)
Recently, I have on a organizing a videoman seen with a SonyVX 2100 - now I have times hereafter, who is known as "the lovely lowlight" proposition. a PD 170, in HDV .. at the time was with my XH A1 of battery (I filmed it on the side just for fun or try) - so I had only my LCD Picture-in memory, which is +6 or +12 dB roughly equal to the VX 2100 picture WITHOUT gain was increased ...
can that be, the VX 2100 really better than the XH A1 (which is basically synonymous for lowlight their properties will be praised) You do not seriously crippled this 4:3-Picture of the VX2100 with the 16:9 HD picture of the XH-A1 compare? I ask you ...]
Antwort von Bernd E.:
... can that be, the VX 2100 really better than the XH A1 (which is basically synonymous for lowlight their properties will be praised) ... I understand the "better" in your question in terms of capabilities and Lowlight on this point, the VX2100 logically ahead because they have the same sensor size has significantly fewer pixels. HDV cameras are there systemic disadvantage, but their poor sensitivity to light often offset by the gain, without the same picture too clearly deteriorated. This experience you have with your comparison already made himself.
Gruß Bernd E.
Antwort von Meggs:
can that be, the VX 2100 really better than the XH A1 (which is basically synonymous for lowlight their properties will be praised) The VX2100 has Lowlight ensure better properties than the XH A1. Generally one can say: HD camcorder find it difficult to regard Lowlight to be as good as its predecessor SD. Is synonymous logical - 4 times as many pixels on barely larger chips.
Antwort von raymaker:
can that be, the VX 2100 really better than the XH A1 (which is basically synonymous for lowlight their properties will be praised)
The VX2100 has Lowlight ensure better properties than the XH A1. Generally one can say: HD camcorder find it difficult to regard Lowlight to be as good as its predecessor SD. Is synonymous logical - 4 times as many pixels on barely larger chips. That is correct, and the only point of today speaks for the Camera. Otherwise, absolutely not one believes s.SD.
Antwort von PowerMac:
Alas, not even that! The entire Sony HDV mills but are synonymous in Lowlight super. A Z1 can you synonymous with 18 dB run and it is brighter than the PD170. General rushing the Sony HDV cameras almost never. That weighs on any light sensitivity. So buy some prefer HDV Camera, s.Besten of Sony.
