David Ziegelheim
January 28th, 2004, 04:33 PM
Problem here...can't really evaluate the DVD without knowing the camera and preferably also the lens used.
Some of the shots have a real 35mm DOF. And on some the camera operator moved around so that you would have no doubt its 60i. And I'm not even good at recognizing that.
Even the Pro35 DVD only labels some of the info.
To me, the cost of the 35mm DOF is only justified on a progressive frame. It works otherwise, but since the adapter and lens is soooo much more expensive than the camera, why not use the camera?
So...when will there be sames with the DVX100A (12-bit ADC) and the SDX900? Will there also be more samples with a vivid (e.g. Frida-like) environment. Many of the samples looked B/W.
Also, why is the Pro35 some much more than the Mini35? The only difference appears to be the camera mount.
David
Some of the shots have a real 35mm DOF. And on some the camera operator moved around so that you would have no doubt its 60i. And I'm not even good at recognizing that.
Even the Pro35 DVD only labels some of the info.
To me, the cost of the 35mm DOF is only justified on a progressive frame. It works otherwise, but since the adapter and lens is soooo much more expensive than the camera, why not use the camera?
So...when will there be sames with the DVX100A (12-bit ADC) and the SDX900? Will there also be more samples with a vivid (e.g. Frida-like) environment. Many of the samples looked B/W.
Also, why is the Pro35 some much more than the Mini35? The only difference appears to be the camera mount.
David