Any one deciphered what this means yet?

"When you set [OFF] to the [STEADYSHOT], it is possible to record it at any time by all pixels regardless of the zoom position.

>OFF

Do not set this function.

ON

It displays it by all pixels display."

???????

Sean

Yes these Sony manuals are fairly obviously written originally in Japanese and then they get a bunch of translators to produce foreign-language versions.
Clearly they need to hire a slightly better interpreter!

What it is referring to is that to get the Full-scan mode working, the Steadyshot must be turned OFF. you can't use both together.
When Steadyshot is off, full-scan mode can then use the thin border of pixels around the image area that is used when Steadyshot is active, so it is now using a larger area of pixels to create the image. The thin border of pixels used to 'float' the image in steadyshot mode can now be used for image purposes and not for electronic steadying purposes.

Also when steadshot is on, the camera uses a thincker border of pixels as you zoom more towards telephoto (that is our theory) as at telephoto end of the range there tends to be more shake. But of course when steadyshot is off and full-scan is on, the camera does not make any of these adjustments dependent on the focal length you're at, and that is what the "regardless of zoom position" quote is referring to.

But you're right it is really pretty badly and illogically worded.

Yes these Sony manuals are fairly obviously written originally in Japanese and then they get a bunch of translators to produce foreign-language versions.
Clearly they need to hire a slightly better interpreter!

Stu Thanks {you're the 1st person ever to answer one of my posts - I was beginning to think you guys use some special grammar known only to the initiated!}

If I've understood you correctly, it makes you wonder why the camera doesn't just switch into full scan automatically once you turn steadshot off?

By the way, have you noticed any significant improvement in picture quality on a tripod with steadyshot off and full scan on??

Hi Sean

Well I have never been known for suppressing my opinion just to not rock the boat, just between you and me, i have formed the firm opinion that certain Internet boards have a sort of hierarchy (unstated) in which if the hard-core of allegedly "older/more experienced" members (i.e. people make facile jusgment based on your post-count which is pathetic) often ignore newer posters cos they consider it below them. I am not one of those people and have 18yrs experience in 35mm photography and also some time, lesser, in videography. This is a tribal thing, unfortunately in my opinion, and as such is part of mankinds less admirable behavoir traits). It's not a function of the (relatviely recent in evolutionary terms) cerebral cortex. Some humans have an innate desire for power, and if they satisfy even partially that craving from perceiving themselves higher in the hierarchy of a that global-critical entity (sic), a BBS, then fine let them feel important..

OK enough about board anthropology and philosophy.

Having said the above (which does not require any response whatsoever from any smart-alec posters - it's merely observational fact ased on 39yrs observation of human behavior) then my ansewr to your question is :
Honestly i'm not sure !
It's a good question and one which i have no immediate response. Some of what i said in my previous post is indeed conjecture based upon stated Sony press release material (a noted PDF particularly).
On the tripod question - i would simply turn Steadyshot off WHEN it's not required. that is, definitely not required on a tripod. It's just superfluous to requirements. Having said that, i would use the remote control to start and stop recording even on a tripod as use of the controls can jiggle the shot dependent on the solidity of the tripod.
To be honest the qualitative difference between using Full-scan mode and not is decidedly marginal at best and i wouldn't waste too much energy on it.
You can achieve much bigger improvements to your shot by consideration of composure, exposure, focal length, and the "big picture" of the story you're trying to tell. IMO.

To be honest the qualitative difference between using Full-scan mode and not is decidedly marginal at best and i wouldn't waste too much energy on it.
You can achieve much bigger improvements to your shot by consideration of composure, exposure, focal length, and the "big picture" of the story you're trying to tell. IMO.

Yes, of course. Directing reconstructions for work, I always try and go for an experienced drama/film cameraman for exactly that reason; their lighting skills, composition etc... are just in a different class to an ENG crew. Most of the time we shoot widescreen digibeta, but if I want a particular look (normally the reduced shutter speed) or need to make the action indistinct for legal reasons, we go with the pdx10. Recently we've been using the Z1 as well - but only in Dvcam mode. Nevermind twiddling with settings - with an experienced lighting cameraman, a spark & good direction they all give fantastic pictures.

I'm only getting into the technical minutiae of how the A1E works as I've bought one recently; I got fed up scratching around for funding for my 1st short film and decided I may as well buy my own kit and learn how to use it. Plus if I don't get round to making a short, it's small enough to take on holiday.

Thanks again for the reply. If you had time, would you mind seeing if you could shed any light on my other post? It's in the "Final Cut for HD / HDV" section - I'd include it here but I understand there's some protocol about "going off topic". It's to do with playing the pictures back in FCP.

Cheers

Sean

So the A1 uses electronic image stabilisation? It's a surprise to me as the vibrating-element principle initiated by the TRV900 and carried over to the FX1 seems to work so very well indeed. Wonder why they ignored that proven technology?

tom.

So the A1 uses electronic image stabilisation? It's a surprise to me as the vibrating-element principle initiated by the TRV900 and carried over to the FX1 seems to work so very well indeed. Wonder why they ignored that proven technology?

tom.

Well it's a lot cheaper to go the electronic route. I'm sure it's a lot smaller too. On the positive side, at least we don't have to worry about the RF interference problems that often affect optical stabilization performance.

I agree it's cheaper, and it's probably lighter, uses less battery power and is silent in operation. But this is a class camera its bolted to, and I for one would expect that if my ancient TR2000 Hi-8 had a OIS in 1997 then this A1 should be similarly equipped.

OIS systems are impervious to the gloom and fog (and in fact work well in total darkness if that's a help to anyone). They don't affect zooms in the slightest (unlike DIS) and don't need bigger chips to let the image float about.

Many DIS systems also automatically up the shutter speed a stop when switched on (does the A1? has anyone tested this?) and of course this makes the camera a lot worse indoors.

Cheaper is good for Sony, but not for us.

tom.