16:9 mode on GL2

Boyd Ostroff · February 5th, 2006, 06:21 PM

That adaptor should give you nice 16:9, but with some limitations on zoom. However, $750 is a lot of money to put into a camcorder of that age...

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont....x=0&image.y=0

Galen Rath · February 5th, 2006, 08:46 PM

Is the 16X9 lens adapter something that can enhance a GL2 abilities, or can the GL2 offer the same results with the standard GL2 lens?

Vincent Rozenberg · February 6th, 2006, 03:20 AM

Click on I gave up here and see the difference they state to offer, and judge for yourself.

Zack Birlew · February 6th, 2006, 09:43 AM

Any 16:9 adapter for the GL1 will be better than the 16:9 menu setting, but that doesn't mean the 16:9 menu setting is useless, just remember to crop it in post accordingly.

I've seen the 16:9 adapter for the GL1 in action at NAB 2005 and it does make a difference, however, to be safe there's always the option of buying the Panasonic Anamorphic adapter, about the same price, and using a 72mm-58mm step down ring and using that on the GL1 for a time and then getting a used DVX100A/B a few years down the line for cheap. But that depends on how much you want to spend on the ol' GL1 I suppose.

Lisa Shofner · December 15th, 2006, 07:30 PM

Maybe I'm confused on how this works exactly (read some info on the product pages for the adapter). But wouldn't putting a WideAngle adapter on the camera and switching it to 16:9 via the menu give the same effect as shooting in 4:3 with the 16:9 adapter?

Travis Cossel · April 5th, 2007, 12:53 PM

I've searched and searched for a clear answer to this, but I haven't found one yet. Maybe there isn't one?

My question: will I get a better looking video image if I shoot 4:3 and just crop to a 16x9 look in post, or a better image if I shoot in the GL2's 16x9 mode and edit the video in 16x9 format in post?

John Miller · April 5th, 2007, 01:00 PM

Do you mean letterboxed 16:9 mode? i.e., the camcorder puts black bars on a 4:3 image to simulate 16:9?

If so, in theory, it would be better to do it "in camera" since the cam's DV encoder can dedicate more of the available bit space to the active parts of the frame. Encoding the black bars uses very little bit space. But it depends on whether the cam is that smart or not.

Travis Cossel · April 5th, 2007, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John F Miller

Do you mean letterboxed 16:9 mode? i.e., the camcorder puts black bars on a 4:3 image to simulate 16:9?

If so, in theory, it would be better to do it "in camera" since the cam's DV encoder can dedicate more of the available bit space to the active parts of the frame. Encoding the black bars uses very little bit space. But it depends on whether the cam is that smart or not.

Actually, I meant the GL2's 16x9 mode, where the image is "stretched" in the viewfinder. I hope that makes more sense.

Chris Barcellos · April 5th, 2007, 01:15 PM

Travis;

This has been subject of a lot of debate in the Sony PD/VX line too. Essentially, the consensus is that the electronic 16:9 as good as real 16:9 dedicated chips (seems obvious). There is a bit more debate about the choice between the pseudo 16:9 and just adding bars in camera (as in the VX and PDs) or in post. I started a thread and I think the responses apply to the Canon side of things too. Here is thread:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=88405

Travis Cossel · April 5th, 2007, 01:24 PM

Thanks, Chris . . reading that thread now . . .

Don Palomaki · April 5th, 2007, 04:07 PM

Results may depend on your editing system as well, and external material you might want to intertcut. Why not try both with typical material you plan to shoot and see which way works better for you.

Travis Cossel · April 5th, 2007, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Palomaki

Results may depend on your editing system as well, and external material you might want to intertcut. Why not try both with typical material you plan to shoot and see which way works better for you.

I shoot almost primarily weddings with my 3 GL2's, so I don't really have to worry about external footage.

I was going to run some tests if I didn't get the answers I needed here, but I wanted to try here first, since running tests takes away time from running the business, ya know?

Tim Agnew · November 8th, 2007, 09:56 AM

Hi all

Shot footage with my Gl2 in 4:3 format. Was just wondering, is there a way to convert the footage to 16:9? If I keep the footage in 4:3 will it play alright if someone has a $5000 wide screen tv?

Thanks in advance

Merlin Vandenbossche · November 8th, 2007, 02:32 PM

It will always play on a widescreen TV, but as a pillarboxed image to maintain the aspect ratio (make sure that ratio is set to "4/3" in TV menus or on something like autoscale, otherwise you'll get distorted images)

pillarbox: http://hairy.geek.nz/img/43-pillarbox.jpg (two black sidebars)

To convert to a 16/9 image you need to letterbox your image using an effect in a post-production softwaresuite named something like '16/9 matte' or 'letterbox'. Be aware this does cut off top and bottom of the image and replaces it with black bars. So you may lose important parts of your image if you didn't frame correctly for letterboxing (hence the setting on GL2: '16/9 guidelines' to help you frame). Then just export it to DVD/whatever and make sure the aspect in all of those settings is set to 16/9 (it will stretch out the image to fully scale the 16/9 screen).

Truth be told: the GL2 isn't a 16/9 camera.

Randy Garrett · December 11th, 2007, 09:49 PM

Can someone give me some info on this one.. I'm a photographer and work with upper end Nikon and Canon Equeptment but this Video stuff is new to me. I bought the GL2 a couple years ago as a client wanted both still and video. only used it once but for the price he paid, the camera was more than paid for..
The GL2 has both the 4/3 & 16/9 settings on it but of what I've been reading, The 16/9 really isnt a wide angle. and the 16/9 lenz is needed for actual wide angle shots.
I'm trying to understand this before I buy the lenz.. Does the lenz give you a "fish-eye" or panoramic, approach to the viewing or is it just a standard viev (4/3) with the upper and lower areas cropped off.....
And if the 16/9 setting on the GL2 is a modified comp. setting, when the lenzis installed, do you still use the 4/3 setting or the 16/9..

February 6th, 2006, 09:43 AM	#154
Zack Birlew Major Player Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 613	Any 16:9 adapter for the GL1 will be better than the 16:9 menu setting, but that doesn't mean the 16:9 menu setting is useless, just remember to crop it in post accordingly. I've seen the 16:9 adapter for the GL1 in action at NAB 2005 and it does make a difference, however, to be safe there's always the option of buying the Panasonic Anamorphic adapter, about the same price, and using a 72mm-58mm step down ring and using that on the GL1 for a time and then getting a used DVX100A/B a few years down the line for cheap. But that depends on how much you want to spend on the ol' GL1 I suppose. __________________ "Babs Do or Babs Do not, there is no try." - Zack Birlew www.BabsDoProductions.com

December 15th, 2006, 07:30 PM	#155
Lisa Shofner Major Player Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 373	Maybe I'm confused on how this works exactly (read some info on the product pages for the adapter). But wouldn't putting a WideAngle adapter on the camera and switching it to 16:9 via the menu give the same effect as shooting in 4:3 with the 16:9 adapter? __________________ [http://www.ljparkerphotography.com] photos [http://www.youtube.com/darkdragonvegas] videos

April 5th, 2007, 12:53 PM	#156
Travis Cossel Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Miami, FL Posts: 2,933	16x9 "in camera" vs 16x9 cropped I've searched and searched for a clear answer to this, but I haven't found one yet. Maybe there isn't one? My question: will I get a better looking video image if I shoot 4:3 and just crop to a 16x9 look in post, or a better image if I shoot in the GL2's 16x9 mode and edit the video in 16x9 format in post? __________________ Black Label Films www.blacklabelweddingfilms.com

April 5th, 2007, 01:15 PM	#159
Chris Barcellos Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Elk Grove CA Posts: 6,838	Travis; This has been subject of a lot of debate in the Sony PD/VX line too. Essentially, the consensus is that the electronic 16:9 as good as real 16:9 dedicated chips (seems obvious). There is a bit more debate about the choice between the pseudo 16:9 and just adding bars in camera (as in the VX and PDs) or in post. I started a thread and I think the responses apply to the Canon side of things too. Here is thread: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=88405 __________________ Chris J. Barcellos

April 5th, 2007, 01:24 PM	#160
Travis Cossel Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Miami, FL Posts: 2,933	Thanks, Chris . . reading that thread now . . . __________________ Black Label Films www.blacklabelweddingfilms.com

February 5th, 2006, 06:21 PM	#151
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,800	That adaptor should give you nice 16:9, but with some limitations on zoom. However, $750 is a lot of money to put into a camcorder of that age... http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont....x=0&image.y=0

February 5th, 2006, 08:46 PM	#152
Galen Rath Major Player Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Illinois Posts: 323	Is the 16X9 lens adapter something that can enhance a GL2 abilities, or can the GL2 offer the same results with the standard GL2 lens?

February 6th, 2006, 03:20 AM	#153
Vincent Rozenberg Major Player Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Rotterdam, The Netherlands Posts: 475	Click on I gave up here and see the difference they state to offer, and judge for yourself.

April 5th, 2007, 01:00 PM	#157
John Miller Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Hillsborough, NC, USA Posts: 968	Do you mean letterboxed 16:9 mode? i.e., the camcorder puts black bars on a 4:3 image to simulate 16:9? If so, in theory, it would be better to do it "in camera" since the cam's DV encoder can dedicate more of the available bit space to the active parts of the frame. Encoding the black bars uses very little bit space. But it depends on whether the cam is that smart or not.

April 5th, 2007, 04:07 PM	#161
Don Palomaki Wrangler Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Northern VA Posts: 4,488	Results may depend on your editing system as well, and external material you might want to intertcut. Why not try both with typical material you plan to shoot and see which way works better for you. __________________ dpalomaki@dspalomaki.com

November 8th, 2007, 09:56 AM	#163
Tim Agnew Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Sarasota Posts: 64	4:3 to 16:9 Hi all Shot footage with my Gl2 in 4:3 format. Was just wondering, is there a way to convert the footage to 16:9? If I keep the footage in 4:3 will it play alright if someone has a $5000 wide screen tv? Thanks in advance

November 8th, 2007, 02:32 PM	#164
Merlin Vandenbossche Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Holsbeek BELGIUM Posts: 40	It will always play on a widescreen TV, but as a pillarboxed image to maintain the aspect ratio (make sure that ratio is set to "4/3" in TV menus or on something like autoscale, otherwise you'll get distorted images) pillarbox: http://hairy.geek.nz/img/43-pillarbox.jpg (two black sidebars) To convert to a 16/9 image you need to letterbox your image using an effect in a post-production softwaresuite named something like '16/9 matte' or 'letterbox'. Be aware this does cut off top and bottom of the image and replaces it with black bars. So you may lose important parts of your image if you didn't frame correctly for letterboxing (hence the setting on GL2: '16/9 guidelines' to help you frame). Then just export it to DVD/whatever and make sure the aspect in all of those settings is set to 16/9 (it will stretch out the image to fully scale the 16/9 screen). Truth be told: the GL2 isn't a 16/9 camera. __________________ Canon XM-2 AVID Xpress Pro 5.7

December 11th, 2007, 09:49 PM	#165
Randy Garrett Tourist Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: great circle route Posts: 2	16/9-lenz Can someone give me some info on this one.. I'm a photographer and work with upper end Nikon and Canon Equeptment but this Video stuff is new to me. I bought the GL2 a couple years ago as a client wanted both still and video. only used it once but for the price he paid, the camera was more than paid for.. The GL2 has both the 4/3 & 16/9 settings on it but of what I've been reading, The 16/9 really isnt a wide angle. and the 16/9 lenz is needed for actual wide angle shots. I'm trying to understand this before I buy the lenz.. Does the lenz give you a "fish-eye" or panoramic, approach to the viewing or is it just a standard viev (4/3) with the upper and lower areas cropped off..... And if the 16/9 setting on the GL2 is a modified comp. setting, when the lenzis installed, do you still use the 4/3 setting or the 16/9..