|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
November 5th, 2006, 09:24 PM | #1 |
Trustee
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Denver, Colorado
Posts: 1,891
|
A1 Low Light is Fine
As good as the Z1, and better in the sense that the Canon optic retains more sharpness at f1.6 than the Zeiss optic.
For comparable noise levels in the image, the gain setting on the Sony is higher by about 3-6 dbs. Judged from my standard darkened indoor conditions that includes (1) 60 watt and (1) 40 watt incandescent lamps for total room illumination, the 6 db gain setting is very clean, properly exposed and displays an image representative of how the room would be perceived in person. |
November 5th, 2006, 09:46 PM | #2 |
Major Player
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 917
|
Pictures?
This is more hearening, but there seem to be so many Lowlight accusations flying about it's hard ot judge without empirical evidence. I am sure that it's jsut as good as any other camera, I think many people are expecting some AMAZING lowlight functions that simply are not possible. Would love to see some clips. |
November 6th, 2006, 02:23 AM | #3 | |
Major Player
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Temecula, CA
Posts: 189
|
Quote:
This is the area where it has always had trouble and I am not sure the A1 is any different. I really wanted it to be but so far I am not seeing it.
__________________
DBoZ |
|
November 6th, 2006, 04:29 PM | #4 |
Trustee
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Pembroke Pines, Florida
Posts: 1,418
|
Unless a Canon shooter wants really high shutter speeds in bright light, 12db of gain in low light will produce very grainy video- I've tried all sorts of settings for the last hour and the Sony is noticeably better.
|
November 6th, 2006, 07:07 PM | #5 |
Major Player
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Grass Valley, California
Posts: 350
|
I tend to keep the gain to a minimum even at night and bump the image in post with saphire plug-ins or FCP 3-way color corrector. Canons tend to be more finikee at night. This has been the trick for me in some cases.
Side note... I should be getting the A1 on Friday...the day before I leave for Fiji to do some video work : ) Too bad I won't have the underwater enclosure yet : ( |
November 7th, 2006, 09:09 AM | #6 | |
Trustee
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Denver, Colorado
Posts: 1,891
|
Quote:
|
|
November 7th, 2006, 10:47 AM | #7 |
Major Player
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: NYC
Posts: 260
|
Daniel - cameras should produce marginal images at maximum gain. If not the manufacturers should just include higher gain settings. To say the canon falls apart above 12db but at 12 db it is already brighter than the sony at maximum gain is a criticism of sony not canon
|
November 7th, 2006, 11:47 AM | #8 |
Major Player
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Coalville America
Posts: 244
|
So considering that the sony and canons have different standards for db, at 0db with full open iris, what cam has a brighter image, and what one is cleaner.
Also how does to XHA1 fare with the DVX100 with lowlight. Is it about the same? |
November 7th, 2006, 05:48 PM | #9 | |
Trustee
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Denver, Colorado
Posts: 1,891
|
Quote:
Whether these or any cams are ever wholly satisfactory in dimly lit conditions only you can judge, suffice to say +6 db is very clean, and there's enough gain to get you a bright if noisy picture if the alternative is not having one. |
|
November 7th, 2006, 06:40 PM | #10 |
Major Player
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 385
|
I find it hilarious that people are judging this camera as "terrible" in low light because at 18db gain the image is bad. Really 18db? And it looks like garbage? Thats just plain crazy!
What on earth are people shooting on a regular basis that they even need to push it to 18db gain? |
November 7th, 2006, 06:56 PM | #11 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Simsbury, CT
Posts: 247
|
Quote:
Wedding videographers often have to work in very lowlight conditions, such as reception halls only lit by table candles, and still capture the human events that occur without interfering with that event by using intrusive lighting. Thus the intense interest, from many videographers, in lowlight capabilities, even at 18dB. |
|
November 7th, 2006, 07:15 PM | #12 |
Major Player
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Grass Valley, California
Posts: 350
|
Still photographers use flashes, videographers use lights. 18db would be silly to use for a paid gig.
|
November 7th, 2006, 08:09 PM | #13 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Birmingham, AL USA
Posts: 722
|
Quote:
|
|
November 7th, 2006, 08:23 PM | #14 |
Major Player
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 385
|
I've shot in some pretty dark venues I've never had to use gain past 12db on any camera.
At 18db you are always going to get subpar video on any camera you use. If it's just about capturing an image and the client knows this in advance, why worry so much about it at that point? |
November 7th, 2006, 08:52 PM | #15 |
Trustee
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Denver, Colorado
Posts: 1,891
|
Sixteen years ago I video'd my parents 50th wedding anniversary in a dance hall where they just kept dimming the lights more as the night wore on. Eventually, it got so dark there was virtually nothing but darkness yet today if someone watches that old video they remain riveted because the sound, the voices were captured, enough that you could make out who was who even if all you could see was the burning end of a cigarette. Many of those people are dead now, all we have are memories captured in time.
Of course, the odds of someone still caring to watch a wedding video are a lot less since only about 1 in 3 couples make it without hating each other...lol. |
| ||||||
|
|