How does XL2 4:3 compare with DVX100a 4:3? at DVinfo.net

James Farley · October 1st, 2004, 07:13 PM

Has anyone done tests or seen footage of the XL2 in 4:3 mode compared to DVX100a 4:3 footage? Is one sharper than the other?

Barry Goyette · October 1st, 2004, 07:33 PM

Jim,

http://homepage.mac.com/barrygoyette/PhotoAlbum13.html

Here are some stills I posted a few weeks ago (4:3 to 4:3). Essentially the images pan out to being about the same. the xl2 is sharpened more, but also seems to have the edge on detail. (sharpening can be turned down).

the DVX will have slightly shallower depth of field.

Barry

Jaime Valles · October 2nd, 2004, 09:24 AM

I believe with the DVX you'll get a much wider angle of view than the XL2 in 4:3, correct?

Barry Goyette · October 2nd, 2004, 10:01 AM

yes, unless you attach the 3x lens to th xl2.

Barry

Jesse Bekas · October 3rd, 2004, 12:59 PM

The XL2 will have less low-light capability than the DVX in 4:3 because of the smaller area of the chips being used.

Barry Goyette · October 3rd, 2004, 04:30 PM

Jesse

Yeah, you'd think so, based on what we all think we know about ccd's. But in side by sides, I've seen that they are about the same, with a slight edge going to the xl2 in low light.

Here's color commentary on a test I ran and posted over at dvxuser.

http://www.dvxuser.com/cgi-bin/DVX2/...num=1095124325

Barry

Jesse Bekas · October 3rd, 2004, 10:11 PM

Yeah, I was just "going by the numbers" on the CCDs. I saw two still captures online from both cams side by side at the same F-stop and the XL2's was barely brighter, but I chalked it up to less than scientific testing conditions. The glass on both is rated at an F1.6 wide. I'd like to learn what in the processors' or CCDs' tech is differentiating their performance if it's not the glass. We all know the chip size:photosite# rule, but some of us (like me) are ignorant of the many differing CCD and processor technologies. Guess it's time to start googling.

Barry Goyette · October 4th, 2004, 10:18 AM

Note chris's posting at the top of th xl2 page...canon has updated the operator manual with audio block diagrams...but also the low light specs have been put into the same framework as the xl1s specs (1/8 sec..18db..)..so officially the new lux rating is .7

Barry

October 1st, 2004, 07:13 PM	#1
James Farley New Boot Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: N.Y,N.Y. Posts: 20	How does XL2 4:3 compare with DVX100a 4:3? Has anyone done tests or seen footage of the XL2 in 4:3 mode compared to DVX100a 4:3 footage? Is one sharper than the other?

October 1st, 2004, 07:33 PM	#2
Barry Goyette Trustee Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: San Luis Obispo CA Posts: 1,195	Jim, http://homepage.mac.com/barrygoyette/PhotoAlbum13.html Here are some stills I posted a few weeks ago (4:3 to 4:3). Essentially the images pan out to being about the same. the xl2 is sharpened more, but also seems to have the edge on detail. (sharpening can be turned down). the DVX will have slightly shallower depth of field. Barry

October 2nd, 2004, 09:24 AM	#3
Jaime Valles Major Player Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: New York City, NY Posts: 316	I believe with the DVX you'll get a much wider angle of view than the XL2 in 4:3, correct?

October 2nd, 2004, 10:01 AM	#4
Barry Goyette Trustee Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: San Luis Obispo CA Posts: 1,195	yes, unless you attach the 3x lens to th xl2. Barry

October 3rd, 2004, 12:59 PM	#5
Jesse Bekas Major Player Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Ridgefield Park, New Jersey, USA Posts: 572	The XL2 will have less low-light capability than the DVX in 4:3 because of the smaller area of the chips being used.

October 3rd, 2004, 04:30 PM	#6
Barry Goyette Trustee Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: San Luis Obispo CA Posts: 1,195	Jesse Yeah, you'd think so, based on what we all think we know about ccd's. But in side by sides, I've seen that they are about the same, with a slight edge going to the xl2 in low light. Here's color commentary on a test I ran and posted over at dvxuser. http://www.dvxuser.com/cgi-bin/DVX2/...num=1095124325 Barry

October 3rd, 2004, 10:11 PM	#7
Jesse Bekas Major Player Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Ridgefield Park, New Jersey, USA Posts: 572	Yeah, I was just "going by the numbers" on the CCDs. I saw two still captures online from both cams side by side at the same F-stop and the XL2's was barely brighter, but I chalked it up to less than scientific testing conditions. The glass on both is rated at an F1.6 wide. I'd like to learn what in the processors' or CCDs' tech is differentiating their performance if it's not the glass. We all know the chip size:photosite# rule, but some of us (like me) are ignorant of the many differing CCD and processor technologies. Guess it's time to start googling.

October 4th, 2004, 10:18 AM	#8
Barry Goyette Trustee Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: San Luis Obispo CA Posts: 1,195	Note chris's posting at the top of th xl2 page...canon has updated the operator manual with audio block diagrams...but also the low light specs have been put into the same framework as the xl1s specs (1/8 sec..18db..)..so officially the new lux rating is .7 Barry