|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
February 7th, 2008, 05:12 AM | #1 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 43
|
Question lens softness
Hi,
I am looking to upgrade cameras soon and need some advice. I have owned the Canon XL1s for years and was pleased with the camera. If I had any complaints, it would have to be that most of the footage shot was "soft". I all ways kept the sharpness with in the camera turned way up to help. I am wondering if the the newer generation cameras such as the Canon H1 (and hopefully the H2) improves on the sharpness levels any? Secondly, does any one know how the Sony EX1 compares in image quality to the H1? I definitely want to go tape less for sure. My hope is the future H2 would give me all I want but Image quality will have to take priority in my next camera. Any help greatly appreciated! |
March 8th, 2008, 08:36 AM | #2 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Chicago IL
Posts: 30
|
softness
I shot with my XL1S for four years. The standard lens had a back focus problem that was a disaster. I went to the 3x lens and cleared that up. I am using the XLH1 with the 6x lens and it is ultra sharp (I have sharpness on 4 (of 9) cause I want it even sharper). Sharpness should not be an issue (altho I have not used the standard lens).
|
March 8th, 2008, 09:58 AM | #3 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 191
|
Completely different performance than the XL-1s lens. In my opinion it is extremely sharp and works quite well!
|
March 8th, 2008, 03:32 PM | #4 |
Major Player
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Kangasala, Finland
Posts: 445
|
Jeff, I apologize if I'm teachng a duck to swim: Any chance you've been using small apertures? With the XL-series cameras I always tried to keep the aperature larger than 5.6, i.e., the f-values were smaller than 5.6. In practice, you need to set the ND on. Small apertures result in soft images. The effect is significant and easily checked at the wide angle end of the lens.
|
March 8th, 2008, 06:31 PM | #5 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Port St. Lucie, Florida
Posts: 2,614
|
In that case why even consider the XL H1. Simply get your Sony or Pany and get to shooting.
M
__________________
Chapter one, line one. The BH. |
March 8th, 2008, 08:25 PM | #6 |
Major Player
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
Posts: 840
|
Mike,
Let me second Lauri's comment. I just got an XL H1, and was experimenting with depth of field. I shot with a 70-300 zoom. The target was a tape measure set at 50 feet away. I was blown away by the difference in sharpness when shooting at F/5.6 to F/8 as opposed the F/16. I expected any difference to be subtle. It ain't. The F/16 shots could only be called "blurry". No wonder the 20X lens goes black after F/11. Canon must know something. |
March 8th, 2008, 08:30 PM | #7 | |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Port St. Lucie, Florida
Posts: 2,614
|
Quote:
M
__________________
Chapter one, line one. The BH. |
|
March 8th, 2008, 09:50 PM | #8 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 43
|
I like my Canon
Thanks everyone!
What can I say, I love my Canon. I ordered the CD from Sony which contained some footage and customer feedback on the EX-1. It looks like a very capable camera but honestly leaning towards Canon. The Aperture could very well be the culprit in the softness, good information on what to look for and how to prevent it!! Tapes, I have had several occasions in which drop outs were high. Not sure, but have been told this is an inherent problem with miniDV tapes. Not only that but the wear and tear on the drive mech. I think tape less is the way to go. Anyway, the boss (my wife) has given me permission so get another camera, just want to get the best bang for my bucks and hopefully turn a hobby into something more. The feedback is greatly appreciated! |
March 8th, 2008, 10:08 PM | #9 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Port St. Lucie, Florida
Posts: 2,614
|
Drop-outs is like an "In" phrase around here. But, would you believe that I have never had one? It is true. Using one brand of tape, cleaning the heads regularly and just using common sense works for almost everyone. I buy Sony Premium tapes for about $2.50 each and just stay clean.
Perhaps it is that being clean and neat is foreign to most. If you have never owned a very delicate piece of equipment in your life, how would you know to care for it. The current generation knows nothing about maintaining anything they have in their homes, cars, TV's, VCR's, or anything. Some service guy or gal does everything for them. That is not my generation and it does not have to be your's. Don't believe the "bull" you read here, clean your camera the day you receive it and regularly thereafter. I have never seen one worn out from cleaning but have heard of many sent for repairs that were not cleaned correctly. Rumors spread like wild-fire, especially if false. Buy whatever camera feels good in your own hands and does whatever you want and need it to do. Don't be over brand loyal and just get the one that is right for you. Mike
__________________
Chapter one, line one. The BH. |
March 9th, 2008, 07:14 AM | #10 |
Major Player
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: McLean, VA United States
Posts: 749
|
What they know is that the tiny pixel spacing of these 1/3" sensors is smaller than the width of the point spread function for a lens stopped down more than f/8 or so. In other words, the sensor is beyond the diffraction limit if closed down further than this. What you are seeing with the XL-H1 is entirely within the realm of the expected. OTOH the pixel spacing in the XL1s, XL2 is about double so I would be surprised to see diffraction blurring in that camera unless a lens were stopped down to f/16 or smaller. There are lots of things which can cause blurring besides diffraction and some of them have been named here. I always thought those cameras were pretty sharp considering the limitations of NTSC and DV.
Last edited by A. J. deLange; March 9th, 2008 at 12:27 PM. Reason: Correct typo (realm, not real). |
March 9th, 2008, 11:57 AM | #11 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Kangasala, Finland
Posts: 445
|
Quote:
http://dvinfo.net/canon/articles/article19.htm |
|
March 10th, 2008, 09:18 AM | #12 |
Major Player
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 201
|
I've got an XL-H1 and tested for a couple hours the Sony EX1. It's a little sharper at 35mb/s quality than the XL-H1 IMO.
But the Canon has the advantage of the interchangeables lenses, (which is very important for my work).
__________________
http://www.songesdemoai.com/ |
May 11th, 2008, 05:14 AM | #13 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 43
|
Sony !!
Sony has taken a cue from Canon and I'm impressed!
http://www.vimeo.com/882030
__________________
Jeff Whitley <'/))))>< |
May 12th, 2008, 02:33 AM | #14 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 226
|
Quote:
Thanks, Dave
__________________
http://www.videoproductionshampshire.co.uk |
|
May 12th, 2008, 04:09 AM | #15 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Billericay, England UK
Posts: 4,711
|
Just a point about diffraction losses. Many cameras offer you the chance to menu-in a 'smallest aperture' to be used because of the softening effects of shooting at small apertures, especially noticeable in HDef work. And it's down the wide end (shortest focal lengths) where diffraction is at its worst and most noticeable.
So use those NDs even before the v'finder calls for them. tom. |
| ||||||
|
|