No image stablisation??

Jonathan Ames · June 22nd, 2006, 09:00 AM

I just posted this for someone else and hope it helops here.

Image stabilization is always an issue but the fact of the mater is that the form of stabilization found in most camcorders is not sufficient for quality images, especially in HD. Stabilization occurs in one of two ways; optical and mechanical. Mechanical or "hardware stabilization" produces the best results using a mechanical gyro to detect movements in the lens and compensate for it. We use this type of stasbilization when shooting aerials and ground cover shots from the airplane/helo and ORV respectively, employing a neat little device made by Kenyon Labs http://www.ken-lab.com/stabilizers.html. Taylor Wigton turned us onto this great company and we've been hooked ever since. For camcorders, binoculars and the like, however, image stabilization occurs via a liquid- or gel-based prism mounted in front of the lens. This bladder bends the light so that the image falls on a fixed point on the CCD. This type of electronic or "software" image stabilization is less expensive, available on digital camcorders and is far less desirable because you place yet another interger between the image and sensor, this time liquid and so dibilitating to the image. Thus it's not the best of solutions where quality images are concerned. Thus, if you're looking for quality images, a mechanical stabilization unit is the only way to go for quality pictures. The subject gets alot more complex but I hope this overview helps.

K. Forman · June 22nd, 2006, 09:25 AM

I find that leaning against buildings and trees helps steady things when hand held. Unfortunately, neither of these options are very portable...

Jonathan Ames · June 22nd, 2006, 11:47 AM

Great visual ;-) Thanks for the smile today.

Daniel Patton · June 22nd, 2006, 01:14 PM

You could give the Fig Rig a shot. We have one and it tested okay on the JVC, not perfect, but it was better for that type of movement compared to handling the camera without one. It was purchased for a shoot with the HVX, but after the shoot I stuck it on the JVC and tried some moves over and around a classic custom car, thought "not bad"! You can even still shoot shoulder with the rig attached to the camera.

Might sound a little goofy to those who have not tried one yet, but just the same it did help for maneuverability with an otherwise bulky camera (with all our cr@p ours is getting bulky anyway), the Fig Rigs just one more toy. Just a thought.

Jonathan Nelson · June 22nd, 2006, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Giuseppe Pugliese

I really believe this camera is NOT for wedding work at all...

Well I just bought two of these to be used with misc projects including weddings. I thought people liked to use the hd100 for wedding such events.

Do you think I should cancel these orders and get Z1s instead?

Drew Curran · June 22nd, 2006, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel Patton

You could give the Fig Rig a shot.

I'd thought of this, but i'm not sure how it would look at a wedding! it looks quite big.

Something more like the Red x-wing device would be less in-your-face. I also saw a device on the DVXuser forum but now i can't find it

Thanks

Andrew

K. Forman · June 22nd, 2006, 05:36 PM

I still can't get over the FigRig... It looks like you're driving a bus!

Jonathan Nelson · June 23rd, 2006, 12:31 AM

The fig rig hurts your arm too after a while of using it. I tried it out at nab and I can tell you for sure that it is not for weddings unless its a one to five minute wedding.

Marc Colemont · June 23rd, 2006, 03:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonathan Nelson

The fig rig hurts your arm too after a while of using it. I tried it out at nab and I can tell you for sure that it is not for weddings unless its a one to five minute wedding.

Thr FigRig is too small for the HD100. I do all sorts of events and I have no problem not having the image stabilisation, since the HD100 uses a fixed lens like any other professional camera. If you use a IDX or AB battery you have more weight on the back which balances the camera perfectly for shoulder-shooting.
And I prefer a sholdercamera with no image stabilisation way above a 'handycam' housing like the Z1 with build-in image stabilisation.

Chad Terpstra · June 23rd, 2006, 07:58 AM

I have to say as an owner of both the FX1 and the HD100, the FX1 does lend itself better to weddings in a variety of ways.

1.) Image stabilization. - It's smoother and steadier 80% of the time. End of story.
EDIT: This doesn't mean you can't get steadyshots with the HD100. But for anything 20mm and above, you'll get woble.
2.) Wide lens. - The stock lens on the HD 100 does not do well at receptions or anywhere you need wider shots.
3.) Sensitivity. - It's been said elsewhere, but the HD100 is a noisier camera. It maxes out at 6db or 9db gain (for acceptable picture) while the FX1 can go up to 15db, be brighter, and have less noise.
4.) Light weight. - The HD100 is not great for creativity at weddings. Sure you can take it off your shoulder and do the low shots, but it's so much more cumbersome to do so. The FX1 easily can be held much steadier at waist level or my favorite is to hold it above your head. In fact what I often have done at receptions is to put the FX1 on a monopod and lift it way up in the air to get a nice aerial shot. With image stabilization and auto focus this was a piece of cake (no pun intended) and had stunning results. Not a chance the HD100 or any shoulder mount camera work like this.
5.) Autofocus – Actually it’s not that great, but once in a while it’s good to have.

Now, having said all that. I would never trade in my HD100 for a Z1U or anything else because even though I do weddings almost full time, I also do corporate and independent filmmaking. And for these applications, this camera is a dream come true. Just this past weekend we shot for two full days on a 10 minute short film. I was directing, but my DP said I spoiled him with the camera. He doesn't want to use anything else. Everything from rack focusing to the lens barrel markings to handheld style is so much more like a film camera. Not to mention the images it produces over the Z1U (I've used both and this one is far more filmic).

For corporate work as well I feel like I can achieve the look I envision using 24pHD and getting a brilliant product in the end.

But am I glad I still have a small "handycam" FX1 for getting creative on the fly at weddings? You bet.

And for the record, for a lot of the wedding day it's best to shoot 60i (if you're going SD) and use Nattress or some other plug-in to get 24p in post. Your slow motion will thank you greatly! Hope this helps, Drew.

Stephen Knapp · June 23rd, 2006, 08:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonathan Nelson

Well I just bought two of these to be used with misc projects including weddings. I thought people liked to use the hd100 for wedding such events.

Do you think I should cancel these orders and get Z1s instead?

I am far from an authority on this, but I do happen to have both an FX1 and a HD100, and for maximum flexibility would recommend a combo with very different cameras like that. This thread and others have been pointing out that no one camera can do it all, and it's nice to have a camera with the right features at the right moment. Don't most professionals have a variety of tools in their kitbag to cover more contingencies? So in terms of camera features, functions, and dimensions, if you don't already have a combo you might consider cancelling one of the HD100s for a Z1U.

BUT

things do get more complicated when you try to do a two camera shoot with machines that are shooting HDV in such different ways. Perhaps others can advise you on how to find or create a common ground between them that saves time in post production. I think in the end it comes down to what you need the most for your work: flexibility in camera applications, or simplicity in multicam setups.

Drew Curran · June 23rd, 2006, 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonathan Nelson

Well I just bought two of these to be used with misc projects including weddings. I thought people liked to use the hd100 for wedding such events.

Do you think I should cancel these orders and get Z1s instead?

Jonathan

I can see in my area a market for 24/25p wedding 'FILMS' so I wanted to stay away from the interlaced look. Many wedding pros will laugh at me, but I don't care. I already do wedding stills photography in a less conventional way, and a lot of couples have asked if I would do their weddings using my stills style. Many are telling me that they aren't getting video coverage of their day because the results look so tacky with traditional video techniques.

I will adapt to shooting with the HD100 and 25p with practice. I want to produce unique film style weddings using the skills i already adopt when taking stills. I will make them aware of what they are getting so there is no confusion.

Just my 2 pence.

Andrew.

Daniel Patton · June 23rd, 2006, 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith Forman

I still can't get over the FigRig... It looks like you're driving a bus!

Well that explains why I make the BRBRBRBRBRBR noise when shooting with it!

I Agree that it might be odd looking and draw attention away from the wedding itself.

As for using the Fig Rig for image stabilization... it's just okay, it's better for range of motion. But even then I can't see needing an over the crowd shot and then quickly dipping down to the floor and performing that always requested under the bridal dress shot. But what do I know, people are strange.

Jonathan Nelson · June 23rd, 2006, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen Knapp

So in terms of camera features, functions, and dimensions, if you don't already have a combo you might consider canceling one of the HD100s for a Z1U.

I would love to do this because I would get the best of both worlds, however I am afraid of the picture differences between the two cameras. The reason I chose to get two hd100s is because I wanted an efficient system with matching video quality. I do ALOT of two camera shoots and I know how it feels to use two different cameras. I remember in high school, I used a gl2 and canon optura 10 which went together like oil and water.

I have not ordered the second hd100 yet, and I am now considering this z1 camcorder as my second. I really need some words of wisdom.

With a limited budget, would most of you guys order two hd100s or a hd100/z1 mix?

How hard would it be to combine the two and have similar video characteristics?

John Clark · June 23rd, 2006, 01:59 PM

The realistic price difference between the hvx and hd100 (figure initial cost and p2 cards, is at least $2000) So, for the price of an hvx, you can buy an hd100 and have a couple of grand left over for a used dvx100a which could handle your wedding gigs.

June 22nd, 2006, 09:25 AM	#17
K. Forman Capt. Quirk Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Middle of the woods in Georgia Posts: 3,596	I find that leaning against buildings and trees helps steady things when hand held. Unfortunately, neither of these options are very portable... __________________ www.SmokeWagonLeather.us

June 22nd, 2006, 01:14 PM	#19
Daniel Patton Major Player Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Knoxville TN Posts: 589	You could give the Fig Rig a shot. We have one and it tested okay on the JVC, not perfect, but it was better for that type of movement compared to handling the camera without one. It was purchased for a shoot with the HVX, but after the shoot I stuck it on the JVC and tried some moves over and around a classic custom car, thought "not bad"! You can even still shoot shoulder with the rig attached to the camera. Might sound a little goofy to those who have not tried one yet, but just the same it did help for maneuverability with an otherwise bulky camera (with all our cr@p ours is getting bulky anyway), the Fig Rigs just one more toy. Just a thought. __________________ Our eyes allow us to see the world - The lens allows others to see the world through our eyes. RED ONE #977

June 22nd, 2006, 05:36 PM	#22
K. Forman Capt. Quirk Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Middle of the woods in Georgia Posts: 3,596	I still can't get over the FigRig... It looks like you're driving a bus! __________________ www.SmokeWagonLeather.us

June 23rd, 2006, 01:59 PM	#30
John Clark New Boot Join Date: May 2006 Location: shelter island, ny Posts: 11	why not get both? The realistic price difference between the hvx and hd100 (figure initial cost and p2 cards, is at least $2000) So, for the price of an hvx, you can buy an hd100 and have a couple of grand left over for a used dvx100a which could handle your wedding gigs.

June 22nd, 2006, 09:00 AM	#16
Jonathan Ames 2nd Unit TV Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 509	I just posted this for someone else and hope it helops here. Image stabilization is always an issue but the fact of the mater is that the form of stabilization found in most camcorders is not sufficient for quality images, especially in HD. Stabilization occurs in one of two ways; optical and mechanical. Mechanical or "hardware stabilization" produces the best results using a mechanical gyro to detect movements in the lens and compensate for it. We use this type of stasbilization when shooting aerials and ground cover shots from the airplane/helo and ORV respectively, employing a neat little device made by Kenyon Labs http://www.ken-lab.com/stabilizers.html. Taylor Wigton turned us onto this great company and we've been hooked ever since. For camcorders, binoculars and the like, however, image stabilization occurs via a liquid- or gel-based prism mounted in front of the lens. This bladder bends the light so that the image falls on a fixed point on the CCD. This type of electronic or "software" image stabilization is less expensive, available on digital camcorders and is far less desirable because you place yet another interger between the image and sensor, this time liquid and so dibilitating to the image. Thus it's not the best of solutions where quality images are concerned. Thus, if you're looking for quality images, a mechanical stabilization unit is the only way to go for quality pictures. The subject gets alot more complex but I hope this overview helps.

June 22nd, 2006, 11:47 AM	#18
Jonathan Ames 2nd Unit TV Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 509	Great visual ;-) Thanks for the smile today.

June 23rd, 2006, 12:31 AM	#23
Jonathan Nelson Major Player Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Kingman Arizona Posts: 298	The fig rig hurts your arm too after a while of using it. I tried it out at nab and I can tell you for sure that it is not for weddings unless its a one to five minute wedding.

June 23rd, 2006, 07:58 AM	#25
Chad Terpstra Major Player Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Grand Rapids, MI Posts: 320	I have to say as an owner of both the FX1 and the HD100, the FX1 does lend itself better to weddings in a variety of ways. 1.) Image stabilization. - It's smoother and steadier 80% of the time. End of story. EDIT: This doesn't mean you can't get steadyshots with the HD100. But for anything 20mm and above, you'll get woble. 2.) Wide lens. - The stock lens on the HD 100 does not do well at receptions or anywhere you need wider shots. 3.) Sensitivity. - It's been said elsewhere, but the HD100 is a noisier camera. It maxes out at 6db or 9db gain (for acceptable picture) while the FX1 can go up to 15db, be brighter, and have less noise. 4.) Light weight. - The HD100 is not great for creativity at weddings. Sure you can take it off your shoulder and do the low shots, but it's so much more cumbersome to do so. The FX1 easily can be held much steadier at waist level or my favorite is to hold it above your head. In fact what I often have done at receptions is to put the FX1 on a monopod and lift it way up in the air to get a nice aerial shot. With image stabilization and auto focus this was a piece of cake (no pun intended) and had stunning results. Not a chance the HD100 or any shoulder mount camera work like this. 5.) Autofocus – Actually it’s not that great, but once in a while it’s good to have. Now, having said all that. I would never trade in my HD100 for a Z1U or anything else because even though I do weddings almost full time, I also do corporate and independent filmmaking. And for these applications, this camera is a dream come true. Just this past weekend we shot for two full days on a 10 minute short film. I was directing, but my DP said I spoiled him with the camera. He doesn't want to use anything else. Everything from rack focusing to the lens barrel markings to handheld style is so much more like a film camera. Not to mention the images it produces over the Z1U (I've used both and this one is far more filmic). For corporate work as well I feel like I can achieve the look I envision using 24pHD and getting a brilliant product in the end. But am I glad I still have a small "handycam" FX1 for getting creative on the fly at weddings? You bet. And for the record, for a lot of the wedding day it's best to shoot 60i (if you're going SD) and use Nattress or some other plug-in to get 24p in post. Your slow motion will thank you greatly! Hope this helps, Drew.