New Sony DCR-PC300K (1/3" CCD RGB filter) at DVinfo.net

Yik Kuen · July 31st, 2003, 06:52 PM

This new matchbox type camcorder promises better image quality with 3MP stills, 2MP video and a large 1/3" RGB filter based CCD block.

Here you are :
http://www.sony.jp/products/Consumer/handycam/PRODUCTS/DCR-PC300K/index.html

Dave Valencic · August 1st, 2003, 10:06 PM

You need to remember that just because it's 1/3" doesn't mean the low light will be any better...sure, this camera will have the best depth-of-field since JVC"s DVL9800 1/3" 680,000pixel camera back in 2000. Sony squeezing a 2100x1600 pixel raster onto a 1/3" CCD will absolutely kill the lowlight! I'll bet money that it doesn't get better than a 8LUX rating. It's not worth $1600 when I can spend $900 on a great 1chip camera and $700 on a 5 megapixel Nikon digital camera.

A safer investment is a solid 3chip camera....no one can go wrong with a TRV950 or VX2000.

Robert Mann Z. · August 2nd, 2003, 12:20 AM

it might just be me, but i think the most important feature of upright cams is OIS not DIS, which by the way will it work in photo mode with the ccd being put to full use...

other wise step in the right direction...

Tony Leung · August 3rd, 2003, 07:31 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Dave Valencic : You need to remember that just because it's 1/3" doesn't mean the low light will be any better...sure, this camera will have the best depth-of-field since JVC"s DVL9800 1/3" 680,000pixel camera back in 2000. Sony squeezing a 2100x1600 pixel raster onto a 1/3" CCD will absolutely kill the lowlight! I'll bet money that it doesn't get better than a 8LUX rating. It's not worth $1600 when I can spend $900 on a great 1chip camera and $700 on a 5 megapixel Nikon digital camera.

A safer investment is a solid 3chip camera....no one can go wrong with a TRV950 or VX2000. -->>>

I read some articles in other site that 3CCD is better because of the color handling in CCD pixel (one pixel can handle one color only). However after reading (guessing) the info from Sony web site about PC300K, I guess the RDB color filter may improve a lot the overal quality both in photo still and video. Further with effective 2M pixel for video, actually PC300K may able to simulate 3CCD effect by using more than 1 pixel to handle color.

For example with 2M pixel (1600x1200), PC300K can use 4 pixel to handle color instead of one:

RGRGRG ...
GBGBGB ...
...

So the 'effective' color pixel will be '800x600' which is enough for DV quality of video and the color compensation is better than normal 1CCD. In fact it is almost equal to 1/6" 4CCD effect. As the model will be released in Sept, I think more detailed review will be coming sooner of later.

Yik Kuen · August 3rd, 2003, 10:51 PM

Right, this cam needs 15 lux. Sony still rate 950 their top camcorder in terms of image quality, but this cam comes second.

I believe it produces clean video images due to its mega pixel CCD block alberit darker.

I would take image quality in terms of these attributes :

> Colours
> Low light capability
> Dynamic range.
> Noise level

What do you think?

Dave Valencic · August 4th, 2003, 08:58 AM

Canon has used the RGB Color filter for years...I can remember cams from 1998-1999 that used it. It WAS better than a strait up 1CCD cam, but no where near a 3chip. If you're given good lighting, even a 1chip camera can appear to look like a 3chip. I shot some video at my friend's soccer game with the Sony TRV30, (bright sunny day... F9.6 1/250 shutter) and the color on the video was absolutely amazing for the size of the camera. Same deal with Canon cameras...The Optura Pi was a tiny camera that had the best color rendition of any 1chip camera i've ever seen....but with REALLY horrible lowlight performance. I put it next to an old Digital8 camera and it still looked like crap under dimly lit conditions.

July 31st, 2003, 06:52 PM	#1
Yik Kuen Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Johor Bahru, Malaysia Posts: 135	New Sony DCR-PC300K (1/3" CCD RGB filter) This new matchbox type camcorder promises better image quality with 3MP stills, 2MP video and a large 1/3" RGB filter based CCD block. Here you are : http://www.sony.jp/products/Consumer/handycam/PRODUCTS/DCR-PC300K/index.html

August 3rd, 2003, 07:31 PM	#4
Tony Leung Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 46	<<<-- Originally posted by Dave Valencic : You need to remember that just because it's 1/3" doesn't mean the low light will be any better...sure, this camera will have the best depth-of-field since JVC"s DVL9800 1/3" 680,000pixel camera back in 2000. Sony squeezing a 2100x1600 pixel raster onto a 1/3" CCD will absolutely kill the lowlight! I'll bet money that it doesn't get better than a 8LUX rating. It's not worth $1600 when I can spend $900 on a great 1chip camera and $700 on a 5 megapixel Nikon digital camera. A safer investment is a solid 3chip camera....no one can go wrong with a TRV950 or VX2000. -->>> I read some articles in other site that 3CCD is better because of the color handling in CCD pixel (one pixel can handle one color only). However after reading (guessing) the info from Sony web site about PC300K, I guess the RDB color filter may improve a lot the overal quality both in photo still and video. Further with effective 2M pixel for video, actually PC300K may able to simulate 3CCD effect by using more than 1 pixel to handle color. For example with 2M pixel (1600x1200), PC300K can use 4 pixel to handle color instead of one: RGRGRG ... GBGBGB ... ... So the 'effective' color pixel will be '800x600' which is enough for DV quality of video and the color compensation is better than normal 1CCD. In fact it is almost equal to 1/6" 4CCD effect. As the model will be released in Sept, I think more detailed review will be coming sooner of later. __________________ Travel Photos - http://www.fotop.net/hktraveller Traveller Diary - http://hktraveller.blogspot.com

August 1st, 2003, 10:06 PM	#2
Dave Valencic Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Cleveland OH Posts: 34	You need to remember that just because it's 1/3" doesn't mean the low light will be any better...sure, this camera will have the best depth-of-field since JVC"s DVL9800 1/3" 680,000pixel camera back in 2000. Sony squeezing a 2100x1600 pixel raster onto a 1/3" CCD will absolutely kill the lowlight! I'll bet money that it doesn't get better than a 8LUX rating. It's not worth $1600 when I can spend $900 on a great 1chip camera and $700 on a 5 megapixel Nikon digital camera. A safer investment is a solid 3chip camera....no one can go wrong with a TRV950 or VX2000.

August 2nd, 2003, 12:20 AM	#3
Robert Mann Z. Skyonic New York Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: NYC Posts: 614	it might just be me, but i think the most important feature of upright cams is OIS not DIS, which by the way will it work in photo mode with the ccd being put to full use... other wise step in the right direction...

August 3rd, 2003, 10:51 PM	#5
Yik Kuen Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Johor Bahru, Malaysia Posts: 135	Right, this cam needs 15 lux. Sony still rate 950 their top camcorder in terms of image quality, but this cam comes second. I believe it produces clean video images due to its mega pixel CCD block alberit darker. I would take image quality in terms of these attributes : > Colours > Low light capability > Dynamic range. > Noise level What do you think?

August 4th, 2003, 08:58 AM	#6
Dave Valencic Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Cleveland OH Posts: 34	Canon has used the RGB Color filter for years...I can remember cams from 1998-1999 that used it. It WAS better than a strait up 1CCD cam, but no where near a 3chip. If you're given good lighting, even a 1chip camera can appear to look like a 3chip. I shot some video at my friend's soccer game with the Sony TRV30, (bright sunny day... F9.6 1/250 shutter) and the color on the video was absolutely amazing for the size of the camera. Same deal with Canon cameras...The Optura Pi was a tiny camera that had the best color rendition of any 1chip camera i've ever seen....but with REALLY horrible lowlight performance. I put it next to an old Digital8 camera and it still looked like crap under dimly lit conditions.