does more pixels equal better picture quality? at DVinfo.net

November 23rd, 2001, 02:29 AM

If so then is the king of clear pictures title belong to the VX2000 or the PD150?

I went to a site,

http://www.consumerdvreviews.com/camcorders/

and on it you can compare different types of cameras, well I did a comparison between a GL1, XL1s, and a VX2000
it shows that the VX2000 has better pixels at 1/3" (380,000 Pixels) ...the XL1s has 1/3" (270000/250000 Pixels) and the GL1 has 1/4" (270000/250000 Pixels) .

You can look at the review at by clicking on the boxes next to the cameras and clicking COMPARE.

So, does that mean because the VX2000 has more pixels that it has better quality and therefore is a better camera, even though the XL1s is the newest of the 3 cameras?

I also was told that the best quality for a miniDV cam starts around 370,000 pixels. Is this also true?

Somebody please help!
Thanxs

Adrian Douglas · November 23rd, 2001, 02:58 AM

High pixel counts do help the quality of the image, but that dosen't necessarily mean that the highest is the best. The best way to compare is look at the cameras side by side, not on the net, in a store on a monitor. The XL1/GL1 has less pixels than the VX2000 but the green CCD is extended to enhance colour. Look at the images and decide which one you like the most. The output image depends on many things, the CCD's, the Optics, the quality of the circuitry etc.

You can't beat the XL1/s for optics, and accessory lenses are even better. Next would be the GL1/XM1, followed by the VX2000, which, last time I checked, gets it's optics/image stabilizer from Canon.

Then you have to look at the features, each camera has good and bad points/features which all depends on what you want to do with it.

Last of all, do you like Sony or Canon, I know it sounds vain, and petty, but one of the reasons I went with the XL1 is that I've been using Canon still cameras/lenses for years and they've been great products.

So don't choose your camera on pixel count alone, look at the "big picture"

Chris Hurd · November 23rd, 2001, 08:43 AM

It's a serious mistake to base a purchase decision on one specification alone... so much more affects the overall quality of a digital video camcorder than the number of pixels in the CCD.

Quality of optics, physical size of the CCD, quality of the DSP (digital signal processor), etc. -- feature sets, ergonomics, etc. -- all of these factors go into the equation.

As an example, in the digital still camera world, you have the Canon D30 which takes interchangeable EOS lenses. It has a 3 megapixel CCD, yet it can run circles around *any* 4 or 5 megapixel all-in-one camera. Why? Because the size of the CCD is larger and the quality of optics is so much better. Ask any pro photographer.

Also, the more pixels crammed onto a CCD, the smaller these pixels are and the less light they gather. A lower pixel count camera will usually perform better than a high pixel count in low light.

Don't make the mistake of thinking more pixels equals better image... it's not true since so many other factors may not be equal. The advice to "try before you buy" is excellent... no individual tech spec should make or break it for you; only your hands-on experience will determine which is the best camera for your needs.

November 23rd, 2001, 11:20 AM

thanks for the great replys!

I'm a film student and unfourtanetly I dont know much or anything about CCD's and DSP's and hell even as far as pixels go Im still a bit fuzzy.

Im looking to spend $3-4000 bucks on a good miniDV cam to be able to shoot commerical specs and local televeison commercials and most feedback I get is either a PD150 and/or the new XL1s and then there is the VX2000.

So, a lot of things make a great camera. Cool, this is going to sound dumb to you guys but is there a miniDV guide to beginners like myself? Maybe a website or a book? Maybe a "Idiots guide to miniDV's"....haha

thanks again

Chris Hurd · November 23rd, 2001, 02:03 PM

My friend Scott Smith, who writes for RES Magazine, is coming out with a book called "FireWire Filmmaking," published by PeachPit Press. It should answer a lot of questions for you. The thing is that DV technology is still fairly new, and is changing fast so the books out now are already obsolete.

Get a subscription to RES Magazine (www.res.com/). It's all about using DV for filmmaking. My XL1S review will be in the next issue. Also check out the Resources page on my website, www.dvinfo.net -- I list the Top 10 websites for learning about digital video. Start with Adam Wilt's DV FAQ and work your way up.

The VX2000 can do almost everything the PD150 can do and is a lot less expensive. Remember the camera is only *one* piece of all the gear you'll need. Make sure to budget for a decent tripod, a zoom/focus controller, decent microphones, etc. etc. -- not to mention an editing system.

The choice of camera is in my opinion a very small thing -- ultimately it doesn't matter; these days *all* DV camcorders are good cameras. Sony and Canon are the top manufacturers of prosumer-level gear. It's just a question of camera size and features. Choosing one is easy... the hard part in my opinion is developing an eye, a style, and getting yourself marketed and getting your work seen.

Nobody cares what camcorder you shoot with -- it's what you *do* with it that counts. Hope this helps,

November 23rd, 2001, 02:29 AM	#1
gateway1 Posts: n/a	does more pixels equal better picture quality? If so then is the king of clear pictures title belong to the VX2000 or the PD150? I went to a site, http://www.consumerdvreviews.com/camcorders/ and on it you can compare different types of cameras, well I did a comparison between a GL1, XL1s, and a VX2000 it shows that the VX2000 has better pixels at 1/3" (380,000 Pixels) ...the XL1s has 1/3" (270000/250000 Pixels) and the GL1 has 1/4" (270000/250000 Pixels) . You can look at the review at by clicking on the boxes next to the cameras and clicking COMPARE. So, does that mean because the VX2000 has more pixels that it has better quality and therefore is a better camera, even though the XL1s is the newest of the 3 cameras? I also was told that the best quality for a miniDV cam starts around 370,000 pixels. Is this also true? Somebody please help! Thanxs

November 23rd, 2001, 02:58 AM	#2
Adrian Douglas Trustee Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Chigasaki, Japan. Posts: 1,660	High pixel counts do help the quality of the image, but that dosen't necessarily mean that the highest is the best. The best way to compare is look at the cameras side by side, not on the net, in a store on a monitor. The XL1/GL1 has less pixels than the VX2000 but the green CCD is extended to enhance colour. Look at the images and decide which one you like the most. The output image depends on many things, the CCD's, the Optics, the quality of the circuitry etc. You can't beat the XL1/s for optics, and accessory lenses are even better. Next would be the GL1/XM1, followed by the VX2000, which, last time I checked, gets it's optics/image stabilizer from Canon. Then you have to look at the features, each camera has good and bad points/features which all depends on what you want to do with it. Last of all, do you like Sony or Canon, I know it sounds vain, and petty, but one of the reasons I went with the XL1 is that I've been using Canon still cameras/lenses for years and they've been great products. So don't choose your camera on pixel count alone, look at the "big picture" __________________ Adrian DVInfo.net Search for quick answers Where to buy? From the best in the business...DVInfo.net sponsors

November 23rd, 2001, 08:43 AM	#3
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	It's a serious mistake to base a purchase decision on one specification alone... so much more affects the overall quality of a digital video camcorder than the number of pixels in the CCD. Quality of optics, physical size of the CCD, quality of the DSP (digital signal processor), etc. -- feature sets, ergonomics, etc. -- all of these factors go into the equation. As an example, in the digital still camera world, you have the Canon D30 which takes interchangeable EOS lenses. It has a 3 megapixel CCD, yet it can run circles around any 4 or 5 megapixel all-in-one camera. Why? Because the size of the CCD is larger and the quality of optics is so much better. Ask any pro photographer. Also, the more pixels crammed onto a CCD, the smaller these pixels are and the less light they gather. A lower pixel count camera will usually perform better than a high pixel count in low light. Don't make the mistake of thinking more pixels equals better image... it's not true since so many other factors may not be equal. The advice to "try before you buy" is excellent... no individual tech spec should make or break it for you; only your hands-on experience will determine which is the best camera for your needs. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

November 23rd, 2001, 11:20 AM	#4
gateway1 Posts: n/a	wow thanks for the great replys! I'm a film student and unfourtanetly I dont know much or anything about CCD's and DSP's and hell even as far as pixels go Im still a bit fuzzy. Im looking to spend $3-4000 bucks on a good miniDV cam to be able to shoot commerical specs and local televeison commercials and most feedback I get is either a PD150 and/or the new XL1s and then there is the VX2000. So, a lot of things make a great camera. Cool, this is going to sound dumb to you guys but is there a miniDV guide to beginners like myself? Maybe a website or a book? Maybe a "Idiots guide to miniDV's"....haha thanks again

November 23rd, 2001, 02:03 PM	#5
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	My friend Scott Smith, who writes for RES Magazine, is coming out with a book called "FireWire Filmmaking," published by PeachPit Press. It should answer a lot of questions for you. The thing is that DV technology is still fairly new, and is changing fast so the books out now are already obsolete. Get a subscription to RES Magazine (www.res.com/). It's all about using DV for filmmaking. My XL1S review will be in the next issue. Also check out the Resources page on my website, www.dvinfo.net -- I list the Top 10 websites for learning about digital video. Start with Adam Wilt's DV FAQ and work your way up. The VX2000 can do almost everything the PD150 can do and is a lot less expensive. Remember the camera is only one piece of all the gear you'll need. Make sure to budget for a decent tripod, a zoom/focus controller, decent microphones, etc. etc. -- not to mention an editing system. The choice of camera is in my opinion a very small thing -- ultimately it doesn't matter; these days all DV camcorders are good cameras. Sony and Canon are the top manufacturers of prosumer-level gear. It's just a question of camera size and features. Choosing one is easy... the hard part in my opinion is developing an eye, a style, and getting yourself marketed and getting your work seen. Nobody cares what camcorder you shoot with -- it's what you do with it that counts. Hope this helps, __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!