SD is Dead. Long Live SD!

Robert M Wright · January 15th, 2010, 09:56 AM

A DVX isn't going to yield a very good 16x9 image without an anamorphic lens adapter.

Brit Albritton · January 15th, 2010, 05:25 PM

Robert - the DVX100b isn't actually that bad in 16:9. To my eye the lost resolution isn't terribly noticeable compared to the camera's image in 4:3. You probably wouldn't be happy with either though - a bigger problem is the overall detail & dynamic range. The Panasonic's colors, pretty as they are, seem almost designed to mask the sensor's limitations. (But I'd need to own one and to play with the settings to be sure.)

I've tried to uprez the GY300u to match the DVX100b's 16:9, even using instant HD style filters, but I haven't had much luck so far. Since my consumer HD cams & my shooting partner can do widescreen, I feel I'm missing a tool.

Bill, you're right - I know in many applications I'd be thrilled with the 5000 (assuming I was videographer enough for it), but I'll need to carefully consider what I most need. Considering I do want 16:9, I am seriously considering the HD110 in SD mode, though I understand they were very temperamental, prone to head blockages, and miserable in low light when recording HD.

CMOS is, I think, the future - my understanding is that CCDs overheat when too many pixels are crammed into them. The key will be newer technologies to overcome rolling shutter, and back-illuminated CMOS designs to improve light sensitivity. So in three years today's cameras will once again be nearly obsolete. Sigh. :)

Robert M Wright · January 15th, 2010, 06:18 PM

If you want widescreen SD out of an HD cam, used HDR-FX1s are a pretty good value, at well under $2k used nowadays. I've seen those go for as little as $1600 even. I suggest shooting HDV though, and downscaling (properly). You'll get an even better image than shooting in SD with almost any cam really.

Btw, an FX1 can work just dandy for downscaling to either 60i or 30p SD.

If you are interested in looking at getting an FX1, you can drop me a private msg. I've got one that's essentially like new, that I do intend to sell.

Bill Rankin · January 15th, 2010, 06:25 PM

Update: I just sold my jvc5000. Craigslist...no listing or paypal fees !!!

Robert M Wright · January 15th, 2010, 06:33 PM

Glad to hear it Bill. I know it's not easy to sell an SD JVC cam for anywhere near what it's worth!

Robert M Wright · January 15th, 2010, 06:44 PM

One of the things that's slowing me down with getting this FX1 sold, is I'm not willing to let it go for what well used FX1s are typically selling for. Realistically, it's got a lot more useful life left in it than a typical, well used FX1, but most folks don't seem to be willing to spend anymore at all for one that's basically like new. This one hasn't even recorded over 20 tapes. A heck of a lot of the FX1s being sold used, even though they may have been very well cared for, have hundreds of hours on the heads. I've got to think mine is worth at least a couple hundred more than one that's half way to needing the heads replaced.

January 15th, 2010, 05:25 PM	#17
Brit Albritton New Boot Join Date: May 2006 Location: Northampton, MA Posts: 15	Thanks again Robert - the DVX100b isn't actually that bad in 16:9. To my eye the lost resolution isn't terribly noticeable compared to the camera's image in 4:3. You probably wouldn't be happy with either though - a bigger problem is the overall detail & dynamic range. The Panasonic's colors, pretty as they are, seem almost designed to mask the sensor's limitations. (But I'd need to own one and to play with the settings to be sure.) I've tried to uprez the GY300u to match the DVX100b's 16:9, even using instant HD style filters, but I haven't had much luck so far. Since my consumer HD cams & my shooting partner can do widescreen, I feel I'm missing a tool. Bill, you're right - I know in many applications I'd be thrilled with the 5000 (assuming I was videographer enough for it), but I'll need to carefully consider what I most need. Considering I do want 16:9, I am seriously considering the HD110 in SD mode, though I understand they were very temperamental, prone to head blockages, and miserable in low light when recording HD. CMOS is, I think, the future - my understanding is that CCDs overheat when too many pixels are crammed into them. The key will be newer technologies to overcome rolling shutter, and back-illuminated CMOS designs to improve light sensitivity. So in three years today's cameras will once again be nearly obsolete. Sigh. :)

January 15th, 2010, 06:25 PM	#19
Bill Rankin Major Player Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 433	Update: I just sold my jvc5000. Craigslist...no listing or paypal fees !!! __________________ Bill Rankin

January 15th, 2010, 09:56 AM	#16
Robert M Wright Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Minnesota (USA) Posts: 2,171	A DVX isn't going to yield a very good 16x9 image without an anamorphic lens adapter.

January 15th, 2010, 06:18 PM	#18
Robert M Wright Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Minnesota (USA) Posts: 2,171	If you want widescreen SD out of an HD cam, used HDR-FX1s are a pretty good value, at well under $2k used nowadays. I've seen those go for as little as $1600 even. I suggest shooting HDV though, and downscaling (properly). You'll get an even better image than shooting in SD with almost any cam really. Btw, an FX1 can work just dandy for downscaling to either 60i or 30p SD. If you are interested in looking at getting an FX1, you can drop me a private msg. I've got one that's essentially like new, that I do intend to sell.

January 15th, 2010, 06:33 PM	#20
Robert M Wright Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Minnesota (USA) Posts: 2,171	Glad to hear it Bill. I know it's not easy to sell an SD JVC cam for anywhere near what it's worth!

January 15th, 2010, 06:44 PM	#21
Robert M Wright Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Minnesota (USA) Posts: 2,171	One of the things that's slowing me down with getting this FX1 sold, is I'm not willing to let it go for what well used FX1s are typically selling for. Realistically, it's got a lot more useful life left in it than a typical, well used FX1, but most folks don't seem to be willing to spend anymore at all for one that's basically like new. This one hasn't even recorded over 20 tapes. A heck of a lot of the FX1s being sold used, even though they may have been very well cared for, have hundreds of hours on the heads. I've got to think mine is worth at least a couple hundred more than one that's half way to needing the heads replaced.