Upgrading to HD from PD-170

Tom Hardwick · January 25th, 2011, 04:47 AM

Ah - it sounds like you're not comparing 1440 x 1080 HDV footage to SD 720 x 576, you're comparing down-converted Z1 and A1 footage to the PD170 and XM2 - is that what you mean?

In that case, I can go along with you - and certainly in the 4:3 mode. My VX2k produced some quite startlingly sharp footage whereas the on-board, 4/11d Z1 down-converter makes SD tapes that are on the good side of so-so.

You say you edited a project that used footage from all the cameras - so was this a 4:3 or 16:9 production?

I shot a wedding as second camera, using my Z1 in SD mode (effectively doing the down-conversion on the fly between chips and tape). My pal used his 170 in the 16:9 mode and know what? We simply couldn't A / B cut them together, the 170 looked so soft. Looks ok letterboxed on a 4:3 CRT, but when upscalled as a DVD into a big LCD TV - no way.

tom.

Bill Rankin · January 25th, 2011, 07:39 PM

I too, moved from a 170 to Z1's and thought the Z1 picture (in SD of course) was just a touch softer than 170. But still was happy with my purchase. HOWEVER, I will be listing my Z1's for sale because, for me, it is time go solid state. I have an EX1R that is my primary camera and the speed in which I can load onto the computer is great. For me, it's like going from manually changing the channel to a remote control.

Geoffrey Cox · January 26th, 2011, 01:19 PM

Tom - yes I am talking about 4:3. Mind you 16:9 HD images were cropped rather then letterboxed in the down conversion, and not shot in 4:3 - I found particularly that the A1's SD 4:3 mode was horrible and the Z1's not much better. And yes 16:9 in a native 4:3 SD camera is pretty horrible too; don't know any native 16:9 SD cameras personally.

Mind you it's not just the softness that's the issue for me with the Z1 - I dunno maybe I was just not using it right but it tended to produce nasty coloured edges in certain light too.

Mark Chafe · January 26th, 2011, 03:55 PM

Thanks guys for all the feedback. I have also heard the Z1U has a softer picture. I had it down to a XH-A1 or Z1U. WIth the ratings both good for each one, albeit more leaning towards the A1 vs the Z1U, the price of the sony was the deciding factor for now.

Once i get the Z1U and if I am not satisifed with it, i will switch out for the XHA1. I know a local producer that uses them and he prefers them over the z1u's. I would like to stick with sony, but for the price the XHA1 looks like a nice camera too, and newer, mind you i would still have to buy used. If i was only buying one i could probably buy new, but i need 2 cameras all the time atleast.

Would make sense to have one of each to have the best of both worlds? I rarely do 2 camera shoots, but I do some local sports online and the scattered 2 camera shoots for dvd or the web. I'm guessing a z1u and a xha1 would be a bit tricky to match up in post.

Thanks
Mark

David W. Jones · January 26th, 2011, 05:44 PM

If your mood swings toward the XH-A1 drop me a line. I have one with low hours and wide angle lens that I really haven't used much since we got the Red. I have kept it around since it's such a nice little camera, but have since bought an AF100 for second camera work.

Good Luck!

Dave

Tom Hardwick · January 27th, 2011, 02:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Chafe

Would make sense to have one of each to have the best of both worlds? I rarely do 2 camera shoots

It's something that I'd avoid, if only because of the different batteries and chargers you'll have lying about. Also, as you run to your car for your backup cam when nr 1 cam has seized up, your brain will have to switch into nr2 cam mode, with all the changes and differences that entails.

I can't see that matching up in post will be a problem.

tom.

Geoffrey Cox · January 27th, 2011, 02:51 AM

Mark - had to do exactly that in a recent project all shot on a Z1 and A1 - colour matching was OK (actually set the A1 to match the Z1 in camera) but matching the general look was difficult due the aforementioned softness of the Z1.

January 25th, 2011, 07:39 PM	#17
Bill Rankin Major Player Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 433	From PD170 to Z1's I too, moved from a 170 to Z1's and thought the Z1 picture (in SD of course) was just a touch softer than 170. But still was happy with my purchase. HOWEVER, I will be listing my Z1's for sale because, for me, it is time go solid state. I have an EX1R that is my primary camera and the speed in which I can load onto the computer is great. For me, it's like going from manually changing the channel to a remote control. __________________ Bill Rankin

January 26th, 2011, 05:44 PM	#20
David W. Jones Trustee Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Little Rock Posts: 1,383	If your mood swings toward the XH-A1 drop me a line. I have one with low hours and wide angle lens that I really haven't used much since we got the Red. I have kept it around since it's such a nice little camera, but have since bought an AF100 for second camera work. Good Luck! Dave __________________ David W. Jones www.joneshdfilms.com

January 25th, 2011, 04:47 AM	#16
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	Ah - it sounds like you're not comparing 1440 x 1080 HDV footage to SD 720 x 576, you're comparing down-converted Z1 and A1 footage to the PD170 and XM2 - is that what you mean? In that case, I can go along with you - and certainly in the 4:3 mode. My VX2k produced some quite startlingly sharp footage whereas the on-board, 4/11d Z1 down-converter makes SD tapes that are on the good side of so-so. You say you edited a project that used footage from all the cameras - so was this a 4:3 or 16:9 production? I shot a wedding as second camera, using my Z1 in SD mode (effectively doing the down-conversion on the fly between chips and tape). My pal used his 170 in the 16:9 mode and know what? We simply couldn't A / B cut them together, the 170 looked so soft. Looks ok letterboxed on a 4:3 CRT, but when upscalled as a DVD into a big LCD TV - no way. tom.

January 26th, 2011, 01:19 PM	#18
Geoffrey Cox Major Player Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Huddersfield, UK Posts: 469	Tom - yes I am talking about 4:3. Mind you 16:9 HD images were cropped rather then letterboxed in the down conversion, and not shot in 4:3 - I found particularly that the A1's SD 4:3 mode was horrible and the Z1's not much better. And yes 16:9 in a native 4:3 SD camera is pretty horrible too; don't know any native 16:9 SD cameras personally. Mind you it's not just the softness that's the issue for me with the Z1 - I dunno maybe I was just not using it right but it tended to produce nasty coloured edges in certain light too.

January 26th, 2011, 03:55 PM	#19
Mark Chafe Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Newfoundland, Canada Posts: 162	Thanks guys for all the feedback. I have also heard the Z1U has a softer picture. I had it down to a XH-A1 or Z1U. WIth the ratings both good for each one, albeit more leaning towards the A1 vs the Z1U, the price of the sony was the deciding factor for now. Once i get the Z1U and if I am not satisifed with it, i will switch out for the XHA1. I know a local producer that uses them and he prefers them over the z1u's. I would like to stick with sony, but for the price the XHA1 looks like a nice camera too, and newer, mind you i would still have to buy used. If i was only buying one i could probably buy new, but i need 2 cameras all the time atleast. Would make sense to have one of each to have the best of both worlds? I rarely do 2 camera shoots, but I do some local sports online and the scattered 2 camera shoots for dvd or the web. I'm guessing a z1u and a xha1 would be a bit tricky to match up in post. Thanks Mark

January 27th, 2011, 02:51 AM	#22
Geoffrey Cox Major Player Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Huddersfield, UK Posts: 469	Mark - had to do exactly that in a recent project all shot on a Z1 and A1 - colour matching was OK (actually set the A1 to match the Z1 in camera) but matching the general look was difficult due the aforementioned softness of the Z1.