|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
December 18th, 2003, 03:15 AM | #1 |
Outer Circle
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Hope, BC
Posts: 7,524
|
a 2nd look at the PAL MX350
What's better? The MX300 or the MX350? Perhaps it depends on which shade of silver you like better and perhaps body style. The MX300 has a muscular body. Some people like this. The MX350 looks pokerish, and some people like that. To some, the MX300 says "I mean business." Do you think that, cosmetically, the MX350 looks too similar with the other Panasonic MX 1-chip models? Maybe this is a good thing. The MX350 is certainly better featured and the bigger and brighter LCD Panel is a blessing. MX350 still resolution is up compared with the MX300, and that's a good thing too. The flash is a welcome addition also, as is this flash's range adjustment. Would you say the MX350 loses it's identity compared to the individual brute looking MX300? I think the MX350's low & long poker-like profile may not be as well accepted by some shooters, but for me, poker-styled cams are just dandy---even though the "professional" looking DX100 came after the professional looking DX1/EZ1 models. Does the MX350 lens have the same width as the MX300 lens? MX300 & MX350 viewing angles: the MX300 is definitely wider than the MX350, however the MX300 has obvious E/W pincushion or barrel effect where as the MX350 doesn't.
YES! YES! 1/4' CCDs!' (3 of them) MX350 Specifications Power Source: DC 7.9/7.2 V Power Consumption: Recording 4.7 W (When using Viewfinder) 5.6 W (When using LCD Monitor) Recording Format: Mini DV (Consumer-use Digital Video SD Format) Tape Used: 6.35 mm digital video tape Recording/Playback Time: SP: 80 min.; LP: 120 min. (with DVM80) Video Recording System: Digital Component Television System: CCIR: 625 lines, 50 fields PAL colour signal Audio Recording System: PCM Digital Recording 16 bit (48 kHz/2ch), 12 bit (32 kHz/4ch) Image Sensor: 1/4-inch 3CCD Image Sensor (Effective Pixels: 360 K k 3, Total: 570 K k 3) Lens: Auto Iris, F1.6, Focal Length; 3.55-42.6 mm, Macro (Full Range AF) Filter Diameter: 43 mm Zoom: 12:1 Power Zoom Monitor: 3.5-inch LCD Viewfinder: Colour Electronic Viewfinder Microphone: Stereo Speaker: 1 round speaker ? 20 mm Standard Illumination: 1,400 lx Minimum Required Illumination: 8 lx (Low Light Mode) Video Output Level: 1.0 Vp-p, 75 ohm S-Video Output Level: Y Output: 1.0 Vp-p, 75 ohm C Output: 0.3 Vp-p, 75 ohm Audio Output Level (Line): 316 mV, 600 ohm Video Input Level: 1.0 Vp-p, 75 ohm S-Video Input Level: Y Input: 1.0 Vp-p, 75 ohm C Input: 0.3 Vp-p, 75 ohm Audio Input Level (Line): 316 mV, 10 kohm or more Mic Input: Mic sensitivity -50 dB (0 dB = 1 V/Pa, 1 kHz) - Stereo mini jack Digital Still Picture: Digital Still Picture Output, Control Signal Input/Output (Transfer rate: max. 115 kbps) USB/Mini-SystemE: Card reader/writer function, USB 1.1 compliant (max. 12 Mbps) No copyright protection support / Mini-System editing terminal Digital Interface: DV Input/Output Terminal (IEEE1394, 4-pin) Dimensions: Approx. 72 (W)k 94 (H)k 219 (D) mm Weight: Approx. 720 g (without Battery and DV cassette) Approx. 780 g (with VSB0419 and DVM60) Operating Temperature: 0C - 40C Operating Humidity: 10% - 80% Card Memory Functions Recording Media: MultiMediaCard, SD Memory Card Image Compression: JPEG Video Compression: MPEG4 Still Image Size: Mega-Pixel Recording; 1568k1152 (1.81 million pixels) VGA Recording; 640k480 Sound Compression: G.726 AC Adaptor Information for your safety Power Source: AC 100-240 V, 50/60 Hz Power Consumption: 35 W DC Output: DC 7.9 V, 9 W (Movie Camera Operation) DC 8.4 V, 2.4 A (Battery Charging) Dimensions: 76 (W)k 52 (H)k 101 (D) mm Weight: Approx. 230 g Weight and dimensions are approximate values. Specifications may change without prior notice. :-) |
December 18th, 2003, 06:05 AM | #2 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Aus
Posts: 3,884
|
if only the mx500 had this CCD size....
it makes a HELL of a difference.. :( |
December 18th, 2003, 08:07 AM | #3 |
Major Player
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Singapore, Passport: Malaysia
Posts: 407
|
Ahh.. Frank fishing for my reply.
I like my MX350. And I tested the MX350 next to Steven Khong's MX300, the wide angle is the same coverage! But the stupid MX350 lens is offset to one side, so filters with a center doesn't work. The MX300 is also offset to one side, but not as much as the MX350.
__________________
Cam: Panasonic MX350EN, SOLD my MX8EN Mac: G3 400MHz PowerBook, 256 MB, OS 9 PC: Pentium 4 2800MHz, 512 MB, WindowsXP SW: iMovie, Final Cut Pro, Adobe Premiere, Ulead Video Studio, various little utilities |
December 18th, 2003, 08:10 AM | #4 |
Major Player
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Singapore, Passport: Malaysia
Posts: 407
|
Oh, for guys with large hands, the MX300 is more comfortble. For tiny hands like mine, the MX350 is welcomed!
|
December 18th, 2003, 03:49 PM | #5 |
Outer Circle
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Hope, BC
Posts: 7,524
|
I agree about the small/large hands thing. For me, the MX300 is a bit difficult to hold; small hands but hard knuckles. :-)
Wasn't fishing, just bored, and wanted to post something. I meant the physical size of the front lens element, though I believe we were there before at dv.com. |
December 20th, 2003, 07:01 PM | #6 |
Outer Circle
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Hope, BC
Posts: 7,524
|
MX300 verses MX350: http://www.mycen.com.my/inbox/mx2.html
|
| ||||||
|
|