b/ h shoot out comparisons at DVinfo.net

David Bass · November 18th, 2003, 03:21 AM

Id like to know what some of you think about the results from the b/h shoot out ,comparing three cameras above $2000 and up.
These tests were carried out by" camcorderinfo .com"
The three cameras compared were.....dcr-vx2000
cannon xl1s
pana dvx100
am interested on your views?

Peter Jefferson · November 18th, 2003, 09:45 AM

pffffft

what a farce....

this "reviewer" obviously doesnt know how to configure the DVX...

what a numbnut...

Stephen van Vuuren · November 18th, 2003, 10:06 AM

An extremely misleading farce.

I sent the editor an email asking to revise the review. It's ironic the site contains a link to Adam Wilt's page - I suggested they read his reviews first :)

Glenn Gipson · November 18th, 2003, 11:18 AM

Camcorderinfo.com is so Sony biased, it isn't funny. The owner of that sight actually said Sony did a smart thing by adding ONLY minor updates to the PD170....even though the new DVX 100 updates blow the PD170 out of the water. The sight is good for breaking news, though.

Nick Medrano · November 18th, 2003, 01:53 PM

Check out all their ads...and check out the "exclusive" reviews on that site. All Sony stuff.

There's your answer.

Stephen van Vuuren · November 18th, 2003, 02:06 PM

Camcorderinfo replied to me and when I posted the replies here, they asked for them to be removed. I suggested they post here themselves, but they don't seem inclined to change or alter their review, so Glenn and Nick are probably right about the editorial bias.

Marc Young · November 18th, 2003, 11:33 PM

I haven't read their $2000 & above camcorder review, but the one this gal Lisa did for under-$2000 camcorders was a real laugh. Duh, Lisa, you are testing a video camera, not a still camera. I have no objection to using a "B&H" test pattern, or any test pattern, for that matter. But, try panning across it at a steady speed or zooming in on it. This will get rid of the 1/8th sec shutter speed which the Canon GL2 seems to be using to capture the low light image. Better yet, rotate the image on a lazy susan. The other things these testers never do is to calibrate the sensitivity index (SI) of the camcorder. Without this, it's like comparing pears to peaches. Without setting the black level and the gain, and telling me what the shutter speed and iris are, the results are meaningless, and irreproducible.

Last but not least, why the heck can't they do standardized lux tests? Give me a set of gray patches, and tell me what the luminance accuracy over each patch is, and the noise sigma, as recorded by each camcorder.

Oh well, I know why they never do this stuff (including vertical smear). Because it makes most of the cameras look like hobby equipment compared to the pro ENG cameras.

Chris Hurd · November 19th, 2003, 12:50 AM

Having relatively ample access to most all 3-chip DV camcorders, I've often proposed doing our own formal comparisons here on DV Info, but of course in a more structured and carefully thought-out manner that makes solid technical sense -- I'd need some serious input from across all of our boards as to how this should best be approached. All of the elements are available, however (all cams in one place at one time, indoor plus outdoor). Let me know your ideas, and together we'll do it up right.

Peter Jefferson · November 19th, 2003, 01:41 AM

chris, thats an bloody beautiful idea :)

maybe throw in some PAL and NTSC comparison models as well if thats possible.

maybe somethign liek a grid chart without a "comparison" set up..

more like an "info" grid... going thru different aspects, with comments (agreed to by polls on the board) eg an image of a Progressive shot is uploaded, and people can vote on its quality compared to another.. this gives a fairer opinion on the "mass vote" and not restricted to one persons opinion...

jsut a thoguht...

Yang Wen · November 19th, 2003, 08:57 AM

Robin Liss from Camcorderinfo do the most pointless reviews on cameras. Half of the reviews goes towards to describing the texture of the hand strap or the color is the camera body, and how nice do the menus look. Totally irrelevant stuff. I give the active forum on that site more credence than the staff's reviews. Read this exerpt from her VX2100 review:

"..Many people are blasting Sony for not including a 24 frames progressive mode of HD capability on the DCR-VX2100. I agree that these are both good features that should be included in future models, however the technology just isn't there yet. If Sony were to include 24 frames progressive it would certainly mean a huge research and development investment cost which would increase the price of the camcorder significantly..."

Buwaahahaha, tell me they're not paid by Sony!.

Chris, do your reviews.. show em how it's really done.

Stephen van Vuuren · November 19th, 2003, 09:00 AM

Chris:

That's a fantastic idea. A great idea would be to do the review with images and short full rez clips for Peter's jury idea. I think a two part jury, one you hand pick experts that will be unbiased, and then, just an open vote.

Nick Kerpchar · November 19th, 2003, 03:26 PM

Chris,
Fantastic idea!

Nick

Mikel Low · November 24th, 2003, 04:37 PM

The reviews on camcorderinfo.com have more bias than a PNP transistor. A waste of bandwidth and more to the point - a bloody waste of time.

Yes, Chris - please begin your reviews. It may save us all from having to endure the existence such sites. Thanks.

Cheers!

Jarred Land · November 26th, 2003, 11:24 AM

Noah Kadner helped make a DVD that compared the Sony to the DVX, its great and you can get it from Promax.com

Robert Mann Z. · December 2nd, 2003, 09:48 AM

interesting to find this thread here, i saw the test, it was terrible, what amazed me more was all the supporters of the test, it's interesting to see what folks will accept as fact...

Chris is you do decide to do a test like that you have my full support...

November 18th, 2003, 03:21 AM	#1
David Bass New Boot Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: u.k. Posts: 23	b/ h shoot out comparisons Id like to know what some of you think about the results from the b/h shoot out ,comparing three cameras above $2000 and up. These tests were carried out by" camcorderinfo .com" The three cameras compared were.....dcr-vx2000 cannon xl1s pana dvx100 am interested on your views?

November 18th, 2003, 10:06 AM	#3
Stephen van Vuuren Space Hipster Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Greensboro, NC Posts: 1,508	An extremely misleading farce. I sent the editor an email asking to revise the review. It's ironic the site contains a link to Adam Wilt's page - I suggested they read his reviews first :) __________________ stephen v2 www.insaturnsrings.com

November 18th, 2003, 02:06 PM	#6
Stephen van Vuuren Space Hipster Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Greensboro, NC Posts: 1,508	Camcorderinfo replied to me and when I posted the replies here, they asked for them to be removed. I suggested they post here themselves, but they don't seem inclined to change or alter their review, so Glenn and Nick are probably right about the editorial bias. __________________ stephen v2 www.insaturnsrings.com

November 19th, 2003, 12:50 AM	#8
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	Having relatively ample access to most all 3-chip DV camcorders, I've often proposed doing our own formal comparisons here on DV Info, but of course in a more structured and carefully thought-out manner that makes solid technical sense -- I'd need some serious input from across all of our boards as to how this should best be approached. All of the elements are available, however (all cams in one place at one time, indoor plus outdoor). Let me know your ideas, and together we'll do it up right. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

November 19th, 2003, 09:00 AM	#11
Stephen van Vuuren Space Hipster Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Greensboro, NC Posts: 1,508	Chris: That's a fantastic idea. A great idea would be to do the review with images and short full rez clips for Peter's jury idea. I think a two part jury, one you hand pick experts that will be unbiased, and then, just an open vote. __________________ stephen v2 www.insaturnsrings.com

November 18th, 2003, 09:45 AM	#2
Peter Jefferson Inner Circle Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Aus Posts: 3,884	pffffft what a farce.... this "reviewer" obviously doesnt know how to configure the DVX... what a numbnut...

November 18th, 2003, 11:18 AM	#4
Glenn Gipson Major Player Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Plainfield, New Jersey Posts: 927	Camcorderinfo.com is so Sony biased, it isn't funny. The owner of that sight actually said Sony did a smart thing by adding ONLY minor updates to the PD170....even though the new DVX 100 updates blow the PD170 out of the water. The sight is good for breaking news, though.

November 18th, 2003, 01:53 PM	#5
Nick Medrano Major Player Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 331	Check out all their ads...and check out the "exclusive" reviews on that site. All Sony stuff. There's your answer.

November 18th, 2003, 11:33 PM	#7
Marc Young Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Honolulu, HI Posts: 112	I haven't read their $2000 & above camcorder review, but the one this gal Lisa did for under-$2000 camcorders was a real laugh. Duh, Lisa, you are testing a video camera, not a still camera. I have no objection to using a "B&H" test pattern, or any test pattern, for that matter. But, try panning across it at a steady speed or zooming in on it. This will get rid of the 1/8th sec shutter speed which the Canon GL2 seems to be using to capture the low light image. Better yet, rotate the image on a lazy susan. The other things these testers never do is to calibrate the sensitivity index (SI) of the camcorder. Without this, it's like comparing pears to peaches. Without setting the black level and the gain, and telling me what the shutter speed and iris are, the results are meaningless, and irreproducible. Last but not least, why the heck can't they do standardized lux tests? Give me a set of gray patches, and tell me what the luminance accuracy over each patch is, and the noise sigma, as recorded by each camcorder. Oh well, I know why they never do this stuff (including vertical smear). Because it makes most of the cameras look like hobby equipment compared to the pro ENG cameras.

November 19th, 2003, 01:41 AM	#9
Peter Jefferson Inner Circle Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Aus Posts: 3,884	chris, thats an bloody beautiful idea :) maybe throw in some PAL and NTSC comparison models as well if thats possible. maybe somethign liek a grid chart without a "comparison" set up.. more like an "info" grid... going thru different aspects, with comments (agreed to by polls on the board) eg an image of a Progressive shot is uploaded, and people can vote on its quality compared to another.. this gives a fairer opinion on the "mass vote" and not restricted to one persons opinion... jsut a thoguht...

November 19th, 2003, 08:57 AM	#10
Yang Wen Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 991	Robin Liss from Camcorderinfo do the most pointless reviews on cameras. Half of the reviews goes towards to describing the texture of the hand strap or the color is the camera body, and how nice do the menus look. Totally irrelevant stuff. I give the active forum on that site more credence than the staff's reviews. Read this exerpt from her VX2100 review: "..Many people are blasting Sony for not including a 24 frames progressive mode of HD capability on the DCR-VX2100. I agree that these are both good features that should be included in future models, however the technology just isn't there yet. If Sony were to include 24 frames progressive it would certainly mean a huge research and development investment cost which would increase the price of the camcorder significantly..." Buwaahahaha, tell me they're not paid by Sony!. Chris, do your reviews.. show em how it's really done.

November 19th, 2003, 03:26 PM	#12
Nick Kerpchar Major Player Join Date: May 2002 Location: Texas Posts: 211	Chris, Fantastic idea! Nick

November 24th, 2003, 04:37 PM	#13
Mikel Low Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: San Francisco, Ca Posts: 39	The reviews on camcorderinfo.com have more bias than a PNP transistor. A waste of bandwidth and more to the point - a bloody waste of time. Yes, Chris - please begin your reviews. It may save us all from having to endure the existence such sites. Thanks. Cheers! __________________ Cheers! K. Mikel Low

November 26th, 2003, 11:24 AM	#14
Jarred Land DVX User Join Date: May 2003 Location: Vancouver Posts: 281	Noah Kadner helped make a DVD that compared the Sony to the DVX, its great and you can get it from Promax.com

December 2nd, 2003, 09:48 AM	#15
Robert Mann Z. Skyonic New York Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: NYC Posts: 614	interesting to find this thread here, i saw the test, it was terrible, what amazed me more was all the supporters of the test, it's interesting to see what folks will accept as fact... Chris is you do decide to do a test like that you have my full support...