And finally... the dvx100 arrives and... what the hell is this?

Patrick Bower · March 26th, 2003, 01:28 PM

There are some explanations here:

http://www.michaeldvd.com.au/Articles/VideoConnectors/VideoConnectors.asp

I am actually using SCART connectors, but both the DVD and the TV have menu options to set the ouput and input to RGB or S-VGA.

Patrick

Juan Trujillo · March 26th, 2003, 03:00 PM

Miguel, 'component' output is what we call Eurconector, but with RGB transmission. I've got a 20000 pesetas DVD player and a SABA 25" TV. The DVD outputs component image (far superior to S-VHS one) and the first 'euroconector' on the TV accepts this (but not the second). To see properly your filmings on tv you should need an expensive RGB out trough your computer.

Is it the image very good on your PC? Better than XM2?
Could you please post some screencaps?

Do you realise that your camera's software has to be 1.08 or higher? If not, you have to upgrade it, in order to capture image properly vía firewire (there's one field delay in 'old' PAL DVX-100E).

I'd love to see those caps (and clips, if possible).

Best regards from Salamanca.

Boyd Ostroff · March 26th, 2003, 03:17 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Miguel Lopez : If your DVD player has component output that must be a proffesional thing. And i do not know any TV that supports component video input

Here in the US most new DVD players have component output and new TV's have component inputs. This is even true for the lower priced models (DVD players in the $100 price range and TV's in the $200 range). Along these lines, I wonder when the "prosumer" camcorders will start offering this feature?

Miguel Lopez · March 26th, 2003, 04:29 PM

It is good to know new things. I did not know there were DVDs an TVs with component I/O.

And Juan, if you give your email i can write you in spanish for better explanations.

And yep, the software of my camera is 1.08. I just looked this afternoon.

The image in the PC is really incredible. As good as the better digital still cameras. I had a Canon XL1 until last week, and i must say that it is much better in quality issues.

I am going to upload some stills and videos in another post. ;-)

Greg Matty · April 27th, 2003, 10:02 PM

Ditto all the negative comments made about the DVX-100. I am not impressed. You sure don't get a whole lot for 400,000+ pixels per CCD. I read so many glowing reviews and I must have missed all the ones that pointed out the issues myself and Miguel have with this camera.

What really bites is that I am stuck with it for some time since I can't afford to lose money on it by selling it right now. I hope the audio is as good as everyone says it is, that will help some.

Greg Matty

Patrick Bower · April 28th, 2003, 05:33 PM

A shame you're disappointed with the video quality. Is that when viewing AVI files on computer screen, or using RGB or component video input on TV? If you are judging the S-VHS output from the camera, you are seeing a significantly degraded version of what the camera has recorded. Even in interlaced mode.
I think the audio excellent. I have used it to record an amateur symphony orchestra, with a Rode NT4 stereo microphone. Despite needing a huge dynamic range, there is no audible hiss on the recording. As I recall, the off camera sound quality is pretty close to the sound off the mixer feed.
I have also used it to record a birthday celebration in a restaurant, with no additonal lighting. I just needed 6dB of gain, and there is very little graininess in the video.
I bought the DVX100 because I wanted low light performance comparable to the VX2000, XLR inputs and good enought audio quality so I didn't have to make dual system recordings for music. The DVX100 is the cheapest camera do do all that. Maybe it's not as durable as the PD150. Time will tell.

Dylan Couper · April 28th, 2003, 05:59 PM

I think all cameras should be judged by the picture and sound they have produced when depleted down to lowly VHS level, since that's probably where 98% of everything shot on video cameras ends up.

Greg Matty · April 29th, 2003, 08:03 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Patrick Bower : A shame you're disappointed with the video quality. Is that when viewing AVI files on computer screen, or using RGB or component video input on TV? If you are judging the S-VHS output from the camera, you are seeing a significantly degraded version of what the camera has recorded. Even in interlaced mode.
I think the audio excellent. I have used it to record an amateur symphony orchestra, with a Rode NT4 stereo microphone. Despite needing a huge dynamic range, there is no audible hiss on the recording. As I recall, the off camera sound quality is pretty close to the sound off the mixer feed.
I have also used it to record a birthday celebration in a restaurant, with no additonal lighting. I just needed 6dB of gain, and there is very little graininess in the video.
I bought the DVX100 because I wanted low light performance comparable to the VX2000, XLR inputs and good enought audio quality so I didn't have to make dual system recordings for music. The DVX100 is the cheapest camera do do all that. Maybe it's not as durable as the PD150. Time will tell. -->>>

My first post was a little harsh. Maybe one reason I am disappointed is because what I see as a flaw is just the DV codec and not the camera? Areas of high contrast leave a lot to be desired and I know that is more DV than anything else. Maybe I did not notice this with my XL-1 since the image is softer?

All preview tests are being done via S-VHS viewed on a Sony NTSC monitor. I read the posts about how much better the video should look using component video. Are you guys sure that is the case? I will put money on the claim that going from S-VHS to component is no where near as big a jump as going from composite to S-VHS. Unfortunately, my DV deck does not have component out. Maybe it is time for a DSR-11?

I have been using FCP for three years and everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, who uses FCP knows for certain that video on your CRT monitor or LCD is MUCH lower in quality than what you see on the NTSC monitor. In fact, when someone complains about how bad video looks, the first response is alway, "Are you viewing it on your computer screen or an NTSC monitor?" Then again, that is seen through firewire. On the third hand, doing an A-B comparison with XL-1 and DVX footage should still work if they are both going through S-VHS.

I've beaten that topic to death and will finally get a chance to do more testing this afternoon at a motorcycle shop. I have been riding dirt bikes since I was twelve and I know what the various components look like. That make it easy to judge picture quality.

As mentioned, I was a little too harsh in my first post and most of that comes from an unrealistic expectation of what any $3,500 3CCD camera can do. That is one thing I learned from dirt biking. If one manufacturers 250cc MX bike doesn't have enough power, none of the other 250cc bikes will either. Get an open classer.

Greg Matty

Boyd Ostroff · April 29th, 2003, 08:51 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Greg Matty : have been using FCP for three years and everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, who uses FCP knows for certain that video on your CRT monitor or LCD is MUCH lower in quality than what you see on the NTSC monitor. -->>>

Well that has more to do with the way that FCP generates its previews than it does with the quality of the computer monitor. If you have a second monitor hooked up to your mac, set it to 720x480 resolution. You can use the the "calibrate" option in the monitors control panel to set the gamma closer to the level of an NTSC monitor. You could even try to calibrate it with color bars (see http://www.videouniversity.com/tvbars2.htm). Now take the actual quicktime file that you captured in FCP and open it in Quicktime Pro. Under the movie properties, select the video track and enable high quality playback. Then play your file in full screen mode.You get a pretty clean looking image if you try all this, one that looks much better than the FCP previews.

Now I don't know anything about the DVX100 and don't have an opinion on this debate. I just wanted to point out that there is a way to view a quicktime clip on your computer screen in a high quality fashion which is 100% digital. Also, I saw a very clear demonstration of the shortcomings of S-video awhile ago. We were experimenting with a big 12,000 lumen DLP projector on a 40' wide screen. When we used the s-video output from my PowerBook to drive the projector it looked OK, but when we tried the same thing with the VGA output the difference was striking; the colors were much richer and the whole image was was sharper. FWIW, we were viewing QuickTime files using the technique described above.

David Slingerland · May 7th, 2003, 07:15 AM

can anybody tell me how the 25p technology works ? is it the same like its bigger brother the AJ-SDX 900? i know the bigger camera uses dvc-pro.

thanks,

March 26th, 2003, 03:00 PM	#17
Juan Trujillo New Boot Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 14	... Miguel, 'component' output is what we call Eurconector, but with RGB transmission. I've got a 20000 pesetas DVD player and a SABA 25" TV. The DVD outputs component image (far superior to S-VHS one) and the first 'euroconector' on the TV accepts this (but not the second). To see properly your filmings on tv you should need an expensive RGB out trough your computer. Is it the image very good on your PC? Better than XM2? Could you please post some screencaps? Do you realise that your camera's software has to be 1.08 or higher? If not, you have to upgrade it, in order to capture image properly vía firewire (there's one field delay in 'old' PAL DVX-100E). I'd love to see those caps (and clips, if possible). Best regards from Salamanca.

April 28th, 2003, 05:59 PM	#22
Dylan Couper Wrangler Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Vancouver, British Columbia Posts: 8,314	I think all cameras should be judged by the picture and sound they have produced when depleted down to lowly VHS level, since that's probably where 98% of everything shot on video cameras ends up. __________________ Need to rent camera gear in Vancouver BC? Check me out at camerarentalsvancouver.com

May 7th, 2003, 07:15 AM	#25
David Slingerland Major Player Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Soest ,Holland Posts: 307	can anybody tell me how the 25p technology works ? is it the same like its bigger brother the AJ-SDX 900? i know the bigger camera uses dvc-pro. thanks, __________________ D.Slingerland director/cameraman http://www.slingerlandproductions.nl

March 26th, 2003, 01:28 PM	#16
Patrick Bower Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: London, England Posts: 126	There are some explanations here: http://www.michaeldvd.com.au/Articles/VideoConnectors/VideoConnectors.asp I am actually using SCART connectors, but both the DVD and the TV have menu options to set the ouput and input to RGB or S-VGA. Patrick

March 26th, 2003, 03:17 PM	#18
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,802	<<<-- Originally posted by Miguel Lopez : If your DVD player has component output that must be a proffesional thing. And i do not know any TV that supports component video input Here in the US most new DVD players have component output and new TV's have component inputs. This is even true for the lower priced models (DVD players in the $100 price range and TV's in the $200 range). Along these lines, I wonder when the "prosumer" camcorders will start offering this feature?

March 26th, 2003, 04:29 PM	#19
Miguel Lopez Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Madrid, Spain Posts: 187	It is good to know new things. I did not know there were DVDs an TVs with component I/O. And Juan, if you give your email i can write you in spanish for better explanations. And yep, the software of my camera is 1.08. I just looked this afternoon. The image in the PC is really incredible. As good as the better digital still cameras. I had a Canon XL1 until last week, and i must say that it is much better in quality issues. I am going to upload some stills and videos in another post. ;-)

April 27th, 2003, 10:02 PM	#20
Greg Matty Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Kirkland, WA Posts: 177	Ditto all the negative comments made about the DVX-100. I am not impressed. You sure don't get a whole lot for 400,000+ pixels per CCD. I read so many glowing reviews and I must have missed all the ones that pointed out the issues myself and Miguel have with this camera. What really bites is that I am stuck with it for some time since I can't afford to lose money on it by selling it right now. I hope the audio is as good as everyone says it is, that will help some. Greg Matty

April 28th, 2003, 05:33 PM	#21
Patrick Bower Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: London, England Posts: 126	A shame you're disappointed with the video quality. Is that when viewing AVI files on computer screen, or using RGB or component video input on TV? If you are judging the S-VHS output from the camera, you are seeing a significantly degraded version of what the camera has recorded. Even in interlaced mode. I think the audio excellent. I have used it to record an amateur symphony orchestra, with a Rode NT4 stereo microphone. Despite needing a huge dynamic range, there is no audible hiss on the recording. As I recall, the off camera sound quality is pretty close to the sound off the mixer feed. I have also used it to record a birthday celebration in a restaurant, with no additonal lighting. I just needed 6dB of gain, and there is very little graininess in the video. I bought the DVX100 because I wanted low light performance comparable to the VX2000, XLR inputs and good enought audio quality so I didn't have to make dual system recordings for music. The DVX100 is the cheapest camera do do all that. Maybe it's not as durable as the PD150. Time will tell.

April 29th, 2003, 08:03 AM	#23
Greg Matty Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Kirkland, WA Posts: 177	<<<-- Originally posted by Patrick Bower : A shame you're disappointed with the video quality. Is that when viewing AVI files on computer screen, or using RGB or component video input on TV? If you are judging the S-VHS output from the camera, you are seeing a significantly degraded version of what the camera has recorded. Even in interlaced mode. I think the audio excellent. I have used it to record an amateur symphony orchestra, with a Rode NT4 stereo microphone. Despite needing a huge dynamic range, there is no audible hiss on the recording. As I recall, the off camera sound quality is pretty close to the sound off the mixer feed. I have also used it to record a birthday celebration in a restaurant, with no additonal lighting. I just needed 6dB of gain, and there is very little graininess in the video. I bought the DVX100 because I wanted low light performance comparable to the VX2000, XLR inputs and good enought audio quality so I didn't have to make dual system recordings for music. The DVX100 is the cheapest camera do do all that. Maybe it's not as durable as the PD150. Time will tell. -->>> My first post was a little harsh. Maybe one reason I am disappointed is because what I see as a flaw is just the DV codec and not the camera? Areas of high contrast leave a lot to be desired and I know that is more DV than anything else. Maybe I did not notice this with my XL-1 since the image is softer? All preview tests are being done via S-VHS viewed on a Sony NTSC monitor. I read the posts about how much better the video should look using component video. Are you guys sure that is the case? I will put money on the claim that going from S-VHS to component is no where near as big a jump as going from composite to S-VHS. Unfortunately, my DV deck does not have component out. Maybe it is time for a DSR-11? I have been using FCP for three years and everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, who uses FCP knows for certain that video on your CRT monitor or LCD is MUCH lower in quality than what you see on the NTSC monitor. In fact, when someone complains about how bad video looks, the first response is alway, "Are you viewing it on your computer screen or an NTSC monitor?" Then again, that is seen through firewire. On the third hand, doing an A-B comparison with XL-1 and DVX footage should still work if they are both going through S-VHS. I've beaten that topic to death and will finally get a chance to do more testing this afternoon at a motorcycle shop. I have been riding dirt bikes since I was twelve and I know what the various components look like. That make it easy to judge picture quality. As mentioned, I was a little too harsh in my first post and most of that comes from an unrealistic expectation of what any $3,500 3CCD camera can do. That is one thing I learned from dirt biking. If one manufacturers 250cc MX bike doesn't have enough power, none of the other 250cc bikes will either. Get an open classer. Greg Matty

April 29th, 2003, 08:51 AM	#24
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,802	<<<-- Originally posted by Greg Matty : have been using FCP for three years and everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, who uses FCP knows for certain that video on your CRT monitor or LCD is MUCH lower in quality than what you see on the NTSC monitor. -->>> Well that has more to do with the way that FCP generates its previews than it does with the quality of the computer monitor. If you have a second monitor hooked up to your mac, set it to 720x480 resolution. You can use the the "calibrate" option in the monitors control panel to set the gamma closer to the level of an NTSC monitor. You could even try to calibrate it with color bars (see http://www.videouniversity.com/tvbars2.htm). Now take the actual quicktime file that you captured in FCP and open it in Quicktime Pro. Under the movie properties, select the video track and enable high quality playback. Then play your file in full screen mode.You get a pretty clean looking image if you try all this, one that looks much better than the FCP previews. Now I don't know anything about the DVX100 and don't have an opinion on this debate. I just wanted to point out that there is a way to view a quicktime clip on your computer screen in a high quality fashion which is 100% digital. Also, I saw a very clear demonstration of the shortcomings of S-video awhile ago. We were experimenting with a big 12,000 lumen DLP projector on a 40' wide screen. When we used the s-video output from my PowerBook to drive the projector it looked OK, but when we tried the same thing with the VGA output the difference was striking; the colors were much richer and the whole image was was sharper. FWIW, we were viewing QuickTime files using the technique described above.