ENG camera suggestions wanted.

Thierry Humeau · January 2nd, 2007, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Bang Jensen

snip......
Both cameras are les light sensitive than a 450/570 SD only. About 2/3 fstop.
If you use gain on a XDCAM HD camera you will ruin the picture quality even +3db induce a significant amount of noise and blur to the picture..
On some 2/3 inch SD cameras you can gain up to about +9db, and still have a decent picture!

I am surprised at your notes on the XDCAM HD cameras gain performance. We have 350s and they actually do perform very well with gain up to +9db or even +12db. Look at our test shots at www.telecamfilms.com/xdcam.html

Thierry.

Alex Horvath · January 3rd, 2007, 06:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thierry Humeau

I am surprised at your notes on the XDCAM HD cameras gain performance. We have 350s and they actually do perform very well with gain up to +9db or even +12db. Look at our test shots at www.telecamfilms.com/xdcam.html

Thierry.

Is it for shure, that the 330 and the 350 have the same performance? (beside of the additional features)

Last week I had a 330 for testing and I noticed exactly the same downsides regarding the lightperformance as posted from Brian Bang Jensen.
Speaking with another colleague who owns a 350 said the opposite, so exactly the same as you, Thierry. I know that the colleague has the same high requirements to the quality as me, so I´m a little confused.
In the last days I heard a lot of different experiences with the 330 but nothing critical about the 350.....
So again: Is it for shure, that the 330 and the 350 have the same performance?

Beside of that, my 330 test model brought up a hotpixel at +9b and depending on the whitebalance 3 additional one at +12db,
Disc Read errors when switching on, and an error which could solved only by taking away the battery. (newest firmware was up)

disappointed...
alex

Brian Bang Jensen · January 3rd, 2007, 07:00 AM

I have find out why there is a difference in noise using gain.

It is all op to the gamma setting, use STD gamma and +12db, and there is a lot of noise, use cine2 gamma, and the noise disappears….

So the difference, is not if it is a 330 or a 350 but it depends on the gamma setting.

Maybe 350 users mostly use there cameras for film like productions, and therefore have set the gamma in cine mode!

I have always used my camera in std gamma and tuned the knee and black to my preference, thereby avoided the need for grading in post.

From now on I will go the cine route. It maybe, gives a little more work in post, but the overall quality of my work will gain a lift.

For the other problems Alex have experienced, I have newer seen it.
My camera (330) have always performed well.
For the Disc Read errors, it wasn’t because there were takes on it in another bitrate?

I have updated the firmware.

Thierry Humeau · January 3rd, 2007, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex Horvath

Is it for shure, that the 330 and the 350 have the same performance? (beside of the additional features)

Last week I had a 330 for testing and I noticed exactly the same downsides regarding the lightperformance as posted from Brian Bang Jensen.
Speaking with another colleague who owns a 350 said the opposite, so exactly the same as you, Thierry. I know that the colleague has the same high requirements to the quality as me, so I´m a little confused.
In the last days I heard a lot of different experiences with the 330 but nothing critical about the 350.....
So again: Is it for shure, that the 330 and the 350 have the same performance?

Beside of that, my 330 test model brought up a hotpixel at +9b and depending on the whitebalance 3 additional one at +12db,
Disc Read errors when switching on, and an error which could solved only by taking away the battery. (newest firmware was up)

disappointed...
alex

In regard to noise, what is your reference display? The camera viewfinder, the camera LCD or an actual professional HD monitor with componen or HD-SDI inputs? Just looking through the viewfinder and switching to different levels of gain can be VERY deceiving, especially if the peaking adjustment on your viewfinder is slightly over. The viewfinder noise level on both the 330 and 350 models happen to be very sensitive to the use of gain, more than I have ever seen on any professional HD cameras. XDCAM HD cameras use standard def viewfinder and the problem most likely lies in the HD/SD downconversion of the video signal sent to the viewfinder.

In regard to your hot pixel at +9db, this should be easily taken care of by using the camera's APR function. Just hold your black balance switch down until it cycles 4 or 5 times through the all black balance process. This should mask any hot pixels.

Thierry.

Alex Horvath · January 4th, 2007, 03:59 AM

Thierry, my testsetup was in a controlled enviroment, with Waveform/vectorscope for alignement to a 17"PVM YUV SD Monitor and a professional native 16:9 3Chip DLP Projector.
Hotpixels were temperature dependent, after one hour blackbalance process didn´t help and it was seen at 0dB.
To much errormessages (discread errors on an empty quickformatted disc)
The 4:3 1,5" Viewfinder on such a Camera in conjunction with the behavior from the autofocus Optik, peaking and zebra switched on AND framing a picture, indeed a creative act...

But to shorten the survey, apparently there was something wrong with the camera, she went back to the service.
I will have another try with a 350 at the end of this month. (and better organized with different lenses)
The workflow, nondestrcutive, native in HD and SD and never ever capturing is a bummer, so I don´t give up, I really want to have this camcorder

alex

Brian Bang Jensen · January 4th, 2007, 04:53 AM

Sorry the post came up twice….

Brian Bang Jensen · January 4th, 2007, 04:55 AM

As most of my customers still displays my work on an SD CRT television set, this is my preferred tool for testing if the takes is OK.

In my editing system I have an 1680 x 1050 LCD HP monitor.

I never uses the viewfinder, as a tool for testing camera settings!

My camera is an 330 with no SDI, I use firewire/FAM from disk, because this is the way I will be using my footage, in a real production.

In my opinion, the SDI from XDCAM HD won’t give a better picture quality, because it is an up converted 4:2:0 signal.
On my timeline in EDIUS I work with 10 bit 4:2:2. it does not give an improvement to my original footage, but it make a lot of difference to my graphics, transitions and stills.

The use of cine2 for getting rid of some of the noise, is fine to some extend.
If you push the grading in post, so that the picture is, as in std gamma, the noise will to some extend be visible again.
I have found out, if using gain and the camera is set to cine 2, and master black to –10, the picture is OK, and the grading can be held down to minor adjustments.
This leaves me with a picture that can be used in my production.
The picture is a little more flat than if I was using STD gamma or if I pushed it all the way in grading,
But the bottom line is, I can now use the low light takes in my production……

Regarding the difference between the 330 and 350. To my knowledge, it is only found, between people who don’t have both types, in there hand, at the same time!

Take a 330 and a 350, set them up exactly the same, and my bet is, that you can’t se any difference……….

January 4th, 2007, 04:53 AM	#21
Brian Bang Jensen Regular Crew Join Date: May 2006 Location: Denmark Posts: 79	Not answering for Alex, but here is some comments on how I work and test my camera se Sorry the post came up twice….

January 4th, 2007, 04:55 AM	#22
Brian Bang Jensen Regular Crew Join Date: May 2006 Location: Denmark Posts: 79	Not answering for Alex, but here is some comments on how I work and test my camera As most of my customers still displays my work on an SD CRT television set, this is my preferred tool for testing if the takes is OK. In my editing system I have an 1680 x 1050 LCD HP monitor. I never uses the viewfinder, as a tool for testing camera settings! My camera is an 330 with no SDI, I use firewire/FAM from disk, because this is the way I will be using my footage, in a real production. In my opinion, the SDI from XDCAM HD won’t give a better picture quality, because it is an up converted 4:2:0 signal. On my timeline in EDIUS I work with 10 bit 4:2:2. it does not give an improvement to my original footage, but it make a lot of difference to my graphics, transitions and stills. The use of cine2 for getting rid of some of the noise, is fine to some extend. If you push the grading in post, so that the picture is, as in std gamma, the noise will to some extend be visible again. I have found out, if using gain and the camera is set to cine 2, and master black to –10, the picture is OK, and the grading can be held down to minor adjustments. This leaves me with a picture that can be used in my production. The picture is a little more flat than if I was using STD gamma or if I pushed it all the way in grading, But the bottom line is, I can now use the low light takes in my production…… Regarding the difference between the 330 and 350. To my knowledge, it is only found, between people who don’t have both types, in there hand, at the same time! Take a 330 and a 350, set them up exactly the same, and my bet is, that you can’t se any difference……….

January 3rd, 2007, 07:00 AM	#18
Brian Bang Jensen Regular Crew Join Date: May 2006 Location: Denmark Posts: 79	I have find out why there is a difference in noise using gain. It is all op to the gamma setting, use STD gamma and +12db, and there is a lot of noise, use cine2 gamma, and the noise disappears…. So the difference, is not if it is a 330 or a 350 but it depends on the gamma setting. Maybe 350 users mostly use there cameras for film like productions, and therefore have set the gamma in cine mode! I have always used my camera in std gamma and tuned the knee and black to my preference, thereby avoided the need for grading in post. From now on I will go the cine route. It maybe, gives a little more work in post, but the overall quality of my work will gain a lift. For the other problems Alex have experienced, I have newer seen it. My camera (330) have always performed well. For the Disc Read errors, it wasn’t because there were takes on it in another bitrate? I have updated the firmware.

January 4th, 2007, 03:59 AM	#20
Alex Horvath Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Innsbruck,Austria Posts: 45	Thierry, my testsetup was in a controlled enviroment, with Waveform/vectorscope for alignement to a 17"PVM YUV SD Monitor and a professional native 16:9 3Chip DLP Projector. Hotpixels were temperature dependent, after one hour blackbalance process didn´t help and it was seen at 0dB. To much errormessages (discread errors on an empty quickformatted disc) The 4:3 1,5" Viewfinder on such a Camera in conjunction with the behavior from the autofocus Optik, peaking and zebra switched on AND framing a picture, indeed a creative act... But to shorten the survey, apparently there was something wrong with the camera, she went back to the service. I will have another try with a 350 at the end of this month. (and better organized with different lenses) The workflow, nondestrcutive, native in HD and SD and never ever capturing is a bummer, so I don´t give up, I really want to have this camcorder alex