HC3 image soft at DVinfo.net

Roger Shealy · February 4th, 2008, 08:41 PM

I notice that when I use my HC3 the image tends to be very soft. I usually find that if I bump the contrast up to around 25% it looks much better. Much more and it starts to get grainy. Much less and it looks fuzzy.

Anybody have comments/shared experiences with your HC series camera and if you have a better method.

Thanks,

Roger

Jack Zhang · February 7th, 2008, 10:06 PM

There are only 1434k effective pixels during recording on the HC3 due to the electronic stabilizer, counting for some of the softness.

Areas that are too bright to be captured clearly by the sensor can also be soft.

John M. Graham · February 7th, 2008, 10:18 PM

I'm sorry your image is soft, Roger. I just bought a used HC3, and compared to the FX1 (in good lighting), the picture is sharper. I'm actually very impressed with this camera.

Roger Shealy · February 8th, 2008, 06:20 AM

John,

I'm not unhappy with the camera, just would like to avoid post-capture processing on the image as much as possible. I do use image stabilization, so perhaps Jack is onto something.

Adam Gold · February 8th, 2008, 11:55 AM

My experience is similar to John's. I have to turn the sharpness down on the HC3 and up on the FX1 to get them to match in post.

I almost never use any form of in-cam stabilization, as I rarely am off the tripod. So I think Jack's right.

Roger Shealy · February 9th, 2008, 09:25 PM

I give the non-IS a whirl and see what it does.

Thanks for the input.

February 4th, 2008, 08:41 PM	#1
Roger Shealy Major Player Join Date: May 2007 Location: Fayetteville, GA Posts: 772	HC3 image soft I notice that when I use my HC3 the image tends to be very soft. I usually find that if I bump the contrast up to around 25% it looks much better. Much more and it starts to get grainy. Much less and it looks fuzzy. Anybody have comments/shared experiences with your HC series camera and if you have a better method. Thanks, Roger

February 7th, 2008, 10:06 PM	#2
Jack Zhang Inner Circle Join Date: May 2005 Location: Burnaby, BC, Canada Posts: 3,053	There are only 1434k effective pixels during recording on the HC3 due to the electronic stabilizer, counting for some of the softness. Areas that are too bright to be captured clearly by the sensor can also be soft.

February 7th, 2008, 10:18 PM	#3
John M. Graham Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Fort Worth, Texas Posts: 83	I'm sorry your image is soft, Roger. I just bought a used HC3, and compared to the FX1 (in good lighting), the picture is sharper. I'm actually very impressed with this camera.

February 8th, 2008, 06:20 AM	#4
Roger Shealy Major Player Join Date: May 2007 Location: Fayetteville, GA Posts: 772	John, I'm not unhappy with the camera, just would like to avoid post-capture processing on the image as much as possible. I do use image stabilization, so perhaps Jack is onto something.

February 8th, 2008, 11:55 AM	#5
Adam Gold Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Woodinville, WA USA Posts: 3,467	My experience is similar to John's. I have to turn the sharpness down on the HC3 and up on the FX1 to get them to match in post. I almost never use any form of in-cam stabilization, as I rarely am off the tripod. So I think Jack's right.

February 9th, 2008, 09:25 PM	#6
Roger Shealy Major Player Join Date: May 2007 Location: Fayetteville, GA Posts: 772	I give the non-IS a whirl and see what it does. Thanks for the input.