|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
October 10th, 2004, 10:44 AM
|
#1 |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 29
|
FX1 vs. panasonic AJ-SPX800 or AJ-spx900
Hey guys,
Help enlighten me here. What would the benefit be of having the SPX800 or 900 over that of the FX1, as far as resolution. I know that the 800 and 900 have bigger chips which will allow for better low light, but if they are both (FX1 and 800) filming a well lit scene, will the FX1 have a better resolution? Which one will give the better picture? Thanks, Josh M. |
|
|
|
October 10th, 2004, 11:12 AM
|
#2 |
|
Obstreperous Rex
|
Higher resolution does not insure better image quality. These are two completely different classes of camera; you're talking about $3,000 vs. $20,000. The price is your guide. If you can afford production gear at the $20,000 price point, then that's definitely the way you need to go.
("It's not just pixels." -- Michael Pappas) |
|
|
|
|
October 10th, 2004, 11:27 AM
|
#3 |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 29
|
Chris,
Thanks for the reply. I understand the difference in price and that more pixels don't necessarily mean a better picture. However, can you be more specific in how the Panasonic would produce a better picture. Thanks, Josh M. |
|
|
|
|
October 10th, 2004, 12:05 PM
|
#4 |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: California
Posts: 667
|
Josh, that's like asking why is a Maserati__better then a Honda Acura. Both will get you from point a to point b. Both cars have 4 wheels, engine, stirring wheel, front lights etc etc. Get the picture. They may be similar, but they are in an entirely different class on every level. So when anyone asks that question, it's not so easy to break it fully down. Of-course we could sit down and spend a whole day breaking it into technical specifics as to isolate all the elemental differences that would highlight what makes that camera better then the other. I've been friends with Chris for some time. Chris dreams, and even wishes he had a whole day to break that down into scientific precise descriptions of these cameras. But hell, who has the time to do that........
Josh, I believe we will soon have clips coming in like Tsunamis, _ any day. The same thing happen when the DVX100 was first announced. The beach footage, and then the expo footage was the first to surface that us hungry devouring Image/camera addicts got our first high from. I'm sure it is soon to happen again................Hell, I'm Getting hungry thinking about it.............. Grrrrrrrr Michael Pappas http://www.pbase.com/arrfilms www.PappasArts.com |
|
|
|
|
October 10th, 2004, 04:30 PM
|
#5 |
|
Obstreperous Rex
|
Lens mount, glass, CCD size, image controls, power options, lens controllers, remote CCU, genlock, SDI, this list goes on and on... but as Michael points out... we'd need a day to explain it all, the reasons why a $20,000 camera is better than a $3,000 camera.
|
|
|
|
|
October 10th, 2004, 07:05 PM
|
#6 |
|
Retired DV Info Net Almunus
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 6,943
|
Josh,
Clearly you must not realize that cameras are sold by the pound. Seriously, though, if you ever have a chance to get behind (or, better yet, under) one of these pro cams do so. It's not just a different world...it's a different galaxy.
__________________
Lady X Films: A lady with a boring wardrobe...and a global mission. Hey, you don't have enough stuff! Buy with confidence from our sponsors. Hand-picked as the best in the business...Really! See some of my work one frame at a time: www.KenTanaka.com |
|
|
|
|
October 10th, 2004, 07:13 PM
|
#7 |
|
Obstreperous Rex
|
Exactly, Ken... the heavier they are, the more expensive they are.
Think I'll start using that explanation myself. After all it is absolutely true! |
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
||||||
|
|
