PDX10 -- various questions

[Mike Rehmus]

<<<-- Originally posted by Anthony Milic : Hello people.

First and foremost, this forum is a goldmine of information - but of course one quickly discovers that the more one knows, the more one knows one doesn't know. no? ...*sigh
Like many, I've had a real hard time making a final decision on which camera to purchase. (PD150 v PDX10). My liking of 16:9 is what's put the PDX10 ahead, (of course the price diff doesn't hurt)and I feel that I will set my mind and purchase very shortly.
At this stage, The X10 will be used primarily for artistic purposes/short film.

So many topics have been discussed and revisited, though I still have a few concerns regarding PDX10 that I'd appreciate a fresh opinion on.

1. I've been confused with some info read on data compression via USB upload. Simply, will it effect the quality of my image if I upload for post editing/effects etc?

You cannot download the video from the tape to your computer via USB AFAIK. The USB port is for stills. The video is compressed as a fact of being DV.

2. 7Lux dummified...really. Just to give me a really broad idea: Let's say for example it's an outdoor shoot on a grey, overcast afternoon - is the integrity of my image going to suffer/grain?

No but the inside of a room with windows might pose a problem or two for you. Depends on how late in the afternoon.

An 'everyday' (low-light) situation where I couldn't shoot for example would be...?

Indoors, dimly lit or at night without a lot of grain and black areas. Understand that the PD150 can get a quite reasonable picture when it is too dark to read. The 10 will not come close. Also, the 10 has a tendency to streak in high-contrast situations so where the 150 would do OK with just candle light, the 10 will suffer from not enough sensitivity and streaking. The 150 will streak too but not nearly as much from all reports.

3. Smaller CCDs. When and how will this affect the quality of my image.
450,000 dot to 246,000 seems significant.

Not an issue of resolution but of pixel sensor size. That's the reason for 7 lux.

4. Stupid question (no such thing right!?) - does the PDX10 have any time lapse function? - you know the old "watch the grass grow".
err.. I can record at different speeds right?

Ya gotta post that one in the correct forum but probably. Most Sony camcorders do have that function.

[Boyd Ostroff]

<<<-- Originally posted by Anthony Milic :2. 7Lux dummified...really. Just to give me a really broad idea: Let's say for example it's an outdoor shoot on a grey, overcast afternoon - is the integrity of my image going to suffer/grain? -->>>

Actually I was just getting ready to post a bunch of examples from a long day of location shooting with the PDX-10. Sure, it would be nice to have a little more light sensitivity, but the camera can really handle all but the most challenging situations. Here are a few examples. These were taken with the light from a campfire. The moon, clouds, reflection on the water, are all real. OK, we cheated just a bit and used a $5 home depot flashlight with a piece of diffusion gel and amber gel taped to it, from a distance of maybe 30 feet. Note that these images have been treated in post (using FCP filters), but are actual video frames. Some of them have a significant amount of noise, while others are surprisingly clean.

http://www.greenmist.com/trovatore/f...09/azucena/01/
http://www.greenmist.com/trovatore/f...09/azucena/02/
http://www.greenmist.com/trovatore/f...09/azucena/03/
http://www.greenmist.com/trovatore/f...909/azucena/04
http://www.greenmist.com/trovatore/f...9/ferrando/04/
http://www.greenmist.com/trovatore/f...09/ferrando/06

[Anthony Milic]

ha.. I'm like ..Wrong forum?!? what the hell's he on ab-.. oh. :) .."
sorry dudes.
off to find x10 ppl

ps Thanks for info guys

[Anthony Milic]

Thank you Mike for your information. I appreciate it.

Same to you Boyd. thanks for the input
- now about those video shots. (importantly, are they stills from DV footage or actual photo stills?)
It looks as if you've blackened all unfeatured ares of the shots in post. I presume this was done to counter the grainy/colour leech effect of low light recording. - which makes the more faded, grainy features stand out by contrast.
Now, in terms of the image quality of those featured areas; It's all pretty poor is it not? If not unusable (unless artistically, which is a whole different ball game) or did you take those shots as an example of extreme low light capabilities?
BTW, I like image 4, pretty cool!

(please pardon my lack of photo/cam-lyngo)

Thank you.

[Anthony Milic]

OK Boyd, As soon as I posted previous, I noticed your post on this very topic.

[Boyd Ostroff]

<<<-- Originally posted by Anthony Milic : Now, in terms of the image quality of those featured areas; It's all pretty poor is it not? If not unusable (unless artistically, which is a whole different ball game) or did you take those shots as an example of extreme low light capabilities? -->>>

I can't use all of this footage, but will indeed use a significant amount. I think the grainy-ness (is that a word? ;-) will fit what we're trying to do. And it will end up as part of a montage. This is also "artsy" stuff that's being used in an opera to show what the characters are remembering and fantasizing; it isn't being shown by itself as a movie. But this is all a big experiment for me; we'll see how it looks on the big screen in a couple weeks...

Actually I didn't "blacken" any areas, if anything I brightened them to bring out detail like the night sky, and this does unfortunately serve to bring out the noise even more. But I thought they would be of interest since it shows what the camera can do in what I consider a very low light situation.

Looks like you answered you own question, but yes these are actually de-interlaced 60i video frames.

[Anthony Milic]

Appreciate the help.

Anthony

[Kirk Tutterrow]

I'm getting ready to add a new camera and I'm stuck between the GL2 and PDX10. Not to rehash the numerous other posts, I would just like to know if the PDX10 low light issues would cause noticeable problems in an office environment without a additional lighting. Or are the differences in the low light capabilities only evident in dimly lit places, i.e. nightclubs.

thanks,
Kirk

[Joe Garnero]

My recollection is that the pdx does an admirable job in most lighting conditions. While it may not be a GL2 or PD150, it seemed to fail about the same time my eyes failed me in the dark. I recall it worked quite well at the office, at home and outdoors producing quite good exposure and color.

The only drawbacks to the camera are the balance (leans left and forward when handheld) and the probabilty of vertical smear in high contrast and point-light situations.

[Shawn Mielke]

The PDX10 does great on a tripod or monopod. I recently shot in a classroom setting, similar in lighting to an office. Noise really wasn't an issue, but I underexposed slightly. Noise is most obvious in distant wide shots, and much of my pdx10 work in this shoot was on a monopod, traversing the general area to grab medium and close ups, as well as some distant wides. No problem.

[James Sullivan]

I am going to get a pdx10 and I want to film while i snowboard, I have learned it is comfortable to have a handle on the top like the xl1 or pd1-50 has. Is there any company that makes one? Thanks guys!
James


(i just realized i put this in the wrong catagory. It woun't let me delete it for some reason.) sorry!

[Steve Nunez]

Hello PDX users,

quick question: I've owned a Canon XL1S, & GL2 as well as the Pan DVX100- all excellent cameras but none shoot native 16:9. I'd like to purchase the PDX10 (b/c of the 16:9) but keep hearing issues of low light incapabilities. I primarily shoot nature and for the most part shoot under mixed lighting conditions (whatever enviornement the animal is in)......my question is: can the PDX10 shoot under lowish light into somewhat dark areas of say, "tree branches"? I have uploaded a very small 1.6mb .mov file that shows just the type of lighting i find myself shooting under....I wouldn't call it dark, but somewhat overcast.....check out the clip here-

http://stevenunez.com/hostedimages/rtwpigeons.mov

- I'd appreciate opinions on wether you guys think the PDX would be suitable for this range of light shooting?

The clip is of a redtail hawk eating a NYC pigeon under overcast conditions (just after rain) and into the branches a bit....hope it doesn't gross you guys out too much!
Not sure which camera shot this footage but likely the GL2.

[Boyd Ostroff]

Personally I don't think you'll have any problems whatsoever with this sort of condition. Although the PDX-10 is a couple stops slower than the VX-2000, it can still work in very dim places. And footage shot at f1.6 +18 db is still generally very clean.

Here are some pretty extreme examples

Shot at sunset: http://www.greenmist.com/trovatore/film/20030831

It was REALLY dark in this one, shot at 1/30 sec well after sunset: http://www.greenmist.com/trovatore/film/20030812/08

Just the light of a campfire with a flashlight providing a little accent:
http://www.greenmist.com/trovatore/f...09/ferrando/04
http://www.greenmist.com/trovatore/f...909/azucena/04

There is plenty of noise apparent in these shots, and I only offer them as proof that the PDX-10 can capture images in really dark places. Conditions such as you describe (dark areas of tree branches) really shouldn't be too much of a challenge.

[Steve Nunez]

Boyd,

thanks for the response. I like the "aura" the PDX gave the characters you shot...I know it's noise but it gives the video a nice quality for the setting you setup.

I have yet to get to B&H to try out the PDX10 personally- they have them setup on a small kiosk with live feeds out to monitors with a decently lit "model railroad" setup to pan around with and check out the video quality 1sthand......I got to get to B&H...again thanks for the response.

If anyone cares to add comments- I'm all eyes!

[Steve Nunez]

Well I've bitten the bullet and have purchased the PDX10.

....First impression is of extreme high build quality- feels very much like a professional camera should- very sturdy and robust.

I tested it's low light shooting as this seems to be the camera's "weak" spot- but am finding it quite useable and will likely suit my subject matter very well. I did notice some grain but nowhere near as bad as I had imagined- with just average decent lighting, the camera does fine. The 16:9 mode is absolute killer and the 3.5" screen is excellent...menu's are very simple to navigate and set...just a superb job by Sony (and I'm not a big Sony fan!!)

The big test will be when I add a tele lens- if there's image degradation it will be made apparent on a large Tv set.....stay tuned on that one!!!

Anyone thinking of getting a PDX10 but is worried about it's low light performance should see if they could "demo" a unit at a local store- you'll be pleasantly surprised at how well it works....I'd say it's a tad bit grainer than a GL2 at similar light levels....but in no way is it horrible.

I definitely like this PDX10 better than my GL2 and plan on shooting allot of video.....I'll move onto HDV when FCP can edit it natively....and even then I may hold onto this camera- it's "that" sweet.

Happy PDX10 owner! Let the games begin!