16:9 Real World Result with PD's and VX's

John Jay · September 28th, 2004, 12:53 PM

For 16:9 and SLIM check pages 36 & 40 of your manual

Anamorphic simply means the image aspect ratio is different than the frame aspect ratio, thats how 16:9 can be represented in a 4:3 frame

Ruben Senderey · September 28th, 2004, 01:55 PM

THINKING OF GETTING A CENTURY PRECISION LENS 16X9 ds-1609-sb

Do you know if will fill out the all screen on a 16x9 tv,or you will still see the black lines on top and bottom,
thanks

http://www.adorama.com/CYDS1609SB.html?searchinfo=ds-1609-sb&item_no=1

http://www.centuryoptics.com/products/dv/16x9/16x9.htm

Alex Filacchione · September 29th, 2004, 03:01 PM

I am basically trying to decide which camera to get and have narrowed it down to the following:

Pana DVC30
Sony VX2000/PD150
Sony VX21000/PD170

WHich has better digi squeeze 16:9 mode? THe DVC or the VX/PD? Is there even a discernable difference?

I was leaning towards the DVC30 overall. I like that it has frame mode (@ 30fps) & CineGamma, but can't I get all those same effects in post? All those cameras seem to do pretty well in low light. All of the cameras seem to have good manual controls of focus, zoom, f-stop, etc. (which is why I am staying away from the PDX10 and the JVC GR-HD1 - no simultaneous control of f-stop & shutter - just one or the other, plus neither performs well in low light)

So what would steer me in one direction of another (DVC30 vs VX2000/2100)?

And what exactly are the differences between the VX and their complementary PDs? I know that the PDs add color bars, and they have XLRs, but what else? I am thinking more along the lines of the vx series just because they are cheaper, but if a cheap PD comes my way, I'm not turning it down. :-)

Thanks for any help,

Alex F

Boyd Ostroff · September 29th, 2004, 07:05 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Alex Filacchione : (which is why I am staying away from the PDX10 and the JVC GR-HD1 - no simultaneous control of f-stop & shutter - just one or the other-->>>

I think you may have some wrong information. I have both a VX-2000 and PDX-10. The manual control of iris and shutter on these two cameras are identical. They both offer full manual contol of the iris and f-stop but not "simultaneous." You need to choose your shutter speed first, lock it in, then you can manually control the iris. If this bothers you then you should remove the VX-2000 and VX-2100 from your short list.

Alex Filacchione · September 30th, 2004, 07:54 AM

OK, I knew that you could do that w/ the VX, but I was not aware that you could do that with the PDX10. The reviews I read (can't remember where) simply stated that you could only have control over one or the other, similar to the JVC GR-HD1 (again, having control of one OR the other but not both is a big negative to me). Being able to lock one in and then control the other is fine for my purposes.

OK, so then I should probably add the PDX10 to my list and do some more research on it. How is it in low light though? I will most likely be using the camera in low light situations like bars and recording studio control rooms. If it does not do well in low light, then I may be back to my original list...

THanks,

Alex F

Mike Rehmus · September 30th, 2004, 09:01 AM

The answers to how the x10 operates in low light has been a subject of many posts in the camera's Forum. A quick search will probably tell you to take it off your list.

Alex Filacchione · September 30th, 2004, 09:43 AM

Well, that's what I thought (PDX10 & low light). I figure I am going to have to compromise in one way or the other. I am thinking maybe the best solution, if I don't like the 16:9 performance in a camera, is to get a wide angle lens adapter to get more in my frame, and then letterbox it. If I could afford a real anamorphic adapter, I would probably just wait and see how the new Sony HDV cameras turn out instead, but neither are in my budget, sadly. :-(

So that still brings my choice down to DVC30 vs the Sonys...

Thanks,

Alex F

Alex Filacchione · September 30th, 2004, 09:46 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Mike Rehmus : The answers to how the x10 operates in low light has been a subject of many posts in the camera's Forum. A quick search will probably tell you to take it off your list. -->>>

You know, that's part of my problem. I have all of these notes written down on the cameras, and it turns out that some of the notes are wrong, and I can't remember where I got what information from. Most of my info has come from manufacturer specs, sites like this, and various reviews (like camcorderinfo and others). I had thought that the PDX10 was poor in low light, but I also thought that you could only control F-stop OR shutter, but not both, and you can (via locking). The F-stop I was wrong on, so I then begin to wonder about the rest of my info! :-)

Alex F

Boyd Ostroff · September 30th, 2004, 04:38 PM

My PDX-10 works OK in low light, but nowhere near as well as my VX-2000. I've observed about a two and a half f-stop difference between them. Outside at night on the street you would like to have those extra stops. Shooting a dimly lit stage show is on the cusp of what it can do well. For our dark operas I shoot wide open with as much as 15dB gain. You can add 6 or maybe even 9dB gain without any noticeable image noise due to its 14-bit DSP.

You really need to decide which is more important: 16:9 or low light. The PDX-10 produces much better 16:9 than the VX-2000 and its siblings. I think the Sony's will probably be a little better in low light than the DVC-30... bigger chips.

Jheronimus Nunca · October 1st, 2004, 08:03 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Boyd Ostroff : I think the Sony's will probably be a little better in low light than the DVC-30... bigger chips. -->>>

The pdx10 is really 14bit? Sweet.

The dvc30 performs very well in low light, even without the IR SNS. The gain on it goes up to 9db with little noise - 12 bit. The dvc30 is however very sensitive to color differentiations in mixed light settings, but utilizing the manual white balance, it is usually possible to attain a good median between two different light sources, where both look 'natural', or to say it in filmic terms 'motivated'. With the dvc30 it is actually possible to shoot light sources without the smear that 1/4.7" chip cameras seem to exhibit.

Gareth Watkins · October 7th, 2004, 07:57 AM

Hi all,
I've been reading about the widening use of 16:9 format, with cameras like the XL2 on the market...

As I'm in the market for a new camera (I've been looking at the PD170) I have been wondering what the extent of true 16:9 is in general tv broadcast.

Most of the programmes I see are still 4:3 often shown distorted on people's widescreen tv's....

Perhaps any of you out there working in television may be able to comment on the trends...

Is it still worth getting a 170... I can see it's a great camera..

many thanks for your comments..

Regards

Gareth

Robin Davies-Rollinson · October 7th, 2004, 03:49 PM

Gareth,
For UK broadcast, forget anything that isn't 16:9.

Robin

Andre De Clercq · October 7th, 2004, 04:06 PM

Most progams in Europe are transmitted in (letterbox) 16:9

Gareth Watkins · October 8th, 2004, 03:37 AM

Thanks for your replies...

Does this mean that a PD 170 is not a good choice for shooting anything destined for eventual broadcast on satellite TV for example????

Or does one letterbox at the editng stage?

Do not the BBC use these format Sony camaras for certain documentary type programmes???

Basically I'm looking for the best camera to get for eventual tv use.

Regards

Gareth

Robin Davies-Rollinson · October 8th, 2004, 04:19 AM

Gareth,
The BBC use them as second unit cameras - they wouldn't choose to shoot a whole programme with them. If it had to be on DV, then the DSR570WSP is the preferred camera.
I think that the XL2 will start to change the equation now, with decent 16:9 as well as a small size (relative to pro cameras that it)

Robin

September 28th, 2004, 12:53 PM	#121
John Jay Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: US & THEM Posts: 827	For 16:9 and SLIM check pages 36 & 40 of your manual Anamorphic simply means the image aspect ratio is different than the frame aspect ratio, thats how 16:9 can be represented in a 4:3 frame __________________ John Jay Beware *PLUGGER-BYTES*

September 28th, 2004, 01:55 PM	#122
Ruben Senderey Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: LAUDERHILL FLORIDA Posts: 47	16X9 THINKING OF GETTING A CENTURY PRECISION LENS 16X9 ds-1609-sb Do you know if will fill out the all screen on a 16x9 tv,or you will still see the black lines on top and bottom, thanks http://www.adorama.com/CYDS1609SB.html?searchinfo=ds-1609-sb&item_no=1 http://www.centuryoptics.com/products/dv/16x9/16x9.htm

September 29th, 2004, 03:01 PM	#123
Alex Filacchione Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Atlanta, Ga Posts: 129	Better fake 16:9 - DVC30 or Sony? I am basically trying to decide which camera to get and have narrowed it down to the following: Pana DVC30 Sony VX2000/PD150 Sony VX21000/PD170 WHich has better digi squeeze 16:9 mode? THe DVC or the VX/PD? Is there even a discernable difference? I was leaning towards the DVC30 overall. I like that it has frame mode (@ 30fps) & CineGamma, but can't I get all those same effects in post? All those cameras seem to do pretty well in low light. All of the cameras seem to have good manual controls of focus, zoom, f-stop, etc. (which is why I am staying away from the PDX10 and the JVC GR-HD1 - no simultaneous control of f-stop & shutter - just one or the other, plus neither performs well in low light) So what would steer me in one direction of another (DVC30 vs VX2000/2100)? And what exactly are the differences between the VX and their complementary PDs? I know that the PDs add color bars, and they have XLRs, but what else? I am thinking more along the lines of the vx series just because they are cheaper, but if a cheap PD comes my way, I'm not turning it down. :-) Thanks for any help, Alex F

September 29th, 2004, 07:05 PM	#124
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,802	Re: Better fake 16:9 - DVC30 or Sony? <<<-- Originally posted by Alex Filacchione : (which is why I am staying away from the PDX10 and the JVC GR-HD1 - no simultaneous control of f-stop & shutter - just one or the other-->>> I think you may have some wrong information. I have both a VX-2000 and PDX-10. The manual control of iris and shutter on these two cameras are identical. They both offer full manual contol of the iris and f-stop but not "simultaneous." You need to choose your shutter speed first, lock it in, then you can manually control the iris. If this bothers you then you should remove the VX-2000 and VX-2100 from your short list.

September 30th, 2004, 09:01 AM	#126
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	The answers to how the x10 operates in low light has been a subject of many posts in the camera's Forum. A quick search will probably tell you to take it off your list. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

September 30th, 2004, 07:54 AM	#125
Alex Filacchione Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Atlanta, Ga Posts: 129	OK, I knew that you could do that w/ the VX, but I was not aware that you could do that with the PDX10. The reviews I read (can't remember where) simply stated that you could only have control over one or the other, similar to the JVC GR-HD1 (again, having control of one OR the other but not both is a big negative to me). Being able to lock one in and then control the other is fine for my purposes. OK, so then I should probably add the PDX10 to my list and do some more research on it. How is it in low light though? I will most likely be using the camera in low light situations like bars and recording studio control rooms. If it does not do well in low light, then I may be back to my original list... THanks, Alex F

September 30th, 2004, 09:43 AM	#127
Alex Filacchione Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Atlanta, Ga Posts: 129	Well, that's what I thought (PDX10 & low light). I figure I am going to have to compromise in one way or the other. I am thinking maybe the best solution, if I don't like the 16:9 performance in a camera, is to get a wide angle lens adapter to get more in my frame, and then letterbox it. If I could afford a real anamorphic adapter, I would probably just wait and see how the new Sony HDV cameras turn out instead, but neither are in my budget, sadly. :-( So that still brings my choice down to DVC30 vs the Sonys... Thanks, Alex F

September 30th, 2004, 09:46 AM	#128
Alex Filacchione Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Atlanta, Ga Posts: 129	<<<-- Originally posted by Mike Rehmus : The answers to how the x10 operates in low light has been a subject of many posts in the camera's Forum. A quick search will probably tell you to take it off your list. -->>> You know, that's part of my problem. I have all of these notes written down on the cameras, and it turns out that some of the notes are wrong, and I can't remember where I got what information from. Most of my info has come from manufacturer specs, sites like this, and various reviews (like camcorderinfo and others). I had thought that the PDX10 was poor in low light, but I also thought that you could only control F-stop OR shutter, but not both, and you can (via locking). The F-stop I was wrong on, so I then begin to wonder about the rest of my info! :-) Alex F

September 30th, 2004, 04:38 PM	#129
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,802	My PDX-10 works OK in low light, but nowhere near as well as my VX-2000. I've observed about a two and a half f-stop difference between them. Outside at night on the street you would like to have those extra stops. Shooting a dimly lit stage show is on the cusp of what it can do well. For our dark operas I shoot wide open with as much as 15dB gain. You can add 6 or maybe even 9dB gain without any noticeable image noise due to its 14-bit DSP. You really need to decide which is more important: 16:9 or low light. The PDX-10 produces much better 16:9 than the VX-2000 and its siblings. I think the Sony's will probably be a little better in low light than the DVC-30... bigger chips.

October 1st, 2004, 08:03 PM	#130
Jheronimus Nunca New Boot Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: New York, NY Posts: 8	<<<-- Originally posted by Boyd Ostroff : I think the Sony's will probably be a little better in low light than the DVC-30... bigger chips. -->>> The pdx10 is really 14bit? Sweet. The dvc30 performs very well in low light, even without the IR SNS. The gain on it goes up to 9db with little noise - 12 bit. The dvc30 is however very sensitive to color differentiations in mixed light settings, but utilizing the manual white balance, it is usually possible to attain a good median between two different light sources, where both look 'natural', or to say it in filmic terms 'motivated'. With the dvc30 it is actually possible to shoot light sources without the smear that 1/4.7" chip cameras seem to exhibit.

October 7th, 2004, 07:57 AM	#131
Gareth Watkins Major Player Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: France Posts: 578	Broadcast and 16:9 Hi all, I've been reading about the widening use of 16:9 format, with cameras like the XL2 on the market... As I'm in the market for a new camera (I've been looking at the PD170) I have been wondering what the extent of true 16:9 is in general tv broadcast. Most of the programmes I see are still 4:3 often shown distorted on people's widescreen tv's.... Perhaps any of you out there working in television may be able to comment on the trends... Is it still worth getting a 170... I can see it's a great camera.. many thanks for your comments.. Regards Gareth

October 7th, 2004, 03:49 PM	#132
Robin Davies-Rollinson Trustee Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Gwaelod-y-garth, Cardiff, CYMRU/WALES Posts: 1,215	Gareth, For UK broadcast, forget anything that isn't 16:9. Robin

October 7th, 2004, 04:06 PM	#133
Andre De Clercq Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Belgium Posts: 804	Most progams in Europe are transmitted in (letterbox) 16:9

October 8th, 2004, 03:37 AM	#134
Gareth Watkins Major Player Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: France Posts: 578	Thanks for your replies... Does this mean that a PD 170 is not a good choice for shooting anything destined for eventual broadcast on satellite TV for example???? Or does one letterbox at the editng stage? Do not the BBC use these format Sony camaras for certain documentary type programmes??? Basically I'm looking for the best camera to get for eventual tv use. Regards Gareth

October 8th, 2004, 04:19 AM	#135
Robin Davies-Rollinson Trustee Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Gwaelod-y-garth, Cardiff, CYMRU/WALES Posts: 1,215	Gareth, The BBC use them as second unit cameras - they wouldn't choose to shoot a whole programme with them. If it had to be on DV, then the DSR570WSP is the preferred camera. I think that the XL2 will start to change the equation now, with decent 16:9 as well as a small size (relative to pro cameras that it) Robin