Best for low light. at DVinfo.net

Paul Kellett · April 17th, 2008, 07:19 AM

Quick question,which is best for low light on an EX1? Interlaced or progressive ?

Thanks.

Paul.

Piotr Wozniacki · April 17th, 2008, 07:37 AM

Quick, but difficult one...

Due to the line-doubling effect, the EX1's sensitivity in interlaced is reported to be double that of progressive (800 vs 400 ASA). However, you can effectively make for it by switching shutter off, which is only really viable in progressive...

I use the latter option exclusively.

Mark David Williams · April 17th, 2008, 08:02 AM

Would the better light sensitivity in interlaced affect the dof?

Piotr Wozniacki · April 17th, 2008, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark David Williams

Would the better light sensitivity in interlaced affect the dof?

How on earth? Because it'd make you close the iris? Well - use ND filters! Or even faster shutter, if DOF is your priotity.

Mark David Williams · April 17th, 2008, 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Piotr Wozniacki

How on earth? Because it'd make you close the iris? Well - use ND filters! Or even faster shutter, if DOF is your priotity.

Well by shooting interlaced you appear to be gaining a stop more. Just wondered what effect that might have if any on dof.

Piotr Wozniacki · April 17th, 2008, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark David Williams

Well by shooting interlaced you appear to be gaining a stop more. Just wondered what effect that might have if any on dof.

Yes - the effect you mean I mentioned above.

Mark David Williams · April 17th, 2008, 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Piotr Wozniacki

Yes - the effect you mean I mentioned above.

Thats why I asked the question. If you dont know and you have already said you don't. Thats fine, let someone else answer?

Eric Pascarelli · April 17th, 2008, 09:31 AM

At a given focal length, only the iris affects DOF. Chip sensitivity (gain, interlacing etc.) will have no effect on DOF unless you stop down to compensate.

But as Piotr said, there are ways other than stopping down the iris to compensate for exposure - such as ND filters (the best solution) and shutter. Using these methods will have no effect on DOF.

Mark David Williams · April 17th, 2008, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric Pascarelli

At a given focal length, only the iris affects DOF. Chip sensitivity (gain, interlacing etc.) will have no effect on DOF unless you stop down to compensate.

But as Piotr said, there are ways other than stopping down the iris to compensate for exposure - such as ND filters (the best solution) and shutter. Using these methods will have no effect on DOF.

OK so nothing is happening to let more light in?. Yes thanks! I know about ND filters use them all the time. Just wanted to understand why Interlaced has a stop more and what that means. No difference in dof. Thanks.

Eric Pascarelli · April 17th, 2008, 09:54 AM

With interlacing the extra stop has nothing to do with the optical path. The chip has twice as many photons to work with on a given field (half the resolution) and hence is twice as bright.

Piotr Wozniacki · April 17th, 2008, 09:58 AM

Thanks Eric; I tried to explain the exactly same thing to Mark, but apparently my English is not good enough :)

Paul Kellett · April 17th, 2008, 10:40 AM

Interlaced is better in low light then,thanks guys.

Paul.

Eric Pascarelli · April 17th, 2008, 11:11 AM

Paul,

I refer you back to Piotr's response - you are not really getting something for nothing...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Piotr Wozniacki

Quick, but difficult one...

Due to the line-doubling effect, the EX1's sensitivity in interlaced is reported to be double that of progressive (800 vs 400 ASA). However, you can effectively make for it by switching shutter off, which is only really viable in progressive...

I use the latter option exclusively.

Mark David Williams · April 17th, 2008, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric Pascarelli

Paul,

I refer you back to Piotr's response - you are not really getting something for nothing...

Yes but with nothing in between wouldnt you get to much motion blur?

Piotr Wozniacki · April 17th, 2008, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark David Williams

Yes but with nothing in between wouldnt you get to much motion blur?

Mark,

Perhaps my answer should have been worded like this (bolds added):

"Due to the line-doubling effect, the EX1's sensitivity in interlaced is reported to be double that of progressive (800 vs 400 ASA). However, you can effectively make for it by switching shutter off, thus gaining one stop, which is only really viable in progressive as you don't get the motion blur you would get in interlaced..."

Is it more clear now?

April 17th, 2008, 07:19 AM	#1
Paul Kellett Trustee Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Bristol UK Posts: 1,273	Best for low light. Quick question,which is best for low light on an EX1? Interlaced or progressive ? Thanks. Paul. __________________ Round 2 GH5,FZ2000

April 17th, 2008, 07:37 AM	#2
Piotr Wozniacki Inner Circle Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Poland Posts: 4,086	Quick, but difficult one... Due to the line-doubling effect, the EX1's sensitivity in interlaced is reported to be double that of progressive (800 vs 400 ASA). However, you can effectively make for it by switching shutter off, which is only really viable in progressive... I use the latter option exclusively. __________________ Sony PXW-FS7 \| DaVinci Resolve Studio; Magix Vegas Pro; i7-5960X CPU; 64 GB RAM; 2x GTX 1080 8GB GPU; Decklink 4K Extreme 12G; 4x 3TB WD Black in RAID 0; 1TB M.2 NVMe cache drive

April 17th, 2008, 09:58 AM	#11
Piotr Wozniacki Inner Circle Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Poland Posts: 4,086	Thanks Eric; I tried to explain the exactly same thing to Mark, but apparently my English is not good enough :) __________________ Sony PXW-FS7 \| DaVinci Resolve Studio; Magix Vegas Pro; i7-5960X CPU; 64 GB RAM; 2x GTX 1080 8GB GPU; Decklink 4K Extreme 12G; 4x 3TB WD Black in RAID 0; 1TB M.2 NVMe cache drive

April 17th, 2008, 10:40 AM	#12
Paul Kellett Trustee Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Bristol UK Posts: 1,273	Interlaced is better in low light then,thanks guys. Paul. __________________ Round 2 GH5,FZ2000

April 17th, 2008, 08:02 AM	#3
Mark David Williams Major Player Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Hertfordshire UK Posts: 414	Would the better light sensitivity in interlaced affect the dof?

April 17th, 2008, 09:31 AM	#8
Eric Pascarelli Major Player Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 498	At a given focal length, only the iris affects DOF. Chip sensitivity (gain, interlacing etc.) will have no effect on DOF unless you stop down to compensate. But as Piotr said, there are ways other than stopping down the iris to compensate for exposure - such as ND filters (the best solution) and shutter. Using these methods will have no effect on DOF.

April 17th, 2008, 09:54 AM	#10
Eric Pascarelli Major Player Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 498	With interlacing the extra stop has nothing to do with the optical path. The chip has twice as many photons to work with on a given field (half the resolution) and hence is twice as bright.