Stepan Sivko Posted February 15, 2005 Share Posted February 15, 2005 Hi guys, im thinking of buying PS techniks mini35 lens coverter.....and as well apropriate camera....I wanted to get a PD170....but now the new HDV cameras r coming and im confused....what do u think is better...and if u ahve time can u tell me the reolution difference between HDV and DVCAM? Thanx a lot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alvin Pingol Posted February 16, 2005 Share Posted February 16, 2005 >>reolution difference between HDV and DVCAM HDV: Progressive - 1280x720 Interlaced - 1920x1080 DV, NTSC: 720x480 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Achterberg Posted February 16, 2005 Share Posted February 16, 2005 >>reolution difference between HDV and DVCAM HDV: Progressive - 1280x720 Interlaced - 1920x1080 DV, NTSC: 720x480 <{POST_SNAPBACK}> well you have the resolution difference...but I'd recommend getting an XL2 if you want minidv (sounds like thats what you want) with that, you will have damn good resolution, native 16:9, and 24p not to mention you wont have to shoot through 2 set of glass. just my 2 cents Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomas Koolhaas Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 In my opinion the mini 35 adaptor is definately the way to go if you want to shoot mini DV, The XL2 is a good camera, it has higher reolution at 16x9 than the next best 24p mini-DV camera which is the DVX100a, this is due to the "native" 16x9 chip in the XL2. The XL2 also has slightly more extensive menus (Than the DVX) in the camera which allow you to manipulate the image more effectively on set. I have used both cameras many times and have always been frustrated by the terrible optics of the lenses, and the relative production unfriendlyness that the lenses have e.g. It is almost impossible to measure and set marks for focus pulls on either camera's lenses. The mini-35 adaptor allows you to not only have the D.O.F (depth of field) of film but it also allows you to work with accurate focus marks. The important thing to remember about any P.L. adaptor is that some of the early models had problems as the ground glass only spun, as opposed to oscilating as the newer versions do, the newer versions, which I have used on both HD and Mini-DV with Ziess super-speeds and Panavision lenses respectively, yielded incredible results!!! I was surprised to find that not only did the adaptor have the advertised benefits ( Shallow D.O.F etc.) but it even gave me more lattitude in my Highlights, which as we all know is a godsend when shooting on DV and even HD. People have many varying opinions about the P.L. adaptors, "the extra glass decreases the purity of your optics" etc. I would suggest that the ground glass of the adaptor doesn't decrease your optics any more than a 1/8-1/4 black promist would. Which many people use on DV in order to soften the tell tale harsh video highlights. In regards to the sony HDV camera, the question remains whether they have actually found a way to compress the image so much (onto what is basically a mini-DV tape) without loosing information and creating artifacts. I haven't had a chance to test the camera yet so cannot say myself, but perhaps someone else on the forum has and would share their thoughts, I would love to hear anyone's experiences with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alvin Pingol Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 In regards to the sony HDV camera, the question remains whether they have actually found a way to compress the image so much (onto what is basically a mini-DV tape) without loosing information and creating artifacts.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well, think about it this way... HDV, at 1920x1080, is six times the resolution of (NTSC) SD video, yet has the same 25Mbit/sec data rate. ;) [Though I must say, the full-resolution stills I've seen from HDV cameras don't look too bad, but I've yet to see any full motion video directly off of tape] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Phil Rhodes Posted February 18, 2005 Premium Member Share Posted February 18, 2005 Hi, > Well, think about it this way... HDV, at 1920x1080, is six times the resolution of (NTSC) SD video, yet > has the same 25Mbit/sec data rate Exactly what this means depends on how much better you think MPEG-4 is than DVSD. I think that perceptually it's quite a lot better, but the compression artifacts are pretty obvious in all the HDV stills I've seen. DV artifacts can often be hard to spot as anything more than a slight general softness. Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stepan Sivko Posted February 25, 2005 Author Share Posted February 25, 2005 Thanks guys for all the info.....i would normaly go for the XL2...the think is just i m not sure about the dv format.....i wish i can just test the cameras before i buy them....simply im looking for the MOST FILM LOOK and highest resolution at the same time for affordable price Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now