XL2 Image Problems

[the_director]

This is what I was able to gather from other forums. All this indicates that the DVX is a better camera.

1. There were two DP's at the DV Expo NY that reported aliasing problems with the NTSC model.

2. There is a UK magazine that is testing for a week the PAL version and has already reported moire pattern problemm

3. The W/A 3x zoom is made for a 1/3" CCDs. The target area on the XL2 is smaller, especially in 4x3 aspect ratio mode. The pixels are a lot denser, especially on the PAL model. The camera has a progressive scan and gives subjectively better resolution. The W/A has some problems even on the XL1/XL1s. It does not appear to be sufficiently good for the XL2. So there does not seem to be a W/A lens that would be good enough. The new 20x zoom does not have W/A range.

[chi_red]

I thought that review by a famous director of photography was bogus.

I am sure they are going to come out with a new wide angle adapter or converter, that should solve the problem somewhat.

[Gary_McClurg]

I just played with the camera tonight. They had three actually, one with the 20x, one with the 3x and the last one had the 16x manual lens (my film camera operator friend and I liked this set up the best).

Now of course I didn't shoot any video so the verdit is still out until I can shoot some test footage myself are truthfully see a film out.

But please this world famous DP. Now I'm not knocking him but when you shoot maybe two low budget films and three shorts that makes you world famous. I'm sorry that blows the lid on that story.

Look, we just bought the DVX Friday. Why, because one we didn't want to wait for the XL2 because we had a shoot coming next week. Two, the DVX has been out there so we know what it can do.

To me right now I don't have the time to figure out if its going to do everything they say it does or not (which I think it will). I rather let someone else spend their time and money to get everything up to pair with what we know about the DVX. I'm just not a gambler.

The best thing is what someone else posted on another thread here. It's just a tool. If you have the talent both will get you there if you have a good crew, wonderful actors, and a great script.

And the script is the key because you can make a bad film from a great script but you can't make a great film from a bad script.

[alpi69]

hear hear

[dogstarman]

This whole thing is becoming so petty and immature. "Our camera is better than your camera!!" What's the point? As long as the camera allows you to appropriately create your vision than that's it. It's not like we're selling the camera, there's no need to defend anything.

[Glenn_Gipson]

This whole thing is becoming so petty and immature. "Our camera is better than your camera!!" What's the point? As long as the camera allows you to appropriately create your vision than that's it. It's not like we're selling the camera, there's no need to defend anything.


Five thousand dollars is a lot of money..for some of us, so I don't see anything wrong with making sure this camera works before it is purchased. People just want to make sure that the camera does what you said it should do, which is to appropriately create their own vision. Of course, premature reviews and rumors are a different issue entirely.

[the_director]

I never said a famous director of photography. If you go to the Cinematography.com forums, there are couple of older threads and there was some DP named Mitch that saw aliasing on the NTSC model. There was also some other DP that saw the same thing. Now, you don't have to be famous DP to notice aliasing. Still, maybe there are good anti-aliasing filters like in the DVX. Maybe this was a preproduction model defect, and maybe the guys were wrong. We'll see.

There is a thread dvinfo in the XL2 category that discusses the moire problem and has grabs that show it very clearly on the PAL model. The guy works for some magazine and has the camera from Canon for one week.

The existing W/A lens - we'll have to wait and see. Still it was designed for CCDs that are about 1/2 dense. XL2 CCD target area is something like less than 1/4" in 3:4.

[Glenn_Gipson]

>>There is a thread dvinfo in the XL2 category that discusses the moire problem and has grabs that show it very clearly on the PAL model.<<

I saw these same problems when I was watching a Sopranos DVD. This is definitely something that is inherent with SD Video, and not the XL2. If anything, the moiré patterns just means that the XL2 is extremely sharp, which means it would probably be best for any type of blow up.

[Guest]

The moire issue with the UK mag was alot of bupkus. Clive, who posted his report at dvinfo.net never actually showed anyone a frame off the xl2 that had any moire...he did show a "simulation" of what he was seeing on his monitor (all monitors will show moire when a pattern of a certain frequency is displayed on them). Later he posted that he had figured out how to get rid of the moire...but didn't bother to respond when someone (me) asked how he pulled off such magic.

All digital capture devices will produce moire under certain circumstances. Any videographer worth his salt knows how to recognize moire, and adjust for it.

Barry