Icarus2005
01-16-2006, 08:58 PM
I tend to joke around a lot, but on a serious note:
Has anyone seen film out from SD 2/3 chip cam verses film out from HDV or 1/3 HD?
Clearly everyone agrees that 2/3 chip wins in sharpness and latitude and such, and would still be prefered for most TV purposes. But, it seams that the more lines would translate into a better blowup for the film out from an 1/3 HD. Or does my logic fail me? It has certainly failed me in the past
I love the SDX900, and would use it for TV. But for those of us wanting to make films that might actually get a shot at theatrical distribution, does an HVX200 make more sense?
Obviously 2/3 chip 4:4:4 HD is the best, but most of us can't afford that, even if we bend over and provide the lube. But some of us are able to afford an SDX900 and need to choose between that and two HVX200s with which to shoot feature films with.
Having two HVX200s will certainly speed up my shooting and save me money from that standpoint alone.
Has anyone seen film out from SD 2/3 chip cam verses film out from HDV or 1/3 HD?
Clearly everyone agrees that 2/3 chip wins in sharpness and latitude and such, and would still be prefered for most TV purposes. But, it seams that the more lines would translate into a better blowup for the film out from an 1/3 HD. Or does my logic fail me? It has certainly failed me in the past
I love the SDX900, and would use it for TV. But for those of us wanting to make films that might actually get a shot at theatrical distribution, does an HVX200 make more sense?
Obviously 2/3 chip 4:4:4 HD is the best, but most of us can't afford that, even if we bend over and provide the lube. But some of us are able to afford an SDX900 and need to choose between that and two HVX200s with which to shoot feature films with.
Having two HVX200s will certainly speed up my shooting and save me money from that standpoint alone.