Thoughts on DVX 10* zoom.

[Newbie4sure]

The DVX has a 10* zoom, I was just wondering how everyone feels about this length, has anyone ever found its not enough or is it just fine?

I intend on filming weddings, and while at 10* from a non intrusive distance (7 meters) it would be enough to get a decent shot, although i would like extreme close ups every now and then, here i would have to stand about (2 meters) which i jsut cant do.

Does the DVX offer some kind of "digital zoom" or is it 10* optical only, if not has anyone zoomed in (stretched the image) in post slightly, does it lose obious quality?

There would only be a few digitaly zoomed shots (up to 20* zoom) so i think with a few blurs or sharpens in post it would not be noticible.... how does anyone feel about this..... its a wedding so i dont think they would really notice,, but i would like high quality shots throughout.

I would get an XL2 but too expensive,,, and i also like to make short films, so i figure the DVX is good down under in Australia for at least 2 more years before i can get 16:9 HD or HDV.

I dont think the native 16:9 issues is too much of a worry for me, im just getting started and i have seen disjectas method to look decent enough, most people dont even notice the camera work (unless they are crazy nuts like us)... i just dont need it at this stage and type of work, i have brought an audience of 300 people to tears followed by a standing ovation lasting at least 5 minutes... and that was with a crappy old ($300 current value mv500i) thing i have with a broken pixel on the ccd.... a lot of the time its all about the overall effect of the movie (including, music, type of shot, actors, themes, lighting) the quality of the 16:9 shot is irrevelavant (almost) when i think about it.
SO with that said, i will just buy a DVX, get back to doing wat i like and be done with it! enough of this research B******T!

[alpi69]

the DVX goes 35mm equivalent to 325mm. now that is more than most photographers ever use. i work with a lot of snowboard/ski/sportsphotographers and they use 300-400mm as the longest. when absolutely needed they rent a 600mm (mind you F2.8 photolenses are very expensive). if you really think you need more you can get a 1,6 converter (i look for one too) which is pricey also, but you end up with about 480mm and that is really a good length for most occasions. but like in a church you might run out of light anyway when using a 1000mm from the XL2.......then i rather have the wideangle on the DVX.

[Newbie4sure]

so, no one else feels anything about the zoom length? :-/

[pookie_old]

I'll go along with alpi69.

[Bill__Turner]

From the sales of our 1.6X tele for the DVX100/100A it is clear that many users want a longer focal length than the 45mm max of the on camera lens.

Conversely we sell few tele's for the Canon XL1/2 because of the dramatically longer (around 80mm) maximum focal length of their lens.

Longer lenses are popular both to acheive dramatic impact and in video, shallower depth of field.

Designing zoom lenses is a compromise. The biggest single short coming of camcorder lenses is the lack of wide angle. Panasonic clearly addressed this.

The longer the Zoom range, the harder (and more expensive) it is to make a high quality lens. You will notice that Canon on the XL2 "improved" the lens from 16x to 20x, but did it by adding to the already more than adequet telephoto end, not the wide end where it was needed-- and the reason is absolutely the manufacturing cost.

Bill Turner
Century Division
Schneider Optics

[Shaw]

And the lens is also so chop full of chromatic aberration it's sick :P

[pookie_old]

And the lens is also so chop full of chromatic aberration it's sick :P


Ho ho ho.......




LOL is so overused.

[Ruff_Futtidge]

ST ! Yes - I'd like my DVX100A to say " x15 " or even "x20 optical zoom " on the box !

The wide angle is a real bonus for some of the tiny churches we have in England - infact it was one of the advantages I noted when selecting the camera ( cf PD170 ) , but I like to get closeups of wildlife , and the DVX starts a bit wider than I'd like for this .( although Disjecta doesn't seem to have any problems - check his superb " Magicfall.mov " )

I still have my old Sony TRV828 ( x18 optical ) , and TRV238 ( x25 optical !! ) - these are both in the consumer field , especially the 238 , so not really a meaningful comparison to DVX , but BOY can they zoom in close !! - they also start from a less-wide angle so difference is even greater than numbers suggest ! Sony's PD170 (and VX2100) is x12 and is better than the DVX in low light - you should check it out.

I will certainly be buying a Tele addon lens for my DVX as soon as I find out who has them and which to buy.

Good luck mate !

Ruff