The end of 35mm adapers and hv20s....

If you want it back, I can give it to you, but then I'd be taking stoiga's 100th page victory away... what to do....?

Haha, I see you've taken matters into your own hands :beer: Or is that Stoiga at work?
 
1344472184_b3d780eed3_m.jpg
 
Hehehe!!!

It`s official....you can run the race afterwards, if you like...I`m still drinking my beer.
 
So... if the wobble can't be minimized by using higher shutter speed... does anyone actually still want this camera? If the rolling shutter is consistent, then that means that even if you took a still with a fast moving object in the foreground... it would be distorted. Boo.
 
And... if what they say in the forum from the EX1 is correct, and cmos chips typically take 1/60th of a second to roll the shutter then... shooting at a lower shutter speed and increasing the iso speed would minimize the appearance because the time it would take for the top row of pixels to finish it exposure before the bottom row had started would be increase.

That seems logical, but that would increase the image smear.
 
dave12781 said:
So... if the wobble can't be minimized by using higher shutter speed... does anyone actually still want this camera? If the rolling shutter is consistent, then that means that even if you took a still with a fast moving object in the foreground... it would be distorted. Boo.
Click to expand...

I don't think the photography aspect of the camera utilizes a rolling shutter. My guess.
 
How about this though... if the roll is constant, and not effected by the shutter's speed what you're saying is: The amount of time each row of pixels is exposed is what we're selecting as the "shutter speed" That isn't shutter speed that is ISO speed.

The ISO speed on a video camera like the EX1 is constant, you're simply increasing the shutter speed, gain, or fstop when you expose it. With a digital slr, you can also increase or decrease the iso speed...
 
No, the ISO speed is the equvivalent to Gain on a video camera. Lowest ISO is about no Gain, dubbling the ISO is like adding 6 dB Gain.
 
Ok well in that case... would a higher shutter speed then make the seperation between the exposure of the top pixel row, and the bottom pixel row more apparent? For instants... assuming the roll is 1/60 of a second, and you're open to... let's say 1/2000 shutter... wouldn't the scan lines then be noticeable?
 
Moreover, if it is just the nature of the roll to be consistent... how did RED prove the skew of their camera? Increase the speed of the roll is the only way that would make sense given your logic, and that couldn't be possible either given your logic.
 
boo said:
exposure jumps? what do you mean exposure jumps? i don't see any exposure changing?!

http://video.on.nytimes.com/?fr_story=ab3bebeb36b12764d1eab72cc81e8aa9f82aaeb5 :)
Click to expand...


Good find. It would be nice to see it in HD though...

As for exposure changes. The D90 is auto mode. Wait tell the right people get a hold of it.


The long shots of the boats look nice. Also super wide, Sweet, Were gonna see a lot of close up shots as the caterpillar shot demonstrates coming from the D90.....
 
There are jumps, but again was he aware at the time of the situation and locked exposure? That we don't know. If he did and it kept jumping then there is a problem, if he didn't.... The image was pretty steady and the close-ups looked great. I was waiting for those since he reviewed the camera in The Times and was very positive about it.
 
dave12781 said:
Exposure jumps in that video, dude... but what isn't consistent is the image wobble.
Click to expand...

i know it does jump...but my point was, when creating a film, who is your target audience? 1000's of filmmakers(your peers), or millions of people(everyone else)?

i just had my wife, brother and daughter look at the clip and they didn't notice any exposure changing. =P
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top