100 to 100B? What did I miss in the A?

I

icicle22

Well-known member
I know it's an odd question but I have never shot with the 100A so I am not too familiar with what new features it had over the 100 other than squeeze mode, new gamma curve and Peaking. Is there an article specifically documenting the differences between the 100 and the 100a in a similar manner to Jarred's on the 100a to 100B?

I was surprised when I couldn't get the DVX100 to a 1/30th shutter speed in 60i the other night. Hope that was changed in the A.

Thanks!
 
There are about 26 changes from the 100 to the 100A, and yes, slow shutter speeds is one of them, along with the addition of squeeze mode, a shorter close-focus distance, peaking, three new gamma curves, a new prism for better color reproduction, autofocus and gain and colorbars now working in progressive-scan mode, a delay circuit for the audio in 24p mode so that the audio is perfectly in sync on the tape, a louder headphone circuit, lots of new scene file settings (like knee, v.detail level, detail coring and a new matrix), better feedback on the "marker", improved feel to the focus and zoom rings... lots of very nice changes.
 
So going from using a DVX100 to a dvx100B would result in a significant amount of new features? Also...I know it's not directly on topic here, but I am interested in the squeeze mode. I know it is not true 16x9 but is it much better than shooting letterboxed and uprezzing to 16x9 in vegas? I currently use that method with a DVX100 (since it only has lb mode) and find the results ok but soft compared to the XL2. Is the squeeze mode better than doing it in post? I can sacrifice a little sharpness for a good 16x9 in a small 24P camera.....
 
There are a *lot* of changes from the original 100 up to the 100B. I always envied the 100A, but it wasn't quite enough to get me to sell my 100 and upgrade. I wouldn't hesitate for a second to ditch my 100 and get a 100B! (at least, if I wasn't already planning on getting the HVX, that is).

Squeeze is an internal stretch, and the results depend on whether you're shooting interlaced or progressive. If you're shooting interlaced the results are certainly nothing to write home about. If you're shooting progressive, and you use thin line detail, then squeeze looks pretty darn good. It delivers an image with about the same resolution as a native-16:9 Sony FX1 (when shooting in DV mode). It won't be as sharp as an XL2's 16:9 though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top