anamorphic vs stretch

W

walkinfauxpas

New member
i'm trying to decide between a dvx100 and dvx100a, the difference being about $1000 used on ebay. the deciding factor for me is the issue of 16x9. i know the 100a has stretch mode, but (as someone who does not have the infamous dvx100 book yet) wouldn't the regular 100 with an anamorphic adaptor be just as good and cheaper? i'd assume that a glass lens doing the stretching as opposed to electronic stretching would be better, but am i wrong? are there any examples online somewhere?
 
Glass does not stretch, it optically squeezes a wider field of view onto 4:3 ccd. My dvx100 with my anamorphic lens is better than any in-camera-stretched dvx100a.
100a comes with focus assist that is the only difference that matters to me...

Edit: Welcome!!!
 
The DVX100a has 16 bit audio the 100 doesn't. The built in wide mode is a digital stretch that cuts off 60 pixels of vertical res. The high def cameras and the XL2 have true 16x9 formats. Hope this helps
 
VIDEOMIKE said:
The DVX100a has 16 bit audio the 100 doesn't.
Click to expand...
Not sure what you mean. The DVX100 has 16-bit, 48khz audio, identical in all ways to the DVX100A's. The only audio change at all between the cameras was that the headphone jack is 6db louder on the DVX100A.

The built in wide mode is a digital stretch that cuts off 60 pixels of vertical res.
Click to expand...
Actually it cuts off about 54 pixels from the top, and 54 pixels from the bottom, so about 108 pixels total.
 
I have a question re: squeeze mode, but figured since its relavant to this thread, I would try here instead of creating a new topic:

I understand you can do the "squeeze" in post for a widescreen DVD: this is good because it doesn't lock you down permanently to the image like the in camera squeeze. But this raises the question, how does an NLE squeeze comapair in quality to the DVX doing the squeeze?

Has anyone compaired the DVX s squeeze mode to an NLE, maybe Vegas?

thanks,

Ed
 
Barry_Green said:
Not sure what you mean. The DVX100 has 16-bit, 48khz audio, identical in all ways to the DVX100A's. The only audio change at all between the cameras was that the headphone jack is 6db louder on the DVX100A.
Click to expand...

See, I always thought that the 100 has an audio sync issue that was fixed on the DVX100a. I guess I am not an expert yet, but then again I only own an A model.
 
Youre right, Sir Galt, it did have a two frame offset between the audio and video, and it was addressed in the A, but now, in the A, there is an off phase issue in the headphones as a result, so that unless you use isolating phones you'll hear an echo while youre monitoring.
 
Aha -- yes, Daniel and Galt are correct. I guess I didn't lump that in the same category, because the audio hardware didn't change (i.e., the pre-amps, etc). But they did add a buffer that delays the audio for a couple of frames before writing it to tape when in 24P mode, to provide frame-accurate alignment on tape.
 
Hey Barry, how do they do a delay buffer if it is not part of the audio circuit? Inquiring minds want to know... LOL
 
You'd have to ask an audio engineer... it's my understanding that the basic audio hardware is the same. There's just some sort of delay before writing it to the tape. Could be something implemented downstream in the DV encoding algorithm when they go to write it out, some sort of FIFO buffer...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top