does the 170 have a 1920 x 1280 size

The image it creates is 1920x1080, and the image it outputs through its SDI port is 1920x1080.
The image it records to its P2 cards is 1280x1080. It gets scaled down during compression, and your NLE will scale it back up to 1920x1080 when editing.
 
i am confused i bought 174er which online they say its fullhd 1920 1080 only to get it recording 1440 1080. how can you say having 1440 1080 you get 1920 1080 on your NLE? HOW EXPLAIN .
 
Many cameras use recording codecs that "prefilter" the image. All HDV cameras are 1440x1080, DVCPRO-HD in 50i is 1440x1080, AVC-Intra in 50mbit mode is 1440x1080, even the HDCAM that George Lucas shot Star Wars Episode II on, is 1440x1080.

NLEs just "know" how to deal with it. The pixels are not square, they're rectangles, they use a Pixel Aspect Ratio of 1.33:1. Those 1440 pixels need to be stretched by 33% to become 1920. The NLE just does it automatically, if you tell it the footage has a 1.333x pixel aspect ratio. Any NLE that handles HPX170 footage should do it automatically.
 
Barry, I had to shoot 1080 / 50i for a Brit client with my HPX-500. Last time no problem, this time his editor said why did the Americans shoot 1440 X 1080? I know (I think) that my venerable HPX does not have a 1920 X 1080 imager, so does that mean it is unusable for 1920 X 1080 PAL broadcast work? In NTSC, when I incorporate 720P footage from the HVX into a 1920 X 1080 timeline it upscales automatically and looks fine (at least for web / DVD work). My question also involves whether if using a Ninja or other type of recorder, will I be able somehow to get out an image that reads 1920 X 1080 in an NLE? Thanks, John
 
It's used for PAL broadcast work all the time. The recording format is 1440x1080, but then again, so's the Sony F900's HDCAM format. So's HDV. There's nothing unusual about 1440x1080, it was the prevailing high-def broadcast size for years and years.

And yes, using a Samurai (*not* a Ninja) or using a NanoFlash or PIX 240 or HyperDeck Shuttle, all the images will be recorded at 1920x1080. The camera is creating a 1920x1080 image, it's just that the recording format samples it down to 1440x1080 for recording (again, just like any XDCAM-HD or HDCAM or HDV camera would).

The reason I say don't use the Ninja is because the Ninja is HDMI-only, and the HPX500 doesn't have an HDMI output port on it. You'd need an SDI recorder.
 
Well, hmm, I guess that would work, but it would seem like an expensive and silly workaround just to use an inferior product. The Samurai is made by the same people as the Ninja is, but it's an overall better unit, better screen, more features, and supports SDI input. I'd strongly recommend the Samurai over the Ninja. The Ninja is only preferable for those who have nothing but HDMI output (such as Sony FS100).
 
Well I have both the AF-100 and the GH-2 and was looking to get one recording device. Would really love to make the AF-100 the interview cam and the GH-2 the b-roll cam at least for for quick get out and shoot situations. And all the DSLR's that I borrow/rent have HDMI out.
I see Atomos makes a converter
http://www.atomos.com/connect/
but honestly am using my HPX-500 for every shoot I can get away with it because of appropriateness for so many typical video shoot applications, and I HAVE it. And the rocker zoom is SUCH a plus. So maybe the way to go at least for now is to use the Samurai on both--move it from one to the other, but then there's the issue of schlepping 2 cameras and the matching. I prefer the AF-100 for all interviews of course but am not going to spend the 1,000's to get it really useable as a shoulder / broll cam. I know other owner operators are in the same boat with this hybrid video-cinematic field, including you and thanks again for your guidance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top