Dynamic range HDR-FX1 vs AG-DVX100a
- Thread starter drt
- Start date
Barry_Green
Moderator
Re: Dynamic range HDR-FX1 vs AG-DVX100a
The camera won't even be on the market for another month. It's too early to tell.
What Policar says has historically been true: more pixels = lower dynamic range. However Sony's using brand-new CCD's and had a couple of years to improve on DVX technology, so it remains to be seen whether they've overcome that limitation or not.
The camera won't even be on the market for another month. It's too early to tell.
What Policar says has historically been true: more pixels = lower dynamic range. However Sony's using brand-new CCD's and had a couple of years to improve on DVX technology, so it remains to be seen whether they've overcome that limitation or not.
G
Guest
Guest
Re: Dynamic range HDR-FX1 vs AG-DVX100a
Thats a still camera. With video its different. In video you have a rough maximum data rate per sec limit which is dictated by the recording medium because MiniDV tape runs at a set speed. With your still cameras its totally different. Your record medium doesnt have that same limitation so your free to feed it huge data files at extended periods of time. Get it? This is why the HDV standard had to turn to the more compressed (generally less latitude) MPEG2 in order to record a HD res signal to MiniDV tape. But even the regular DV is highly compressed (but less so than HDV mpeg2). When you see uncompressed footage from the DVX (yes its possible) you will see a HUGE increase in latitude over regular DV but again this is too high of a data rate for MiniDV tape. Hard drives have to be used.
On a side note I wonder what the footage will look like from the coming MPEG2 cameras. After all we will be recording in a inferior format (mpeg2) and then apply a even more compressed version of mpeg2 to the footage again when we do our DVD's. Are these new HDV camera really going to be a step forward in quality or are they instead being created to feed the consumer markets hunger for HD on the cheap. We will see.
Thats a still camera. With video its different. In video you have a rough maximum data rate per sec limit which is dictated by the recording medium because MiniDV tape runs at a set speed. With your still cameras its totally different. Your record medium doesnt have that same limitation so your free to feed it huge data files at extended periods of time. Get it? This is why the HDV standard had to turn to the more compressed (generally less latitude) MPEG2 in order to record a HD res signal to MiniDV tape. But even the regular DV is highly compressed (but less so than HDV mpeg2). When you see uncompressed footage from the DVX (yes its possible) you will see a HUGE increase in latitude over regular DV but again this is too high of a data rate for MiniDV tape. Hard drives have to be used.
On a side note I wonder what the footage will look like from the coming MPEG2 cameras. After all we will be recording in a inferior format (mpeg2) and then apply a even more compressed version of mpeg2 to the footage again when we do our DVD's. Are these new HDV camera really going to be a step forward in quality or are they instead being created to feed the consumer markets hunger for HD on the cheap. We will see.
J_Barnes
Veteran
Re: Dynamic range HDR-FX1 vs AG-DVX100a
I'd assume that if methods similar to the 4:4:4 toolings of the DVX were used, you could get an HD signal from the camera's head...but not past that. HDV is by nature, compressed as stated above, so you wouldn't gain anything by pushing the data to a disk over a tape.
Either way, it's too theoretical to be practical for any real use.
I'd assume that if methods similar to the 4:4:4 toolings of the DVX were used, you could get an HD signal from the camera's head...but not past that. HDV is by nature, compressed as stated above, so you wouldn't gain anything by pushing the data to a disk over a tape.
Either way, it's too theoretical to be practical for any real use.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Re: Dynamic range HDR-FX1 vs AG-DVX100a
The Firestore guys are talking about modifying it so it will record HDV.
However it wouldn't be "uncompressed" HD... it would be HDV data, just like how those hard disks are currently recording DV data.
Uncompressed HD... that would be a monumental undertaking. You'd need something like 93 megabytes per second to store that!
The Firestore guys are talking about modifying it so it will record HDV.
However it wouldn't be "uncompressed" HD... it would be HDV data, just like how those hard disks are currently recording DV data.
Uncompressed HD... that would be a monumental undertaking. You'd need something like 93 megabytes per second to store that!
Antoine_Fabi
Well-known member
Re: Dynamic range HDR-FX1 vs AG-DVX100a
DRT,
hmmm...
If you take a SDX900, and record "only" in DV25 mode, there is still a very broad dynamic range. It has more to do with the CCDs capability i think...
DRT,
hmmm...
If you take a SDX900, and record "only" in DV25 mode, there is still a very broad dynamic range. It has more to do with the CCDs capability i think...
G
Guest
Guest
Re: Dynamic range HDR-FX1 vs AG-DVX100a
Its definately both (quality of CCD and level of compression). Both can make a huge difference.
Also some special CCDs also capture video at two sensitivities and then combine them before putting to tape in camera.
Its definately both (quality of CCD and level of compression). Both can make a huge difference.
Also some special CCDs also capture video at two sensitivities and then combine them before putting to tape in camera.
Re: Dynamic range HDR-FX1 vs AG-DVX100a
[quote author=Brett Erskine link=board=Links;num=1097805460;start=0#4 date=10/15/04 at 01:29:21] When you see uncompressed footage from the DVX (yes its possible) you will see a HUGE increase in latitude over regular DV but again this is too high of a data rate for MiniDV tape. Hard drives have to be used.
Hi Brett,
You talk about the possibility of record a better quality for Dv.Do you record on hard drives by firewire or in what way? Can you explane me more about it?
Thankss
Danilo
[quote author=Brett Erskine link=board=Links;num=1097805460;start=0#4 date=10/15/04 at 01:29:21] When you see uncompressed footage from the DVX (yes its possible) you will see a HUGE increase in latitude over regular DV but again this is too high of a data rate for MiniDV tape. Hard drives have to be used.
Hi Brett,You talk about the possibility of record a better quality for Dv.Do you record on hard drives by firewire or in what way? Can you explane me more about it?
Thankss
Danilo
hvpz
Well-known member
Re: Dynamic range HDR-FX1 vs AG-DVX100a
[quote author=Brett Erskine link=board=Links;num=1097805460;start=0#9 date=10/15/04 at 23:25:28]
Also some special CCDs also capture video at two sensitivities and then combine them before putting to tape in camera.
[/quote]
I read about it at silicon imaging and I found that it could be a promising way for the future. http://www.siliconimaging.com/dual_slope.htm
If we believe Juan Pierterra and his famous mod for the dvx, the dynamic range straight from the CCD are significantly better than the one recorded on the tape after compression.
[quote author=Brett Erskine link=board=Links;num=1097805460;start=0#9 date=10/15/04 at 23:25:28]
Also some special CCDs also capture video at two sensitivities and then combine them before putting to tape in camera.
[/quote]
I read about it at silicon imaging and I found that it could be a promising way for the future. http://www.siliconimaging.com/dual_slope.htm
If we believe Juan Pierterra and his famous mod for the dvx, the dynamic range straight from the CCD are significantly better than the one recorded on the tape after compression.
G
Guest
Guest
Re: Dynamic range HDR-FX1 vs AG-DVX100a
Yep thats the one. Pretty cool stuff huh.
As far as info on a uncompressed DVX100 go to this thread:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=6a9c1e6738bd3f7c36d7a9e642bc1f70&threadid=20332
Brett Erskine
Yep thats the one. Pretty cool stuff huh.
As far as info on a uncompressed DVX100 go to this thread:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=6a9c1e6738bd3f7c36d7a9e642bc1f70&threadid=20332
Brett Erskine