HD100 + Mini35 Footage!!!

Miltos Pilalitos said:
Any other PC users around watched the clips in Media Player? What does the file properties say the video resolution is guys?
Click to expand...
I'm using Windows Media Player, and the properties says that the clips are 1280x720...
 
I read in these forums that HD100's mpg stream is 20 Megabytes per second but if i calculated correctly, all the videos have a data rate of approximately 2.5 megabytes per second.

For example: http://www.hdvinfo.net/articles/jvcprohd/hd100mini35test5.php

File: A-flowerbed-Mini35.m2t
Run Time: 21 seconds
File Size: 51 megabytes

51 Megabytes divided by 21 seconds is 2.4 Megabytes per second. If these videos are really bit-for-bit identical to what the camera records does it mean the HD100's mpg stream is roughly 2.5 Megabytes per second?

Can someone explain?
 
Miltos Pilalitos said:
I read in these forums that HD100's mpg stream is 20 Megabytes per second
Click to expand...
No, it's 19 megaBITS per second. Not megabytes, megabits. 1/8 as much as megabytes.

If these videos are really bit-for-bit identical to what the camera records does it mean the HD100's mpg stream is roughly 2.5 Megabytes per second?
Click to expand...
Those videos are absolutely, positively, guaranteed bit-for-bit identical copies of what the camera recorded on the tape. I'm the guy who did the monitoring and the capturing, and I can verify that they're exactly right.

19 megabits, divided by 8, = 2.375 megaBytes per second. That's the data rate for the JVC HDV format.
 
stephenlnoe said:
Those shots on the article, are they the best depth of field the supplied lens had to offer?
Click to expand...

If by best you mean the shallowest, then yes. We shot wide open on the Cookes which was a T2.
 
John_Hudson said:
I cannot find a program that can open these clips? Anyone?
Click to expand...

VLC plays them fine on a PC.

On a Mac, I've only demuxed them with MPEGStreamClip to .m2v, and then played in QT player. My experience with VLC on a Mac has been that it's buggy, but it's also been a long time since I've tried it.
 
I opened it in Vegas but was having issues with QT and WMV. Weird. I even tried CyberDVD. Anyway; watching it now! Thanks Nate.

Looks great by the way.
 
Nate Weaver said:
If by best you mean the shallowest, then yes. We shot wide open on the Cookes which was a T2.
Click to expand...

Exactly, the most shallow you could ever hope to get with the stock lens. Another question, when focusing with your depicted lens setup, did you use the focus assist built into the camera? Was it intuitive and accurate to the monitor?
 
stephenlnoe said:
Exactly, the most shallow you could ever hope to get with the stock lens.
Click to expand...

Mmm, I think I misunderstood you. When we shot with the Fuji for comparison shots, we left the camera exactly where it was and zoomed to match the frame size exactly. Aperture was then adjusted to match exposure. In other words, we made no efforts to make the Fuji TRY to look like the Mini35 shots because it was a lost cause. In the comparison shots with the Fuji, pretty much the entire world was in focus no matter what aperture you used.

stephenlnoe said:
Another question, when focusing with your depicted lens setup, did you use the focus assist built into the camera? Was it intuitive and accurate to the monitor?
Click to expand...

I personally thought Focus Assist was great. There were times when shooting when focus was so critical and the subjects were moving too fast to chase using Focus Assist that we needed to take focus and lens marks and shoot them just like we were shooting film.

But...for most users I think Focus Assist is going to be the best tool to use to ensure good focus, which is no joke when shooting HD.
 
stephenlnoe said:
Exactly, the most shallow you could ever hope to get with the stock lens.
Click to expand...
We took no efforts whatsoever to extract the shallowest DOF from the Fujinon. We used the exact same setup for both shots. We didn't specifically set out to get the shallowest DOF from the mini35 either, we just left the lens on T2. Had we been looking to extort maximum shallow DOF from the mini35, we would have always used longer lenses and set the camera further back. Instead we chose the lens based on the desired field of view and relationship to the subject, and let the DOF fall where it may.

The Fujinon is capable of getting quite shallow DOF, but it would involve moving the camera approximately 4.4 times further away from the subject (I think; I may have just made that number up).

The Fujinon goes to 88mm, and is capable of delivering a reasonably shallow DOF look. However, the chromatic aberration is substantially more noticeable at the telephoto end of the lens, so this may not be a practical option.
 
Barry_Green said:
one megabit = 1/8 as much data as a megabyte.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I thought you meant 1/8 the data rate figure, when it is actually 8 times... ie - the datarate in bits is 8 times that of in bytes, not 1/8... oh forget it
:grin:
 
Barry_Green said:
We took no efforts whatsoever to extract the shallowest DOF from the Fujinon. We used the exact same setup for both shots. We didn't specifically set out to get the shallowest DOF from the mini35 either, we just left the lens on T2. Had we been looking to extort maximum shallow DOF from the mini35, we would have always used longer lenses and set the camera further back. Instead we chose the lens based on the desired field of view and relationship to the subject, and let the DOF fall where it may.

The Fujinon is capable of getting quite shallow DOF, but it would involve moving the camera approximately 4.4 times further away from the subject (I think; I may have just made that number up).

The Fujinon goes to 88mm, and is capable of delivering a reasonably shallow DOF look. However, the chromatic aberration is substantially more noticeable at the telephoto end of the lens, so this may not be a practical option.
Click to expand...

@Nate-Thanks for the info. Good stuff.

@Barry-I have not seen any screenshots of the aberrations when at full zoom. Has someone posted any that your aware of? I'd like to see the extent of it. Another question, is there a longer lens available (or will there be) that will fit right into the HD's mount?
 
The only other lens that's available is the 13x, and that's not longer -- it's wider. It's 13x3.5mm, vs. the stock lens which is 16x5.5mm.

Almost any lens that gets adapted to the camera will have a longer focal length. Other lenses will have been designed for bigger-chip cameras, and those bigger chips demand longer focal-length lenses to deliver usable fields of view, so telephoto won't be a problem once the lens adapters are out.

And -- you want some full-telephoto chromatic aberration? have a gander at this .wmv:
http://www.icexpo.com/HD100/chroma-aberration.wmv

Look at the reflections in the glass. In that shot I'm executing a rack focus from the back of the glass to the front of the glass. The lights shining on the glass were pure white. There was nothing green or purple in that shot at all. Yet the lights all render with an extreme green or purple outline, depending on the degree of focus/out-of-focus, and also on whether focus is short or long.

I think it's outrageous.

Those highlights should have been rendered white, not as green or purple blobs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top