Screen Grabs of 170 and 300 Comparison

it's definitly over exposed as her pants (highlights are clipped) are bright and the shadows are brighter than the 300.

the shadows in the 300 are darker and almost clipped to black.
 
Barry_Green said:
But... Cees, you seem always to panic whenever anything isn't perfect. You said yourself that you're worrying, even though this is a 1920x1080 sensor recording to the best recording format in the world!

Anyone can take a bad picture. There is *nothing* to be gained by judging from a bad picture. It is only from the good stuff that you learn whether a camera is worthwhile.

If you see sharp imagery from the camera, even once, then that should settle the matter once and for all. I posted that Africa footage back in February! It's June now. Why is there even a question as to whether the HPX300 is razor-sharp and super-crisp? I saw this footage projected on a 20-foot screen and it was jaw-droppingly sharp, so crisp that you would probably be very, very happy with it.

Nothing has changed, so why the panic because some end user took a mediocre picture? I guarantee you I could find mediocre shots from a Red One or a Sony F35, does that make those cameras bad?
Click to expand...


Well put Barry!

It has a lot to do with "the guy behind the camera". (hopefully that doesn't offend anyone...)

No wait.. it has everything to do with the guy/girl behind it!


I've seen crappy footage come from 35mm cameras and the oh'so mighty RED.

I mean.. I have even seen DVX100 footage that just totally smacks 35mm in the face.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top