DVL-Digest 649 - Postings: Index DV-boards always use some kind TRV900 vrs DSRPD100A VX2000 low light vs. Sony 505V DV-boards always use some kind - Adam Wilt When I capture video over IEEE1394 from tape (miniDV from Sony TRV900E), > the bitstream of the writing to the harddisc is about 3,6Mb/s. > I wonder if there is some compression going on in the DV300 ? No, it's going on in the camera: DV is a (roughly) 5:1 compressed 720x480 (NTSC) or 720x576 (PAL) format. The DV300 simply copies that compressed datastream. See http://www.adamwilt.com/DV.html for all you ever wanted to know (and more) about the DV format. Cheers, Adam Wilt TRV900 vrs DSRPD100A - Adam Wilt Will the JVC deck playback DVCAM? I don't think so. > And, actually ;-) the VX2000 is only a few hundred dollars more > than the PD100A. Should I write a new subject :-) Nah, just go buy the VX2000. You'll be happier in the long run! :-) The TRV900/PD100A has the upper hand in compactness and the latge size of the flip out screen. In every other way (image quality, adjustability, user interface) the VX2000/PD150 is superior, IMHO. Cheers, Adam Wilt VX2000 low light vs. Sony 505V - Adam Wilt As I understand it, the 505V still camera only has (1) 1/8inch CCD > versus (3) 1/3inch CCD......on the VX2000. The Sony termonology is a bit confusing: it's actually one 1/1.8" (one over one point eight inch, slightly bigger than 1/2") CCD, but it has 3.3 million pixels (only 2.6 of which are used in the 505V, BTW). The VX2000 has three 1/3" CCDs, but those CCDs are only around 1/3 megapixel each, and they're laid out differently. The net result is that each pixel on the VX2000 is rather a bit larger than pixels in the 505V. Bigger pixels, all else being equal, let in more light. Hence the VX2000 is quite a bit more sensitive than the 505V. Cheers, Adam Wilt (diese posts stammen von der DV-L Mailingliste - THX to Adam Wilt and Perry Mitchell :-) [up] |
 slashCAM  News HD Camcorder database One-on-One Cam comparison About our tests About us |
|
|
