Hello, would soon begin a project that will be in 16:9 format. I have the XM2 and make the cut with PPro 1.5. Am I correct that if I record with the XL2 in 16:9 mode, then the scenes in PPro (DV Pal Widescreen) Manipulating and the whole again in widescreen format and export to DVD banne, a 'real' 16: 9 Movie have? Or will all just dragged / compressed and 'artificial' brought to the format? Thank you. Rolf
Antwort von jens:
Well, that depends of erstmal from the camera. I think, correct me, that takes up di XM2 no real 16:9. A discussion of real and fake you can follow here: Example image Premiere will probably (your material and not as recognizable as 16:9 letterbox 4:3), but I would say that the image quality against scaled on a 4-3 (of 4:3 to 16:9) did not improve. Jens
Antwort von Markus:
Hello Rolf,
the 16:9-definition distinguish here the spirits. I mean, if a camcorder 720 × 576 pixels with a pixel aspect ratio of 1.42 writes onto tape, then this is for real, anamorphic 16:9, with 16:9 you can create a real DVD discs.
Only of the XL2, Canon has a true 16:9 format! But the MX2 not. Greeting from Canada of Henry
Canon XL2, new digital camcorder with broadcast quality. Among the most important functions: 3 x 1/3-inch progressive scan CCD with 800,000 pixels 50 fields or 25 full-screen images for television and cinema applications Recording in 16:9 and 4:3 format Full manual handling on a variety of settings and Aufnahmevariablen XL interchangeable lens system Fluorite 20X optical zoom lens Lens with Super Range optical image stabilization 2 independent neutral density (ND) filter 4 audio channels with 2 built-in XLR connectors with 48-volt phantom power SMPTE time code with the timer options "Rec Run" and "Free Run" IEEE1394 camera control for Direct to hard drive
Antwort von Markus:
16:9 is only "real" if synonymous, the image intensifier of this format? And when a 4:3-image converter can not produce a true 16:9, it means the reverse is not synonymous to a 16:9 camcorder can record not a true 4:3? After all, he would cut the left and right the picture, instead of above and below (expand, where the black bars in 16:9 in the 4:3-Television to appear) ... ;-)
Antwort von tongi:
Hello,
I am in the summer because of a project in the usa.
We have 4 prosumer cams. including the synonymous canon xl2 and the Canon xm2 (in usa anscheind canon gl2) (the exact other models were not yet known to me)
The mitsicherheit synonymous xm2 has a 16:9 mode (ie not letterbox) times, I hope ... or??
And the canon xl2 has "real" (that is REALLY REAL?) 16:9 ...
can be different materials forming the 2 camcorders Zusammenschneiden conspicuous without unpleasant?? (synonymous of total visual character)
what do you think? someone has experiences with multicam recording (with different models)
Antwort von Axel:
"longi" wrote:
someone has experiences with multicam recording (with different models)
I have with the VX2000 in 16:9 mode (pixels) and my buddy with his FX1 in DV mode (true 16:9 chip bruised, higher horizontal resolution) before. The higher Resolutionauch the XL2 was (yes, I believe the 800 000 pixels) is obviously curtailed by the Resolutiondes respective output device when a DVD in NTSC or PAL format is the goal. Of course, here is the picture of the real-Chipper WAS better, but not spectacularly. If the material for film are issued, provides for the safe thing different. But while the major shortcoming of the synonymous "GL2" over the large, that these controls no 24 frames, or that are 25 in the PAL model.
Antwort von Markus:
Because it is in the discussion about 16:9 over again to "real or unreal" went, I wrote a food for thought after a time contribute to the topic:
->
Antwort von tongi:
Thank you both for your reply! 16:9 NaTrue your thread had read it. is explained really well and concise.
axel, so you have no bad (or non-optimal) mix together experiences made several cams?
what do you think about the connection of the xm2 and xl2 (and probably of 2 prosumer cams of sony)
the goal is a DVD (NTSC) I for the European market will most likely convert to PAL has to be right? arhg (ntsc region free so synonymous have to run, but I think europeans deterred by the rather vlt from ntsc <- to right ^ ^)
would be nice if I could distract someone because my worries:)
Antwort von Axel:
"longi" wrote:
the goal is a DVD (NTSC) I for the European market will most likely convert to PAL has to be right?
Regarding the interaction of the cams, there are Canon Experienced, think differently? I suspect that your worries are groundless.
To NTSC> PAL: I've never heard that a DVD player would have refused an NTSC disc, nor do I know PAL television, which are not so, unless you go with a VHS-NTSC video via the antenna jack rather than composite. I would not even think to convert. Opposing opinions?
Antwort von Markus:
"Axel" wrote:
I would not even think to convert. Opposing opinions?
Nope, I see the same. With me so far were all synonymous NTSC DVDs. ;-)
Antwort von AmateurProfi:
Here on Youtube a video of the XM2 with 16:9 is Is it so see if it 16:9 in the "real picture" films?
Antwort von Bespi:
The xm2 is not a true 16:9
Antwort von Jitter:
That's true. Although the XM2 delivers anamorphic 16:9 images, but Resolutionbleibt clear back behind the 4:3-recording. The result looks grottenschlecht 16:9. I tried it elbst.
Antwort von beiti:
Quite amazing that this thread from 2005 (!) Was dug out again, but the definitions of "real" or "fake" are still not clarified.
The crux of the argument, one must question the authenticity do not depend of the type of production or the achievable image quality. As the signal is generated and how good it looks, is one thing. Whether it meets a certain standard, is another matter.
Here come the ultimate definition:
True 16:9 The Resolution720 x 576 pixels will be fully completed, ie there are no black bars. The pixel aspect ratio is 1:1,42.
Phony 16:9 It creates a picture in 4:3 aspect ratio (pixel aspect ratio 1:1,06), the top and bottom black bars called (synonymous letterbox).
The confusion surrounding the XM2 is because they (like most older DV camcorder), the absence of its high-resolution chip 16:9 picture clipped from a 4:3-scaled picture, which of course does not provide a good quality. To the authenticity of the format it does not budge.
In other words, the XL2 produces a true 16:9 picture, but only in an unsatisfactory quality.
And now that I just contradicted None, otherwise the discussion is still next to 2012 ...;)
