Frage von heufti65:
Hi,
so far I've done with the Sony VX 1000 following operations.
1. fast sport shooting (tennis) in 10,000 Shutter Speed
2. Converts DV 720/576
3. Stills of them made in Adobe Premiere 6.5
Has anyone already made experience with the FX1 or the smaller brother, the HC1?
The problem with speed sports photography is always to hold, or freeze fast movements. With 10,000 cap it is OK, but the aperture is, of course, and they are just natural light shots possible.
Is that with the FX1 is better? It is indeed recorded in 60 frames per sec can do. If one then converted, through Premiere Pro 1.5 and HD plugin reads and in DV, then the quality is very good?
I think that yes, the generic file a perfect Qaulität. Is it possible to save over into the DV format?
Thank you for an answer.
Antwort von domain:
In all interlaced formats are imaged at an interval of 2 frames 1 / 50 sec, and more or less well mixed. Of course, can expose the FX1 synonymous with 1 / 1000, but the snapshots they look synonymous accordingly: 2 very sharp individual images are combined to a mixed picture. If you're not just going to do motion analysis that looks horrible. I can not imagine that with your VX is 1000 so far has been different (or it can 25p?). There are no perfect deinterlacer for such cases. Dost worth "nice" pictures, you get a progressive aufzeicnenden camcorder which 25 frames / sec. unexposed around. The European version can FX1E only 50 fields / sec. to expose the result would be synonymous with 60, but not much better. Of course you can read in DV, or convert afterwards, but will work no better than an original DV Recording with a DV camcorder good.
LH Helmut
Antwort von Bruno Peter:
With 10,000 cap it is OK, but the aperture is, of course, and they are just natural light shots possible. You mean the Aperture is full on ...
Antwort von AMH:
The FX1 is Sportaufahmen fundamentally inappropriate. Simply because of the MPEG conversion.
In addition, they can not record Halbblider in 60 seconds. You have probably confused it with the Z1. This can easily switch between PAL and NTSC. Therefore, the differences in the composition.
Semi-professional camcorder to record the full screen in my opinion, synonymous not suitable. The picture is very "Stroboskopmässig.
At least with the models I know.
In my opinion, the VX2100 would s.besten suitable for your purposes.
Best regards
Alex
Antwort von WeiZen:
The FX1 is Sportaufahmen fundamentally inappropriate. Simply because of the MPEG conversion.
::::
In my opinion, the VX2100 would s.besten suitable for your purposes. Oh, why me?? Does the VX2100 other 50 fields (as the FX1)?
Have you ever had both cameras in hand?
Greeting
Ulrich
Antwort von AMH:
Indeed!
The VX2100 is better suited for this situation in many respects.
Among sports shots I imagine football games, car races etc before. What you then need 16:9 chips?
A standard DV compression seems to me that much more practical.
Question: Have you ever had both cameras in hand?
Gruss
Alex
Antwort von wolfgang:
So I have no FX1. But I would be interested synonymous times why a 50i procedures for sports photography to be less suitable when it is compressed in mpeg.
Do you have examples of this, or at least reasons that warzum you think?
Or is it really just a confession of faith?
At a distance like a "normal DV compression is much more practical"?
And what are those cameras in their hands? If anything, I'd shoot it once ...
;)
So I understand that yet ... AMH, but perhaps that can explain this a little bit more or even justified?
Antwort von PowerMac:
I know the FX1 and PD170/150 pretty good. In addition, the DVX and larger cameras.
With many details, and fast movements Mpeg2 nunmal looks like shit.
For you Wolfang: Like a Gop of 15 pictures will look good when everything is changing constantly waving at? V. s.bei sports photography?
Until we have an I-frame, the world is totally different ...!
Here's a comparison between the F900 and FX1:
http://www.hdforindies.com/2005/01/mike-gets-hands-on-sony-hdr-fx1-hdv-vs
And here is rapidly moving Mpeg2 material:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/archive/index.php/t-36489.html
Antwort von AMH:
The FX1 has a very bad move sharpness, which are victims of the strong MPEG compression.
Well, this seems to me to be quite problematic. Moreover, it is in Comparison to the VX2100 more dependent on light, what a short exposure time would stand in its way.
Lich enough in the dark? Or have I got the completely wrong? Maybe I am in favor of yes to underexpose or not bright enough: P
I did not say that it would be useless for sports photography, but only that it is not predestined for this task.
So, what do the jurors to my defense?
kurzbelichtete Greetings
Alex
Antwort von AMH:
ah, PowerMac was faster!
Antwort von WeiZen:
Moin,
yes and no, yes and no because I have a VX2000 and FX1 one, not VX2100. Here
And here is rapidly moving Mpeg2 material:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/archive/index.php/t-36489.html runtergerechnetes is Mpeg4, WMV, not an original stream. I sport shooting in Low Light, Dancing (Ballroom Dancing) of the two cameras.
And because of the rapid movement, here is a gekeyten Reißschwenk without tripod out of hand, however, synonymous to WMV. (The yellow trike is gekeyt and changes the color without changing the color of yellow A2 synonymous.
