Frage von Horst Tappert:
Maybe a stupid question, but for me as an animal photographer not uninteresting. Which camcorder (in the <10,000 ¬ class) are suitable for mapping with the minimum depth, from the handling s.besten so simple as to use a DSLR?
Thank you - Horst
PS: format (SD, HD etc) would be irrelevant anyway because I quite new in the world of the moving image arrive.
Antwort von stefanph:
How about with the EX1 HD, which has the first 1 / 2 "sensors in this price range
http://www.film-tv-video.de/newsdetail.html?&uid=36850&no_cache=1
Antwort von Bernd E.:
Which camcorder (in the <10,000 ¬ class) are suitable for mapping with the minimum depth of field. As a rule of thumb: The larger the image sensor, the better it is with the depth of play. In this relationship would be best for you is a camcorder-style SonyDSR-500 with 2/3-Inch-Sensoren, but - especially if the price one synonymous Lens should be included - for only 10,000 euros is needed to get.
What new equipment is concerned, I really fell brand new SonyPDW-EX1, which only in a few weeks on the market and still holds 1/2-Inch-Sensoren.
Gruß Bernd E.
Antwort von Jan:
The zoom but not forgotten, with a Canon XH A 1 with 20x optical zoom, I can rather with the depth of play than with a
SonyFX 1 with 12x, although both 3x 1 / 3 "hold.
The SonyPMW EX-1, but not bomb, as one of only 6500 ¬ 3x 1 / 2 "CMOS is able to offer me a puzzle - but so it goes.
A DSLR is not necessarily easy to use, especially when you're in the class Ds Canon & Nikon FX looks.
VG
Jan
Antwort von stefanph:
.. With the zoom you get no more depth! The assumption is wrong.
Antwort von Schleichmichel:
You probably wanted to write "less depth."
Right. But the blur (as the whole picture synonymous) increases when working with long focal lengths.
Antwort von beiti:
.. With the zoom you get no more depth! The assumption is wrong. Not calculated, because you're right. But in reality, there usually is not about the depth alone, but the overall effect exemption. And that is with a longer focal clearly better. The fact that fashion photographers like outdoor use long focal lengths, has practical reasons.
Antwort von Jan:
Sagt times can you read?
I had written (and not changed):
The zoom but not forgotten, with a Canon XH A 1 with 20x optical zoom, I can rather with the depth of play than with a
SonyFX 1 with 12x, although both 3x 1 / 3 "hold.
Horst Tappert has less depth in demand - so my answer - the 100% true. That we in the small sensors over large depth of focus must not talk, I had assumed, maybe this time I prefer to say nothing more here.
Yes clearly I do not get more depth - I had not written so synonymous, depending on the circumstance, but I get more optical zoom with less depth of field that I can use creatively.
If you do not 2 cameras Comparison daheim have to move you in times of a market digicams offer a test.
Let 2 cameras:
1. Panasonic DMC FX 12 Sensor 1 / 2, 5 "with 3x zoom 35-105mm
2. Panasonic DMC TZ 3 sensor 1 / 2, 4 "with 10x zoom 28-280
For both models, although it has no aperture code, but for interior lighting, the camera always open aperture depending on the focal.
Object ca 5m away and try to free the object - with the FX 12 you have no chance, TZ 3 Zoom to 280 and it works. The distance to the object must not be too big - then it will be difficult for the synonymous TZ 3rd
I see that even with the SonyFX 7 - the smaller 1 / 4 "sensors are often mocked, but I did with 20 x optical zoom has often
People are free to 10-12 with X is naturally heavier.
PS: You can Digicam synonymous with a 105 mm with 1 / 1, 8 "(the so purely theoretically produce less depth must) - it is always good to see his sharpness - blurred background is in principle not to create, I habs even my Fuji F 40 (1 / 1, 6 "CCD) is not done.
VG
Jan
