Hello! a buddy wants to rotate with the XL1S. The question is whether or pixel data or quality when he lost this pseudo-stretch 16:9 mode safe. but really should only pixel missing a 16:9 screen in retrospect anyway, or covertly? when it comes to broadcast the material, it is smarter because the 16:9 mode (would be easier because of the Kasch), or 4:3 filming and later balken drauf? my opinion there is no difference .. thank you in advance!
Antwort von Marco:
"but should really only missing one pixel 16:9 maske in retrospect anyway, or face?"
In principle is correct. The XL1 laminated and stretches the picture in 16:9 mode. Regarding the resolution is 144 lines going lost. The video is purely technical point of view but as a "true" 16:9 recorded.
Antwort von B.DeKid:
Gude I let my "Guidelines on the display show and working with the 4:3 mode ... after" bar screen "on it .... I want the camera is not a" translation "on leave.
(The situation where other people have Glueing Linen XL offers the "16:9 Guidelines Appropriate restraint, I
Times and should be shelved in Height / Depth is still synonymous scope.
MfG B. DeKid
Antwort von Meggs:
In 16:9 mode you lose in any case which is in comparison to subsequent letterbox. The XM2 as the XL1 synonymous not enough pixels on the chip for "true" 16:9. It interpolates but with the help of Pixel Shift quite cleverly, so that recording in 16:9 mode are significantly sharper than images with 4:3 letterbox bars. In case of doubt in the XL1 try.
Antwort von sas_hh:
Alright, this has helped me very schonmal!
So, the XL1 has these guidelines in any case, the fact I had even then. But the XL1S Know?