Th13X3.5BRMU - Page 2 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > JVC ProHD & MPEG2 Camera Systems > JVC GY-HD Series Camera Systems

JVC GY-HD Series Camera Systems
GY-HD 100 & 200 series ProHD HDV camcorders & decks.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old March 9th, 2006, 10:19 AM   #16
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ - USA
Posts: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Weber
Since this is what I do for work, (travel and shoot). I can give you a few tips on the cheapest way to travel.
That is awesome advice! I can't say I'm going to do it tomorrow - but that's really helpful, thanks for posting it.
Joel Aaron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 9th, 2006, 10:24 AM   #17
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Richmond, Virginia
Posts: 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Weber
Since this is what I do for work, (travel and shoot). I can give you a few tips on the cheapest way to travel.

I use www.sidestep.com as a tool to search for flight options at cheap prices. I find a flight option that works for me price wise and is on my airline of choice (United for me). I then write down the exact flight info and times and then go to the airlines direct website and use the multi-city search option. Insert all of the info that you wrote down and usually you will have a cheaper flight option than the one on on sidestep.

The best way to get through Jakarta is through Bangkok. You will arrive in Bangkok at 12:00 am and will need to get a hotel until you can catch your flight to Jakarta. The Miracle Grand is a 5 start hotel with the best breakfast you will ever find for around $55 a night. Google Asia Travel to make your reservation. They will also pick you up and take you back to the airport.

Dan Weber
Things like this is why I love being a DVinfo member!!!

Tim
Tim Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 14th, 2006, 07:06 AM   #18
New Boot
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 7
Is there someone who can tell me what size of filter is needed with the 13X 3.5, Thank you
Tobie Marier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 14th, 2006, 10:49 AM   #19
New Boot
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 9
Filter size

Hi Tobie
82 mm filter size for the th13x3.5BRMU lens.

Regards
David Cubbage
David Cubbage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 14th, 2006, 11:12 AM   #20
New Boot
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 7
Thank you David

My question wasn't clear. I was doing reference to the filter dimension using matte box 4X4 or 4X5.6.
Tobie
Tobie Marier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 14th, 2006, 11:24 AM   #21
Wrangler
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada
Posts: 3,637
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tobie Marier
Thank you David

My question wasn't clear. I was doing reference to the filter dimension using matte box 4X4 or 4X5.6.
Tobie
You would need a 85mm adapter ring for a clip-on matte box, the same as with the 16x stock lens.

If you were referring to filter coverage, a 4x4 seems to work fine, but a 4x5.6 would be a safer bet for the wide end.
__________________
Tim Dashwood
Tim Dashwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 14th, 2006, 12:01 PM   #22
Major Player
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Crestline, California
Posts: 351
Filter size

We tested my Petroff matte box for vignetting at Ste-Man (distributors of Petroff) with the 13x3 on the camera when I picked up the box.

Their 4x4 frames cannot be made to shadow the lens at full-wide in any rotation. So with the Petroff at least there is no reason to put yourself in the position of buying the more expensive 4x5.6 filters. Other brands may be different, so one should certainly test before buying.

I did get the 4x5 matte box though, so if a wider lens becomes available (not likely) I'll still be able to pop in the bigger frames and filters.

I love my Petroff and suggest anyone in the market for a matte box check it out. Very nice.

Tip
Tip McPartland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 14th, 2006, 12:45 PM   #23
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 109
matte box

I have ordered a vocas M.B. and I am planning to use 4X4 filters unless someone can give a positive info that the 4X%.6 are needed.
For the C.A. of the lens, over f8 in clear sky shots I get C.A. at the lower edges of the lens.
It is embarassing because this glass costs more than the camera.
I am thinking of many senarios, one being that there is a problem with the ccds or there is an issue with the detail as I see the CA through the fine paterns only, palm leaves, trees etc.
I hope that if we load more filters and stay under f8 it would be better.
In comparison with the 16X I think that the CA is ~30 -40% less.
We had full moon 2 days ago, I shot it and it was really nice, with the 16X it had a red bump over the circle.
As I didn't have the chance to test the lens through a real project yet, still testing it slowly in my garden and in my office, I am wondering if somebody could post his experience with it, give us a few advises and maybe ways to avoid the CA.
Bright days seem to be the enemy of the 1/3" Fujinon lenses and this makes me feel frustrated here in the tropics with a magic hour that last ~ 15min.
The guys that mount directly the nikon lenses have noticed any CA that looks like the one we get from the 16X stock lens?
I cannot download footage for the moment, an answer in words would be enough for me.
Waiting for your creative comments.
Thanks - Panos B
Panos Bournias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 15th, 2006, 06:45 PM   #24
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Greeley, CO
Posts: 52
Has there been any resolution tests comparing the 13x to the 16x? I am interested to see how sharp the 13x is with the detail off. With the detail off using the stock lens, the image is quite soft.
Ian E. Pearson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 15th, 2006, 07:02 PM   #25
Wrangler
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada
Posts: 3,637
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian E. Pearson
Has there been any resolution tests comparing the 13x to the 16x. I am interested to see how sharp the 13x is with the detail off. With the detail off using the stock lens, the image is quite soft.
Yes. I performed that exact test on all detail settings with both lenses.
I haven't uploaded the results yet. I'm still analyzing them, but I can email you the frame grabs now if you want.

Tim
__________________
Tim Dashwood
Tim Dashwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 15th, 2006, 10:08 PM   #26
Trustee
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 1,896
Tim,
Does the 13X appear to have better rez?
Steven Thomas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2006, 05:23 AM   #27
Major Player
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: NE of London, England
Posts: 788
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Dashwood
Yes. I performed that exact test on all detail settings with both lenses.
I haven't uploaded the results yet. I'm still analyzing them, but I can email you the frame grabs now if you want.

Tim
Can you email them to me aswell please Tim. Many thanks!
Mike Marriage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2006, 11:24 AM   #28
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 248
Tim, why not post them since we're all interested?
Warren Shultz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 17th, 2006, 03:43 AM   #29
Wrangler
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada
Posts: 3,637
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren Shultz
Tim, why not post them since we're all interested?
I haven't had a chance to carefully scrutinize the results in order to quantify the resolution difference, but when comparing the frame grabs it is clearly obvious that the 13x is much sharper.

These were originally exported as uncompressed TIFF, but I did these versions as Jpeg to make them smaller for download. However, the file size is still 23Mb.

These were all shot statically at F4, with the same camera body locked in the same position with both lenses at the same focal length (around 15mm.)
Using 15mm at F4 is probably the best possible scenario for the stock lens.

http://homepage.mac.com/timdashwood/..._rez_tests.zip
__________________
Tim Dashwood
Tim Dashwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 17th, 2006, 11:21 AM   #30
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 248
Thanks Tim.

I'm not sure how you'd quantify it but you can sure see there is a clear difference in sharpness.

On my stock, I get progressive vignetting after 40 and wide open in low light I have an awful gradient of green to magenta through the whole image. Anything like that on the wide angle?
Warren Shultz is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > JVC ProHD & MPEG2 Camera Systems > JVC GY-HD Series Camera Systems

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:47 PM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network