Zoom rocker sensitivity

[Sam Jankis]

Originally Posted by Robert Lane

There's not enough room to have both focus and zoom rings setup for external manual controls.

If you had two single-sided FF units (that are adjustable enough - maybe Dan Diaconu's FF unit), you could use one unit on the left side and the other on the right side of the camera. Of course, you could just keep the autofocus on and use the FF for just the zoom.

[Robert Lane]

There's no practical way for a dual mount; the right side of the camera front is dominated by the XLR inputs and switches. Besides, focus and zoom ring are so close to each other that the FF/zoom control would be competing for space on the rails making one unmountable.

Clearly, some enterprising engineer-type could easily create a custom mount where both zoom & focus controls could be mounted but it would take a special design not yet created.

My guess is that since such a small percentage of HVX users actually need or want external manual lens controls that it would be cost prohibitive to create such a dual device, but we can always hope!

[Robert Aldrich]

Use a dolly...it's SO much nicer than a zoom!

[Benjamin Hill]

A dolly isn't practical much of the time, especially in an interview setting.

[Dean Sensui]

I've had similar problems with trying to manually zoom.

I was thinking of some sort of crank-driven setup that could be adapted to any rod support system.

[Dale Hildebrand]

Yes, this has been a problem (and people have been bringing up this issue) since the first DVX100. Problem is, it was never fixed in the DVX100a, DVX100b and now the HVX. Really was hoping it was fixed, now that I've just moved from the DVX to the HVX. Seems like such a basic fix to implement, especially since, as mentioned earlier, you can get a relatively smooth slow zoom and step into zoom from a $400 camcorder.

[Tom Ang]

No-one's mentioned it that I've noticed on this thread, but personally I find the slow setting on the handle-mounted zoom controller is fine for slow zooms - no problem to reach it during interviews. But maybe I'm not as critical as the experienced DPs out there.
Tom

[Benjamin Hill]

Tom, the handle mounted zoom has the same problem, I assume because it's employing the same servo.

[Andrew Clark]

For all you HVX200 owners, can you tell me when you use the ZOOM ring in manual mode, does it have the feel of the:

-DVX100
or
-DVX100a/b

I remembered when playing with the DVX100 zoom ring (in manual mode), that the zoom ring was VERY loose and basically useless to do a nice, although not the smoothest, zoom.

I only heard, have not experienced first hand, that the zoom ring tension was improved on the A and B DVX100 models. True?

[Benjamin Hill]

Andrew, the zoom ring tension (in manual mode) is a lot stiffer on the HVX200 than on the DVX100 (original model) that I had before this. It doesn't make to much difference to me as I only use manual for snap zooms. But it does have a little more resistance, if that's what you wanted to know.

[Andrew Clark]

Thanks Ben!!

Indeed that's what I was hoping to hear.

[Martin Iverson]

Originally Posted by Benjamin Hill

I'm talking slow and steady Matt, a completely different type of effect than a snap zoom. So slow that you can barely see it.

Try that, manually, on an HVX- it won't be smooth. Unless you're Steve Austin and have a bionic arm.

Benjamin, you're not trying to zoom manually without moving the Zoom switch on the front of the camera from servo to manu are you? It would hardly require Steve Autstin to move the zoom ring when it is switched to manual. Jane Austin could handle it.

I'm new to the HVX but, I think it's smoother to use the handle zoom at setting one, and it requires zero practice. It's not slow enough either though. My first Panasonic camera was an AG DVC30 and it has a wonderfully slow servo zoom at one third the cost. Much slower and smother than my HVX. What up wit dat Panny?

[Robert Aldrich]

I have never used the DVX 100A or B but the HVX200 manual zoom is for me, great. One thing though, so far for me, it's impossible to get an unnoticable zoom unless you combine it with motion, like moving from one person or subject to another. You just can't start or control the zoom smoothly enough by hand.

But combined with motion, it is invaluable, and so much more controllable than the "servo" mode. In other words, you can hide the zoom with the motion of the camera and this is exactly what I like to do with it. A manual zoom on these cheaper cameras to me is useless otherwise, you just can't start/stop it smoothly enough.

There is one thing, the level "1" setting of the handle zoom starts off almost unnoceable, but still starts off with a very slight jerk in my opinion, and then is only at the slowest setting, so not really of any use if you want it to go any faster.

The only other option on changing he subject size in the frame is to dolly instead of zoom, you get very smooth start and stops, that you can't really do with a zoom.

I've recently watched a number of old feature films where they zoomed instead of dollied and to me it was very obvious because no dolly could start and stop that fast. But maybe the general audience wouldn't notice this anyway, just seemed a little too sudden for my taste.

[Cees Mutsaers]

Profressionals never use zoom in the final footage so it is a none issue

[Benjamin Hill]

Originally Posted by Martin Iverson

Benjamin, you're not trying to zoom manually without moving the Zoom switch on the front of the camera from servo to manu are you? It would hardly require Steve Autstin to move the zoom ring when it is switched to manual. Jane Austin could handle it. [/i]

No, Martin, I'm not trying to break my camera. What I meant by Steve Austin was that it would take a robotic hand to deliver an extremely slow manual zoom that was as smooth as a servo (because a robotic hand would be a servo, har har).

This type of slow, creep zoom actually does have application in the professional world; I've used it for interviews and filming dance, and I'm sure I've seen it used in wildlife footage. Some people don't like zoom out of principle, to each their own. What perplexes me, as I said at the beginning of this thread, is that my $400 Sony Handicam can do slower, more subtle zooms than a DVX or HVX.