time to sell the pdx?

Douglas Spotted Eagle · July 12th, 2005, 06:36 PM

you want a sore shoulder? Just try carrying around a Z1 with a mattebox and RedRock Micro on it. Ain't a shoulder camera that way, no sir. Adds about twice the weight once you throw on a 105mm Nikon lens.

Tommy Haupfear · July 12th, 2005, 06:55 PM

Quote:

i wonder why tommy is selling his FX1?

I've had it for five months and have not used it at all. There is a chance it might be next summer before I could put it to good use. Of course if no one bites on it I don't think my feelings would be hurt if I had to keep it!

Kaku Ito · July 12th, 2005, 07:11 PM

Michael,

I read through this post, maybe I can help you get more ideas about this because I did own DSR-PDX10s and the similar cams (AG-DVC30 and NV-GS400s), then HDR-FX1 and HDR-HC1.

So, let's discuss little by little, fearture to feature, so figure out which is better in each situation. I would figure you would need A1 instead of HC1, so you still have good period of time to think it over. To me, it is good to look over to justify my migration and maybe it would be useful for other people's decision making, too.

When you talk about shooting in 16:9, DSR-PDX10 was one of the first affordable professional cam to support better quality anamorphic. But with HDV, you have waaay higher resolution (while within the limit of MPEG2 compression, which means within reasonable motion), so I look back at the similar footage I shot with PDX10, I see the lack of feeling from the atomosphere. HDV can offer you (within the limit of motion) better feel of the place it was shot at, what kind of material the cast is wearing. However, this extra details might hinder you from making the audience understand the main idea of the story (depending on how you make the video). The audience might get too attracted by the hi-res scene, forgetting to read the main idea. I read the study about films that 24 frame make the film look less live, thus forces the audience to realize it is not live, so they concentrate more to understand the story. This goes to the same for hi-res audio or some other audio technologies. A good monoral recording is better than bad stereo or surround recording. The main idea is to make the audience understand the story. Then again, after clearing this philosophy, if you use the ability to expand the expressions with high resolution, it might give you the power to make people touched even deeper.

so, this time was about the difference in the resolution. I do love to see higher resolution of the HDV footage I shot, but I tend to get infatuated by how the video look and I do get carried way by that. After all, it should matter by WHAT was there or what happened there.

I will look for "me and my bike" footage shot with DSR-PDX10 for you to compare side by side with the ones by HC1 and FX1 that I posted last week at my site.

Michael Gibbons · July 12th, 2005, 08:19 PM

Wow. That would be really nice. thank you.
The new, wife approved, plan is to keep the pdx and sock away a little cash each month until we have enough for an upgrade. This should provide enough time for the format to shake itself out a little in the marketplace.

Kaku Ito · July 13th, 2005, 02:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Gibbons

Wow. That would be really nice. thank you.
The new, wife approved, plan is to keep the pdx and sock away a little cash each month until we have enough for an upgrade. This should provide enough time for the format to shake itself out a little in the marketplace.

I couldn't find the quite the same one (with my wife shooting with tripod chasing me as the cast on my bike), but found one that is shot with PDX10, GS400 and GS100 all at the same time with tripod static position.

First, you have to register at my site. It is easy, normal Mambo site registration procedure.
Take a look.

Does anybody rememer if I had the routine shot with PDX10?

July 12th, 2005, 06:36 PM	#16
Douglas Spotted Eagle VASST Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Stockton, UT Posts: 5,648	you want a sore shoulder? Just try carrying around a Z1 with a mattebox and RedRock Micro on it. Ain't a shoulder camera that way, no sir. Adds about twice the weight once you throw on a 105mm Nikon lens. __________________ Douglas Spotted Eagle/Spot Author, producer, composer Certified Sony Vegas Trainer http://www.vasst.com

July 12th, 2005, 08:19 PM	#19
Michael Gibbons Major Player Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Loveland, Colorado, USA Posts: 292	comparison video Wow. That would be really nice. thank you. The new, wife approved, plan is to keep the pdx and sock away a little cash each month until we have enough for an upgrade. This should provide enough time for the format to shake itself out a little in the marketplace. __________________ " When some wild-eyed, eight foot tall maniac grabs your neck, taps the back of your favorite head against a bar room wall, and looks you crooked in the eye, and he asks you if you've payed your dues, well, you just stare that big suker right back in the eye, and you remember what old Jack Burton always says at a time like that, 'Have you paid your dues, Jack? Yes sir, the check is in the mail."

July 12th, 2005, 07:11 PM	#18
Kaku Ito Trustee Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo Posts: 1,382	Michael, I read through this post, maybe I can help you get more ideas about this because I did own DSR-PDX10s and the similar cams (AG-DVC30 and NV-GS400s), then HDR-FX1 and HDR-HC1. So, let's discuss little by little, fearture to feature, so figure out which is better in each situation. I would figure you would need A1 instead of HC1, so you still have good period of time to think it over. To me, it is good to look over to justify my migration and maybe it would be useful for other people's decision making, too. When you talk about shooting in 16:9, DSR-PDX10 was one of the first affordable professional cam to support better quality anamorphic. But with HDV, you have waaay higher resolution (while within the limit of MPEG2 compression, which means within reasonable motion), so I look back at the similar footage I shot with PDX10, I see the lack of feeling from the atomosphere. HDV can offer you (within the limit of motion) better feel of the place it was shot at, what kind of material the cast is wearing. However, this extra details might hinder you from making the audience understand the main idea of the story (depending on how you make the video). The audience might get too attracted by the hi-res scene, forgetting to read the main idea. I read the study about films that 24 frame make the film look less live, thus forces the audience to realize it is not live, so they concentrate more to understand the story. This goes to the same for hi-res audio or some other audio technologies. A good monoral recording is better than bad stereo or surround recording. The main idea is to make the audience understand the story. Then again, after clearing this philosophy, if you use the ability to expand the expressions with high resolution, it might give you the power to make people touched even deeper. so, this time was about the difference in the resolution. I do love to see higher resolution of the HDV footage I shot, but I tend to get infatuated by how the video look and I do get carried way by that. After all, it should matter by WHAT was there or what happened there. I will look for "me and my bike" footage shot with DSR-PDX10 for you to compare side by side with the ones by HC1 and FX1 that I posted last week at my site.