Low Light Performance - PDX10 vs VX-2000 - Page 2 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > Sony XAVC / XDCAM / NXCAM / AVCHD / HDV / DV Camera Systems > Sony HDV and DV Camera Systems > Sony TRV950 / PDX10 Companion

Sony TRV950 / PDX10 Companion
...plus TRV900, PD100A and other Sony DV camcorders.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old December 28th, 2003, 11:07 AM   #16
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Hooper, UT
Posts: 177
Thanks Boyd and Tommy (discovered that last night also, good deal). Let's close this one out for now. Happy holidays.
Randy
Randy Stewart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 29th, 2003, 04:04 AM   #17
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 90
Gee, guys....

I feel really bad about my PDX10 after all the discussion about its poor performance under low light conditions. That is until I finished a recent editing task.

Having recently filmed a social gathering (with indoor and outdoor persuits [fishing, bike riding, eating drinking etc] , with some poor lighting situations) all in 16:9 and edited in FCX and DVDSP2 burning the DVD, I was able to use many of the colour correction facilities available in FCX to create some very usable footage of the poorly lit indoor scenes.

The final product when viewed on a decent widescreen TV suggested to me that the PDX 16:9 was worth some of the perceived shortcomings. As long as the lighting is not pitch dark and you have some colour correction tools like in FCX, you should be ok.

Regards P
__________________
Sony PDX10 by 2, DRS-11, Dual G5, FCX, DVDSP and Logic Plat.
www.VarsityMusicVideo.com
Patrick Grealy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 29th, 2003, 02:13 PM   #18
Major Player
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: US & THEM
Posts: 827
Tom

where did you get the 3 stops from?

when I had a vx2k (since sold it) it came out just under 400asa wheras the pdx comes out about 100asa - maybe you meant the vx2100?

also the pdx has longer telephoto than vx in 4:3 so pull back and compare?

maybe theres a spec lying around stating sensitivity f(xx) at 2000 lux somewhere for each cam?


IMO when you consider noise the vx is unuseable above +6db gain, whereas +12db with the pdx is just useable
__________________
John Jay

Beware ***PLUGGER-BYTES***
John Jay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 2nd, 2004, 10:01 AM   #19
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Billericay, England UK
Posts: 4,711
the three stop difference is determined experimentally John. I had both the PDX10 and VX2000 set up perpendicular to a large white, evenly lit, projection screen. Both cameras were set to give the same picture, the PDX10 at max wide and the VX zoomed in a bit to match the area exactly. I fed both cameras output to a TV using different inputs so that I could easily A/.B switch between them using the TV's remote.

I varied the light on the screen such that on replay the PDX10 showed that maximum aperture was being used, but no gain-up had taken place. In the same conditions the VX2000 was working at f4.8. If I used telephoto the PDX loses another half stop over the VX's f2.4 max aperture.

Interestingly the chips give slightly different colours on screen, the VX had a blueness and the PD had a brown-ness to the grey as it appeared on TV.

tom.
Tom Hardwick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2004, 07:41 AM   #20
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: n.w. minnesota
Posts: 35
>the three stop difference is determined experimentally John. I had both the PDX10 >and VX2000 set up perpendicular to a large white, evenly lit, projection screen.
>tom.
Now I wonder about the projection screen Tom…compared to an evenly lit white surface such as a painted wall, or white fabric…it seems the projection screen may have been slightly if not highly reflective and not the kind of scientific control one may think…while in actual shooting environments there may be numerous reflective material in your frame, seldom would one be shooting a solid reflective surface. Useful information perhaps…but not sure how accurate the results would be

Don’t matter though…still love you guys !!!
David Korb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2004, 08:06 AM   #21
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Billericay, England UK
Posts: 4,711
David, you do my experimental technique a diss-service. Of course I used a dead matt white low efficiency screen. What I would say is this though. The PDX10 I had on test needed the exposure preset knocked back two clicks to the left to stop highlights blowing out, so in effect this 'claws back' some low light sensitivity.

tom.
Tom Hardwick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2004, 09:28 AM   #22
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: n.w. minnesota
Posts: 35
Tom i highly respect your work and your conclusions...didnt mean to offend...nor do i completely understand projection screens as you may well see by now
Please forgive my ignorance
__________________
If at first you dont succeed...well so much for skydiving
David Korb 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 > Sony XAVC / XDCAM / NXCAM / AVCHD / HDV / DV Camera Systems > Sony HDV and DV Camera Systems > Sony TRV950 / PDX10 Companion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:29 PM.


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