DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   Sony XDCAM EX Pro Handhelds (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/sony-xdcam-ex-pro-handhelds/)
-   -   Image Advice (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/sony-xdcam-ex-pro-handhelds/116003-image-advice.html)

Benjamin Eckstein February 29th, 2008 12:44 AM

Image Advice
 
Here is a frame grab from Las Vegas, where I am visiting for a shoot. Does this image look right? I mean.....seriously......does the EX-1 do this justice?

http://www.dvinfo.net/gallery/showimage.php?i=855&c=2

Paul Dhadialla February 29th, 2008 01:00 AM

Benjamin, the image looks slightly blurry to me (maybe camera shake, auto focus on (don't recommend it), shutter speed to slow, or simply detail/crispness settings need some fine tuning.

I downloaded the 1920x1080 and viewing in photoshop on a cinema display.

There is also the slight possiblity that backfocus is off

It's not that severe - whatever it is - it looks about 15% off what i'm used to seeing

It could be the JPEG artifacts.

What is your gain setting, focus (auto/manual), and what framerate and shuttter?

Do you have a TIFF

Exposure looks ok to me

Paul

Michael H. Stevens February 29th, 2008 01:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Benjamin Eckstein (Post 835055)
Here is a frame grab from Las Vegas, where I am visiting for a shoot. Does this image look right? I mean.....seriously......does the EX-1 do this justice?

http://www.dvinfo.net/gallery/showimage.php?i=855&c=2

No. No. Seriously out of focus.

Dean Sensui February 29th, 2008 02:45 AM

Was the aperature at f16?

I had a shot that was terribly soft when the lens was stopped down to f16. I hadn't seen anything like that with any other lens. Now it's just something to be aware of.

Dennis Schmitz February 29th, 2008 02:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dean Sensui (Post 835077)
Was the aperature at f16?

I had a shot that was terribly soft when the lens was stopped down to f16. I hadn't seen anything like that with any other lens. Now it's just something to be aware of.



SAME thought...

Michael Mann February 29th, 2008 03:04 AM

If this is what we get when stopping down to F16 then F16 would be unusable. Hope this is "only" an out of focus shot.

Dennis Schmitz February 29th, 2008 03:08 AM

F16 is unusable - but not only on this cam!
The picture looks already soft at F11.

Don't use it. Better use some additional ND-Filters or faster shutter.


regards Dennis

Ola Christoffersson February 29th, 2008 03:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dennis Schmitz (Post 835085)
F16 is unusable - but not only on this cam!
The picture looks already soft at F11.

Don't use it. Better use some additional ND-Filters or faster shutter.


regards Dennis


Yep - seen the same on my cam. And I remember that it was really important to use the right ND-filters on my old PD150 to avoid soft images on bright sunny days.

Michael Mann February 29th, 2008 03:23 AM

Hhhm, I hoped that the much better lens of the EX1 would show less softness even when stopped down. A good DSLR zoom lens (e.g. Nikon 18-200) does not get that soft at F11 or F16. Can anyone explain?

Piotr Wozniacki February 29th, 2008 03:52 AM

Unfortunately, this is true about all cameras in this price range; the diffraction softness could be seen with F8 and up with my V1E - with EX1, F11 is the smallest usable aperture, I'd say (but it's better to stay around 5.6 as the best compromise).

PS: Benjamin, I bet lots of beer you were not kidding when first posting the picture; there is NO motion brur but diffraction softness at its best in it :)

Michael Mann February 29th, 2008 04:16 AM

You're right, Piotr.
But I'd really like to understand (from a technical point of view) why this is obviously different for photo lenses, which sure get softer due to diffraction when stopped down, but much less than camcorder lenses, even professional ones. Any ideas?

John Hedgecoe February 29th, 2008 08:07 AM

Camera lenses DO exhibit the same softness when stopped down. It is not advisable to use DSLR lenses below about f11 or maybe f13. It is softness due to diffraction as light passes through the very small opening in the iris.

This link explains it better than I can... http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tut...hotography.htm

Benjamin Eckstein February 29th, 2008 08:35 AM

Nobody gets a joke
 
Holy crap, I did NOT think you guys were going to take me seriously. I guess it is hard to post a cyber joke. I was in the car and laughed out loud when we drove by the Sexpresso (this was my first time to Vegas so I wasn't so used to all the blatant sex stuff). Anyways I grabbed the cam out of my bag in the back seat as we drove through the parking lot and I shot this out of the car.

I am sure the image was crap, but people get so serious here I just wanted to post a funny picture or the "Hottest Coffee in Vegas".

BTW, I am thinking of buying a a franchise for the Boston area. Good idea?

Marty Hudzik February 29th, 2008 08:45 AM

This is what happens when you get a bunch of camera geeks together. You could show us a room full of beautiful naked super models and we would be busy talking about the resolution or the lack of CA on the edges. Sometimes you have to knock us over the head to realize there is actual content in the images we are looking at. Sorry we missed the joke.

However just about all the technical talk seemed right on. I have messed up a few times with my XLH1 and shot with auto exposure on and no ND Filters. In the EVF it looks fine but then later you see it and realize that f16 really softens everything.

Peace.

Benjamin Eckstein February 29th, 2008 08:49 AM

FWIW, I am almost positive I had both NDs in as I had just been shooting outside before I got in the car, and I don't think I have had auto iris on since I got the camera, but shooting in about 5 seconds out of a moving car could probably account for some softness. You think?

Content people, content!!!!! I am trying to make people laugh.

Marty I may try posting naked shots next and see what happens.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:39 PM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2024 The Digital Video Information Network