DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   Wedding / Event Videography Techniques (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/wedding-event-videography-techniques/)
-   -   Sony VX2100, 4:3 or 16:9? (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/wedding-event-videography-techniques/508918-sony-vx2100-4-3-16-9-a.html)

Darryn Carroll June 29th, 2012 04:18 PM

Sony VX2100, 4:3 or 16:9?
 
Hello all, been shooting weddings with a pair of VX2100's about 4 years, all in 4:3 mode. Anything I should consider before shooting in 16:9? Everyone has a widescreen TV these days, so about time I make the changeover but naturally a bit nervous before shooting one. Thanks all.

Jeff Harper June 29th, 2012 05:03 PM

Re: Sony VX2100, 4:3 or 16:9?
 
You might want to practice framing your shots in 16:9, as it is completely weird when you change over. Other than that there is nothing else I can think of to concern yourself with.

Joel Peregrine June 29th, 2012 05:07 PM

Re: Sony VX2100, 4:3 or 16:9?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Darryn Carroll (Post 1740917)
Hello all, been shooting weddings with a pair of VX2100's about 4 years, all in 4:3 mode. Anything I should consider before shooting in 16:9? Everyone has a widescreen TV these days, so about time I make the changeover but naturally a bit nervous before shooting one. Thanks all.

Take a look at the picture quality in 16:9 mode with that camera. From what I remember the quality is very much degraded with artifacts and reduced resolution.

Dave Blackhurst June 29th, 2012 05:24 PM

Re: Sony VX2100, 4:3 or 16:9?
 
yeah - all those widescreen TV's are also HD... depending on how that particular camera processes "widescreen" (some just crop the top and bottom off IIRC...) you may not like the results.

Don Bloom June 29th, 2012 05:44 PM

Re: Sony VX2100, 4:3 or 16:9?
 
The VX/PD series of cameras suck in the 16:9 format. I've been using PD since 2000 or 2001 and still do. As great an image as they produce they really miss the mark in widescreen.

Chris Harding June 29th, 2012 07:43 PM

Re: Sony VX2100, 4:3 or 16:9?
 
The Master has spoken ..Don is pretty clued up on Sony SD cameras!! My first shoulder-mount Panasonics had the same setup with a 4:3 sensor and the camera actually crops the image to 16:9 for you...and as Don says, it ain't pretty.

Put once of your normal 4:3 clips in your NLE timeline and crop it there and see the huge difference...to make the image 16:9 the camera (or NLE) needs to slice a bit off the top and bottom of the image and then zoom the image 40% to fill the 16:9 frame....In your NLE, also try zooming a clip 40% and you will see how much IQ you actually lose!!

Might be time to by an HD camera otherwise say with 4:3 and just have pillars on the side...It's normally quite accepted by clients.

Chris

Darryn Carroll June 29th, 2012 10:28 PM

Re: Sony VX2100, 4:3 or 16:9?
 
Thanks all, I will keep todays wedding at 4:3, I am ready for an HD upgrade, been stalling due to expense but it is time :)

Adam Gold June 30th, 2012 11:24 AM

Re: Sony VX2100, 4:3 or 16:9?
 
This has been discussed to death in the VX/PD subforum. Never, ever shoot widescreen with these cams.

Chris Barcellos June 30th, 2012 04:25 PM

Re: Sony VX2100, 4:3 or 16:9?
 
One way around was the Century wide adapter. You shot 4;3, but the adapter gives a distorted picture which has to be "stretch fit" in post. It was considered one of the best resolution to going 16:9. When HD 16:9 came in, Century sold the lenses out for $ 99.00, when original sale price was $ 999.00. I bought one then form VX2000 and use occasionally.

The other thing we did to give a 16:9 film look was to shoot in 4:3, but add a letter box frame through the chip on board. The VX and PD allowed use of overlays of the chip, and you could frame a letter box in as part of the 4:3 image. That actually worked better than the electronic 16:9 provided by the camera.

J. Stephen McDonald June 30th, 2012 09:40 PM

Re: Sony VX2100, 4:3 or 16:9?
 
I was never pleased by the image quaity of my VX2100 and removing 25% of the pixels for 16:9, made it even worse. Its progressive-scan mode at 15 FPS was a joke. I had analog-recording SD camcorders 23 years ago that produced sharper videos with better color. After shooting only 10 hours of video with it, I sold it last year after 6 years of sitting on a shelf. It was better than my Canon L-1, made in 1992, but those two were over-rated to an amazing degree, by so many people. Do yourself a favor and dump the VX2100 while it's still worth a few dollars. Any of the new sub-$500. Sony video-shooting photo cameras in the HX-Series will give you better video and it's HD 60p. If you want, they will also produce very good 640 X 480 at a bit-rate that is a fraction of what the DV CoDec uses. Such a camera will gain you no status among the participants here------all you get from it will be good results at a small price. The audio is passable from the built-in mikes, but limited in its versatility. Some might use a separate digital audio recorder with external mikes and match it up in editing. The audio recorded on the camera would always be there as a backup.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:19 PM.

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