lux rating of the XH-A1/G1

[Jerry Gordon]

Originally Posted by Pete Bauer

Auto Mode continually changes not only shutter and aperture, but as required will increase the gain (and therefore change the video noise level) to get what the camera judges is an appropriate exposure. So measuring low-light capability in Auto Mode is really a "desperate case" assessment and a moving target. This also brings up the difficulty with lux specs ... each manufacturer, if not each different camera, uses its own methodology to make a lux claim. Also, exposure is affected by custom presets such as gamma curve, setup, and pedestal. So it is really tough to get true apples to apples comparisions. The nearest fair approximation to compare different cameras is either to optimize each cameras settings or set each camera to default, and then do a side-by-side shoot.

Low light comparisions have been one of the most common requests lately. I don't have any other manufacturer cameras, but since I've been too lazy to put my old cameras up for sale, I have a GL2, an XL2, and XL H1 that I'll do a quick-n-dirty side-by-side test on. We don't know, but presume that since the XH cameras use the same sensor as the XL H1 (although different processing algorithms), their sensitivity ought to be in the same ballpark.

BTW, I've noticed that one of the XL H1 modes (I think 30F, but I can't remember for sure right now) has about 1/2 to 1 stop less exposure than the other modes. Again, don't know that will be true with the XH cameras, but probably so.

Thanks Pete again

Yes I would assume the auto mode would do much like the still camera, change shutter speed etc for best shots. And thanks for telling me which camcorder you use, I just asked that in another reply.

And it seems from all the replies and further reading I have done since posting this that the A1 will be much like the XL's in this matter, which would be nice. I think I will be an all canon person after this, as my DSLR's are all Canon.
<Smiling> I know what you mean about selling. I had thoughts of selling the VX2100 when I make this jump, but I too am a bit lazy in that dept. I still have a brand new Canon Elan 7 and 2 10d's, that I have stashed and never even considered selling after upgrading to the mkII's.

Thanks
Jerry

[Lou Bruno]

Mine will be in shortly. I will compare it to my FX-1. I also own the HV-10 and the colors are excellent!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Can't wait.

Originally Posted by Dave Lammey

If any of you early purchasers of the A1 or G1 can do a direct comparison to the FX1/Z1 in lowlight conditions, that would be greatly appreciated!

[Jerry Gordon]

Thanks Lou....color is important also.
I will look forward to your comparison. I had thought the FX-1 way was how I would go at first but then realized it had been out for a long time and decided to look for newer technology.

Thanks
Jerry

[Bill Pryor]

Originally Posted by Dave Lammey

Daniel: great, thanks ... it will also be interesting to see if the canon's footage can be matched to the Fx1 in post. If I recall correctly, the GL2's footage didn't match up very well to the VX2000/PD150 ...

That's not a valid comparison--the GL2 is a 1/4" chip camera and the VX2000/PD150 have 1/3" chips.

[Dave Lammey]

If I recall, it was more of a color issue, than a lowlight issue ... so I'll be interested to see if the new Canon is just as distinct, in a color / softness of picture sense.

[Chad Shivel]

can anybody tell me just how bad the low light capability is on the sony hvr a1u? i know that it is a relative question but basically here is my situation: Im searching for a camera in the $2500 range. after all of my research i find the sony hvr a1u, the sony vx 2100, and the canon gl-2 in my price range. I thought the a1u was the winner but have recently been turned off by the reviews on the low light capability. Now im very new to this whole scene, so when they say it is bad can it video good quality in a candle lit room cause i really need something that can video in low light. is the vx2100 (3CCD) the better choice in this situation? I know i would be sacrificing HD for SD. also does the vx2100 have the XLR input capabilities like the a1u? thats important to me. please someone help the newby!!!!

[Mikko Lopponen]

Originally Posted by Stu Holmes

THe 0.4lux is only 0.4lux as i beleive (by memory) they stated in brackets the shutterspeed used and it was very slow ! So you can do that with any camera to get a "better lux rating". The Sony ones are quoted at default shutter speed of 1/60th NTSC and 1/50th PAL.

Sony has changed that. Now they will also use 1/25 shutter for lux readings if the camera has to ability to go automatically to 1/25 shutter. For example the hc7's lux is rated at 1/25 for pal.

[Terence Murphy]

Originally Posted by Chad Shivel

can anybody tell me just how bad the low light capability is on the sony hvr a1u? i know that it is a relative question but basically here is my situation: Im searching for a camera in the $2500 range. after all of my research i find the sony hvr a1u, the sony vx 2100, and the canon gl-2 in my price range. I thought the a1u was the winner but have recently been turned off by the reviews on the low light capability. Now im very new to this whole scene, so when they say it is bad can it video good quality in a candle lit room cause i really need something that can video in low light. is the vx2100 (3CCD) the better choice in this situation? I know i would be sacrificing HD for SD. also does the vx2100 have the XLR input capabilities like the a1u? thats important to me. please someone help the newby!!!!

Chad -- note that both Sony and Canon make HD cameras called "A1". Your post is in the Canon XH-A1 forum, but probably would have been more appropriate in the Sony forum. The Canon would be a better choice as far as low light capabilities, but it's a bit out of your price range. But even the Canon may not give you good video quality in a candle lit room. HD needs light, or bigger chips like in the Sony EX (even more out of your price range).

The VX2100 does amazing things in low light, and if your final output is standard def DVD then the resolution isn't noticably different from down-converted HD (to the typical viewer). It does not have XLR inputs -- you can add an XLR adapter like a Beachtek box, or get a PD170 which is the same camera but with more pro features. You might want to consider a used one. VX2100's regularly come up for sale on DVinfo, and they're typically very well cared for. Its also a tank, and the heads supposedly last 1000-1500 hours so buying used can make a lot of sense. You should be able to see the classified section after you've been a member for 30 days and have made a few posts (not sure what the minimum is).

-Terence

[Don Palomaki]

FWIW on LUX ratings.

There is an industry standard (EIA-639 I believe) for consumer camcorder LUX ratings, but it is not clear whether or not any manufacturers follow it for any given camcorder, from what I've seen, they often use their own standard that mays not map to other makers standards (or even their own for other camcorder lines) but is one that allows good marketing spin. If the spec does not cite the EIA standard, it probably was not used. As I understand it the EIA standard was developed for NTSC camcorders and does not really address MiniDV or HD formats.

The measurement standard for consumer gear is something like:
1/60 shutter speed (for NTSC)
Auto exposure and auto white balance mode on.
Zoom near wide (a maximum aperture for the lens setting)
A bright white target produces a 50 IRE luma level.
A 2% white target produces 4-10 IRE (i.e., NTSC black remains NTSC black, not applicable to DV formats where black = 0 IRE).
Chroma level for a red target is at least 25% of the bright illumination level
Not less than 17 dB luminance signal to noise ratio measured using an 18% gray target
Resolution is at least 70% of bright illumination case.
And that is not a very good picture.

Full up professional gear uses a different measurement standard that includes a brighter picture, and much better signal to noise ratio.