|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
December 18th, 2004, 11:04 PM
|
#1 |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Kirkland, WA
Posts: 177
|
Videomaker Magazine's review of XL-2?
Did anyone read the review of the XL-2 put out by Videomaker magazine? That issue is currently for sale and I just read through it at Comp USA.
They insist in their evaluation that the XL-2 has oversized CCD's. Is seems pretty common knowledge that the XL-2 uses a standard 1/3" CCD but the top and bottom portions are not active. Maybe oversized CCD's is the accepted term for this or maybe it was sloppy journalism. Just curious if anyone noticed this besides me. Greg |
|
|
|
December 19th, 2004, 05:17 AM
|
#2 |
|
Wrangler
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 4,487
|
Videomaker (like most magazines) often contains technical errors, omissions, and somewhat misleading info. Best to verify any important detail independently before you rely on it.
Given that the standard CCD in most consumer/prosumer geat today is 1/4" or smaller - I suppose you could call it "oversized." Note that the inactive portion of the CCD also depends on the shooting aspect ratio (16x9 or 4x3). http://www.dvinfo.net/canonxl2/articles/article06.php has more info on the CCD.
__________________
dpalomaki@dspalomaki.com |
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
||||||
|
|
