|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
January 14th, 2006, 08:54 AM | #16 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Roanoke, VA
Posts: 796
|
Quote:
__________________
Dave Perry Cinematographer LLC Director of Photography • Editor • Digital Film Production • 540.915.2752 • daveperry.net |
|
January 14th, 2006, 08:59 AM | #17 | |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Port St. Lucie, Florida
Posts: 2,614
|
Quote:
Thank you VERY much! It did work and now I can watch it. Funny thing is it said it was already on my computer, but it couldn't find it anywhere, so just added the new one. Glad you are still speaking to me! :) Will drop you an email. Mike
__________________
Chapter one, line one. The BH. |
|
January 14th, 2006, 09:45 AM | #18 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Litchfield Park, AZ (W/of Phoenix)
Posts: 502
|
Quote:
Miguel |
|
January 14th, 2006, 10:34 AM | #19 | |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: St. Louis, MO.
Posts: 26
|
Quote:
this mean that the Digital Right Management (DRM) is corrupt in the file... you need a player that doesn't read DRM like the latter post. For me the XL2 is like the Money Pit - I keep wanting to buy more and more and more for it... I just wish we had the time to use it. Miguel.. the B&W viewfinder is used because color screens emits radiation that will eventually damage your eyes. Also it's easier to focus amoung other things. back to video server configs..... |
|
January 14th, 2006, 11:03 AM | #20 | |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Port St. Lucie, Florida
Posts: 2,614
|
Quote:
Thanks Frank, Using Doug's suggestion I downloaded the Player and it works great! This is the movie I have been waiting for. I have "The Ultimate Guide to the Canon XL2," but it is very disapointing, IMHO. The FU-1000 Viewfinder uses a CRT instead of LCD screen, don't know and never heard of the radiation factor. The CRT is a higher ressolution, and I believe it also has underscan or at least is more accurate in frameing. Most find it very much better at obtaining a correct focus. Just finished watching the movie and feel really energized now. Good luck all---Mike
__________________
Chapter one, line one. The BH. |
|
January 14th, 2006, 08:01 PM | #21 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Auburn, Washington
Posts: 218
|
Quote:
__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759 |
|
January 14th, 2006, 08:07 PM | #22 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Auburn, Washington
Posts: 218
|
Quote:
__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759 |
|
January 14th, 2006, 09:07 PM | #23 |
Wrangler
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Eagle River, AK
Posts: 4,100
|
Frank, do you have any sources for your opinion about viewfinder radiation dangers?
I'd be amazed if both viewfinders were anything but perfectly safe from a radiation standpoint. But **theoretically**, IF one were a risk, it would be the FU-1000. The color viewfinder is an LCD screen, so should emit only negligible RF; the FU-1000 is an actual CRT, so uses an electron beam like any TV set. That is radiation, but at a very low level and the same as with B&W TVs. So I'm doubtful pending reading source documents. I'm simply not aware of any concerns related to the use of such a device. But I'll double check with our eye expert at work on Tuesday just to be absolutely certain. If you have a source, let us know -- o/w let's not get into FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt).
__________________
Pete Bauer The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science. Albert Einstein Trying to solve a DV mystery? You may find the answer behind the SEARCH function ... or be able to join a discussion already in progress! |
January 15th, 2006, 08:13 AM | #24 | |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London
Posts: 90
|
ENG setup
Quote:
Thanks, your comments are very interesting. I am sure there are a number of us with the XL2 who are thinking about HDV and would echo your thoughts about waiting a year. I though am more interested in your comments about the ENG set up you use and the mono viewfinder. I have been using my XL2 on wildlife for a year and would appreciate your advice about the 16x manual lens in terms of image quality - with the idea that it could be used on the XLHI body as and when it is purchased - (I wonder if a 2/3" Canon ENG could be adapted - especially one with a X2 adapter). The same goes for the viewfinder system - I had a chance to have a look in a Sony mono HD viewfinder recently and I was very impressed with the clarity, I wonder how much advantage the Canon mono viewfinder would give me. Incidentally, when I was using Polaroid for image determination in my artificial light photographic studio, pre -digital, we were recommended to use black and white rather than colour because the contrast ratio and highlight rendering was closer to colour transparency. I wonder if there is an element of that in using a mono viewfinder, notwithstanding the obvious issue of clarity and resolution. Relatedly, most directors in the old days used to use a green filter in their 'prime simulation viewing optic' to get a monochrome effect so as to gauge contrast ratios when using real film. I have to say, for an ex 16mm man, there have been some quite disconcerting anomalies with the XL2 when used in combination with the standard 20x lens set up: Dramatic purple colour fringing at full zoom, where there is a strongly delineated darkish image against a grey sky= chromatic aberration. Jaggies on moving leading edge highlight areas =clash of frame rate and shutter speed, and or aperture, which I have still not solved... I would appreciate your further comments. Rod Compton UK |
|
January 15th, 2006, 08:59 AM | #25 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Mateo, CA
Posts: 3,840
|
Rod,
The 16x manual is a tad sharper than the 20x. Of course, you loose the image stabilization. It's also a bit faster, especially at the long end. This can come in handy if your trying to achieve the apparent look of shallow DOF as you know. I don't own a 20x, but I don't see the kind of CA you are talking about on the 16x. Is it as good as BROADCAST glass for 2/3 cams??? Mmmm, Ive seen worse. There's a thread going somewhere, that speaks to the use of the 16x with the new H1. Apparently, it holds up well. Not TECHNICALLY HD mind you, but holds up well. The FU-1000 is definately a great aid in critical focussing. And the underscan is nice too. Best thing I can recommend is to borrow/rent them and give them a whirl. I had used them (and the 14x, which is a sweet lens) on an Xl1 for years before purchasing the xl2. |
January 15th, 2006, 09:00 AM | #26 |
Wrangler
|
Rod,
I too have a full ENG setup XL2. I love the FU-1000 because of the aid in focusing it provides. It also shows the full frame and is about 700 lines of resolution. The FU-1000 is actually made by Ikegami for Canon. You wouldn't be disappointed with using one. The peaking control acts as a focus assist. Objects in focus will have a white highlight around them. Another less talked about feature of the FU-1000 is that it has a small lens light on the bottom that can be turned on or off with a switch on the underside. Great for seeing the barrel markings of the 16X manual when shooting at night. Because the human eye is more sensitive to luminance than chrominance, having a b/w viewfinder helps tremendously. regards, -gb- |
| ||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|