DV Info Net
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   Sony HVR-V1 / HDR-FX7 (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/sony-hvr-v1-hdr-fx7/)
-   -   Hvr-v1 opinions (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/sony-hvr-v1-hdr-fx7/90166-hvr-v1-opinions.html)

Marcus Marchesseault April 14th, 2007 06:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Douglas Spotted Eagle (Post 659952)
Terrific post, Marcus!
Hope to see you soon; we're shooting end of may/first of june in your neck of the woods.
Spot, are you going to be throwing perfectly good cameras out of perfectly good airplanes? Let me know if you need crew.

Steve, the length of your list shows that there are so many variables to consider that it is going to be individual preference as to which camera is better in low light. One camera is better one way and another has advantages in a different area. We aren't in a situation like the days of the XL1 and the VX2000 coming out to trounce it's low-light sensitivity. There is now a fairly decent list of the "prosumer" cameras that are all fairly close in many areas yet all still retain very distinct "looks".

John Bosco Jr. April 15th, 2007 10:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piotr Wozniacki (Post 659966)
I don't mean no offence, but you're almost quoting Adam Wilt's article. I have thorougly tested both cameras you're mentioning, and can assure you first-hand that the V1 is not noticeably worse a low-light performer than the Canon. Yes it gives a bit darker (more natural) picture, but where I was getting spots of grain with the A1, the V1's picture is still clean - up to 9dB of gain. Also, in spite of Adam Wilt's measurements, the perceived resolution of the V1 does not drop - at least not below 12dB.

Of course it needs lighting in extreme situations, but so does Canon. If the V1 progressive picture is "worse" than the Canon's, it's somewhere quite else: lots of fine detail in full light and with high sharpness.

Also, I can't agree with Marcus' advise to increase colour in low light - quite the opposite, as intense colours increase chroma noise.
No offense taken. Yes, I did borrowed a line from Adam Wilt's article to back up my claim that the Canon is the better of the two in low light. My experience with the two cameras was pointing both in dim light and seeing which one had the brighter and sharper image. Although the Canon was more grainy, it was sharper and brighter than the V1 (1080i, 18db gain on both cameras). I did not test the V1 in 1080 24p in dim light with high gain. I relied on Adam Wilt's low light 24P test.

Outdoor tests showed both cameras looked really good. The Canon's picture looked cleaner in my opinion in 1080i (both cameras - 0db with ND 1 on, the color gain on the canon raised to +35).

Also, I did say that the V1 looked better in its progressive 24P than the Canon in 24F, so I don't know where you got the idea that I thought the V1's progressive picture is worse than the Canon's.

Anyway, I was just stating my opinion that the Canon is better in low light. Had Sony used its larger 1/3rd inch CMOS sensors, then I believe the Sony would have been the champ in low light and most of the other areas (of course, in my opinion).


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:47 PM.
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2025 The Digital Video Information Network