|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
February 24th, 2004, 08:43 AM | #16 |
Wrangler
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Greenville, SC
Posts: 1,415
|
1152x648. That is impressive! So basically the width of the 16:9 mode and the digital stills are the same.
If we could add progressive scan, a few more pixels, and a better recording medium the PDX10 could be a 720p marvel. |
February 25th, 2004, 03:17 AM | #17 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Billericay, England UK
Posts: 4,711
|
Yes, the width of the 16:9 mode and the digital stills are the same. But the price you pay for having tiny 1/5" and mega-pixel chips in your camcorder is in low-light performance. It's quite a price; the VX2k is 3 stops more sensitive but the stills to memory and the 16:9 mode (in controlled, non CCD smear lighting) are impressively better on the PDX10p
tom. |
| ||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|