DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   Sony TRV950 / PDX10 Companion (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/sony-trv950-pdx10-companion/)
-   -   HC1000 -- various questions (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/sony-trv950-pdx10-companion/30692-hc1000-various-questions.html)

Boyd Ostroff August 3rd, 2005 05:44 PM

Actually ND filters don't do anything to reduce glare, they just reduce the amount of light coming into the camera. That quote of mine was with regard to shooting in bright sunlight without having to use a high shutter speed.

Acutally I just learned that the HC-1000 doesn't seem to have a full manual mode like the TRV-950 or PDX-10 - see http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showpost....0&postcount=16. Having a few ND filters might come in handy, but actually I'd suggest getting your hands on the camera first and learning what it's capable of.

The 37mm filters are inexpensive and widely available if and when you need them. I got mine filters at a local Ritz Camera store.

Tom Hardwick August 3rd, 2005 11:36 PM

Interesting that Sony worldwide has just taken a huge hit on profitability, with hundreds laid off and share prices on the tumble. But when you look at what's happened since 1998 - TRV900, 950, 1000, you get the idea that someone in charge isn't paying attention, and that in fact consumers do know their onions, and have gone elsewhere to buy.

Fine to make a dumbed-down HC1000, just don't abandon the ''compact VX2100'' market, Sony. Folk like us with the VX or PD might well be wanting a more compact cam for backup, unattended recording, holidays and so on. The TRV900 was just that camera, but if you look through the Sony catalogue now there's this huge void between the FX1 and the HC1000.

Panasonic have been quick to answer the call, and their proliferation of three-chippers has earned them a deserved following. Sony's arrogance led them into MicroMV fields, and their clinging to ATRAC rather than accepting the lesser MP3 has let Apple trounce them with impunity. It's like the impala killing the panther.

tom.

Tom Hardwick August 3rd, 2005 11:47 PM

Boyd's right, the NDs only soak light. Hopefully in a neutral way, hence the name. I wouldn't have thought them desirable or necessary with the HC1000 for a variety of reasons, and here goes.

The 1000 will have two or three internal NDs that float about with impunity and with no direct control from the operator. I'm sure Sony will have considered the Antartica trip, and added enough ND and shutter speeding to cover all lighting eventualities.

And internal ND is the place to have it funnily enough. The very short focal lengths on modern camcorders (especially when used with much needed wide-angle converters) means that filters fitted in front of the zoom bring with them lots of opportunity for flare, dist, fingerprints, and these find themselves being recorded onto tape with the huge dof.

Internal filtering is the cheap way to go and at the same time is safe from any of these failings. The HC1000's spec indicated that it's not really aimed at the filter adding, exposure tweaking, lens adding crowd. It's just designed to do all the photographic calculations for you, while you get on with pointing it in the right direction

tom.

Sandra Warshaw August 4th, 2005 02:41 AM

WHY TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHICH IF ANY ND FILTERS MAY BENEFIT HC1000... PRIOR TO ARRIVAL OF CAMERA

My reason for trying to figure out which (if any) ND filters could help compensate for the HC1000's limitations is that my new HC1000 will arrive tomorrow or the day after...

...and then I only have seven days to try out the camera to determine if it's okay (based on store's return/exchange policy).

I live in a rural area where 37mm lenses aren't available at local stores...
so I'll be needing to order them from out of area.

But I figured if I ordered one (or several) tomorrow...it could arrive in time for me to try out with camera...before I needed to determine if the HC1000 was okay.

Trying not to make a long entry...longer... Some of my problems with the first HC1000 were described in other entry "Flickering/shimmering/spiraling problems w new HC1000."

Why interest in ND FILTERS? I believe that overexposure did NOT cause the problem...but I suspect that overexposure might have contributed. So, I want to be ready...to possibly compensate for problem...in case problem reappears.

Of course...I hope it doesn't!

But you know Murphy's law...if I order the ND filters...I won't need them. But...naturally...if I don't order them...they would be the perfect fix.

So...my interest in the ND filters is that I'm hoping they can help reduce the problem if it does appear.

Thanks again for input! Haven't been able to find anything like it on other forums!

Tom Hardwick August 4th, 2005 03:19 AM

If the camera does veer on the side of over-exposure Sandra (and of course production tolerances mean that all cameras veer one side or the other to a lesser or greater extent) then adding NDs up front won't help at all. Why? because the camera will simply assume it's got darker out there and open the aperture to compensate - bringing you back to square one.

The only way around this is to use the AE shift feature (if the camera has such a thing) or even the spotlight mode is worth a try. Best way of course is to be in full manual control of the gain, aperture, shutter speed and ND filters, but you have to get to the PD170 before independence from the automation is truely yours.

tom.

Stephen Finton August 4th, 2005 07:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Hardwick
The only way around this is to use the AE shift feature (if the camera has such a thing)...

Yes, it does have AE Shift.

Stephen Finton August 4th, 2005 07:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boyd Ostroff
I was just reading a thread about the HC-1 where Stu Holmes mentioned that you can't really control exposure and shutter speed manually, and this was similar to the HC-1000. So I looked at the PDF of the HC-1000 manual and was surprised to find this was true. I didn't know that!

Evidently if you set manual shutter speed you can't control iris or gain manually. If you choose manual exposure control you can't choose the shutter speed. It's really too bad the way Sony has "dumbed down" this camera in the progression from TRV-900 to TRV-950 to HC-1000, but that may very well be what consumers want.

Poppycock! When you are in Manual Exposure, Shutter is greyed-out. Select Auto Exposure, then go to shutter and select your manual shutter speed. Then Go back to Exposure and select Manual Exposure, this will lock you manual Shutter setting and lets you change exposure manually afterwards.

Boyd Ostroff August 4th, 2005 07:51 AM

Oh, OK. The manual didn't make that clear. In fact, they've changed the format of the manual from the VX-2000, TRV-950 and PDX-10 manuals which are pretty similar. Those manuals have a section on using manual controls, but the HC-1000 only seems to mention these adjustments in the section about using the menus at the end. I looked pretty quickly at the PDF though, so maybe I missed that part?

Stephen Finton August 4th, 2005 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boyd Ostroff
Oh, OK. The manual didn't make that clear. In fact, they've changed the format of the manual from the VX-2000, TRV-950 and PDX-10 manuals which are pretty similar. Those manuals have a section on using manual controls, but the HC-1000 only seems to mention these adjustments in the section about using the menus at the end. I looked pretty quickly at the PDF though, so maybe I missed that part?

I believe it is called Shutter Priority.

Boyd Ostroff August 4th, 2005 01:46 PM

This is what confuses me - page 59 in the manual:

-------------
The shutter speed cannot be changed while you are using the following functions:

- Flexible spot meter
- Exposure
--------------

But you're saying that the shutter speed can first be set, then you can go into manual exposure mode and that speed will stay in effect while you adjust the iris/ND setting? Actually, that's the same as the VX-2000 and PDX-10, but it's implemented a little differently with real buttons and wheels instead of the touch screen.

Stu Holmes August 4th, 2005 08:02 PM

Hi Boyd / Steve

Yep I think (if i may say so !) Boyd misquoted me slightly ther.
what i actually said about the HC1000 / HC1 was that when you fix the shutter speed and then change the exposure manually (which of course you can do), you can't for all EV values, change ONLY aperture or ONLY the gain.
It may well be in, say, middling light levels that when you change the exposure down, that the camera will be at 0db gain anyway, and so will just close the lens 1 stop, so yep that's in effect direct control of the aperture and the shutter speed BUT if light levels fall, say, and you manually increase exposure then you get to a point where the camera is at max.aperture and will have to go to +3dB gain. so that's the limitation really.

- It does have 'shutter priority' mode (to draw a 35mm phrasing analogy) but it wouldve been nice if Sony had given us 'aperture priority' mode too, independent of gain.

Quite why on the A1 Sony still haven't given the user the aperture, gain in-LCD during shooting i don't know. I can see their 'product positioning' guys saying "Oh HC1 is consumer camera so let's not give them that feature" but omitting it for A1 is a bit odd.

Having said that i love my HC1000 to bits - it's a great camera and very similar, functionally, to the HC1 (which i'm getting as soon as i get back to a PAL country !)

rgds

Stephen Finton August 5th, 2005 07:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boyd Ostroff
This is what confuses me - page 59 in the manual:

-------------
The shutter speed cannot be changed while you are using the following functions:

- Flexible spot meter
- Exposure
--------------

But you're saying that the shutter speed can first be set, then you can go into manual exposure mode and that speed will stay in effect while you adjust the iris/ND setting? Actually, that's the same as the VX-2000 and PDX-10, but it's implemented a little differently with real buttons and wheels instead of the touch screen.

That should've read Manual Exposure, in the manual. Once you go to Auto Exposure, shutter can be adjusted manually. Shutter is something you don't want to ride, anyway. The change in shutter speed over time while you are recording definitely registers as a glitch on the screen and would not be something I would want to be doing while I am recording. I set it for what I am doing and then forget it.

Sandra Warshaw August 11th, 2005 01:44 AM

The time has come....
 
UPDATE:

Have put samples on web page
in order to illustrate problem...
http://www.sonic.net/~stepnext/SAMPLES/indexSO.html

The magnified version is very very very magnified...and does not appear that large in image.
_______
Here are current conclusions/observations/theories

BACKGROUND

1. The problem did appear in second camera.

2. I did find ways to limit it (but not eliminate)
(decreasing sharpness while shooting/blurring in postproduction/)

3. I believe (not sure) that the problem is more common than reported. At least I believe that the same problem was described in an archive here. I just found it this week...after returning first camera.
__________________
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/archive/i...hp/t-3382.html

SOMEONE ELSE's ENTRY ABOUT SONY 950:
"I examined my tape in full, both on the camcorder viewing screen and on my TV and found that the 30 minutes of tape I had shot were filled with vertical bands, white or multicolored, which I later learned were the vertical smear problem"
________________
4. But I also have come to believe it doesn't ultimately cause difficulty for most production goals. (It doesn't appear in most mediums...such as computer monitor, VHS dub.)

5. I just contacted a local television station....because that's the final destination of my current project. The representative said he's very familiar with the problem and has found it doesn't cause problems with airing on our local TV stations. (Our standards are lower than many larger areas.)

He also told me it's common in most prosumer cameras and is eliminated in higher end cameras (which I can't afford). Though, I'm currently researching to find out if some other similarly priced cameras do not have problem.

All of these problems did get me thinking that the GS400 may have been a better choice.

DECISIONS...DECISIONS...THE TIME HAS COME...


Tomorrow is the last day to decide (based on exchange policy of seller).

I could be wrong...it could be that I got two bad cameras..and should try to exchange this one...or even get the GS400...if that's possible.

But I'm inclined to conclude
it's time to accept that all cameras have limitations...and the SONY HC1000 while limited in this way...will meet goals for which it was purchased.

In separate entry (below), include reasons why I suspect it's a common problem...and how to mitigate it...for those interested.


PS. I freely admit I have a lot to learn. Plus, I was limited in my ability to try out the camera. In order to qualify for exchange...I was limited to 120 minutes of use with camera...and time limit of one week. So, I'm sure I have not examine every aspect...considered EVERY angle.

So, my decision...is based on best understanding...to date.

And...I realize someone on forum might offer a different perspective that would be good to consider before making final decision.

Though one big limitation is funds. At this point, I can't afford a more expensive camera. So, that's not an option.

THANKS in advance for taking time to respond.

Sandra Warshaw August 11th, 2005 01:59 AM

BELOW IS BACKGROUND which I believe helps to explain why digital camcorders have trouble with lines (light lines against dark background).

And...it's what led me to believe problem is common.

FROM:

PREMIERE for MACINTOSH & WINDOWS
by Antony Bolante

"Graphic elements that look good on a progressive scan monitor display poorly on an interlaced monitor. Due to interlacing, thin horizontal lines (or patterns containing thin horizontals) appear to flicker or vibrate. If a line is thin enough, it actually disappears with every scan of its field."


[NOTE: I suspect that the spiralling colors results when the "line" disappears. But that's a guess.] (Sandra)


Anthony Bolante...continued...

"Avoid using light typefaces, thin lines, and tight patterns in images that are destined for television. If necessary, choose the Flicker Removal option in the Field Options dialog box."

'"Flicker Removal" blurs the image so that thin horizontal details don't flicker due to interlacing."
_________________

NOTE: I found it takes more than "flicker removal." I needed to use "blur" from "video effects". There are varous ones--to apply. It's a trial and error process. The first time I tried the "blur" effect, it didn't seem to work. But the "Quick Time" blur effect worked. And then others like "fast blur" helped. Yet, while the "blur" effect seems to eliminate the blur...it also diminishes sharpness/quality of image.

ALSO...decreasing "sharpen" feature in camera helps...when shooting.

Boyd Ostroff August 11th, 2005 06:37 AM

I don't know Sandra, I just can't see much of a problem in those examples, although the first camera seems to exhibit it more. It would be good to know what all the camera settings were. Did you shoot in full auto mode? Did you change any of the custom presets? Try viewing the data code (should be accessed via touch screen buttons) while playing the tape. It will tell you the aperture, shutter speed, etc. Also, as you note, the sharpness setting could be an issue. Go to custom preset (I assume this camera has them?) and I would suggest turning the sharpness all the way to the minimum, it should give you a nicer image that way, or at least it does on my PDX-10.

I don't really see any of these problems on my PDX-10 which uses the same chips and sensors. BTW, I think B&H sells the HC-1000 for $1,400 and the PDX-10 for $1,600 (with rebate). If you can exchange I think the additional $200 would be very well spent considering all the additional features it has.

But I don't think the problem is related to vertical smear at all. That would only happen on bright white areas in extreme conditions. Also, since you only see the problem on your TV screen... how is the camera connected to the TV? Are you using the composite (RCA) jacks? That's a very poor quality connection and shouldn't be a basis for quality decisions. Can your friend at the TV station hook the camera up or play the tape on a good monitor?

Sorry, you've got me stumped here!

Stephen Finton August 11th, 2005 06:41 AM

You wouldn't be talking to us at all, if you had a progressive scan camera. :)

Sandra Warshaw August 12th, 2005 05:09 AM

THIS FORUM IS A REAL LIFE-SAVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

SHORT VERSION
Quote:

Originally Posted by Boyd Ostroff
BTW, I think B&H sells the HC-1000 for $1,400 and the PDX-10 for $1,600 (with rebate). If you can exchange I think the additional $200 would be very well spent considering all the additional features it has.

THANK YOU!!! BOYD...AND ALL WHO MAKE THIS FORUM POSSIBLE!!!!!

Posting my concerns here...helped me reach a decision...I know I could not have reached without this GREAT input.

I am returning the HC1000.

I am now SERIOUSLY considering the PDX10.

Thanks for telling me about the rebate.

That makes the PDX-10 an option.

They are currently out of stock...at B&H...but said they expect to get them in week (although the price has gone up.)

Today, I've been reading about it in reviews (here and elsewhere) and in online articles. Sounds very very promising. In many ways! For example, the XLR adaptor will actually save me money...since my current XLR adaptor is not compatible with the HC1000

And that great review on this forum by Ignacio Rodríguez de Rementería...
and that article http://www.ukriversguidebook.co.uk/maranon.htm
about a freelance videographer who who used a PDX-10 to film a South African expedition down the Amazon River in Peru...certainly demonstrate its many strengths...while documenting its limitations...realistically.

LONGER VERSION...CONCERNING OTHER QUESTIONS

As to your questions about settings...I tried all variations that I'm aware of...and they failed to deliver a satisfactory image.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boyd Ostroff
But I don't think the problem is related to vertical smear at all. That would only happen on bright white areas in extreme conditions.

I am aware that there is a specific type of vertical smear that occurs when shooting into a very bright light. That is not the one I was referring to. I was under the impression that on at least one forum entry (described above), there was another type of vertical smear "with multi-colored bands." But I could be mistaken. (And that's the one I was referring to...so I guess I misnamed it.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boyd Ostroff
Can your friend at the TV station hook the camera up or play the tape on a good monitor?

I have a professional level monitor. The problem is limited there. But, the end user will be people with a wide range of TVs...so at least want to start out with images that look good on a regular TV set.

From what you're saying...and others have written...I believe the PDX-10 will be a MUCH better match for my use/goals.
*******************************

THANKS AGAIN!!!!! for taking time to seriously consider concerns and offer solid, practical solutions.

Stephen Finton August 12th, 2005 06:58 AM

Nice having something in common with you Sandra...if only for a little while. :(


:)

Clint Newman August 31st, 2005 06:46 AM

Just wondering how the HC1000 would compare to a GL2 on the video quality side of things?

Boyd Ostroff August 31st, 2005 07:35 AM

It will shoot much better 16:9 because of its high resolution CCD's. No frame movie mode though.

Tom Hardwick August 31st, 2005 08:29 AM

Boyd's right in answering your specific question; the 1000 is a much newer design than the GL series.

But if you'd asked us both, "which camera is the better machine?" I bet we'd both have come up with a different answer.

tom.

Boyd Ostroff August 31st, 2005 09:09 AM

Hmm... I am not much of an HC-1000 fan if that's what you're implying. The tiny battery and elimination of physical manual controls put it pretty low on my list. The manual controls on the GL-2 are going to make it more attractive.

I'm sure you can produce great results with either of these cameras though, since the camera itself is only part of the equation. But honestly, neither of these cameras would make my short list today...

Stephen Finton September 5th, 2005 01:11 AM

I honestly like not having the buttons on the outside of the camera. It forces me to setup my shot ahead of time and not ride the settings while I video. I know this sounds like a cop-out but I have had video shot by people who were just helping us using cameras other than the HC1000 and they wouldn't leave the damn exposure alone. We just shot a little independent film a couple of months ago and I set the cameras and forgot it. I did have one person switch it to auto focus but we had no scenes that required any movement in the foreground, so everything was just right when we went to edit everything together.

Stephen Finton December 1st, 2005 12:55 AM

Still Loving My HC1000s!
 
I have not experienced the image problems mentioned here about them. In fact I've dropped one and it still works perfectly, although I do not suggest you try dropping them.

I REALLY don't know what camcorderinfo.com was going on about in their "review" of the camera. They prove that they didn't even REALLY review the camcorder because the reviewer said that it's swivel design does not lend to low level shooting. In fact, they say it points at the sky.

Check it out, though:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...e/DSC00108.jpg

Chris Thiele December 4th, 2005 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen Finton

I got this Stephen:
The page you are requesting cannot be found

Stephen Finton December 6th, 2005 01:34 PM

Oops! That's what that picture was for! I deleted a picture last night with me holding the camera because I couldn't remember why I took such a picture. Hah!

I'll put one up again.

Stephen Finton January 18th, 2006 01:22 AM

Here go:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...e/DSC00125.jpg

Kept on forgetting to do this...

This picture is of an HC1000 with a round lens hood, UV filter and a RHODE Videomic. The swivel grip is rotated forward allowing me to hold it at waist level VERY comfortably and steadicam-like.

Jens East January 18th, 2006 10:07 AM

Nice. A Rhode is on my wishlist too. The only thing that im not happy about is the wideangle on the HC1000. 49mm is not enough.. Dont know what will suit my needs best, the Sony VCL-SW04 x0.45 or the Sony VCL-HG0737Y x0.7. Any advice? But its still an amazing little handycam..

/jens...

Boyd Ostroff January 18th, 2006 10:21 AM

I'd be surprised if you were happy with a $75 wide angle lens. These are generally the cheapo ones that Sony sells for their low end single CCD camcorders: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ughType=search

I haven't tried that lens, but I did get one of their cheap telephotos that I found on sale for $20. Screwed it on the camera, found that sharp focus was impossible, tossed it in the trash can.

Don't have personal experience with the high grade wide lens, but I do have their high grade telephoto and it's excellent. You get what you pay for... http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ughType=search

But if you're interested in wide angle lenses, the topic has been beaten to death in this forum WRT to the PDX-10 which uses the same models:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=47438
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=45338
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=39271
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=29139
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=10273
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=25739

Stephen Finton January 18th, 2006 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jens East
Nice. A Rhode is on my wishlist too. The only thing that im not happy about is the wideangle on the HC1000. 49mm is not enough.. Dont know what will suit my needs best, the Sony VCL-SW04 x0.45 or the Sony VCL-HG0737Y x0.7. Any advice? But its still an amazing little handycam..

/jens...


Yeah, I've been lucky to have only filmed in rooms big enough for me to scoot back and "take it all in". I keep on saying I'll buy a wide angle lens. Only need one because I can't imagine needing more than one wide angle shot of anything. But yeah, the wide bites on the HC1000.

The VCL-HG0737Y is one I've been eyeballing periodically. I guess I am just waiting for the fateful day I REALLY need it. Some reason to spur me on towards Fry's Electronics or Wolf Camera. I am lazy.

Stephen Finton March 13th, 2006 09:47 AM

HC1000 frame record mode.
 
Since the CCDs on the HC1000 and the PDX10 are actually using 1152x864 and then recording that to an SD signal, I surmise (good word, huh?) that the frame mode gives you half of the CCDs' total resolution, which puts you somewhere in the range of NTSC's limits anyway. So I've set my camera to a shutter speed of 1/30, as it also halves the total resolution and turned on frame record and it really doesn't look half bad, if you'll pardon the pun.

If I change the shutter speed to 1/60, won't I then be splitting the NTSC signal in half, only getting a max of 360x240 or so?

Am I confused?

Stephen Finton March 14th, 2006 04:58 PM

Apparently I am confused.

Frame Record mode on the HC1000 is only for stop motion animation. :(

Stu Holmes March 17th, 2006 10:31 AM

Yep and i think i tried it myself a few months ago - it writes each frame to the memory card, so i think you can then use the frames later on in a software editor and concatenate them.

Stephen Finton March 17th, 2006 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stu Holmes
Yep and i think i tried it myself a few months ago - it writes each frame to the memory card, so i think you can then use the frames later on in a software editor and concatenate them.

According to the manual, it records 6 frames each time the record button is pressed.

Stu Holmes March 21st, 2006 04:41 PM

yep i just checked and you're right. Wonder why it records 6 frames.
Or more accurately (as pwer manual) it says "approximately 6 frames".

bit strange!

i've used the interval record before but the minimum amount it wil record is0.5secs to the tape. That's not what i wanted.
What i was wanting to do was do a "speeded-up clouds passing by". You know what i mean. didn't really work...

Boyd Ostroff March 21st, 2006 04:52 PM

This same feature is there on other Sony cameras and isn't very useful. I think the idea behind saying that it records "approximately 6 frames" is due to the fact that it cycles the tape drive on and off, which isn't frame accurate.

The interval record feature is OK for time lapse work over a period of hours (I used it to record the snow piling up during an 8 hour period, for example), but not very good for moving clouds in the sky. You're much better off to just shoot that in real time and speed up in post.

Stephen Finton March 21st, 2006 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boyd Ostroff
This same feature is there on other Sony cameras and isn't very useful. I think the idea behind saying that it records "approximately 6 frames" is due to the fact that it cycles the tape drive on and off, which isn't frame accurate.

The interval record feature is OK for time lapse work over a period of hours (I used it to record the snow piling up during an 8 hour period, for example), but not very good for moving clouds in the sky. You're much better off to just shoot that in real time and speed up in post.

What type of plant gives the best bloom sequences? ;)


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:21 AM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2021 The Digital Video Information Network