I posted some comparison frames between a VX-2000 and PDX-10 in both 4:3 and 16:9 modes here. Draw your own conclusions.

I love my PDX-10, but if you want a "4:3 workhorse" I think you will be less than happy. The VX-2000 or PD-150 will be better in low light and they have a nicer control layout. There are a lot of great things about the PDX-10, but 16:9 has to be pretty high on your list of priorities.

I was called back today by a Sony tech to answer some questions which they were unable to cover the other day.
The main concern was the format in 16X9. Yesterday I spoke with the development head at In-Sync (Blade/Speedrazor NLE)and he said that the difficulties come in the playback end... how the signal tells the TV what format to display it in (wide, letterbox, cropped). Their editing software is resolution independent, so they can digitize or edit any format image.

The answer Sony gave me about the PDX 10 was this.
Regardless of whether you are shooting in 3X4 or 16X9 the resolution on the DVCAM tape is the same 720 lines WIDE.
The difference is that in 16X9 the vertical is not cropped.
in 3X4 it is still the same size pixel wise. Two days ago I spoke to the tech division of Sony in NJ and when I asked about the actual pixel resolution in 16X9 they said that that was an "unpublished figure" and they couldn't tell me.

Supposedly it has more resolution than the 150.

With the info I got today about the DV format staying the same I can only speculate that they are somehow optically squeezing an anamorphic view onto the same number of pixels. When you play back the 16X9 footage it then undistorts them into the "wide" format. This explains their wording about adding more "information" in the wide format... not more pixels.

When you import one of the captured frames shot in 16X9 into a paint program, what is the pixel count horizontally?

The Sony guy is correct. It's anamorphic 16:9 DV. All DV is 720x480. However the anamorphic video has a different pixel aspect ratio. When you shoot in 16:9 the PDX-10 uses a larger area of the CCD to capture the image. When recording to tape it's "squeezed" into a 720x480 image. If you play the tape on a 4:3 TV it will fill the screen, but everything will look too tall and skinny (not a bad thing for some of us ;-)

However there is a signal imbedded in the video stream that tells widescreen-aware monitors/tv's to stretch the image to fill the full screen. Actually the DV format itself is only capable of resolving ~500 horizontal lines; Sony's published specs for the PDX-10 say the horizontal res it 530 lines.

But the real issue with 16:9 is the vertical resolution. The PDX-10's CCD's utilize all 480 vertical lines whereas the PD-150 merely crops the 4:3 image to acheive a 16:9 aspect ratio. This results in only 360 lines of vertical resolution, a 25% loss. It's even worse than that on the PD-150 and VX-2000 because the DV compression further mangles things; you're better off shooting 4:3 and cropping in post - see the link I posted earlier.

When you set the PD-150 to "wide" mode it takes this cropped 720x360 image and stretches it back to 720x480, then sets the anamorphic flag. It will also display properly on a widescreen monitor, but with noticeably less resolution than PDX-10 images.

So in terms of what's written to tape, both cameras output a 720x480 anamorphic 16:9 image. But the PDX-10's image consists of 480 real scan lines while the PD-150's image is made by stretching 360 lines to 480. You know the old cliche about "garbage in, garbage out".... ? ;-)

Hope this helps.

Boyd,
Thanks so much for posting the frames...
There is no question that for 16X9 the PDX 10 is the only choice.
The regular 3X4 seems to be a little sharper with the VX 2K...
I would love to work in wide screen full time (my last project was in 1080i "real" HD but I hired the camera and shooter for the three days of shooting out of a four month project) but for this DVD project and the compatibility of mixing with betacam and the general 3X4 broadcast community it makes sense, at least for right now to go with the PD 150 (although I love the concept of the high powered compact little X-10).
This site has been so illuminating.
Thanks again
Dale

PDX10 for dummies.. or just me
 

Hello people.

First and foremost, this forum is a goldmine of information - but of course one quickly discovers that the more one knows, the more one knows one doesn't know. no? ...*sigh
Like many, I've had a real hard time making a final decision on which camera to purchase. (PD150 v PDX10). My liking of 16:9 is what's put the PDX10 ahead, (of course the price diff doesn't hurt)and I feel that I will set my mind and purchase very shortly.
At this stage, The X10 will be used primarily for artistic purposes/short film.

So many topics have been discussed and revisited, though I still have a few concerns regarding PDX10 that I'd appreciate a fresh opinion on.

1. I've been confused with some info read on data compression via USB upload. Simply, will it effect the quality of my image if I upload for post editing/effects etc?

2. 7Lux dummified...really. Just to give me a really broad idea: Let's say for example it's an outdoor shoot on a grey, overcast afternoon - is the integrity of my image going to suffer/grain?

An 'everyday' (low-light) situation where I couldn't shoot for example would be...?

3. Smaller CCDs. When and how will this affect the quality of my image.
450,000 dot to 246,000 seems significant.

4. Stupid question (no such thing right!?) - does the PDX10 have any time lapse function? - you know the old "watch the grass grow".
err.. I can record at different speeds right?

Here's hoping someone has the time to help me out.

Many thanks

Re: PDX10 for dummies.. or just me
 

<<<-- Originally posted by Anthony Milic : Hello people.

First and foremost, this forum is a goldmine of information - but of course one quickly discovers that the more one knows, the more one knows one doesn't know. no? ...*sigh
Like many, I've had a real hard time making a final decision on which camera to purchase. (PD150 v PDX10). My liking of 16:9 is what's put the PDX10 ahead, (of course the price diff doesn't hurt)and I feel that I will set my mind and purchase very shortly.
At this stage, The X10 will be used primarily for artistic purposes/short film.

So many topics have been discussed and revisited, though I still have a few concerns regarding PDX10 that I'd appreciate a fresh opinion on.

1. I've been confused with some info read on data compression via USB upload. Simply, will it effect the quality of my image if I upload for post editing/effects etc?

You cannot download the video from the tape to your computer via USB AFAIK. The USB port is for stills. The video is compressed as a fact of being DV.

2. 7Lux dummified...really. Just to give me a really broad idea: Let's say for example it's an outdoor shoot on a grey, overcast afternoon - is the integrity of my image going to suffer/grain?

No but the inside of a room with windows might pose a problem or two for you. Depends on how late in the afternoon.

An 'everyday' (low-light) situation where I couldn't shoot for example would be...?

Indoors, dimly lit or at night without a lot of grain and black areas. Understand that the PD150 can get a quite reasonable picture when it is too dark to read. The 10 will not come close. Also, the 10 has a tendency to streak in high-contrast situations so where the 150 would do OK with just candle light, the 10 will suffer from not enough sensitivity and streaking. The 150 will streak too but not nearly as much from all reports.

3. Smaller CCDs. When and how will this affect the quality of my image.
450,000 dot to 246,000 seems significant.

Not an issue of resolution but of pixel sensor size. That's the reason for 7 lux.

4. Stupid question (no such thing right!?) - does the PDX10 have any time lapse function? - you know the old "watch the grass grow".
err.. I can record at different speeds right?

Ya gotta post that one in the correct forum but probably. Most Sony camcorders do have that function.

Re: PDX10 for dummies.. or just me
 

<<<-- Originally posted by Anthony Milic :2. 7Lux dummified...really. Just to give me a really broad idea: Let's say for example it's an outdoor shoot on a grey, overcast afternoon - is the integrity of my image going to suffer/grain? -->>>

Actually I was just getting ready to post a bunch of examples from a long day of location shooting with the PDX-10. Sure, it would be nice to have a little more light sensitivity, but the camera can really handle all but the most challenging situations. Here are a few examples. These were taken with the light from a campfire. The moon, clouds, reflection on the water, are all real. OK, we cheated just a bit and used a $5 home depot flashlight with a piece of diffusion gel and amber gel taped to it, from a distance of maybe 30 feet. Note that these images have been treated in post (using FCP filters), but are actual video frames. Some of them have a significant amount of noise, while others are surprisingly clean.

http://www.greenmist.com/trovatore/f...09/azucena/01/
http://www.greenmist.com/trovatore/f...09/azucena/02/
http://www.greenmist.com/trovatore/f...09/azucena/03/
http://www.greenmist.com/trovatore/f...909/azucena/04
http://www.greenmist.com/trovatore/f...9/ferrando/04/
http://www.greenmist.com/trovatore/f...09/ferrando/06

ha.. I'm like ..Wrong forum?!? what the hell's he on ab-.. oh. :) .."
sorry dudes.
off to find x10 ppl

ps Thanks for info guys

Thank you Mike for your information. I appreciate it.

Same to you Boyd. thanks for the input
- now about those video shots. (importantly, are they stills from DV footage or actual photo stills?)
It looks as if you've blackened all unfeatured ares of the shots in post. I presume this was done to counter the grainy/colour leech effect of low light recording. - which makes the more faded, grainy features stand out by contrast.
Now, in terms of the image quality of those featured areas; It's all pretty poor is it not? If not unusable (unless artistically, which is a whole different ball game) or did you take those shots as an example of extreme low light capabilities?
BTW, I like image 4, pretty cool!

(please pardon my lack of photo/cam-lyngo)

Thank you.

OK Boyd, As soon as I posted previous, I noticed your post on this very topic.

<<<-- Originally posted by Anthony Milic : Now, in terms of the image quality of those featured areas; It's all pretty poor is it not? If not unusable (unless artistically, which is a whole different ball game) or did you take those shots as an example of extreme low light capabilities? -->>>

I can't use all of this footage, but will indeed use a significant amount. I think the grainy-ness (is that a word? ;-) will fit what we're trying to do. And it will end up as part of a montage. This is also "artsy" stuff that's being used in an opera to show what the characters are remembering and fantasizing; it isn't being shown by itself as a movie. But this is all a big experiment for me; we'll see how it looks on the big screen in a couple weeks...

Actually I didn't "blacken" any areas, if anything I brightened them to bring out detail like the night sky, and this does unfortunately serve to bring out the noise even more. But I thought they would be of interest since it shows what the camera can do in what I consider a very low light situation.

Looks like you answered you own question, but yes these are actually de-interlaced 60i video frames.

thanks guys
 

Appreciate the help.

Anthony

low light issues
 

I'm getting ready to add a new camera and I'm stuck between the GL2 and PDX10. Not to rehash the numerous other posts, I would just like to know if the PDX10 low light issues would cause noticeable problems in an office environment without a additional lighting. Or are the differences in the low light capabilities only evident in dimly lit places, i.e. nightclubs.

thanks,
Kirk

My recollection is that the pdx does an admirable job in most lighting conditions. While it may not be a GL2 or PD150, it seemed to fail about the same time my eyes failed me in the dark. I recall it worked quite well at the office, at home and outdoors producing quite good exposure and color.

The only drawbacks to the camera are the balance (leans left and forward when handheld) and the probabilty of vertical smear in high contrast and point-light situations.

The PDX10 does great on a tripod or monopod. I recently shot in a classroom setting, similar in lighting to an office. Noise really wasn't an issue, but I underexposed slightly. Noise is most obvious in distant wide shots, and much of my pdx10 work in this shoot was on a monopod, traversing the general area to grab medium and close ups, as well as some distant wides. No problem.

Handle for PDX10??
 

I am going to get a pdx10 and I want to film while i snowboard, I have learned it is comfortable to have a handle on the top like the xl1 or pd1-50 has. Is there any company that makes one? Thanks guys!
James


(i just realized i put this in the wrong catagory. It woun't let me delete it for some reason.) sorry!

Can PDX10 shoot this??
 

Hello PDX users,

quick question: I've owned a Canon XL1S, & GL2 as well as the Pan DVX100- all excellent cameras but none shoot native 16:9. I'd like to purchase the PDX10 (b/c of the 16:9) but keep hearing issues of low light incapabilities. I primarily shoot nature and for the most part shoot under mixed lighting conditions (whatever enviornement the animal is in)......my question is: can the PDX10 shoot under lowish light into somewhat dark areas of say, "tree branches"? I have uploaded a very small 1.6mb .mov file that shows just the type of lighting i find myself shooting under....I wouldn't call it dark, but somewhat overcast.....check out the clip here-

http://stevenunez.com/hostedimages/rtwpigeons.mov

- I'd appreciate opinions on wether you guys think the PDX would be suitable for this range of light shooting?

The clip is of a redtail hawk eating a NYC pigeon under overcast conditions (just after rain) and into the branches a bit....hope it doesn't gross you guys out too much!
Not sure which camera shot this footage but likely the GL2.

Personally I don't think you'll have any problems whatsoever with this sort of condition. Although the PDX-10 is a couple stops slower than the VX-2000, it can still work in very dim places. And footage shot at f1.6 +18 db is still generally very clean.

Here are some pretty extreme examples

Shot at sunset: http://www.greenmist.com/trovatore/film/20030831

It was REALLY dark in this one, shot at 1/30 sec well after sunset: http://www.greenmist.com/trovatore/film/20030812/08

Just the light of a campfire with a flashlight providing a little accent:
http://www.greenmist.com/trovatore/f...09/ferrando/04
http://www.greenmist.com/trovatore/f...909/azucena/04

There is plenty of noise apparent in these shots, and I only offer them as proof that the PDX-10 can capture images in really dark places. Conditions such as you describe (dark areas of tree branches) really shouldn't be too much of a challenge.

Boyd,

thanks for the response. I like the "aura" the PDX gave the characters you shot...I know it's noise but it gives the video a nice quality for the setting you setup.

I have yet to get to B&H to try out the PDX10 personally- they have them setup on a small kiosk with live feeds out to monitors with a decently lit "model railroad" setup to pan around with and check out the video quality 1sthand......I got to get to B&H...again thanks for the response.

If anyone cares to add comments- I'm all eyes!

Bought the PDX10 (B&H)
 

Well I've bitten the bullet and have purchased the PDX10.

....First impression is of extreme high build quality- feels very much like a professional camera should- very sturdy and robust.

I tested it's low light shooting as this seems to be the camera's "weak" spot- but am finding it quite useable and will likely suit my subject matter very well. I did notice some grain but nowhere near as bad as I had imagined- with just average decent lighting, the camera does fine. The 16:9 mode is absolute killer and the 3.5" screen is excellent...menu's are very simple to navigate and set...just a superb job by Sony (and I'm not a big Sony fan!!)

The big test will be when I add a tele lens- if there's image degradation it will be made apparent on a large Tv set.....stay tuned on that one!!!

Anyone thinking of getting a PDX10 but is worried about it's low light performance should see if they could "demo" a unit at a local store- you'll be pleasantly surprised at how well it works....I'd say it's a tad bit grainer than a GL2 at similar light levels....but in no way is it horrible.

I definitely like this PDX10 better than my GL2 and plan on shooting allot of video.....I'll move onto HDV when FCP can edit it natively....and even then I may hold onto this camera- it's "that" sweet.

Happy PDX10 owner! Let the games begin!

Wonderful Steve, congratulations on your PDX10 purchase. I'm very interested in your coming experience with a telephoto add on on this cam; I'm wanting to do some closeup insect shooting and have yet to work with an adaptor.

about the tapes used for PDX10
 

I read the menu carefully ,and according to the menu it seems that we had better use tapes with memory. I am wondering is it just because the tape memory can make certain search easier? I am not sure whether it is OK to use sony premium DV tapes, what is the major difference between sony Excellence Dv tapesand the Premium DV tapes? The Excellence DV tape with 4k memory is very expensive , at BH it is $13, if so I would prefer to buy the mini DVCAM tape... Can anyone tell me what kind of tapes are you using for PDX10 ? Thanks.

I have only used Sony Premium tapes without the chips in my PDX-10. Have shot in both DVCAM and DV SP mode without any problems whatsoever.

I'm sure there are better places to order in quantity, but at CompUSA you can buy 3-packs for just under $20. This is the best price I could find locally; Best Buy was charging over $7, local camera shop wanted over $8. Most places don't seem to carry the Sony DV tapes at all.

PDX-10 on the way!
 

After much discussion, research and head scratching I finally made the order to B&H yesterday for my PDX-10! 16:9 native, MPEG to memory stick, included XLR's, smaller pro-look, price and cross compatibilty with my surf/snorkel housing all made me sway away from the VX2000/DVC80/GL2. Overall, I am super excited and look forward to the challenges of getting better with light use/composition and taking full advantage of the 16:9 capabilties which was one of my big selling points. I also made the splurge on a new wide angle lens for skate/snow/surf footage, anybody use the Century Optics 0.3x with their PDX? Let me know, plus if you've got any good newbie info for settings or tricks with the PDX pass those along as well.
Thanks!
Ryan

Congratulations on the purchase Ryan, you're going to have fun learning and exploring. If you read back through this forum you'll find lots of discussion on settings and so forth.

Let us know what you think of the .3x wide lens, that sounds interesting.

I use it as long as year. Overall great outside, isn't so good inside, but acceptable ( needs light ). Great DOF. You will notice a softening of corners a bit ( I mean a BIT ). Resolution of field is down about 25%, nothing unusual for such 0,3 lens. And let me say one more thing - you MUST keep a front element immaculate clean. Due to great DOF every little part of dust may ruin your job at all. Best wishes with your new camera!

<<<-- Originally posted by Dmitriy Volper : you MUST keep a front element immaculate clean -->>>

That is an excellent point Dmitriy. I've gotten rather fanatic about this on the PDX-10 and always carry lens fluid, cleaning tissues, microfiber cloth and a brush. This is even more important when using a WA adaptor or external filters. When I first got the camera I ruined a few nice shots with dirt on the lens and learned this the hard way!

Good points Boyd. I know its difficult to do, but if possible hood that front element. That way even if you have dust on the surface of the glass the 'shade' will make the imperfections far less obvious. Being less obvious the auto focus will be less inclined to vote for that rather than your intended subject, too.

tom.

close encounters of the pdx kind
 

Seasons Greets

Inspired by the latest Honda Car advert which is screening on TV. I thought I would check out the macro performance of the pdx.

With a subject distance within about 50 mm of the lens and a limited zoom range of 3 clicks from the left the pdx produces some amazing macro video.

Having this limited zoom is great for image magnification and with the right lighting you could even use it as a telecine device stright off the film itself

dust particles the size of pebbles ......... wow

Replacement Lens Cap for PDX10?
 

I let somebody borrow the PDX over the weekend, and they misplaced the lens cap (for the smaller lens hood). I have a UV filter, so the lens is still protected, but I like having the lens cap. I haven't been able to find anywhere online to order a replacement. Anybody here have a source?

Michael

Hi Michael
I did some looking around, made a few calls--and came up with this, the Sony Business and Professional Parts number. 1-800-538-7550, menu option 1. The sales guy there quoted a price of $19.95, plus a shipping charge of (get this!) $11.50. The part number is X39525951, if I got that right. You can order it directly from them.

I suppose there are generics that might fit, but I don't know. I have a love/hate thing going on with lens caps--they want to be attached, so they don't get lost, but then they have to be removed (or tucked into the velcro on the strap, or somewhere similar) if they are to stay out of the way. I have more than a few shot-from-the-hip clips with the sound of the dangling lens cap clicking against the cam or tripod...doh!

Good luck finding what you need. That phone number is a good one to have on hand!
Chris

Thanks Chris. I'll keep that number handy. I'm not sure about $30 for a lens cap, though (after shipping)! Wow!

I've got the same love/hate thing. I originally attached some velcro to the side of the hood and the other piece to the cap to prevent the dangling, but it still seemed to get in the way, so I usually keep it detatched, which in this case resulted in a loss, of course.

Thanks again for the info.

Michael

If you pull the string that is attached through the metal loop that binds it together it can be pulled up so only the string is dangeling down and the cap is snuggly against the body of the camcorder.
KennJ

35mm film maybe, nothing smaller. Not even sure about the 35mm film as that is 'half frame' when used for cine. Hold up a 35mm transparency to the front element and go to max macro to see what I mean.

tom.

"Soft" onboard light for the PDX 10
 

Happy new 2004

I hope you all have had a great new year celebration.

I, (You all know that i freedive) together with my fiance, spend the chance off the year in the water. Beside beeing an exceptional experience, it was my first winter bath in the northern water, and I can promis you it was just as slipping into a bath tub with ice cubes. If you think that a diving suit helps, well, it doesn't! :-)

Back to Digital Video

I am thinking about low-light, and how to balance the low lux of the PDX 10 with an onboard light. What I am looking for is an onboard light which following characteristics:

It must have a broad or wide light as to avoid spot light feeling.
It must be soft enough not to disturb the people.

I want to use the onboard light at occasions where PDX 10 is not capable to film in the current light situation. I just want it to light up smoothly the scene where the area is at most 5 meters.

Any recommendations (light kit, watt and accessories)?

Lambis

I'll pass on the tub of ice cubes but I'm also interested in what others have to say about the onboard light.

Below is a link of all the on-camera light kits offered by B&H but I have no experience with them. Maybe someone can shed some light on the subject (forgive the pun).

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=&pn=1&ci=4375

Lambis, I think we might have better luck over in the Photon Management forum here on DVinfo.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/forumdisp...?s=&forumid=41

Thanks Tommy

I will put my question on the Photon Management. I was only thinking that maybe some som use the PDX10 have some tips

Lambis

2 stills done with pdx10
 

I had to shoot 2 guitars today so I set up the pdx10 and an Olympus 2100 UZ...frankly I didn’t get the results with the 4+ year old Olympus I wanted and stuck with the one mega pixel Sony stills...for those who may be interested in the still picture capabilities of the pdx done strictly by an amateur, there posted here

www.wiktel.net/dkorb/karvin.jpg

www.wiktel.net/dkorb/gibson.jpg

Heres the settings i used

3 light sources 4@500 watt quarts halogen(shop lights) bounced everywhere...100 watt westinghouse screw in florescent overhead...daylight in front from large window... adjusted the curves in Photoshop, just the white balance and I crushed the blacks a bit, observe the feathers in the corner cause they were white!, shrank the photos to fit in window by about 30 percent
The raw image had more saturation on the pdx10 but more noise than the olympus
sharpness turned all the way down plus one
wb set 1 click + (not sure why)
ae shift factory centered
agc limit off (don’t know what it duz)
manual focus
manual exposure
zebra @ 100 since there were no human subjects
the background is army surplus wool blanket
I’m goinna sell these 2 guitars and buy an Olympus E1 for stills, 14 guitars are 13 to many
And for those professionals here…feel free to post criticism (please)

Which Pelican case is good for the PDX10?
 

Hi,

I'm about to get a PDX10. Also will have a "normal" assortment of accessories (lenses, extra batteries, etc...) and am wondering which Pelican is good for me, i.e. what is the smallest size that will fit the camera and the gear?

At this point I may also get a ME-66 shotgun mike, which likely won't fit in a small to medium Pelican, but I can get a separate case for it.

Links to a page where I may buy them are:

http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/searchtools/search.asp?mnf=1663