Folks, it's probably time to move back to the subject or, if you wish, I can split the thread and move this part to another forum.

I'm the guilty party for it moving off-center.

Does HDV not require bigger CCD's ??? For instance to get the same good low light performance of the PD170p do they have to increase the size from 1/3" to 1/2" ????? What do you think?

The characteristics of the detectors, assuming they are CCDs in both cases, won't change. It is a pure math game . . . So many square units of pixel area vs the number of photons striking it. Each photon discharges the pixel area a little bit. That relationship's inherent in the Silicon from which CCDs are made.

You can pry the top off a memory chip and it will become a 2D light sensor, the CMOS sensor.

So yes, I expect that the HD cameras won't be as sensitive unless they up the size of the CCD.

> So yes, I expect that the HD cameras won't be as
> sensitive unless they up the size of the CCD.

I agree. You should expect though smilar low light performance as you currently get from cameras that downsample the CCD image to DV resolution, though. Example: and 'HD' PDX10 could use the same CCD array it uses now since it already has a higher pixel count than it requires for SD. This is probably the case with most video cameras that do 'megapixel' photos, some probably have the ammount of pixels requiered for HD and perhaps even more.

I guess the solution will be to add faster lenses to the cameras. Since with the higher resolution of the format lens quality will be more critical than with SD video, we can probably expect optics to become the most expensive part of HDV cameras.

LUX
 

And the JVC HD Camera, while on 1 CCD has an awful 36 LUX rating, so obviously it isn't as light sensative as the equivelent DV camera.

I suspect there is a very good chance that this camera will not be very light sensitive. Probably the equivalent of the pdx10.

> I suspect there is a very good chance that this camera
> will not be very light sensitive. Probably
> the equivalent of the pdx10.

Hopefully, it will have 1/30 progressive scan, so even if it has the same sensitivity of the PDX10 you will get better low light perfomance without resolution loss. You can do this on the PDX10 but because the CCD array is interlaced, you get line doubling when going below 1/60.

Also, it might have the same CCD array and still yield better low light images if it has a faster lens. Since it will cost more than twice as much as the PDX10, I will be expecting that.

I ust hope Sony will use 1/2" CCD image chips :-))))
I also understand that the current NLE edditing software like Pinnacle liquid blue, Adobe premiere collection, AVID xtreme etc. is not suitable for HDV !!! After one year of making my mind up wwhich cam and NLE software I want to buy (PD170p and adobe premiere) I have to start all over again.

Why would someone buy a $5,000.00 camera without XLR connections?

If no XLRs, at least a balanced XLR connection similar to the new DVC30 from Panasonic with an external XLR box as an accessory.

I've now split this thread into 3 pieces.

Keep your postings on this part that remains in the Sony Forum to comments directly on the prototype camera.

If you wish to post on the editing aspects, go to the HDV Editing forum.

If you wish to post on the business aspects, please go to

The TOTEM Poll: Totally Off Topic, Everything Media > You know how they pick most B-movies? was: 24p HDV