"It would be reasonable to guess that the low-light ability will be at least similar to that of HD cameras with 1/3" chips containing fewer pixels,"
I posted about this before, but with the size of the CMOS relative to the pixel count vs. its SD cousins, it should, mathematically, come very close to SD sensitivity... I'd say close to what a DVX100 can pull off. |
Quote:
See I told ya it is too early to throw your hands up. |
Quote:
|
To be honest mate I have no idea. Sony don't publish the @2000lux specs on all other camcorders. I physically compared a HD101 to a Z1 when the HD101 came out so I was only estimating that rating on my approximation and the fact JVC do publish @2000lux ratings for the HD series.
|
Quote:
If one camera had a S/N of 51dB say, but same stop at 2000lux, it would NOT be as sensitive as the EX, but rather a stop less sensitive - equivalent to an EX with 3dB of gain in! In practice, it gets even more complicated than that...... |
Sure, but it means a hell of a lot more than those min lux ratings.
|
Like I've said a number of times, lux ratings mean nothing when it comes to camcorders considering the fact that each CCD is a different size (yup... i said SIZE), res, Image Processing (i.e. Digic II va Pana 12bit RGB), and above all of these... GAIN.
Don't bother trying to compare luminance sensitivity in this way. The only way to REALLY know is to line the cameras up side to side and film the same environment with the same lighting and find the optimal exposure whether its using gain on or not. Much like res chart analysis, Lux readings can only be verified when you're out there and you're actually FILMING.. |
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:03 AM. |
DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2024 The Digital Video Information Network