![]()
wasn't just being sharper, it was being EFFORTLESSLY sharper, more natural.". I never said that pixel-count or absolute sharpness are the prime concerns anyway (certainly not for their own sakes) - rather ". Conducted by some of the best DOPs in the British film industry, and the link ( BSC Film & Digital Image Evaluation 09 ) gives an idea of the level the test was conducted to. If your prime concerns about any camera are the pixel-count and absolute sharpness then you're only getting half the picture.ĭid you look at the link? Have you seen the results of the British Society of Cinematographers test? If not, and if you get the chance, you really should. those are exactly "measurbator" statements. ![]() I have not shot with the new 350, but according to Adam Wilt, that camera possesses a similar basic look to the EX1/EX3. It's a look that Sony fanatics seem to revel in and Panasonic fanatics seem to find wanting. Sure the Sonys can look better if you tweak them but I always get the distinct impression with the EX1 and EX3 footage I have shot that even though it was shot in 24p, it looks more like 60i because the camera is just too clean. I have compared a lot of my own S16 footage I shot in the 90s with footage from my HVX200, 170 and the 300 as well as HDX900 footage I have shot on rentals and I see the same thing, it is a Panasonic thing. Panasonic cameras look more like Super 16 cameras/stock to me from a colorimetry and tonality standpoint-and yes, they are noisier as well, which adds to the organic, filmic feel, to my eye." "Overall, I find the look of Sony cameras to be unacceptable out of the box and to possess a "clinical, videoish" image that Panasonic cameras don't have. Panasonic cameras look more like Super 16 cameras/stock to me from a colorimetry and tonality standpoint-and yes, they are noisier as well, which adds to the organic, filmic feel, to my eye. Overall, I find the look of Sony cameras to be unacceptable out of the box and to possess a "clinical, videoish" image that Panasonic cameras don't have. But this might take some time to find on the used market. For my client's needs, I believe the HPX2700 is the right camera, a bigger step above the HDX900 than I expected.Ī used HPX2000 w/Intra board is my first choice in an under $14K camera. P2 CARD READER SKATE PERCEPTION 720PThe 350 is a more flexible camera, however, offering DVCAM(no 24P), 720P with variable frame rates and 1080P from a native, full raster CMOS sensor. I stated in that thread that if somebody has to have native 1080X1920 sensors, then my choice would be a used HPX3000 for $20K. I don't like the color, I don't think the codec holds a candle to AVC-Intra 100, I don't think it has the tonality and film like look that all Varicams are known for, but I'm not a pixel counter, I just know what I like when I see a pleasing image. ![]() It's super sharp(too sharp for my taste), super quiet, super sensitive. P2 CARD READER SKATE PERCEPTION PLUSCMOS, Panasonic colorimetry, five card capacity, 1/2 price deal at the time($19,950 plus VF w/camcorder trade-in), 3 HD SDI outputs-so it's no surprise that David would talk down the HPX500.ĭon't get me wrong-the 350 is worth looking at. P2 CARD READER SKATE PERCEPTION 32 BITThis despite the 10-bit(4 times better than any 8-bit format in gray scale), 4:2:2, I-Frame, 100Mbps AVC-Intra Native frame rate codec, the proven Film-Rec gamma from the Varicam, improved to 600% dynamic range, 32 bit A-D processing, CCD's vs. ![]() On another thread in this forum, "Sony PMW-350 or Panasonic HPX2700?", David and Alister Chapman sided with the 350.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |