motherhucker 0 #1 February 17, 2004 I'm getting ready to throw down for one, and wanted to get some opinions from the real world users. What problems does it have w/ skydiving applications? Video transfer ok? resolution OK? How are you mounting it? thanks! mh Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
clint 1 #2 February 17, 2004 Good question! I am thinking of buying it next month. I have had 3 PC camera's in the past and this is the bomb!! MH, I don't think there will be ANY problems. It is absolutely the BEST camera out there. Finally they came out with the 3CCD in a PC model. I have been reading, It's just like all the rest of the PC camera. Mount it on the side, with the L bracket. I am putting together a video of swooping the cliffs in Moab and I am going to wear the 330 for all the shots. The 101 just isn't good enough quality for making a video. How much did youfind it for? I found one place for $1000. It'll come down in a month or so. Good luck! Hey it's 1:32 Moutain time. Tues. ON ebay there is a 330 for $1059 in 40 mins. Brand new. I looked again and most places are charging $1149 to $1700Clint MacBeth Skydive Moab 435 259 JUMP M.O.A.B. Mother Of All Boogies Sept 19 - 23, 2012 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cajones 0 #3 February 17, 2004 The PC 330 is a single 1/3" CCD. Lew is jumping one. It is nearly identical to the body of the 120. The wrist-strap swivel is a bit bulky, LANC placement is on the side (instead of the front with the 120), and it comes with an FM-30 (kinda wimpy) battery (instead of the same-size/more power FM-50). Image quality is excellent. Image quality has been rated on-par with the older 3-chip TRV-900 - that may be where the confusion is. - Cajones The laws of physics are strictly enforced. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #4 February 17, 2004 Additionally it has the new style combo a/v output jack, so it will be a bit of a PITA at communal editing/playback stations. _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
clint 1 #5 February 17, 2004 Single 1/3" CCD? Isn't that the same as the old sony 3 CCD trv 1000 or 2000? the battery, yeah, that sucks. What do you think of it in your opinion?Clint MacBeth Skydive Moab 435 259 JUMP M.O.A.B. Mother Of All Boogies Sept 19 - 23, 2012 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lewmonst 0 #6 February 17, 2004 yeah, I'm jumping it. It's a nice camera. I had to drill new holes in my d-box. (My dbox is top mounted) The different style A/V plug is only slightly annoying when sharing the editting station. The LANC place is not only on the side, but way in the back on the right by the viewfinder (along with the A/V port). I haven't tried to put it on a sidemount yet since my Optik melted in the fire, but I would imagine if you had a flat surface sidemount helmet, it will be a pain to get the CamEye in there. The charger port is still on the front. The Camera switch is a bit different. Instead of twisting up or down to the 3 different modes (Camera, Memory, and Play), you push down once for camera, again to get to memory, again to get to play, and again back to camera... etc. I was worried about accidentally toggling to many times, but the cameye is only green if it's in Camera mode, and it blinks red in the other two modes. The nightshot switch is sideways, but not a big deal. Another difference from the 120 is that it's a touch screen. It's a sweet little camera, I'm happy with it. The picture quality is superb. It was a little annoying to drill more holes in my helmet and dbox, but I've got it all sorted out nicely now. I haven't tried removing the stap yet, but might. The hinge for the strap is huge and very annoying. It fits in my same dbox I had my 120 in, but it's a little bit harder to get it in there just right. peace lewhttp://www.exitshot.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
murrays 0 #7 February 18, 2004 Quoteand it comes with an FM-30 (kinda wimpy) battery (instead of the same-size/more power FM-50). Image quality is excellent. Image quality has been rated on-par with the older 3-chip TRV-900 - that may be where the confusion is. - Cajones Ed, Can you use the FM-50 or other higher capacity batteries with it? How much time do you get from the various batteries? What is the quality of the still images like? (I am intrigued at the possibility of only carrying one camera. I have a PC-1 and a Sony digicam right now.) Thanks,-- Murray "No tyranny is so irksome as petty tyranny: the officious demands of policemen, government clerks, and electromechanical gadgets." - Edward Abbey Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 20 #8 February 18, 2004 >What is the quality of the still images like? (I am intrigued at the possibility of only carrying one camera. I have a PC-1 and a Sony digicam right now.) You will only have the functionality of one part at a time. And the stills are not remoteable last I knew.Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lewmonst 0 #9 February 18, 2004 the only way to use that would be to take framegrabs after the fact. they are ok to the average ete, but not worth printing bigger than 4x6. to a photographers eye, the quality is not worth the effort. peace lewhttp://www.exitshot.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cajones 0 #10 February 18, 2004 The FM-50 is the same physical size as the FM-30. You can get half-a-day of jumping out of the FM-30 and a full day out of the FM-50. The camera is compatible with the "M" series batteries but they don't fit well into a d-box and stick out the side of a side-mount/l-bracket. We have a HUGE "M" battery we use for special ground stuff - it'll last through three tapes without a hiccup. The still resolution is quite excellent (3MP) for a video camera. I also should mention the camera does not come with a memory stick. If you shoot stills without a memory stick, they are recorded to the tape. I haven't had a chance to do any frame grabs, but I'll let you know how they look from tape to memory stick. Sony specifically markets this camera as an alternative to carrying two cameras. - Cajones edit to add: The shutter release is remote-able. Sony Mavica wired remotes work on the Handycam LANC port, also, giving zoom, record and shutter functions. The laws of physics are strictly enforced. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
murrays 0 #11 February 18, 2004 To be more specific, I am thinking of when you shoot stills to the memory stick, not frame grabs. So, that is the quality that I am wondering about. Per Ed's post, the quality is pretty good. I'll have to do some research and think about this as an alternative to lugging two cameras, charging two batteries, etc. Thanks,-- Murray "No tyranny is so irksome as petty tyranny: the officious demands of policemen, government clerks, and electromechanical gadgets." - Edward Abbey Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
motherhucker 0 #12 February 18, 2004 So, if I'm hearing correctly, it sounds like the PC330: -has a great picture and decent still capabilities -has the LANC port on the right side of the camera, making it difficult to work w/ cameye on side mountz -has a different style --->RCA cable that is not as easy to use as the Sony 2 to 1 cable -comes with a smaller (Mseries) battery -Has a different (but functional) power switch Well, I still have a couple of questions: -Does the tape load from the side, or the bottom? (I'm assuming the bottom since LANC in on right) -I am a die-hard fan of the roll cage. Has anyone looked into using this camera with a PC 100 roll cage (that seems to be the closest size)? -The camera specs have the camera weighing in pretty light--I'm assuming that it's body is primarily plastic where it used to be metal? -How about digital transfer quality? I probably WON'T be using this camera to shoot any tandem vids--I have a workhorse for that. I want a sidemount to dedicate to BASE, and higher quality footage, with out going huge into the ultra 3CCD. At $1200, it seems like a decent deal, but. . . Any and all answers will be appreciated. Thanks! mh Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
clint 1 #13 February 18, 2004 >has the LANC port on the right side of the camera, making it difficult to work w/ cameye on side mountz That't not new, the PC 101 has it in the same place and I don't have a proble with the cameye. >has a different style --->RCA cable that is not as easy to use as the Sony 2 to 1 cable This kinda sucks, if you are at a friends house and he has an older camera, 120,101,105,etc ,you can't use the A/V plug. But soon, everyone will have that and then the old A/V plugs will be extinct. Say 2-5 yrs. >comes with a smaller (Mseries) battery When I bought my 101 it only came with a 2hr battery. They all come with a small battery, don't they. YOu usually have to buy the big battery separetly. >Has a different (but functional) power switch This is not as easy as the older PC's. If you have the cameye like Lew said then its ok, but if not then I think it's a big problem. The IP5 is like that and he always had problems pushing down too much but that was him, get a system down and it could be ok. I personally don't like it but you get used to whatever you have! Buy the cameye! $55 kinda cheap for what you get out of it. That's only 1.3 tandem jumps and then it pays for itself. I am looking to buy that and this is my opinion. I have had 3 older cameras and they have been pretty much the same set up. BASE would be good, you would want the small battery anyway. The big one sticks out alot and really could have a riser strike. I don't use the big battery at all when BASE jumping. WHY take that chance? Keep looking on ebay and you could find it cheaper. That one I mentioned before went for $1060. Plus shipping.Clint MacBeth Skydive Moab 435 259 JUMP M.O.A.B. Mother Of All Boogies Sept 19 - 23, 2012 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #14 February 18, 2004 The a/v cables on the PC101 and before are industry standard. Sony's not going to drive those under simply by changing theirs - they're just going piss everyone off. Jumper wise though you might be right as we all use sony so they may slowly dissapere. Still dumb though as thier new cable does exactly the same thing as the old cable - it just has a different connector on the end... (if it aint broke?...) The battery on the 101 is the fm50 - the 330 comes with the fm30 which is the same physical size but at less powerfull. Apparently the fm50 is 1.7 times more powerfull so it would be an advantage and has little in the way of a down side. You can pick em up for like $30 though (if you try hard enough) so just buy a spair. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyjuggler 0 #15 February 18, 2004 I am also looking to buy a camera and have been checking out all pros and cons of PC 330, but as yet still have a question which no one has answered properly! Lewmonst, as you are using one perhaps you can help. I have heard that some new Sony PC models have a narrower field of view off the shelf than previously. Have you noticed anthing about the PC 330 range of view, can you compare it against other sony cameras? Please no "just put a wide angle lens on it" replies Basically I have asked in other threads but no one has responded with a decent answer, and some comments are incorrect. The lower the focal length the more wide angle the shot I believe. Also I hear that CCD size effects this aswell. I hear the PC105 and PC101 are the cameras in question that have a narrower view. This is from lens manufacturers and user reviews. So please, anyone who can explain this to me or has experience of the PC 330 regarding this, go right ahead, as I really want to hear that it doesn't suffer from this problem. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyjuggler 0 #16 February 18, 2004 Here are some details from recent sony PC cameras for convenience if anyone was going to answer my problem above: PC 105 3.7-37mm f/1.8-2 1/4.7" Mega-Pixel CCD (1,070k Pixels) PC 120 4.2-42mm f/1.8-2.8 1/4" 1.5 Mega Pixel CCD (1,550k Pixels) PC 330 5.1-51mm f/1.8-2.1 1/3" 3 Mega-Pixel CCD (3,310k Pixels) Other threads have mentioned lens size (i.e. PC 330 51mm) and stated that it is a tighter lens (narrower field of vision) although I think 51mm could be the external lens measurement. It was stated by someone in another thread that a PC-5 with a 0.6 will give the same view as a PC 330 with a 0.4, or words to that effect. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lewmonst 0 #17 February 18, 2004 I honestly haven't noticed the narrower field of view too much. I'm using a Sony .6 wide angle lense, which is very wide. I used a Sony .6 on my PC120 as well. The only time I really notice is when I dock and spin tandems and it's very tight. peace lewhttp://www.exitshot.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyjuggler 0 #18 February 19, 2004 Cool, so you haven't really noticed any difference. And to boot you used to use the PC 120. So no real difference in lens field of view? Want to get a PC330, am very jealous. Hopefully the dollar will keep going down and I can get a good deal on a PAL PC330! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sarge 0 #19 February 20, 2004 I just got a 330 a couple months ago and I'm still debating about how to mount it; I'm leaning towards a top-mount set up. The reason is the 330 is very wide and I haven't found a side mount box I really like. I'm waiting to hear from Cookie Composites about their new box for this camera. I've been playing with it at sea level and I am blown away by its versatility and product quality. Its not just a still camera, its not just a video camera; its a video/still combo phenomenon . I've got my base station set up for editing I could care less about the av thing in the field with the 101,105 etc... just give me the tape... I'll get it back to you. Mounting and settings are my only real areas of interest at the moment. I have a .5 lens and filters (for jumping) which serve nicely to protect the component lens. Video transfer is a non-issue; whatever capture device I use: I prefer the Sony Image Transfer to file, then I cut it up in Premiere. Resolution is fine for a product in this class. .-- I'm done with the personally meaningful and philosophical sigs!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jalisco 0 #20 February 20, 2004 Sony claims the PC120 zoomed out gives the equivalent field of view of 48mm focal length on 35mm. Sony claims the PC330 zoomed out gives the equivalent field of view of 45mm focal length on 35mm. Comparing 4.2mm on 1/4" CCD (PC120) vs. 5.1mm on 1/3" CCD (PC330) agrees, roughly, with this. You'd think the .6 would have the same multiplier effect on the focal length on either camera. So the PC330 should be just a tiny bit wider, but maybe not enough to really notice. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dooglex 0 #21 March 19, 2004 Looks like the Cookie 330 box is only a few weeks away. http://www.cookiecomposites.com/products.php?id=5 Doogle Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
