thura3 0 #1 April 27, 2007 I am going to start videoing this summer and I am TORN on a camcorder I definitely want side mount ! here are my findings so far ! PRICE: Sony= PC 1000 refurbished $800 Canon= Hv 10 NEW $800 RECORD: Sony= 530 lines of horizontal resolution Canon= true 1080 high Definition resolution video in 16:9 format, (1920 x 1080) (wow) SYSTEM: Sony= SteadyShot® Picture Stabilization System Canon= Super-Range, Optical Image Stabilization (OIS) ?? STILL: Sony= 2.7 Megapixel 3 CMOS sensors Canon= 2.96 Megapixel 3 CMOS sensors *DUEL CAPTURE: Sony = LANC (Accessory) Terminal: Yes (mini) (does not say the # of stills per Video?) Canon= record HD video and capture a 2 Megapixel photo to a memory card simultaneously. But does not show a LANC port TESTED: Sony = Yes, by skydivers Canon = unknown (German international Boards only) SHARE TIPS: Sony = fellow jumpers know it all Canon =Im on my own My biggest thing is if the Stabilization is the same I want to go with the Canon HighDef...But I also need to take stills while rolling video and the manuals tell me very little about that .#^*%! Thanks for any advice ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #2 April 27, 2007 HV-10 freefall footage: http://www.skydivingmovies.com/ver2/pafiledb.php?action=file&id=4916 Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #3 April 27, 2007 A few notes: -I thought the HV-10 recorded in HDV format, which would mean it can't be 1920x1080, the HDV standard is either 1440x1080i (rectangular pixels) or 1280x720p (square pixels) both using 4:2:0, but I could be wrong, maybe someone else can pipe up here. -It's been said a million times on here: Video cameras are for video, still cameras are for stills. You should not expect to get "good" stills from a video camera, certainly not from a consumer-level camcorder, and certainly not from a camera with no remote shutter release/control option. -The Canon HV-10 is DOA for freefall anyway. I don't know if anyone has tried drastic camera condom/d-box/padding isolation solutions to get it to perform any better, but under most normal setups you're going to get what you see in the video dave linked to. -The PC1000 is a really nice camera. The video quality is probably the best of the PC series, and it's well suited to skydiving. My only nit-pick is that you have to use a docking station to get a firewire port (I loathe docking stations) but I suppose in return you get a little bit smaller camera on your head. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSE 5 #4 April 27, 2007 How HDV works HDV 1080 is 1440 x 1080 on tape, 1.333 aspect ratio. Color sample is 4:2:0, but it's not the same sample space as PAL DV is. The format can either be interlaced or progressive in either frame resolution. The recorded resolution is barely related to the output resolution. Different manufacturers screw with it in different ways. Canon and Sony have various sizes of sensors, but the on-tape resolution is ALWAYS 1440 x 1080. The *display* resolution is ALWAYS 1920 x 1080. Panasonic HVX has a sensor that is 960 x 540 (horizontally smaller than a PAL Standard Def camera), records a frame resolution of 960 x 720, and a display resolution of 1280 x 720. The sensor size doesn't change, but the recorded resolution of 1080 content on the HVX is 1280 x 1080, still from the same 960 x 540 imager. This is why the HVX footage is soft/noisy; it's being upsampled both vertically and horizontally. This messes with the color sample as well, because it's information-starved, resulting in significantly less than a 4:2:2 color sample. HV20 is a true 1920 imager, but still records a 1440 x 1080 image to tape. Only the larger JVC HD 100/200 series camcorders record a full-raster image to tape, ie; 1280 x 720 imager with 1280 x 720 going to tape. Imager size is somewhat important, recorded resolution exceptionally important. Recorded frame resolution is referred to as "spatial" resolution. Frame rate is referred to as "temporal" resolution. Both add up to still image quality. You can get reasonable image quality for small prints or web use when pulling stills from a vid camera, and the new vid cameras have colorspace conversion for the still images sent to the memstick, but the quality is *still* coming from a very small imager (some are as small as 1/6th) that are attempting to produce HD imagery in such a small space. Don't expect much. Stills from even the largest format camcorders still aren't all that great compared to even a cheap cybershot. Edited to fix clicky Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dragon2 2 #5 April 27, 2007 Usually you jump without image stabilisation on anyway. It shows if it's on, and even worse you may get vignetting on a pc (though not on a tv) from the image stabilisation. On the ground, sure, in the air, I don't like it. Although I'm lucky enough that mine does not vignette when turned on, I hate it when people hand over footage for the end of day tape and they have the dark corners. So who gives a damn which brand has which as long as it can be turned OFF. About Canon videocameras in general, I don't know anybody who still jumps one, after problems with autofocus and just quitting. Sony is still the way to go. Like others have said, for stills, buy a stills camera. Why are you set on sidemount anyway? Topmount is better for a lot of purposes and also for your neck. And is way easier to get camera's for these days ciel bleu, Saskia Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fast 0 #6 April 27, 2007 Quote Usually you jump without image stabilisation on anyway. It shows if it's on, and even worse you may get vignetting on a pc (though not on a tv) from the image stabilisation. On the ground, sure, in the air, I don't like it. Although I'm lucky enough that mine does not vignette when turned on, I hate it when people hand over footage for the end of day tape and they have the dark corners. So who gives a damn which brand has which as long as it can be turned OFF. About Canon videocameras in general, I don't know anybody who still jumps one, after problems with autofocus and just quitting. Sony is still the way to go. Like others have said, for stills, buy a stills camera. Why are you set on sidemount anyway? Topmount is better for a lot of purposes and also for your neck. And is way easier to get camera's for these days It still fucks up the image turned off.~D Where troubles melt like lemon drops Away above the chimney tops That's where you'll find me. Swooping is taking one last poke at the bear before escaping it's cave - davelepka Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #7 April 27, 2007 QuoteSo who gives a damn which brand has which as long as it can be turned OFF. And there's the rub... Floating lens elements (Canon's method of OIS) and mobile image sensors (such as Sony Alpha's OIS) are floating/mobile whether stabilization is enabled or not. If the body of the camera is designed in such a way that freefall can disturb these devices, you're hosed before you even open the options menu. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
raceface 0 #8 April 27, 2007 please post any experience with Canon TX-1 if you have..my pictures Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thura3 0 #9 April 28, 2007 Quote Why are you set on sidemount anyway? Every few months I watch my neighbor accidentally drive into his garage...with his mountain bikes still on top of his truck. I don’t want to be that guy ! Especially in the door of the plane. For some reason I would like to be as compact as possible in freefall. BUT, If side mount is a pain in the neck, then maybe top mount is for me. The PC-1000 is $800...AND the HC-5 is only $850 at B&HPhotoVideo ! Then I can video my neighbor in 1080i HDV cursing in his driveway for 45 minutes ! THANKS EVERYONE Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bigdad510 1 #10 April 29, 2007 I like my Sony HC-96, top mount.Brad Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
