New Sony AVCHD HDR-CX100, CX105

[excel485 0]

Exacto knife will work great

[Icon134 0]

Quote

Has anybody removed the holding strap? How to do it?

if you don't want to use the exacto knife... it is easily removed using a small #1 phillips screwdriver and removing about 7 screws... if you like I can take a picture of the screws that need removed when I get home.

it wasn't hard and took me all of about 5-10 minutes and is completely reversible.

Scott

Livin' on the Edge... sleeping with my rigger's wife...

[jocool74 0]

Cool. That's what I thought when I bought the camcorder 2 hours ago

[Ralph_W 0]

Thats easy. Just use a small screwdriver, open the bottom plastic (one screw is hard to see left of the REC button) than on more screw under the bottom and of it is. less than 5 minutes. The bottom needs to be slided out to the side.

HTH

Ralph

Silence is golden. www.bt-ag.ch

[Icon134 0]

Quote

Cool. That's what I thought when I bought the camcorder 2 hours ago

it will be a couple of hours... but I'll post pictures of the disassembly... and point out where the screws that need to be removed are located.

Livin' on the Edge... sleeping with my rigger's wife...

[Icon134 0]

Ok... here are some shots of what needs to be removed... The screws that need to be removed are circled...

I take no responsibility for any damage that may occur or injuries sustained when doing this... but I wouldn't expect any either...

if you have any questions don't hesitate to ask...

Livin' on the Edge... sleeping with my rigger's wife...

[DSE 5]

Quote

DSE, it sounds like you are in favor of the Century lens vs the Raynox. When looking at your lens comparison it looks to me that the Raynox might have better resolution.

The Century is obviously lower profile which I like but more expensive which of course I don't like.

Will we notice much diference in the image between the two.

And would you please tells us definitively which lens you would recommend and why? And where we might find the best prices.

I'm talking .5 range for tandems only.

And thanks for allowing us to pick your brains.
You obvioulsy have VASST knowledge in this area.

Nice play on words. :-)

Raynox does have the edge; it's bigger, flatter, and has more surface area. Will you note the difference? On high quality monitors, maybe. I (personally) am usually willing to sacrifice a small amount of quality for my neck and snag point for day-to-day use. Tandems, meh...I'll use the Century. If it's for a commercial piece that doesn't have budget to warrant an EX, I'll use the Raynox. I'm really looking forward to something Century is hinting at for release at NAB.
BTW, for anyone that wants NAB passes, you have about 2 weeks to make the request via PM. I've got floor passes...

[Skydivesg 7]

I thought you would appreciate the word play.

Thanks for the quick response. I barely sent you the pm and bam! there it was.

So are you saying we may want to wait for the Century news before commiting to a lens?

Thanks again for all the advice.

Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

[DSE 5]

My opinion is that if you need a lens in the next say...90 days, I'd get it as necessary.
-No matter what, with the Schneider acquisition of Century, the glass ain't gonna be cheap.
-If they announce at NAB, it'll be at least 3 months or longer before it hits the streets.
-the .55 is a "known" lens. Whatever is new (if anything), will not be. I don't know if it's a .2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, or 8, and it might be that they've got new tele's but not new wides. Or maybe nothing at all.
I got a teaser last week from their PR department; that's all I know.

[jocool74 0]

Thanks. I'll have a try.

[tr027 0]

Yea, I just did the removal a couple days ago. Takes about 20 minutes. There's 3 or 4 more screws under the cover to deal with and also plugging the holes afterwards. I used high density foam for the plugs.

"The evil of the world is made possible by nothing but the sanction you give it. " -John Galt from Atlas Shrugged, 1957

[Icon134 0]

Quote

Yea, I just did the removal a couple days ago. Takes about 20 minutes. There's 3 or 4 more screws under the cover to deal with and also plugging the holes afterwards. I used high density foam for the plugs.

oh... I just covered them with a bit of gaffers tape...

Livin' on the Edge... sleeping with my rigger's wife...

[bergh 0]

... Stupid question for the Camera gurus. non-HD has NTSC and PAL does HD have the same ?

I will be visiting the US again this year and buying a camera over there is alot cheaper than South Africa but we're pal region in SA, meaning up till now buying video
camera in the US wasn't an option.

Thanks in advance for the answer.

_______________________________________
You are unique, just like everybody else ...

[PhreeZone 20]

Yes it does. its more of a frame rate issue now and not just a size issue. Its PAL at 50i or NTSC at 60i, both at 1080 in size.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[DSE 5]

In terms of nomenclature, there is no "NTSC" nor "PAL" HD. There is only 50i and 60i. But...people will continue to refer to 50i as PAL and 60i as NTSC for many years to come.
Every video app in the world can convert 60i to 50i, but you won't be able to playback 60i to a 50i monitor in most cases.
It's because US/Canada/Japan use 60Hz electrical systems and most of the rest of the world is a 50Hz system, hence the two framerate variations.

[bergh 0]

So buying a CX-100/105 in US will make sense for me as SA is PAL and thus 50i and the US version of the camera is 60i.

_______________________________________
You are unique, just like everybody else ...

[DSE 5]

The CX105 is 50i
The CX100 is 60i.
If you can get a 50i cheaper in the states, then yes...it's worth it to probably buy it here.

[Skydivesg 7]

Thanks for the info.

Do you know where to get the best price on a Century?

Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

[skydemon2 0]

Hi all

Just curious the videos Bomb420 posted on youtube looked like it was filmed next to a strobe light, Im sure there is a term for it but looked like there was multiple images round the people. do you think it was the settings or maybe the faster movements of freeflying? Or is it really not there and its just cause Im watching it on youtube? Anyone that can help it would be appreciated, thinking about buying this cam.

Thanks!!!!



Yes I posted it x2

Beauty is only skin deep, but ugly goes clean to the bone!

I like to start my day off with a little Ray of Soulshine™!!

[Icon134 0]

Quote

Thanks for the info.

Do you know where to get the best price on a Century?

B&H has it for ~$114... which seems to be the best price that google turned up...

Livin' on the Edge... sleeping with my rigger's wife...

[Rover7 0]

Quote

Hi all

Just curious the videos Bomb420 posted on youtube looked like it was filmed next to a strobe light, Im sure there is a term for it but looked like there was multiple images round the people. do you think it was the settings or maybe the faster movements of freeflying? Or is it really not there and its just cause Im watching it on youtube?

I know exactly what you are referring to. After reviewing my first day of jumps using this camera, I am starting to think that this camera isn't the great skydive camera which we were hoping it was. I was originally thinking that my camera might be shaking a bit due to being top mounted using only a quick release and the one screw into the bottom of the camera. But all my video has a horrible ghosting/doubling or tripling the image. (see attached pic) Again, I thought this might be from the wind shaking the cam, but I even see this result before exit.

I'm not sure this camera can handle any quick movement. Unless I have some setting set incorrectly? I didn't have steadyshot activated, but this does not appear to be something steadyshot could fix.

[Fast 0]

Quote

Quote

Hi all

Just curious the videos Bomb420 posted on youtube looked like it was filmed next to a strobe light, Im sure there is a term for it but looked like there was multiple images round the people. do you think it was the settings or maybe the faster movements of freeflying? Or is it really not there and its just cause Im watching it on youtube?

I know exactly what you are referring to. After reviewing my first day of jumps using this camera, I am starting to think that this camera isn't the great skydive camera which we were hoping it was. I was originally thinking that my camera might be shaking a bit due to being top mounted using only a quick release and the one screw into the bottom of the camera. But all my video has a horrible ghosting/doubling or tripling the image. (see attached pic) Again, I thought this might be from the wind shaking the cam, but I even see this result before exit.

I'm not sure this camera can handle any quick movement. Unless I have some setting set incorrectly? I didn't have steadyshot activated, but this does not appear to be something steadyshot could fix.

does all your footage look like this? Cause I have seen good footage from this camera posted already for skydiving. That would leave me to believing you might be doing something wrong.

Also, regarding a "jumping" issue that someone was talking about doing fast pans. I have found that my computer chokes horribly on processing it in realtime, but if I play it back on my camera (cx100) it plays fine. Leaving me to believe that its a AVCHD decoding performance issue that causes the fast pans to look a bit jumpy on computer. (i have a pretty fast computer too)

~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

[Rover7 0]

Quote

does all your footage look like this?

Well watching back from camera to TV I originally noticed a slight shake mainly around bodies during freefall, which made me think my cam was moving ever so slightly. Unfortunately as far as I can tell, I can't move frame by frame on camera to really see what it looks like.

After converting files today to uncompressed quicktimes, and going through them frame by frame, I am seeing that horrible ghosting. I agree that some of the footage that has been posted is looking pretty damn good. Maybe my conversion made my original shake even more noticeable?? I not using a pc, so right now I have do convert these so I can view them. Perhaps I'll mess with some other conversion settings.

[billvon 2,991]

Your camera is probably shaking, and you are likely seeing the alternate frame interlacing. I get that too when I use only a (low quality) mount and nothing else. To prevent it from happening, anchor the lens as well. I use an actual bracket on my HC1 and a simple 'lump' on my helmet under the lens of my CX100 so it has something to rest on.

[Rover7 0]

Quote

Your camera is probably shaking, and you are likely seeing the alternate frame interlacing. I get that too when I use only a (low quality) mount and nothing else. To prevent it from happening, anchor the lens as well. I use an actual bracket on my HC1 and a simple 'lump' on my helmet under the lens of my CX100 so it has something to rest on.

Yeah I think I'm going go back to my original thought of the camera shake. I'm going to start by putting a strap around the camera to pull it tight against the top of my mount.

BTW billvon, what kind of settings did you use to render out those sample cx100 videos?