HNGummeson

Antonija, I'm using my CX520v for everything from now on. It is an excellent camera for what we do. Wait till DSE posts my video of the CX520 mounted next to the CX100 and see if you can pick out the "negative" effect of the OIS mechanics in the CX520v. I don't think you can. The CX100 is 100% accepted for skydiving, the CX520/500 is not because of the OIS but here is the deal, most people can NOT pick out the difference. However, most people will pick out the better quality image that the CX520 will produce. If skydiving is not the ony think you do with it and you need low light/night shot capabilities, get it.

So I got the CX520v and took it to the air yesterday, with the IS set on “standard” (not active, see test comments above). I mounted it sided by side with a CX100 so I could do a straight up, no sh-t, comparison. The CX520v did great. I did some sit-flying and some head down with it. Besides producing a better quality video I could not tell the difference in regards to the shakiness. I asked 6 people to look at the two pictures side-by-side and tell me which one was shakier (I let them look at the two videos side by side on two 27 inch screens). Five out of six said the CX100 produced a shakier picture, the opposite to what everyone is telling me will happen!! In all honesty everyone watching were video armatures, including me. Luckily I had the pleasure of running in to DSE, (Yes, THE DSE!), at the end of my jumping day and he helped explain a lot to me. The CX520 in “standard” IS mode is exactly EIS, the same IS as the CX100 has (IS done through image processing software). Now, what DSE has a problem with is the mechanics that make up the OIS. These mechanical parts do not stay still in the very shaky environment of a skydive, even when the IS is turned off, and this can create a specific shake in the video at times. To his trained eye he can see it, at occasions in the video. I understand what he is telling me but I will challenge anyone to see the difference in your own “home” skydiving videos. I honestly am not sure I could see it even when DSE straight up told me where to look for it. I looked and I looked at the two clips side-by-side and finally said: (with all respect to DSE) If it is this hard to see the “problem” then I’m golden. This camera will do what I need it to do and much more. DSE agreed. I believe DSE will post my side-by-side video and explain the difference so you can see for your self. DSE did give the CX520v a better score than the CX100 on many other points but I will let him tell you about that. If you do not need the night shot and don’t care that the internal memory is small, then the CX100 is a much cheaper camera. I need night shot and can always us the 64GB internal memory so I’m going for it. This will be my straight up skydiving video camera from now on and I am not a bit worried about the OIS issue. To me is it a non-issue. Thanks DSE for taking the time to analyze my videos and to help me understand the ins and out of these cameras a bit better.

I use my HD camera only to film my student’s performance so I can give them feedback on their jump. If I hear them scream on the video this is usually a problem…. The light sensitivity on the CX500/520 is exceptionally good. Again a great plus for me who has to be able to film at night. I’m still looking for someone that has tested this camera in freefall in the “Standard IS” mode. Is there anyone out there who has taken the camera into our environment and actually tested it, instead of guessing how it will do?

We tried the CX500 and found that in the Active IS mode it does not do well. Especially sit flying. Head-down was almost as good as flat. But you have to keep you head super steady or the video will make you seasick. Though most of us don’t care, under canopy it was nearly perfect. We turned the IS off (yes you can turn it off) and again keep you head steady and you get a great picture. The CX500/520 has an additional setting for IS: “Standard Steady shot”. I ran out of time and was not able to test the camera with this setting. I expect it will do just as good as the CX12 but don’t know. Has anyone tested the CX500/520 in this mode? I would use the 100 but it does not have night shot so we have accepted the performance of the CX12 for what we do. However, with the introduction of the CX500/520 the CX12 got discontinued. The CX500/520 does fit in the same Cookie box as the CX12, just need to move the screw and some openings. The Hypeye will naturally work but it sticks straight up, instead of down, because of the way Sony put the plug in….. I have not ruled this camera out yet, as many others seam to have. It’s a cool little camera that produces a stunning video.

Any Windtunnel that can carry a jumper with standard freefall suit will carry a jumper with full combat gear. This includes all SkyVenture designs and naturally the Army tunnel in NC. I would expect any tunnel being built for skydiving, from now on, to be plenty powerful as they all need to cater to FreeFlyers as well “FlatFlyers” to be competitive. FreerFlyers need even more power than standard FreeFallers. I would not count on older designs where special tunnel suit is needed to be able to fly. However, an even bigger issue than to find a good tunnel, is to find the correct tunnel gear. In order to create a good learning environment and to protect the tunnel, operator and flyer, specially modified gear should be used. Here are just one thing to consider: Your rig does not need to be heavy but the Ruck does, thus offsetting the need for power while simulating correct handle placement and the feel of a real Ruck. All gear brought into the tunnel should be bullet proof in respect to things that can snag the net, pieced that can come loose, and hardware that can crack the windows or hurt the tunnel instructor. I think any tunnel owner allowing “home made” tunnel gear to enter their tunnels need to make sure they have deep pockets and great insurances. There is a big push from military clients to fly gear in civilian tunnels. Many tunnel owners is giving into this push allowing just about anything to enter their tunnels. I think this will stop very soon. My name is Niklas Gummeson and my company, G-TEC, has built and operates several military tunnel rigs including MC-4 and SOV3-HH with Rucks. Done right and with the correct equipment there is no better, safer and more cost effective way to teach candidates going through the pipeline how to freefall with combat gear, then in the tunnel. This also goes for operators that need to keep their freefall skills current. In addition I like to use radios on my students so I can coach them verbally as well as hands on while working with them in the tunnel.