Hello,
I wonder if anyone could help. I will shortly be shooting an event using my own VX2100 and possibly a borrowed FX1.
I've read many posts about the FX1's ability to convert HD to SD etc., but I just wanted to check that after the event is over and I'm left with a VX2100 and a stack of tapes (some shot on the VX2100 and some on the FX1) will I be able to capture (using my VX2100), the content from the tapes that were in the FX1?
I have no need for HD on this job so really what I need to know is :- Can I use the FX1 as a second regular miniDV camcorder and then use my VX2100 to capture and edit as normal? Or, am I going to need the FX1 for the capture process?
Thanks,
Mac.
In simple terms, you can capture in SD and then use the tape in any DV or DVCAM deck. However, see my comments about the SD capture issues that we encountered earlier this year with the Z1 - especially in low light (the thread is about the A1 and is just below this one)
Chris
Yep, it'll capture standard SD footage that you can play on any other SD deck.
Thanks Chris, thanks Alan.
The "SD mode" is just what I thought (or hoped), but I had to be certain.
The possible issue with the low light performance was in fact to be my next question. I don't think I've ever seen a posting about the FX1 without there being some mention of the low light performance, but I'm still not entirely sure
what it all means (i.e. just how "bad" is it? or is it just not as good as the VX2100, but still OK for my requirements?)
I guess I need to try one out myself to see (pretty obvious really).
I should find out about lighting for the event next week, at which point I may opt to hire a VX2100 / PD170 instead since I know there will be no problems with either of them.
Thanks again,
Mac.
All other things apart, an HD camera will be less sensitive (i.e. noisier in low light) than an equivalent SD camera simply because the pixels are smaller. However, if you're using it only in SD mode, then the sensitivity/noise should be similar to an equivalent SD camera because the downconversion effectively makes the pixels the same size as the SD camera, if you see what I mean.
Alan, Thank you again.
Yes, I think I do see what you mean. I guess it is similar to a couple of years back when camcorders started appearing with larger and larger mega pixel stills capability, but I seem to remember people complaining that the low light performance wasn't so good as on older models. I think I remember that the explanation was that only a small area of the ccd was used for the video image - i.e. equivalent of a much smaller ccd than you thought you were getting.
Putting things simply, does that mean that the HD chip in SD mode effectively lumps several pixels together and treats them as one larger pixel? Probably a stupid question, but is that what downconversion means?
So would it be fair to say that using the FX1 in SD mode would result in similar low light performance to my VX2100? (or is there something else that I have missed?)
If so, then really the FX1 should be quoted as having "min illumination" of 1 lux / 3 lux for SD / HD.
If the performance is similar, then I think I might finally be getting my head around this and start looking forward to having a play with the FX1.
Thanks again,
Mac.
Mac, you're more or less right about this. I can't comment on the specifics, but you're getting the right idea.