Widescreen camcorders?

witters · 30-09-2003, 11:44 AM

Are Sony the only manufacturer to feature widescreen recording?

I think that this is a very important aspect as in a few years time 4:3 TV will probably be non-existant.

Hambone · 01-10-2003, 12:05 AM

My Hitachi DVDCAM records in 16:9

DVDCAM

01-10-2003, 7:17 AM

"Real" 16:9 means the camera has 16:9 chips, and at this point the only cameras with 16:9 chips are the 2/3" chip ones such as the Sony DSR500/570, Panasonic's 610, and there's a JVC one too, and of course the Ikegami. That's in the DV25 realm. There are other DV50 pricier cameras that also have 16:9 chips, as well as the HD cameras.

The cheapest 16:9 camera would be the JVC, which is I believe in the £10,000 range, plus lens and power. You're going to spend at least £15K for a package!

The "prosumer" cameras that have an electronic 16:9 mode create 16:9 as a digital effect within the camera. Some cameras do it better than others, but there is always some degradation of the image when using the electronic 16:9 mode. In some cases it's not very noticeable. I have a Canon XM2 and shooting in 16:9 mode produces a slightly softer image, although I am not capturing more image, just stretching a 4:3 image to fit a widescreen TV.

However...The Sony PDX10 has a different sort of way of getting 16:9. What Sony do is use the entire width of the chip and crop down from top and bottom. Normally, the camera doesn't use the full size of the chip. All that pixels around the edges are wasted for video but is used for shooting stills (and if your camera has a digital image stabiliser as opposed to an Optical one). The PDX10 uses that wasted width, so when you go to 16:9, there is, allegedly, no degradation of the image over 4:3. At least that's the way I understand it.

witters · 01-10-2003, 8:13 AM

Thanks for that - very interesting. I understood that the Sony TRV33 has an anamorphic 16:9 mode. Is this not correct then?

MartinImber · 01-10-2003, 9:44 AM

TRV33 has a wider picture in 16x9 mode than in 4x3 not a shallower image

01-10-2003, 12:07 PM

Yes, I believe it uses the same method as the Sony PDX10.

MartinImber · 01-10-2003, 6:29 PM

Whatever method it uses the 16x9 picture is good

02-10-2003, 5:35 PM

Sure can't argue with that

MartinImber · 02-10-2003, 8:48 PM

Pretty sure your correct

all for stills

cuts top/bottom for 16x9
cuts sides off as well for 4x3

01-10-2003, 7:17 AM	#3
torrent Guest Posts: n/a	"Real" 16:9 means the camera has 16:9 chips, and at this point the only cameras with 16:9 chips are the 2/3" chip ones such as the Sony DSR500/570, Panasonic's 610, and there's a JVC one too, and of course the Ikegami. That's in the DV25 realm. There are other DV50 pricier cameras that also have 16:9 chips, as well as the HD cameras. The cheapest 16:9 camera would be the JVC, which is I believe in the £10,000 range, plus lens and power. You're going to spend at least £15K for a package! The "prosumer" cameras that have an electronic 16:9 mode create 16:9 as a digital effect within the camera. Some cameras do it better than others, but there is always some degradation of the image when using the electronic 16:9 mode. In some cases it's not very noticeable. I have a Canon XM2 and shooting in 16:9 mode produces a slightly softer image, although I am not capturing more image, just stretching a 4:3 image to fit a widescreen TV. However...The Sony PDX10 has a different sort of way of getting 16:9. What Sony do is use the entire width of the chip and crop down from top and bottom. Normally, the camera doesn't use the full size of the chip. All that pixels around the edges are wasted for video but is used for shooting stills (and if your camera has a digital image stabiliser as opposed to an Optical one). The PDX10 uses that wasted width, so when you go to 16:9, there is, allegedly, no degradation of the image over 4:3. At least that's the way I understand it.
	Quote

01-10-2003, 12:07 PM	#6
torrent Guest Posts: n/a	Yes, I believe it uses the same method as the Sony PDX10.
	Quote

02-10-2003, 5:35 PM	#8
torrent Guest Posts: n/a	Sure can't argue with that
	Quote