ClassicalMan
Established Member
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2009
- Messages
- 75
- Reaction score
- 10
- Points
- 22
I've owned a Panasonic X900 since early last summer. Good points: highly detailed, sharp images in decent light. Bad: noise surprisingly obvious in less than good light (e.g. indoors under normal amounts of tungsten light) - I used to have a Canon XM2, which perhaps gave me unrealistic expectations about what I'd find with a new HD camcorder used indoors. Also, the X900's colours are somewhat muted.
Has anyone compared the new X920 to the X900? The X920 has new sensors that are a little larger and also backlit - in effect, they've been upgraded to the type of sensor technology Panasonic has been using in their still cameras for a couple of years. Panasonic claim 'twice the sensitivity' for the X920 compared to the X900, which I assume means one ISO stop in SLR terms or 3dB in video terms. I'd be very glad to hear from anyone with experience of the X920 used indoors, e.g. in a well lit living room at night (with no natural light coming in to the room). Is it clearly ahead of the X900? And are there any other improvements that result in noticeably superior picture quality (no need to go over technical specs, which I can easily read online - it's actual user experience that interests me).
Also, has anyone compared the X920 to the new Canon G25? My hunch is that the G25 will have superior low light performance (since it has one large sensor that is precisely 1920 x 1080, thus much larger photosites), whilst the X920 will look sharper and more detailed in good natural light... Also, how does the anti shake compare on each?
Talking of anti shake, any news on Sony's new high end camcorders? Their optical steady shot on the CX730 last year seemed superb. However, I have heard that, post their XR500 model (of 2009), all their high-end consumer models shared a signal processing LSI with their still cameras that had to downscale 1920 to 1480, before upscaling to 1920. (But this meant the inherent resolution was only 1480.)
Thanks in advance for any pointers.
Has anyone compared the new X920 to the X900? The X920 has new sensors that are a little larger and also backlit - in effect, they've been upgraded to the type of sensor technology Panasonic has been using in their still cameras for a couple of years. Panasonic claim 'twice the sensitivity' for the X920 compared to the X900, which I assume means one ISO stop in SLR terms or 3dB in video terms. I'd be very glad to hear from anyone with experience of the X920 used indoors, e.g. in a well lit living room at night (with no natural light coming in to the room). Is it clearly ahead of the X900? And are there any other improvements that result in noticeably superior picture quality (no need to go over technical specs, which I can easily read online - it's actual user experience that interests me).
Also, has anyone compared the X920 to the new Canon G25? My hunch is that the G25 will have superior low light performance (since it has one large sensor that is precisely 1920 x 1080, thus much larger photosites), whilst the X920 will look sharper and more detailed in good natural light... Also, how does the anti shake compare on each?
Talking of anti shake, any news on Sony's new high end camcorders? Their optical steady shot on the CX730 last year seemed superb. However, I have heard that, post their XR500 model (of 2009), all their high-end consumer models shared a signal processing LSI with their still cameras that had to downscale 1920 to 1480, before upscaling to 1920. (But this meant the inherent resolution was only 1480.)
Thanks in advance for any pointers.