Super 8 and consumer DV comparison questions.

[ComingApart]

Is there a website or other resource i can look at that has a good comparision or Super 8 and single chip Mini DV cameras? Something with actual film clips would be ideal. Thanks,

[jefury]

I think Super 8 definately beats the single chip miniDV camera, even the 3CCD camera!

anyway, that is all i have to say.

jeffery

[cameraguy]

current single ccd camcorders use such a small ccd that its picture inherently s-u-c-k-s. Then on the other hand most 3 ccd cams out there use slightly bigger higher res ccds. So the companies control that fact that single ccd cameras stink cause they want the 3ccd ones to sell better. Believe me they could make some awesome single chip cameras but they won't.

I wish they would just make a camcorder that has a single 2/3" megapixel ccd and none of the stupid and useless comsumer features.

[Mike Buckles]

While it is generally accepted that super 8 has a sharper image and more detail and color than mini-dv...it is a totally different look too...comparing film and video is like apples and oranges...video, properly shot and lit, can look good...but it doesnt LOOK like film...film has a lush look and rich texture, and, properly transferred, can look extremely good. A one chip camera will give you acceptable pictures, but a 3 ccd camera will do better. I would recommend either Sony's trv 950, panasonic mxe300 or canon's GL1...I have the sony trv900, and it is great! But give film a shot, too! (no pun intended!). Mike

[Greg Crawford]

This is a little off point. but a few years back Alex did the one line edit for me, the project was a commercial I had shot for a local Sheriff.

We shot ithe spots on a one chip S-VHS-C camera. Editing directly on Beta - SP.

The spot looked great, the my client became Sheriff's, life is good.

The secret lots of light! Don't try to shoot one chip video with low light, if you want good color.

In fact most people are lead to believe that video requires less light. But I would have to qualify that to what kind of look you want. To get around video' s high contrast you need more fill to lower the contrast ratio.

I.E. Shooting Kodachrome with Super 8 causes similar concerns. The deep shadows in bright sunlight always look bad no mater what format your working in, but are more of a problem with shooting Kodechrome in super 8 and in video.

These days I am using more Grads to controol contrast .

All in all, I would rather shoot film.

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ September 16, 2002 03:43 PM: Message edited by: bossjock-dp ]</font>

[Alex]

This may come as a surprise to some but the older 1-chip video cameras used bigger chips! Instead of 1/3 and 1/4 inch chips, they used 1/2 inch chip and perhaps 2/3 inch chips (I'm not sure about the 2/3 inch chips however)

S-VHS 1-chip camcorders made in the late 80's and early 90's produced surprisingly good outdoor shots.

[cameraguy]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#DDDDDD"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Alex:
This may come as a surprise to some but the older 1-chip video cameras used bigger chips! Instead of 1/3 and 1/4 inch chips, they used 1/2 inch chip and perhaps 2/3 inch chips (I'm not sure about the 2/3 inch chips however)

</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's not a suprise to me cause I have a 1991 Sony Hi8 that uses a 1/2" ccd. The lowlight performance is quickly noted when compared to current 1/4" or less.

Sonys first 8mm camcorder efforts all used 2/3" ccds as well as the first 2 Hi8 cams they made. The CCD-V5000 with a single 2/3" ccd from 1989 still commands some respectable bucks at ebay.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tem=1376294339

Thing is current technology offers better signal processing so if they did a 1/2" chip today with 1.0 megapixel res it would give a way better picture than the older 1/2" ccd cams.

[Alex]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#DDDDDD"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by cameraguy:


It's not a suprise to me cause I have a 1991 Sony Hi8 that uses a 1/2" ccd. The lowlight performance is quickly noted when compared to current 1/4" or less.

</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

Cameraguy, why do you mean by this exactly?