FORUMS: list search recent posts

Sony DCR-VX2100E and 16:9?

COW Forums : Event Videographers

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
jody kerrSony DCR-VX2100E and 16:9?
by on Aug 6, 2005 at 1:52:14 am

Hi all,
I have read alot of good things about this camera.
One thing I read was "not true 16:9". If someone can give me a easy-to-understand explanation, I'd be very greatful.
Also, does anyone have this camera? Any info on pros and cons would be great.
I notice it doesnt have XLR inputs for audio.
I plan on using the latest senhieser wireless lapel style mic, are there any issues using this micr. with this camera?

Cheers in advance for your helpful comments as always.
Luv your work!

Return to posts index

Jeff CarpenterRe: Sony DCR-VX2100E and 16:9?
by on Aug 6, 2005 at 2:56:26 am

Imagine that you shoot in normal 4x3 mode. Then pretend you take that footage into your computer and simply put black bars on TOP of the image, covering up the top and bottom. Ok, so you have a 16x9 image, but you've lost pixels, right? Rather then making the image WIDER you've just made it SHORTER. It is 16x9 now, but you've lost some of your resolution. Make sense?

Now, when you switch your 2100 to widescreen mode it's essentially doing that EXACT same thing, except it's doing it inside the camera. That's what people mean by "not true 16x9." It is 16x9, but you're losing pixels by doing it that way. You're better off just doing what I described above...just shoot in 4x3 and crop it later. It will all come out the same and you'll at least have the control later to move the image up and down within the letterbox (somethign you couldn't do if you shot 16x9 in the camera.)

There are cameras that actually have 16x9 chips (the best) or you can buy an anamorphic lens that squeezes the picture BEFORE it even goes into your camera. The 2100 would use all the pixels on its chip and you'd stretch that image out later. Not as good as a 16x9 chip, but better than using the in-camera crop.

I have the 2000 (same camera, just not as light-sensitive) and it works great. The audio is the only drawback. You've only got one mini input. It's a stereo input, but even IF you run two mics in there (I've done it, it works) you have to control BOTH audio channels with the same control. So both your mics better be the same level! But hey, if you're just using 1 mic it might be fine. Be aware that once you plug it in you'll be recording ONLY that mic...the camera mic is disabled when something is plugged in.

The PD-170 (or a used PD-150) is the same camera but with XLR inputs. It might be worth a look, at least. But the 2100 is a good camera, no doubt.

Return to posts index

jody kerrRe: Sony DCR-VX2100E and 16:9?
by on Aug 6, 2005 at 3:52:27 am

Thanks alot for all that Jeff, very clear to me now.
Do you have an anamorphic lens for your camera?
Is it a good investment you think?

Return to posts index

Daniel SerranoRe: Sony DCR-VX2100E and 16:9?
by on Aug 31, 2005 at 7:05:20 am

I have the vx2100 and basically the same opinion you got before me, but also use a pdx10 wich is said to have true 16:9 ccds... so check it out... but it not as good in low light.... (in 16:9, if you just want to have the feel of the black bars its not that mauch important, I guess, I made a wedding in 16:9 and it look fine allright, I just meade the DVD have options like 4:3 pan & scan, 4:3 letterbox, and 16:9, and those clients were thrilled)

you can attach a beachtek adaptor to the vx2100 and have two xlr inputs, so that a good one....

Hello from Mexico....

Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2016 All Rights Reserved