I Need help for my new camera.

[incagraphy]

hi. just wanted to say I came here to learn from the OP's question and your valuable answers related to the topic. However, I think the sidetracked discussion is hijacking the thread. I wish I could say I still learned much from them too, but I just skipped over them
Yet, at least I can see that Stears555 is continuing the discussion despite requests for ending it. Well, please consider my message as an outsider's request too, to come back to the original topic.

[Stears555]

hi. just wanted to say I came here to learn from the OP's question and your valuable answers related to the topic. However, I think the sidetracked discussion is hijacking the thread. I wish I could say I still learned much from them too, but I just skipped over them
Yet, at least I can see that Stears555 is continuing the discussion despite requests for ending it. Well, please consider my message as an outsider's request too, to come back to the original topic.

Are you a multiplicated name of Cornucopia? They simply lost the debate, and they can't sustain the situation as gentleman.I always warn the purchasers that DSLR-s cameras produce weaker videos than top consumer camcorders. What's wrong with it?

[turk690]

I'm filming for agriculture company's the camera have to deal with fine dust in the fields not Always but with harvesting alot..

Sony has a professional camcorder for what you intend to do that's water and dust-proof, so they say: HXR-NX70U. bhphotovideo.com, not really surprisingly, has more to say about it than camcorderinfo.com

[Stears555]

I'm filming for agriculture company's the camera have to deal with fine dust in the fields not Always but with harvesting alot..

Sony has a professional camcorder for what you intend to do that's water and dust-proof, so they say: HXR-NX70U. bhphotovideo.com, not really surprisingly, has more to say about it than camcorderinfo.com

bhphotovideo.com simply copy the basic data from the websites of the manufacturers..... "copy + paste". There are no scientific level tests on that site.

[turk690]

bhphotovideo.com simply copy the basic data from the websites of the manufacturers..... "copy + paste". There are no scientific level tests on that site.

That's true but IMHO the best part is the user reviews. That will give you an idea of what to expect with the wretched camcorder, the manufacturer's claim notwithstanding.

[smrpix]

bhphotovideo.com simply copy the basic data from the websites of the manufacturers..... "copy + paste". There are no scientific level tests on that site.

That's true but IMHO the best part is the user reviews. That will give you an idea of what to expect with the wretched camcorder, the manufacturer's claim notwithstanding.

The specifications tab also tends to be more comprehensive than on many other sites. And the filtering and sorting is well implemented.

[budwzr]

Are you a multiplicated name of Cornucopia? They simply lost the debate, and they can't sustain the situation as gentleman.I always warn the purchasers that DSLR-s cameras produce weaker videos than top consumer camcorders. What's wrong with it?

A couple years ago, I bought a Canon T3i from reading all the reviews on how great it shoots video, and that turned out to be hype. In reality, the recorded video is blocky, probably the codec is no good. It's not visible until you start doing color work.

And something else you mentioned is true, that camcorder makers mix optical with digital when referring to the sensor as well as the lens. But in the case of the T3i, although it has a bigger sensor than any camcorder, the codec used was crippled. That's why independent filmmakers use the HDMI-out port to a recorder to capture 4:2:2 straight from the lens.

But the average "joe" doesn't "get" this part until it's too late, and you can't undo the purchase. So I ended up buying a dedicated camcorder, and use my T3i for stills. It's an awesome still camera.

Another comment you made it true that the 1/3CMOS sensors DO have low native pixel count, like 700-ish, and they interpolate it to 1080. This softens the image, and is the main reason they're prosumer, not pro.

As far as camera operators not knowing the technicals, that's probably true too, because they're experienced as "capturers", not "editors".

And P.S. cornucopia(Scott) is a pro, and knows his stuff. He's a stickler, and that's a good thing for us. He cuts through the bullarky. "Bullarky" is regular melarky with variable amounts of BS rolled into it. Bullarky has elements of truth mixed in, so it sometimes passes muster. We depend on users like Scott, and others to step in and clarify.