HC5/HC7 or PC330 for Tandem-Handcam?

[ast4711 0]

Hi,

I post this in Instructors forum because I think most of the Handcam TI`s read here instead of the Video forum.

Is anybody using HC5/HC7 for Tandem-Handcam?
I would be interested in opinions especially since used PC1000 are very rare and you could get a new HC5 for less than a used PC1000.
I have a PC330 (currently on my FTP) which I will sell eventually. Do you think PC330 is a better choice for handcam?
What about wide angle lenses for HD cameras? Do for example Black Eye .25 work well with them?

alex

--
www.tandemmaster.net
www.skydivegear.de

[dragon2 0]

No comment on the handcam thing, but for a HC5 you need a very wide angle. HC5 + raynox .3 no step-ring is less wide than TRV25/PC106/PC2 with hama .45/raynox .5 with step-up ring.

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[DSE 3]

Yes, the Black Eye .25 or Royal .175 will work in terms of width.
Dunno about either of those cams for hand-cam on a tandem tho, I'm not a tandem instructor.

[ast4711 0]

Cool!
What about color abbreviation( spelling?), vignetting and image quality at all? No issue??

alex

--
www.tandemmaster.net
www.skydivegear.de

[DSE 3]

yes, there are significant issues, but those don't seem to bother skydivers all that much.
You're putting a standard def wide angle on a high def camera, cutting the optical resolution by more than half. So, it's a better picture in HD, but it's still not really HD.
You'll have distortion of image no matter what, that's what super wides/fisheyes do. It's what allows them to be close and yet still get more picture than your eye can see.
Chromatic abberation? Yes...there is some of that with these low-cost lenses, it's expected and usually accepted.
Image quality isn't at all bad. Stuff that same image into DV, and it's too soft for my taste, but I'm not the one doing the tasting. If your customers have been fine with hand-cam before, they'll likely be happy with HD hand-cam.

[ast4711 0]

DSE, thanks for your opinion, I expected that.
But do you know, I mean are there any wide angle lenses, specifically designed for those hd cams?

alex

--
www.tandemmaster.net
www.skydivegear.de

[DSE 3]

nothing wider than a 180/.5 that I'm aware of, but there may be something out there. it would be big/heavy though.
I've got Royal's .175 and it is reasonably good for belly cam. It has the highest resolution of any of the ultra wide lenses I've seen, but it still only resolves around 400 lines.

[koppel 3]

I believe Brett Newman uses a HC5 and makes a very nice glove for it. He uses the Liquid 2 lens and gets really nice footage without any problems.

Send him an email if you have any other questions

downwardtrend AT optusnet.com.au

I like my canopy...


...it lets me down.

[skydiveoc 0]

I have about 300 handys with a PC 330 and it was find for a few months but my shoulder started to get sore from a 10 hand cam day. I would prefer a ligher camera. I like the new Sony CX something. Definetely lighter and betting image is superior. PC 1000 saved my shoulder and thing the cx weighs about the same maybe slightly more. Would imagine the HC 3 and 5 would be heavy.

[koppel 3]

He has never complained about the weight of the camera that he is using. I saw how much effort he put into designing the new glove due to the length of it and the result is great.

He has a glove for a CX as well which is very nice too.

I have a 330 that I use for outside cam that I have been using for the last 3 years. Man I take my hat off to you and your mighty muscles for using that one for handcam. I like my 350 which is waaaaay lighter

I like my canopy...


...it lets me down.

[skydiveoc 0]

Its not so bad until you try to film some high right hand spiral shots! Those hurt...I had a century .3 on it for a while too! Heavy lens.