PC1000 or PC350?

[skysurfcam 0]

I'm on the horns of a dilemma.

My regular helmet runs HC3s and/or stills. I really like the widescreen I get from the HC3s, but it's just too damn heavy to fun jump, so I'm building up another another rig for everyday use.

I tow drouges weekends, and have been using my PC101 for handcam until now, but I'd like to up the product quality with a better camera.

I picked up a PC1000 a while back, haven't taken it freefalling yet, but jeeze what a nice camera. The footage I’ve shot on the ground looks great on our big screen, it's natively wide, 3 CMOS, and, well, gorgeous. I've been chasing another one for three months now, but even ebay's slim pickings.

I'd like to have a couple of identical cameras and use them for both handcam and on my "fun" helmet.

I have the opportunity to pick up a couple of PC350s for a reasonable price, and I know I could shift the 1000.

I was thinking of getting another 1000, but I'm not sure that it's built strong enough to use as a handcam longterm. The 350 is stronger, but not natively widescreen.

Anyone experienced both and have a strong opinion either way? Should I lose the PC1000 and get 2 PC350’s, or wait and get another PC1000?

Thanks

Craig.

Brother Wayward's rule of the day...
"Never ever ever go skydiving without going parachuting immediately afterwards."
100% PURE ADRENALENS

[howardwhite 4]

If you choose to "lose the PC1000," I (and a lot of other people) will be happy to take it off your hands, if it's NTSC.
When you can find used ones on eBay, they go for big bucks.

HW

[skydiveoc 0]

I have a 330 and 1000...think the 350 is smaller but I love my 1000 for hand cam. Been using it for 2 years with no signs of wearing.

[DSE 3]

For me personally, I can't *stand* to look at anything 4:3 any more. Yeah, I know skydiving lends itself better to 4:3, but... I don't have any experience with the 350, and very little with the 1000, so can't offer any input on the longevity of either one.
You can always create widescreen in post by either cropping or stretching, but you do lose resolution using either method.
Wish I could give you more intelligent feedback on this one.

[pilotdave 0]

Maybe you can explain something about widescreen on the PC1000 that I have never really understood. I know that some cameras crop the image to get widescreen, but the PC1000 supposedly doesn't... But the field of view in widescreen mode isn't any wider than in 4:3. So what's it doing to make a widescreen image?

Dave

[980 0]

Quote

it's natively wide

What is your definition of natively wide?

The sensor on the PC1000 is 4:3, which in most people's book makes it natively 4:3.


page 19 of the PC1000 manual states that:

still image size will be fixed to 1920 x 1080 pixels in 16:9 mode, whereas in 4:3 mode you can select still image size up to 1920 x 1440 pixels.

[Fast 0]

Quote

Maybe you can explain something about widescreen on the PC1000 that I have never really understood. I know that some cameras crop the image to get widescreen, but the PC1000 supposedly doesn't... But the field of view in widescreen mode isn't any wider than in 4:3. So what's it doing to make a widescreen image?

Dave

Nah, the PC1000 crops the image just like the rest of the PC series cameras when you put it in widescreen. No point in shooting that way. Do it in post and you can pan/scan the picture to get "perfect" framing. See this video for a demonstration of that practice. I highly doubt you will be able to detect where I did it. (It is used a lot)

~D
Where troubles melt like lemon drops Away above the chimney tops That's where you'll find me.
Swooping is taking one last poke at the bear before escaping it's cave - davelepka

[pilotdave 0]

Interesting. I just switched to shooting in 16:9 mode this winter (figured it was time). I'll have to look up what sony says about 16:9 on the PC1000 that made me thing it was different than just cropping the 4:3 picture.

I did the pan and scan thing to put this one into movie theater proportions: http://www.skydivingmovies.com/ver2/pafiledb.php?action=file&id=6641.

Dave