bdazel

Ahh. Thank you. I actually have a copy of "Tandem Videos Made Easy" on the way. I'm hoping for good things! I'm currently working with my DZO to begin the process of moving from LE to NLE. But I want to realistically manage my expectations. I need to pull the trigger soon (probably before I have a chance to watch the VASST video) so hopefully someone can answer a couple questions for me... My current LE workflow: 1. Enter hanger, drop gear, cue tape, plug in. (1 minute) 2. Create video in real time, start DVD finalizing, Burn still pics to CD while editing. (6-7 minutes) 3. Finalize DVD, re-cue tape, pack my velo, prep next student (ground interview, etc.), hand finalized DVD and CD to prior student. (7-8 minutes) 4. Get on airplane, land, repeat. So the whole process takes about 15-16 minutes (minus jump time) if everything goes smooth. I like what I've read and heard about efficient NLE workflows. With NLE I hope to be able to accomplish the same in 15 minutes or less, but I would like to record every jump in AVCHD and deliver an SD DVD. (Is this feasible with a fast enough processor?) I hope to be able to spend a set amount of time at the editing station (hopefully 2 minutes!), and not have to come back to the editing station until the DVD is completely ready. I downloaded a trial version of Sony Vegas Platinum 9 - and it seems like a very clunky process that takes much longer that 2 minutes, even with a template: add footage, edit, render, send to DVD architect, start the DVD burning. I hope to be able to accomplish all of this with some kind of automation or batch processing. I know there are several tools to help speed up the workflow: Workspace Pro, Ultimate S Pro, Production Assistant... probably many more. I know Ultimate S won't work with Vegas Platinum 9, but can the 2-minute workflow presented in the VASST DVD be accomplished with Vegas Platinum and Workspace Pro, and/or Production Assistant? $$ is a factor. I'll push for a quad-core (2.5+ ghz) and at least 4gb RAM. But I'll have a much better time convincing the DZO to purchase Vegas Platinum rather than Vegas Pro due to the large price difference. I see that Vegas Pro supports "scripting" and "custom templates", whereas Platinum does not. Are these features necessary to achieve the 2-minute goal? I haven't looked much at other software options, but if there is a cheaper option than Vegas Pro, I'll certainly consider it. Speed and efficiency are paramount. Adobe's $1700 suite is clearly too expensive. Final Cut Pro is out, because Macs are also too spendy. Any thoughts are greatly appreciated.

What was the announcement?

Agreed. It is very feasible. I guess I just tend to prefer the most efficient and streamlined process possible, and to me, anything less is a hassle.

Dropzone.com has accumulated a substantial amount of information on almost any skydiving-related topic. There is so much good info in the forums - it is a very valuable database. But there are quirks that can prevent people from finding useful information or cause people to assess information more deference that it really deserves. Two changes that can help are the following: 1. Add a feature to allow the searcher to organize search results by date. Often I search for current info on the latest technology. But I have to sift through results from the last 10 years, and I know that I sometimes miss recent, and relevant information. 2. Add a feature that freezes the poster's jump #'s at the time the post way made - but this would only apply to that particular post. For example, when I was new to the sport, I contributed to some forum discussions with what I now know was bad information. When someone searches those threads, they may see my bad information alongside my current jump numbers and give it more deference than it deserves. I know we should always be skeptical of info on this site, but this feature may help raise the credibility level of the site.

Although feasible, it seems to me a real hassle. You would have to open the LCD to access the on/off button. Big problem if the camera is in a box. Difficult situation if you want to turn the camera on/off while the helmet is on your head, even if it's not in a box. If you're shooting for $$, spend the extra on the pro. If it's for fun jumping, then maybe you can get away with it. If it was me, and I kept the mini to save $$, I would quickly regret the decision. Just my opinion.

Excellent.

Sony's PMB software that comes with the camera for playback on PC, but I don't trust it because my processors are maxed out. But PMB seems sketchy anyway - 50% of the time it says "that's not AVCHD" or "cannot play specified file." I understand there is a lot going on here that I don't understand yet - and if it was just a PC playback thing, I wouldn't be concerned at this point. What concerns me is that the jittery/skipping/sticking/frame wierdness thing shows up both on the camera LCD when recording and also on the camera LCD during playback. It happens in all combinations of the following: steadyshot on/off; wide angle conversion on/off; and with the raynox .3 lens on/off. Not yet. I haven't been to the store to pick up the cable... so that is still in the works. As long as those of you who understand how to work with AVCHD are convinced that this camera has the capability to produce good video, then I suppose I shouldn't be too concerned. I'll get it figured out eventually. Thanks a bunch for the input.

Jarno's description sounds exactly like what I was trying to describe - albeit unsuccessfully. So, assuming it is compression-related, is that something that will just have to be accepted? Or is there a way to minimize it? I tried different bitrates, but didn't notice a difference between different AVCHD bitrates - the problem is apparent in all HD modes. If it isn't too noticeable in freefall or on the ground for landings and interviews, it might not be a deal-breaker. In fact, I often use a video effect to create the same type of look.

I'm glad someone else noticed it. See, I'm not crazy...

Thanks for the info everyone. The jumping is visible in several places: on the lcd when recording, on the lcd when playing back through camera, and on my PC when playing using Sony's PMB software. I'm suspicious of the PC playback, because my processors are maxed when playing back the HD footage (Core 2 2.16ghz/ Nvidea GeForce 9800 GT). I'll get an HDMI cable and play directly to the monitor next to try it out, both with and without EIS. I haven't done much editing with AVCHD files yet, but I have converted a few AVCHD files to MPEG2 and AVI using Adobe Encoder. The results seems poor (Very low resolution) - but I'm still trying to work out all the bugs.

With the old PC series cameras, I thought the steadyshot (EIS I think) helped considerably. Maybe the EIS technology is different with solid state? With my cx100 I've noticed some annoying effects when panning (HD format / steadyshot on). The frame seems to jump - kind of like it keeps sticking. Very annoying - and I'm considering returning the camera in part for that reason. I assumed that was due to the camera or memory trying to keep up with capturing at a high bitrate, but maybe it's an artifact of the EIS. I'll experiment with it later.

Why turn off steadyshot? Is there a downside to EIS?

really beautiful? a wonderfully designed very functional camera helmet/mount i'm right there with ya. but attractive it ain't. please post a pic of you wearing said helmet. imho it makes anyone look like a teletubbie Beauty is in the mind's eye. If you think beauty is what makes you look cool when you look in the mirror, then that's your gig. Others see beauty when artistic skill and craftsmanship combine to create said very functional and wonderfully designed camera helmet. I think it looks great.

Why is your time more important than my time?

I'm curious if any Dropzone has tried to route all still picture sales (both prints and digital downloads) through a single website, and whether that was successful? I envision each photographer will make a proportionate amount of $ depending on his/her own skills and salesmanship ability, rather than a flat fee for the cd (with a cut going to the DZO, of course!).

My cam arrived last night. Here are my first impressions: Pros: Tiny and light! Wow... this thing is small, at least without a wide-angle lens. Cons: Terrible low-light footage in SD-HQ mode. Grainy and noisy, and not at all crisp or sharp. Colors are dull. Contrast is flat. Hopefully this is better in daylight. Slow auto-focus, even with the face detection off. Very slow. The menu layout is not user friendly. Not at all intuitive. It's just odd. Trying to record in HD-LP to the internal memory - the video is not smooth during recording or LCD playback. Seems to be bouncing around and skipping frames. I wonder if it can't write to the memory fast enough? Even worse with HD-HQ. My first attempt to play HD footage on my computer using Adobe Encoder produced terrible video. Lots of digital artifacts and errors. BUT - that's probably just me not knowing what I'm doing yet (I hope). Overall, the camera is very much a downgrade in features from the PC9. Few external controls, few creative options, and little control over how the cam captures video. Clearly this cam is intended for soccer moms, not professional videographers. But hey, look at the size and price! There's always a compromise. I hope it holds up in freefall ... *Disclaimer: I am new to solid state - I have always used Sony's PC-series cams with miniDV. These are just my initial observations and thoughts.

Bummer. I have two PC9's and a PC5. No zoom issues with any of them. I recently picked up a brand new PC9 on Ebay for $135.

The Optik can be jumped with top mount video and front-mounted stills. Someone makes a bracket for that, but I'm not sure who.

Thanks! I agree. But without having the lens to actually test, I think the SLR lens comparison is a better measuring tool than trying to compare video lens specs. There seems to be more consistency with SLR lenses than with video lenses.

Do you have this lens? How does the viewing angle match up to a 1.6 crop factor SLR? I've been shooting 17mm and a .45 Titanium with great results - but the Titanium is ready to retire.

Whew. That's a pricey order. Congrats. Mine is also on the way. I'm finally making the upgrade from a PC9. And I'm doing it on the hope that Sony's faithful EIS will not crap up during freefall. My fingers are crossed.

Thanks for the advice. I plan to use both the hot shoe and the bracket mount. I'll try the hardware store next, although someone in another forum told me that he couldn't find a match at the hardware store. Maybe it's a proprietary thread size? Would Canon do that? Unfortunately, Canon's support is dodgy and not at all helpful. I repeatedly attempted to extract this information from them. The responses I got were the following: "It's in the manual" - not true. "It's a standard tripod mount size" - not true. "I don't have that information" - not helpful. When I asked where I could go or who I could talk to to learn the info they ignored the question and regurgitated one of the above three responses. Very disappointing. Some Canon engineer has the specs written down somewhere, and the thread size must be in a drawing for the thing to even be made. I'm shocked that they won't even make an attempt to find out, especially considering the $1000s I've spent on Canon equipment.

Very true. The magnitude and direction of forces are much different. I plan to use it only as one of three attachment points. But I still need the thread size... Anyone? :)

It is under a rubber tab, on the base, opposite the battery compartment. Small shallow hole with very fine threads. Canon says it is strong enough to be used for mounting purposes, but they don't know what the thread size is. Go figure.

Does anyone know what this thread size is? It's not the standard 1/4-20. Canon support has been very unhelpful - and seems incapable of providing the information. The only application I've found is for the SB-E2 bracket sold only in Europe. So I presume it's a metric size.