Flinken

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content

    29

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback

    0%

Posts posted by Flinken

  2. Zlew

    "we've cracked it a long time ago, but there is no feedback so it becomes fairly worthless........."



    That’s not accurate!
    I have a working multiport device and can state that there is feedback present on the multi connector protocol. So if you press rec on the camcorder it is possible to decode the state and set appropriate color for the led, i.e red for rec and blue for idle. However I couldn’t find any information/feedback for low bat, missing storage, device in photo mode or powering off.
    I agree with Trunk that there probably isn’t a reasonable market to make it a commercial product.

  3. PalleNygren

    Really keen on getting the above, mostly for its BOSS stabilizer. Thing is I want to have the equivalent of a CX-105 with a Hypeye. As I understand it there is no Hypeye for the PJ620, but is there any other solution (short of messing about with soldering and the likes)?

    /P



    I ‘have a working prototype that Daniel Åström tried out during the nationals. It only has basic functions for power on/off, rec on/off and LED indicator, the button fits in a Hypeye hole. I wasn’t able to detect any status for low bat or low mem when sniffing the multiport protocol.

    Edit: No soldering required.

  5. I hade something similar and it was caused by the LCD power switch.
    My LCD opened ones in freefall and got some lose after that.
    What I did was to turn OFF the power on by LCD function, which worked for me.

    (edit to add)
    With another camera the HypeEye button was to snugged fitted to the helmet, causing it to squeeze the button by it self.

  9. Quote

    ..... My only criticism is that you're putting the CX115 at an automatic disadvantage by side-mounting the CX115 in that comparison. Side mounts put the camera much more into the wind-stream, so all things being equal you are going to get more shake.......



    As requested I have now uploaded a new comparison video with the CX730 side mounted and the CX115 top mounted (4-way only).

    Link: http://vimeo.com/41370102

  11. Quote

    Would it be possible for you to test the cx730 with 0.45 wide angle lens to compare the views with the same equipment as the cx115?



    All my wide angel lenses are 37 or 30mm threading, the cx730 uses 52mm.
    I could get me a step up ring, but it would most likely result in a lot of vigneting (with my current lenses).

    Maybe one of these with step down could work http://raynox.co.jp/english/video/hd6600pro/index.html / http://opteka.com/OPT4XPF.aspx but it might still generate problems in BOSS mode since the front lens of the cx730 is shifting in angle relative to any added lens.

    If I do a test I’ll report back.

  12. Quote

    Or if you can side mount the CX730 and it still isn't wibbly wobbly, then that's proof the BOSS technology is, well, BOSS-like.



    Yes, that´s what I’m aiming for.

    But to do that I’ll first have to build/adapt a suitable enclosure and solved the Hypeye problem. Or maybe just put an L-bracket on the side for testing.

    For enclosure I was thinking of modify an old TonyFly box I have.
    I order a Sony RM-AV2 remote that I’ll adapt for my needs replacing the Hypeye.

    I think it will take about 2 weeks before I can do another side by side test, this time CX730 side mount and the CX115 top mounted. No promises though.

    And NO, none at our DZ uses/haves flattops for the moment.

  15. I took my new Sony HDR-CX730E for a spin this weekend and so far i´m impressed with the performance of the camera. Follow the links bellow for some test clips.

    The only down side was that my current Hypeye did not work with the camera. Pressing the button powered up the camera, but it turn off right away.

    Top mounted
    No enclosure was used
    Exit temp about -20 degrees Celcius
    52mm UV filter screwed on to protect the moving lens
    BOSS standard
    x.v.Color on
    Focus manual (jumps), auto (Zoom test)
    50p Quality PS (28M)
    Rest of settings factory default

    Tandem jump: http://vimeo.com/40017285
    FreeFly jump: http://vimeo.com/40019137
    17x Zoom test: http://vimeo.com/40019397

    Edit: Downloading the original files from vimeo makes the camera more justice

  17. I played with á J1 for 3 minutes and noticed that it only takes 15 stills (3840x2160 ) while recording movies at 1080/60i. This means the camera is buffering stills in memory while processing the movie capture. Don’t know if the V1 works the same way, but I suspect it does.

    The “moving picture” feature could bee interesting for use with tandems, but I “forgot” to check the speed/performance between consecutive “moving picture” shots.

    Anyone here that has inputs from the V1 to share?

    /Flinken

  18. Did some jumps this weekend with the Backlight compensation turned off without any success. I still have the “blurry/out of focus effect” as explained at the top off this thread. The only thing remaining is to play with the exposure, but getting it right for every jump would be a PITA. I’m considering giving my Raynox lenses a good long vacation until I retire my cx115 for another model.

    /Flinken

  19. Quote

    Thank you Shoot & DSE!
    I'll try it out this weekend

    /Flinken



    Didn’t help much :(

    I’m suspecting the Auto backlight function causing the problems, didn’t try switching it off yet. If so I’ll have to be more selective on when and when not to film a take (I almost never get to seat where I need/want in the plane).
    I will first try to use auto focus for all clips (except for the freefall) to see if it helps (more fiddling but an easy solution if it works)

    /Flinken

  21. I also hade good results with the cx105, that’s why I’m so surprised that cx115 doesn’t work as well.

    In the posted images I hade an istzybitzy amount of zoom and performed a refocus after that. The zoom was never changed for the whole gig.

    I can understand it if the “crappynes” shows up thru out the whole take in all clips, but it seems cx115 with 3035 or 5050 has trouble of handling light shifting conditions as well as my old cx105.

    /Flinken

  22. Raynox 3035/5050 + cx115

    I replaced my workhorse cx105 with the cx115, and now I’m having issues with the sharpness in the footage using Raynox 3035 (same results with the Raynox 5050).
    I tried to different cx115 with same results.

    When light conditions changes, the picture gets noticeable grainy and out of focus. The cx115 is set to manual focus (infinity), color x.y, steady shot standard, and the rest to there default values.

    The attached snapshots are taken from two consecutive clips, in the plane just before climb out and hanging outside before exit.

    With a liquid 0.45 I have consistent picture quality (except for the more chromatic abbreviation you get from single element lenses), but we are not discussing this here.

    Does some one else experienced the same issues?
    Any suggestions for cx115 settings?


    Edit: added the pictures
    /Flinken

  23. Sorry!
    Used an old acount for the las post.
    /Flinken

    Quote

    One issue could be turbulence around your head/camera.

    When belly flying the position of the arms could cause turbulence (with and without wings), depending on how you fly. Are you shooting belly formations (on top) or fun jumps at level?
    Free flying head’s up (sit) you should get most of the lift from your back to get clean air around your head (in head’s down or back flying you normally get clean air, since all body parts are out of the airflow around the head).

    /Flinken

  24. I’m sure what DSE means is that other automated systems (for tandem vids) have evolved using the work flow model of Production Assistant as a reference to start from.

    If we stick to Sony Vegas Pro there aren’t many ways on how to create an automated system for tandem vids. The scripting API of Vegas Pro is comprehensive, but regardless on how much effort you put into it the automation basics will remain the same, i.e ingest, populate time line, render, burn and archive. The differences would be in the way those steps are implemented and any added features here and there.

    Added:
    I agree with DSE regarding having a time line in hand (when you need it) .