Hc9?

[dab]

Although I have yet the opportunity to take the HC9 down for some dives, initial reviews and according to work at CES is that the HC7 is definitely a better buy. The LUX rating is a 5 compared to the HC7 which was a 2! Why Sony did this, we have no idea.

I need help and education here. Can you explain to me what the LUX rating means and the difference between a 5 and a 2? I am considering the purchase of a HC9, but want make sure that is the best camera for my use. I will be shooting primarily in the Great Lakes where often ambient ligt is extremely limited at the deeper depths or inside a wreck. I will be purchasing either the HC7 or 9. Any help is appreciated.

 

[jfproul]

I bought my HC9 friday night ...now i am waiting for my amphibico housing...can't
wait to go U/W .... hope i didn't make a bad choice picking the HC9 instead of HC7

 

[Marinevisions]

I need help and education here. Can you explain to me what the LUX rating means and the difference between a 5 and a 2? I am considering the purchase of a HC9, but want make sure that is the best camera for my use. I will be shooting primarily in the Great Lakes where often ambient ligt is extremely limited at the deeper depths or inside a wreck. I will be purchasing either the HC7 or 9. Any help is appreciated.

Theoretically the lower the lux rating, the better the low light performance, which means that the HC7 would have a better low light performance compared to the 9.
If possible, it's always easiest to compare footage from the two cameras, but in this case, there aren't very many HC9's in circulation yet to get a solid comparison.

It is really hard to just go by the rating because each manufacturer uses their own standards for testing. There are a lot of factors that go into the rating.

 

[PerroneFord]

I need help and education here. Can you explain to me what the LUX rating means and the difference between a 5 and a 2? I am considering the purchase of a HC9, but want make sure that is the best camera for my use. I will be shooting primarily in the Great Lakes where often ambient ligt is extremely limited at the deeper depths or inside a wreck. I will be purchasing either the HC7 or 9. Any help is appreciated.

Basically, you can safely ignore the lux rating of the two cameras. Neither one will produce any kind of usable image at the lux ratings they claim. It might be constructive to note that when professional cameras are compared (like the $120k CineAlta or the $85k VariCam) the comparisons are done at 2000 lux. Because that is about where pro HD cameras hit their sweet spot.

If you want to shoot at deeper depths in the great lakes, I would suggest you purchase as much lighting power you can afford and simply ignore the marketing speak from these camera manufacturers.

BTW, a single candle at 1ft from it's source is 10 lux. If you think ANY of these cameras can produce a quality HD image from a candle at 2ft or more, you're grossly mistaken. You can't even do that with high speed film.

 

[dab]

.
It is really hard to just go by the rating because each manufacturer uses their own standards for testing. There are a lot of factors that go into the rating.

In this case, where the same manufacturer is rating two cameras that they produce, wouldn't one give more credibility to the accuracy of the ratings?

 

[dab]

If you want to shoot at deeper depths in the great lakes, I would suggest you purchase as much lighting power you can afford and simply ignore the marketing speak from these camera manufacturers.

Planning on either 21 or 35 Watt HID's.

 

[ronscuba]

In this case, where the same manufacturer is rating two cameras that they produce, wouldn't one give more credibility to the accuracy of the ratings?

That used to be true until mfr's started using "special" modes to achieve the lower lux rating. Things like changing shutter speeds, etc.. I think this has all been done in response to specs readily available on the internet.

I highly doubt the HC7 rating of 2 lux is comparable to other Sony cams with a 2 rating. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any other Sony HDV cam with a rating that low and I'm confident the FX1 and FX7 have better low light with their 4 & 5 lux ratings.

 

[PerroneFord]

I highly doubt the HC7 rating of 2 lux is comparable to other Sony cams with a 2 rating. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any other Sony HDV cam with a rating that low and I'm confident the FX1 and FX7 have better low light with their 4 & 5 lux ratings.

I have 1080i footage from the FX1, underwater, with late afternoon ambient. Water depths from surface to 30ft. And using 50w of HID lighting. It's still awfully noisy by broadcast standards, though it probably looks ok for web footage or at SD resolutions. Based on the size of the glass alone, the HC7 is letting in about half as much light. And once sensor size is taken into account, it's even less.

 

[Mr.X]

I have 1080i footage from the FX1, underwater, with late afternoon ambient. Water depths from surface to 30ft. And using 50w of HID lighting. It's still awfully noisy by broadcast standards, though it probably looks ok for web footage or at SD resolutions. Based on the size of the glass alone, the HC7 is letting in about half as much light. And once sensor size is taken into account, it's even less.

Are talking about Fla. spring footage? Is the glass we're talking about the port? I've shot footage inside the caves using 3 chip DV and man, oh man does the blackness of the caves eat light...yum, yum, yum.

Amphib. housing, or Gates? The FX1 is the old gold standard for early HD cameras.

X

 

[limeyx]

Planning on either 21 or 35 Watt HID's.

Get more IMO.
Dual 24's are not enough for caves and not really enough for open water.
I am upgrading to 50's