Videomaker – Learn video production and editing, camera reviews › Forums › Specialty Topics › Outdoor Video › New to Biz › XTR, I don’t entirely agre
XTR, I don’t entirely agree. From what I’ve observed for example, in a poorly lit room where my GL-2 needs about 3db of amplification, at the same amplification an XH-A1 is struggling to cope, despite being an astoundingly better picture quality. In truth, SD video still performs much better than HD in low light, which is one reason of many that I’m still shooting weddings (which are mostly in poorly lit places) with SD gear. The reason for this is because with 6 times as many pixels on an HD CCD as there are on a SD CCD, each pixel on an HD chip is getting 1/6 the light as it would on it’s SD counterpart.
I know HD technology is getting better every day, but at this point in the game if low light performance is your greatest need I would still suggest SD quality video. I’ve been watching B&H’s used department a lot lately. With all the high-end producers switching to HD, I’ve seen some incredible SD cameras passing through there with giant 1/2″ and even 3/4″ chips that were $15,000 new, and are selling online for a couple grand, tops. My rule of thumb with SD is that the larger your chip, the more light you’ve got hitting it, and the better performance you’ll have in low light. Chip size plays a big role in low light.
I do agree that a 3CCD camera is the way to go though, especially in low light scenarios. A single chip model just can’t capture colors well when lighting is poor.