On Mon, 15 Jul 2002 06:18:45 GMT, "UrbanVoyeur" wrote:
>"Neuman - Ruether" wrote in message
>news:3d32bccd.4546121@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu...
>> On Fri, 12 Jul 2002 18:35:29 GMT, "UrbanVoyeur"
>> wrote:

>> >I'd like:
>> >a better lens

>> Well, the VX2000 lens appears to be diffraction-limited
>> by about f4, and good to the corners and close to the
>> f4 performance even wide open (see:
>> www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/diffraction.htm), with
>> excellent color, contrast, and freedom from flare, so
>> I assume you mean better zoom control? Wider zooming
>> range? Or...?

>No. I really meant a better lens - sharper, higher resolution, more
>contrast. Lens quality is the bigest limiting factor on 1/3 chip cameras.
>The Fuji & Canon lenses used bradcast camersa (1/2 & 2/3 chips) are vastly
>superior.

But, but, but..., by definition, a diffraction-limited
lens *is* as high-resolution as it can be, from the
diffraction-limited aperture. Few lenses are
diffraction-limited at stops wider than f4 (this is the
only way it could be better, and it would be better only
at these wider stops for resolution - and, as I pointed
out, the VX2000 lens even at f1.6 is about as sharp
as the lens is at its diffraction-limited f4 stop,
so there is not a heck of a lot of room for resolution
improvement here... As for contrast, this, too, is close
to being maximized in the VX2000 lens. The rest is
myth, since it doesn't follow simple optics...

>> >24 fps switchable
>> >longer tape capacity.
>>
>> You can get up to two hours now on an 80-minute
>> tape recorded in LP mode

>LP looks teriible.

It looks identical to SP-mode video in Mini-DV...