#Sony XV-D1000 SEG
10 messages in this thread
I am comparing the price/performance/features of the Sony XV-D1000 SEG to the
Videonics MX1. The Sony is quite a bit more expensive but is it worth it? Does
anyone have first hand knowledge of the Sony? Any comments would be
appreciated.
I recommend the XV-D1000 very highly. It is easier to use than the MX-1 from
Videonics, and from the examples I have seen, offers higher quality.
You can get details on it in the file PART3.ZIP in Library 16 of the Multimedia
Forum and Library 2 of the DeskTop Video Forum. PART3.ZIP requires an IBM-type
PC running Microsoft Windows 3.x to run. It includes details on a number of
the video and audio components I recommend.
James Bell Jr. — Multimedia Contributor – CompuServe
Hi James.
I've got some info on the XV-D1000, but nowhere is it mentioned that it can do
a dissolve. The info mentions "bit defect" as a way of mixing A and B sources,
but is this a clean dissolve or does the video get pixelated?
Thanks
CK
It can do both a standard dissolve (from one source to another) as well as
fades from video to a color. It also offers the bit-defect function which
pixelates the video as it is being dissolved.
James Bell Jr. — Multimedia Contributor – CompuServe
Thanks for the feedback on the Sony SEG. I'm glad you rate it so well. I would
like to incorporate this SEG with my EZV2 program since I can control it
through the VISCA interface, something that I cannot do with the MX1. I'll read
the library info as well.
Harry:
>I am comparing the price/performance/features of the Sony XV-D1000 SEG to the
Videonics MX1.<
I looked at both briefly for an article on DTV that I wrote for VIDEO about a
year or so ago. Frankly, I was underwhelmed by the Sony–while it had a few
interesting wipe patterns, it also apparently had no form of "keying" (not even
the limited "superimpose" keying that Panasonic's WJ-AVE series has!).
I was much more impressed by the MX-1–not the least because of its price
(street price around $1,000!), and its number of features (including chromakey
capability)…
Hope this helps,
Tim Liebe
Thanks for your reply. Did you notice any diference in video quality beteween
the MX1 and the Sony?
Harry:
>Thanks for your reply. Did you notice any diference in video quality beteween
the MX1 and the Sony?<
Well, the MX-1 *does* have a bit of tendency towards "artifacts" (the image
looks digitized)–but you had to be looking for it, IMO, to see it. As for the
Sony, I didn't get more than a brief look at the output video, so I couldn't
say offhand…
Sorry I can't be of more help,
Tim
I have had the XV-D1000 up on a W/VS and it is technically very good. The
video doesn't demonstrate artifacts unless you are using one of the highly
digital modes where it is meant to look digitized. It was better than an MX-1
which was evaluated. (I didn't evaluate it myself, but I did get a look at the
W/VS display).
The W/VS used was a Magni WV-561 and an MM-400.
James Bell Jr. — Multimedia Contributor – CompuServe
James:
>I have had the XV-D1000 up on a W/VS and it is technically very good. The
video doesn't demonstrate artifacts unless you are using one of the highly
digital modes where it is meant to look digitized. It was better than an MX-1
which was evaluated. (I didn't evaluate it myself, but I did get a look at the
W/VS display).<
Well, I figured the Sony *had* to have something going for it <g>… As I
recollect, it's more in the price range of Panasonic's WJ-MX30 or -50 than the
MX1 is, so I would *hope* it gave better results. OTOH, given the price (around
$1,000 street), the MX1 does a lot reasonably well for not a lot of money (it's
certainly better image quality than either Panasonic's WJ-AVE5 or -AVE7, and
costs less to boot)…
I can't say, based on the features, I was too highly impressed w/the D1000; a
lot of lame-o transitions (like heart wipes!) but no "keying" features to speak
of. Of course, I wasn't doing a side-by-side comparison w/other SEGs, so I
probably didn't see it in its best light.
Best,
Tim