[Chris Newlin]

in my research, one of their techs admitted that “the motor in the zoom is not as stable as some customers would like.” That’s about as far a detail as I could get, but was certainly an admission that they know about the problem. However, as you know by now, they just shifted their “spec” on the speed which they consider a stable zoom, and refuse to fix to any decent tolerance. Despite their marketing materials which suggest that it’s a pro lens.
my lens, btw, was unstable at speeds greater than their suggested “10”.

If you have any time left on a dealer’s warranty, just return the camera and get a refund (if that’s possible). IMHO, even if you were really good at coming up w/ a solution, how much personal time/energy/frustration can you deal w/ over the problem? (Unless, of course, you plan to market your “fix” to the many many unhappy customers!) While they will often “exchange” a lens (once), the replacement is likely to be faulty as well. (I tried this as have others.)

If you are vested in the EX3 line, one solution available, (though expensive, but one that I ended up taking) is to buy another lens to go on the unit. (Fuji or Canon make lenses for this camera.) You can also of course use various adapters with still camera lenses.

But do not expect any satisfaction from Sony, they will not repair the lens.

EclecticBubba

[Chris Newlin]

EX1r, about 6 mos. old.
sticky zoom, seemingly at anything other than whip zoom.
can’t use camera for “live” events and program recording.
as for making manufacturing too expensive for that type of tolerance… with all respect, I’ve used many other cheaper cameras that could at least get the zoom right… (no comparison at price point for imager, etc…. but for a “zoomer” we’re not talking breakthrough technology here…)
it’s a design defect, or a really bad manufacturer’s defect that is too expensive to address for this many units already out…

but I’m shopping around for something else.

EclecticBubba

[Chris Newlin]

to respond to “what did you eventually do?”…
a month or so after this original post, I installed “Parallels” and it has run well ever since. I had been using an older PC in the past, but was finding that I often needed to access QB/QK both at the office OR at home… so I didn’t want to keep running two systems just for book keeping.
Parallels seems to work as advertised. I have had one or two programs on the Windows side monopolize the CD writer, but I can just slide the file I need to burn over to the other OS. (and this could easily be a pilot error, I did not spend a lot of time setting the program up, it was just pretty easy to get up and running.)
It boots and powers up nicely, and again, I have not even explored the various ways that I could be using it better.
I am also a version behind, so any hitches that I may have encountered might be solved by now.
very happy with it, and very happy to keep all book keeping, invoicing ability, and banking functions on a MacBook, with the original PC QB/QK software.

bubba

EclecticBubba

[Chris Newlin]

I appreciate your posts, folks.
May be ordering Parallels pretty quickly.

thanks again,
bubba

EclecticBubba

[Chris Newlin]

not a lawyer, not a judge….
and certainly it would have been better to communicate beforehand, and to appreciate the sensitivity of a production company “subcontracting” out to another company, blah blah blah….

but it has always been my understanding that US copyright law extends really strong copyright protection to the original photographer of an image. (I am NOT a lawyer, just wondering aloud here….) As such, the photographer is the actual owner of the images, barring any other formal agreement between parties. I realize that in the video and film world, the translation between still photographer and cinematographer/videographer has become a bit blurred…. but absent of a work-for hire-agreement, the original shooter would maintain HIS copyright, not the other way around.
and yes, if there was an agreement in place, or (in some states) even an oral agreement that your work was to be “owned” by the company that engaged you, then you’re under their hooks.

Yes it would be wise to have had the agreement drawn up by either side to protect the other beforehand, but absent of any formal agreement, I would think that the burden of making such a contact would fall on the company that hired you. Otherwise, as an independent freelancer, they’re your images to do with what you want. (resell them, even.)

And I agree with the previous message, putting out a cease and desist for linking to YouTube is laughable…. obviously they are trying to keep confidential the fact that they utilize subs.

Another thing to consider, (again, a layman’s understanding, not a legal opinion), you would need to be wary of posting video of people’s images, property, proprietary information, etc…. unless you have THEIR permission. Even if you own what you shoot, you might not have proper permissions to show, post, display, sell, etc.

But unless they have a contract in their favor where you release ownership, (or that spells out exact usage permissions), I can’t believe that they could enforce an action against you for you claiming your work was your work!

(yeah, yeah, next time get it ALL in writing!) And I do appreciate that to keep nice with a client, you can’t go slap them around… but it seems to me, you were OK in your thinking and actions.

chris

[Chris Newlin]

Floh,
looks like field order reversal. I’m making 720×486 comps, fine res, even though they’re photoshop simple shapes, I’ve tried “interpreting” footage lower field… nothing new or different. that’s why I thought it might be a QT problem. when I render a full frame motion image and import full frame into timeline, everything is OK. When I drop a title or shape into the graphics track and let Media 100 render, it jags up… and I’ve never seen white flashing in the sourc window while it renders.
thoughts?
thank you,
bubba

[Chris Newlin]

I’ve got everything on the same power source – it’s what I first suspected. I’ve thought about the power supply – and I may end up replacing it as a matter of course. I would have thought that that a bad PS would show up on all the video i/o’s… but I know they can be as flaky as anything else.
I think I’ll try and get a video card on ebay, and then try the PS if that doesn’t work.

I don’t have access to another G4, or at least this model… (i’ve heard the mirror door model is flaky…. )

bubba

[Chris Newlin]

Thanks guys.
I’m always slow to upgrade OS because of just that… exotic peripherals. I never know which ones are exotic until I upgrade!
thanks guys.

bubba

[Chris Newlin]

yeah, 10.2.3
sorry, is that a bad?
I had not had other probs until this showed up? I thought it was approved….
er, what now.
I can probably muddle by… I rarely use those transtions, however the render issue on the graphics track is a headache (when I lay down after effects produced graphics…)

thoughts?
cMn

[Chris Newlin]

Nevermind Floh, it doesn’t like Media100 black… I took out the black slug at the end and got a good import.
Thank you again.

bubba