Don has posted, appropriately, a video he made using the TD10 in the Youtube Home Video thread. Those of you interested in the TD10 should view it to see how the camera performs run n' gun:http://youtu.be/9ZiBZSUrPQE?hd=1
Here are my comments:
I downloaded the 1080p version of the video and watched it on my LG 3D monitor in both 3D and 2D. In general it was great to see all the color, and I liked the way the camera moved and scenes were set up to exploit depth or popout. I actually liked the ceiling shots among the best, which must have been difficult to shoot given the backlighting, but they were well-exposed and despite being distant, had depth.
But there are in evidence many of the problems that frustrate me with the TD10, and 3D issues as well:
1. Many of the shots are overexposed, with lack of color saturation (e.g., 4:21, 3:48). Some of this is due to limited dynamic range. The TD10 in auto mode overexposes in bright light and that seems to be in evidence here sometimes (far from always). I am constantly fighting this when I use the TD10, using the exposure ring. The close-up flower shots were all well-exposed with excellent color (even lighting).
2. In many shots, the limited dynamic range is in evidence (e.g. 7:08). There was evidently horrendous harsh uneven lighting conditions during the day, and the result is many hotspots or vast parts of the scene overexposed.
3. Relatedly, the shots at night had much better color - the TD10 is really good in dim light, and if the lighting is not so harsh, as in the daylight scenes, the color is nicely saturated. The scene pair where you go from the daylight shot to the nightime equivalent is interesting in itself, but also shows the difference in overall light balance.
4. The inability to fix exposure sometimes hurts - in one shot, with red and yellow flowers (9:21), the camera moves a fraction of an inch and the whole scene gets darker (because more of the bright yellow flowers were in the scene, causing the iris to close). In many slow pan shots, the exposure changes as the light changes, resulting in a lot of the shot being either overexposed or underexposed dynamically. Of course if the exposure is fixed, there would still be a problem as the light changes (the wb changes also, because the light source changes). I just avoid scenes with changing light. They don't look good in televised sports events either, where thay have the best cameras, when the shot moves from shadow to bright light. But the problem is worse if the camera has limited dynamic range.
5. The 3D was nice, but, and this is a big but: the many close-up flower shots of course had pop-out but almost all had severe window violations - the objects in front of the frame were almost always cut off at the bottom of the window. The only one that worked well - no wv - was the oval with shoe-pair centered and in front of the frame, since there is no stem support in view that is cut off. But in one shot, the camera moves towards the shoe/oval and slightly cuts off the bottom of the oval that is in front of the window (2:54), so another wv. Looking at flowers in front of the window with their stems cut off by the window frame results in headaches - it violates the physics the eye is used to. Many shots like this. The penultimate close-up of the framed picture (not the last one, which is very nice) also has severe wv.
I did not get a headache, and I enjoyed the video - the color overall and the third dimension were impressive. A fun tour.