Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

You could see the advantage the 1" sensor has over a smaller 1/2.3" sensor when looking at the following link showing a comparison of the RX10 with 1" sensor and F2.8 zoom vs the Panasonic FZ200 with 1/2.3" sensor and F2.8 zoom.
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/son...erturesAOV.png

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

He is incorrect , the FDR-AX100 Handycam does not have a projector.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I can't figure out if that camera has the gyro lens system or not.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

any files around straight from the camera?

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

No it doesn't have the balanced optical stabilizer of the NX30U or the consumer PJ series. It just has Optical with Active mode according to the specs. Lens and sensor assembly is quite big in comparison to the 1/2.88 sensors and lens.

Ron Evans

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Thanks Ron, you just saved me $2k! lol

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

It may not have the balanced image stabilizer but it looks to be a better AVCHD camcorder with 4K as a bonus though.

If you just need the balanced image stabilizer then the PJ790 is the equivalent and almost as expensive . The other consumer models are now 1/4" sensors or less. So for 1/2.88 sensor the choice is NX30U at $2000 or the PJ790 at about the same price too !!! Sony price to market as to what they want to push !!! For handheld shooting the balanced image stabilizer is great if that is what you want.

Ron Evans

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

The AX100 would have to be a much larger camera to use the balanced OSS module and that large 12x Zeiss zoom with 62mm filter thread.

http://www.crutchfield.com.edgesuite..._lensunit2.jpg

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Sony's marketing is very smart in pricing the new CX900 at just below the PJ790V's in US$ according to B&H's web site. Overall the CX900 looks to be a superior HD camera with more manual controls, a bigger and more light sensitive sensor, options for a better codec. etc. except for one that really counts for a lot of people, the BOSS. Joe is right it would not be technically possible to fit a gyro unit similar to those on the PJ7xx and PJ6xx series on the CX900 due to the coverage requirement of the 1" image circle.

There you have it, 2 new and 1 carried-over top of the line Handycams, one shooting 4K at US$500 premium above the other 2 that offer different feature sets at about the same price.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

The PJ-models are also going to be replaced with new ones.
With PJ-810 to be the topnotch.
Which seems to be a lot cheaper than the older PJ790?

Unveiled: New Sony Handycam Camcorders and 4K Prosumer Camcorder | BH inDepth
and
http://bhphoto.prod.acquia-sites.com...ycam_specs.pdf

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Was just on a conference chat with Sony Pro about the topic of XAVC.

We were partially discussing the Sony AX100 and I took the chance to ask about the cameras sensor read out. (even though its' only a "Handycam")

Sony did conform that the senso did not line skip in video and that every pixel is read when scanned and scaled to 4k

They refused to answer any questions about a "pro" sister model to the AX100. (as expected but I HAD to at least ask)

CT

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

This may seem like splitting hairs, but if a sensor was to pixel BIN (average like photosite colour values, straight off the chip) it could accurately be described as "reading every pixel". Even though the end results would be similar to a line skipping case.

The more revealing question to ask would be "does it read every pixel, do a full deBayer, then downscale to 4k from that?"

My suspicion is that this camera does indeed do things "properly" - but in principle just everybody be aware of the possibilities of getting truthful answers that can be misleading.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Having the CX 790 with the magic eyeball, I can say I was very happy with the AX100's active mode at CES, the camera is the perfect balance of size and weight to hand hold.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Hi Paul, can i conclude, does the active mode in the AX100 stabilise the same or even good as the CX790 with his extra balanced eyeball?

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

The sensor on the 810 (1/3.95) looks like (I can never read those dang fractions with any confidence, but I *think* I'm correct?!) it is still smaller than the 1/2.88 sensor that populated the CX/PJ7xx series cameras for the last two model years. Even though larger than the "consumer" cameras, it still looks like a distinct "downgrade" to me?

The 7xx cameras are pretty good performers, but looks like they are the "end of the line"... too bad, since the "BOSS" worked quite well - understandably it would be harder to gimbal/gyro a larger imaging block the size of that on the RX10 and AX100.


Sony feels they "hit it out of the park" with this new generation 1" sensor (and it's quite good!), I don't quite understand the crippled CX900 (and in this case it distinctly IS the AX100 sans the 4K!?). It's not like they're saving a whole bunch on the guts, or the exterior... or... or... OK... I don't get it? To me it looks like a FIRMWARE "option", unless there's a couple "secret" bits of silicon in there somewhere?! I questioned why the RX10 didn't have 4K of some flavor for the same reasons. The only other possible explanation is that Sony has a limited yield of "4K capable" Bionz X processors, similar to how it's typically been with high end processors - some of them don't quite "make the grade", but are too good to toss out, so they get a lower speed rating?



@David - There is a substantial difference between sampling every pixel, then crunching ALL the data, some of which will of necessity be "averaged out" in order to produce a downscaled image... vs. tossing out every other (or every 3rd or 4th or whatever) line worth of data. You can't use data that is simply ignored before processing.

Part of the new "X" processor is the capability to deal with ALL the sensor data early in the processing, rather than diverting substantial chunks of the data away from the "input" BEFORE processing. The more data can be preserved along the line, the better (and more free from errors/artifacts) the output should be. I see that there is a HUGE difference between the two approaches, that seems to be "in the pudding" of the output.