Sony FDR-AX100

Joe Ogiba · January 14th, 2014, 10:24 AM

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

Joe Ogiba · January 14th, 2014, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glen Vandermolen

This review says the AX100 has a projector built in. What?

Sony Debuts 4K Camcorder That Costs Just $2,000

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

Dave Allen · January 14th, 2014, 08:11 PM

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

Bruce Dempsey · January 14th, 2014, 08:15 PM

any files around straight from the camera?

Ron Evans · January 14th, 2014, 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Allen

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

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

Dave Allen · January 14th, 2014, 10:48 PM

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

Ron Evans · January 15th, 2014, 07:50 AM

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

Joe Ogiba · January 15th, 2014, 09:01 AM

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

Wacharapong Chiowanich · January 15th, 2014, 09:43 AM

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.

Jan Vanhoecke · January 15th, 2014, 11:00 AM

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

Cliff Totten · January 15th, 2014, 12:54 PM

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

David Heath · January 15th, 2014, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cliff Totten

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

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.

Paul Rickford · January 15th, 2014, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Ogiba

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

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.

Jan Vanhoecke · January 15th, 2014, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Rickford

I can say I was very happy with the AX100's active mode.

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?

Dave Blackhurst · January 15th, 2014, 04:17 PM

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.

January 14th, 2014, 10:24 AM	#121
Joe Ogiba Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Millstone,NJ Posts: 194	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

January 14th, 2014, 08:11 PM	#123
Dave Allen Major Player Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Boston Posts: 497	Re: Sony FDR-AX100 I can't figure out if that camera has the gyro lens system or not. __________________ Dave -

January 14th, 2014, 08:15 PM	#124
Bruce Dempsey Major Player Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Atlantic Coast Canada Posts: 599	Re: Sony FDR-AX100 any files around straight from the camera?

January 14th, 2014, 10:48 PM	#126
Dave Allen Major Player Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Boston Posts: 497	Re: Sony FDR-AX100 Thanks Ron, you just saved me $2k! lol __________________ Dave -

January 15th, 2014, 07:50 AM	#127
Ron Evans Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Posts: 4,220	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

January 15th, 2014, 09:01 AM	#128
Joe Ogiba Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Millstone,NJ Posts: 194	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

January 15th, 2014, 09:43 AM	#129
Wacharapong Chiowanich Major Player Join Date: May 2008 Location: Bangkok, Thailand Posts: 400	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.

January 15th, 2014, 11:00 AM	#130
Jan Vanhoecke Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Kaapstad South Africa Posts: 64	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

January 15th, 2014, 12:54 PM	#131
Cliff Totten Trustee Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Florida Posts: 1,197	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

January 15th, 2014, 04:17 PM	#135
Dave Blackhurst Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Apple Valley CA Posts: 4,874	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.