Sony FX1 or the A1U? 3CCDs versus a single CMOS

[Lou Squitieri]

Laurence, thanx for the info. I'm gona have to get me one of those shock mounts

[Nathan Brendan Masters]

Originally Posted by Lou Squitieri

I totally agree. The A1 is an excellent choice; you won't be disapointed. I also use an ME66, and it works great with the A1.

Actually I have an Azden that we've used for about two years with much success. People have always seems to say Azden mics were good but I haven't had a problem. I put the battery in turn it on and it read to go, the sound is perfect. I never got bad sound except when our cord was going bad.

-Nate

[Michael Liebergot]

Originally Posted by Laurence Kingston

Well, I chose the A1 over the FX1 mainly for the audio stuff. I replaced the stock mic with a Sennheiser ME66 which is my favorite camera mic. A standard thing for me is using a wireless lav with the ME66 for backup and a little area ambience. I have a boom setup but rarely have the extra body to make use of it. If I am not using the wireless, I usually send the camera mic to both channels with one channel using the 10db pad and AGC and the second channel set manually. This kind of thing is hard to do with a camera like an FX1 and extremely important to me.

Having made this decision, there are times when I regret going this route. Moderate low light on the A1 is not terrible, but it seems to fall off quickly at a certain point. In a dimly lit wedding reception hall for instance, the autofocus on the A1 does not have enough light to really function properly and will constantly keep searching for focus. Manually setting the focus in minimal light is extremely difficult as well. The grain at these levels is quite pronounced and the quality of the image falls off sharply from being really close to a FX1 to quite a lot worse. I still have my VX2000 and find myself reaching for it below a certain light threshold. At some point I will probably by an FX1 or Z1 and use it primarily for low light shots. Anything with decent light looks great.

As far as appearing professional goes, my run and gun setup consists of the A1, a Spiderbrace, a light and diffuser, a wide angle lens and Cavision lens hood and a wireless receiver. It has that equipment junkie look that makes a customer think he or she has hired a professional but none-the-less, even with all the accessories it is still light, fast and compact. I can get in and out of cars easily with the rig and can hold a steady shot without fatigue at the end of the shoot. I doubt I'd use the heavier camera outside of times when the lighting demanded it.

"As far as appearing professional goes, my run and gun setup consists of the A1, a Spiderbrace, a light and diffuser, a wide angle lens and Cavision lens hood and a wireless receiver."

Lawrence, in regards to a light source what do you use. I use a PAG C6 light system with diffuser and 30 watt bulb. Would this help enough in a dim light situation that you mentioned?

[Laurence Kingston]

Originally Posted by Michael Liebergot

"
Lawrence, in regards to a light source what do you use. I use a PAG C6 light system with diffuser and 30 watt bulb. Would this help enough in a dim light situation that you mentioned?

A camera light helps a whole lot, but only for a short distance away from the camera. Plus, the light kind of intrudes on the action and makes people even more conscious that you're there. Yeah it helps though. I'm using this Sony light:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ughType=search

with this Stofen diffuser:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...u=89908&is=REG

I like that light because of the 10/20 watt options and the fact that it uses the same batteries as the camera. The Stofen diffuser isn't designed for this light, but it works perfectly giving softer light and people don't squint when I'm using it.

[Wayne Morellini]

Originally Posted by Lou Squitieri

2) ccd vs cmos - you need to browse the hc1/a1 thread. However, this question seems to be trying to come up. I was hoping that someone with more objective testing could answer this. That said, I will give my opinion tested with my own eyes. I have a Z1 and an A1. I like the A1 over my Z1

I am also interested in how well the A1 does against the FX1. I know for low light it is definitely the one to go for, but the question that keeps coming up in my mind is how does the FX1 compare to the A1 is colour accuracy, latitude and subtlety of picture?

Sony tends to over saturate on their consumer models with unbalanced colors, while even the HC1 looked strikingly good, and one of the selling factors of the A1/HC1 was more latitude.

From your experience Lou, how do these things compare between the cameras?

[Michael Liebergot]

Originally Posted by Wayne Morellini

I am also interested in how well the A1 does against the FX1. I know for low light it is definitely the one to go for, but the question that keeps coming up in my mind is how does the FX1 compare to the A1 is colour accuracy, latitude and subtlety of picture?

Sony tends to over saturate on their consumer models with unbalanced colors, while even the HC1 looked strikingly good, and one of the selling factors of the A1/HC1 was more latitude.

From your experience Lou, how do these things compare between the cameras?

Wayne from all reports, the A1, because of the CMOS sensor prevents picture smearing which is a slight problem with CCD technology. However, the FX1/Z1 is better in low light than the HC/A1, but both have very good color reproduction.

However I have heard many complain about the HC1's color reproduction of the reds being too strong and not acccurate (more purpleish), and the A1 and HC1 share the same CMOS sensor, so I would gather this being the same. From frame grabs I have seen from both HC1 and A1. I would have to agree.

The image from the FX1 and Z1 are stunningly accurate, as is HD because of the 4:2:2 color scheme, which is superior to SD.

[Bruno Donnet]

Originally Posted by Michael Liebergot

The image from the FX1 and Z1 are stunningly accurate, as is HD because of the 4:2:2 color scheme, which is superior to SD.

The color scheme of the HDV isn't 4:2:2 but 4:2:0 like in DV Pal (in DV NTSC, the scheme is 4:1:1).
But, yes, the images of the FX1/Z1 are great!

[Wayne Morellini]

Originally Posted by Michael Liebergot

Wayne from all reports,However I have heard many complain about the HC1's color reproduction of the reds being too strong and not acccurate (more purpleish), and the A1 and HC1 share the same CMOS sensor, so I would gather this being the same. From frame grabs I have seen from both HC1 and A1. I would have to agree.

Yes, reds seem to be a common problem on consumer cams, thanks for pointing that out, I haven't seen much footage with bright reds in it on the HC1. But I'm getting more at the latitude, subtleties of the image, and balance and accurate saturation comparison (is FX1 over saturated (strong saturation) and unbalanced like the VX2000 was compared to the pd150) As I prefer an image with more latitude (less contrasty) and neutral accurate saturation to work with. I thought, as Lou had both cameras he could give an objective opinion.

Thanks for your help anyway.

Wayne.

[Evan C. King]

Laurence what wireless mic setup are you using?

I'm interested in using the HC1 as a B cam to an FX1 or Z1U. Does anyone know how to set the colours up on these cams to make them look the same?

[Laurence Kingston]

I'm using a Sennheiser Evolution wireless. The HC1 will match pretty well as long as the lighting is good without any special effort.

[Mike Sakovski]

i have HC1, and in parallel i have the Pana DVC30 1/4" 3CCD 'industrial' cam. So i can do a lil comparison here. The Sony is the great cam, its form factor and the image under optimal conditions is superb. HC1's strong points IMO are the beautiful color and hi detail on brightly lit sunny day for static or almost static outside shots without much zooming in. When you start moving the cam or your subject begins to move, the resolution drops, it still looks ok, but the above drop is noticible. If light level drops so does the res and colors, and at some point you'll start seeing the chroma noise. When you start zooming in the res drops the closer u get to extreme tele. And with the drop of res CA creeps up. Its kinda unfortunate but its the fact of life. Now, i stopped using the Sony for inside shots because of IMO significant white balance issues. Its very hard to almost impossible to achive good skin color with the Sony, or lets put it this way - i wasnt able to do that. People skin gets some sorta perplish/redish tint. So when i have to videotape indoors, i reach for the DVC30 that has very nice indoor picture, well exposed , color neautral and noise free(almost).
ok, having said that i still use the HC1 80% of the time, i just remember how a and how not to shoot with it and results are very very good.

[Wayne Morellini]

Thanks for that, I am currently trying to help a friend on what camera to buy, and I know that the 30 is suppose to produce a nice image.