Sony Unveils HDR-FX1000 , HVR-Z5J

[Monday Isa]

Originally Posted by Peter Kraft

Would someone please be kind enough to post a link
that explains the folder structure on a CF card.
I know I have seen it already but cannot recall where.

Or even better: post a file with the folder structure and
maybe some short videos files.

Such everybody can test how ingest works.

Thanks in advance. pe.

There's nothing special to the folder structure at all. It's just 2 folders then the files.
1. Video, 2. HVR, 3. all the recorded m2t files.

The beauty is no need to capture the footage as the video files are ready for transferring to your pc. I'm a PC user don't know the process for MAC

[Sean Seah]

Originally Posted by Monday Isa

Yes it will work using the firewire port. It will not connect directly to the camera like the Z5 though.

Oh that would be cool. For the price diff, I think it will be worth it to bear with the wire!

[Colin Zhang]

Hmm...where's the menu selector on these cameras? The back looks bare

[Marco Dias]

Originally Posted by Colin Zhang

Hmm...where's the menu selector on these cameras? The back looks bare

[Colin Zhang]

Ah thanks there it is! Doesn't seem like such a great design to have it there though.

[Mark Whittle]

No mention anywhere in the limited specs lists for the Z5 or FX1000 of optical image stabilization with this new lens. That could be a real deal breaker for me, especially with a much longer lens.

Does anyone know for sure if it has one or not?

UPDATE: I found the brochure, this confirms it has Steadyshot

http://ws.sel.sony.com/PIPWebService...final10-08.pdf

[Roy Smith]

Hi got the Pal version last Thursday very impressed but noticed that the lens took 3 times longer to de mist on a very cold day than the fx1 in exactly the same conditions

[Tom Hardwick]

De-mist Roy? You mean coming into a humid atmosphere after being outside in the cold?

[Roy Smith]

Hi Tom
Yes shot a wedding on Saturday freezing cold conditions My operator was using an FX1 and his camera was clear in about 2-3min it took the fx1000 nearly 6-7 min to clear and it was on the inside element may because it was new? but it did the same at the evening reception but ver impresed with the picture quality ps you will need a lcd shade as well as it has the glossy type screen hard to see in bright conditions

[Tom Hardwick]

Condensation on an inside element - rather worrying I'd think. Worth investigating further maybe. Nothing to do with being new - more to do with ineffective sealing.

I agree entirely with you about these new multi-coated side-screens. The Z7's screen is not a patch on the Z1's out in bright sunlight. Now this is indeed a retrograde step on Sony's part - though they do make a nifty, magnetic catch fold-flat screen as an extra.

tom.

[Kenny Pai]

hdv_01

Sony did good job !!

For other info:
Sony | Micro Site - HDV

[Rodger Smith]

Personally, we weren't overly impressed in the picture of the Z7 over the much cheaper and better balanced Canon XH-A1. Anyone else care to comment?

I mean for the price of a Z7 I could own an XH-A1 and have 20x Canon lens and enough month left over to may add a few bucks and get another one :o)

[Greg Laves]

Rodger, I am surprised by your comment about the Z7 picture quality because you posted previously: "I also like that HDMI OUT and with the Sony Z7U front end . . wow what a picture. I can assure you that my HVX never gave me this picture. Whew, it will scare you it's so HOT. I guess it's true there just is NO REPLACEMENT for a removable lens." Sounds like you had a change of heart for some reason. Since I have been considering a Z7, what has been disappointing with the image of your Z7?

[Rodger Smith]

Originally Posted by Greg Laves

Rodger, . . . Sounds like you had a change of heart for some reason. Since I have been considering a Z7, what has been disappointing with the image of your Z7?

Yes I did have a change of heart. I shot a totaly of 22 principle videos with the Z7 (lots more non-commercial and tests) but 22 that mattered. While I loved having tape as my medium over the HVX and it's challenging medium AND poor low light performance, the Z7 had 9 of those videos of poor quality. Where the camera stands out a winner and stunning is with outdoors, bright colors, vidid composition. Where it fails is artificial light, low light, quick and dirty run and shoot. Those 9 bad ones way outweight the few good ones. In fact, I am this very moment going to be spending nearly 500 to fix a video (frame by frame) in photoshop wherein the image looked great in the view finder but the recorded video is as poor as the HVX material would have been. In other words, the LCD displays "excellent" video excellently but also "marginal" quality video "excellently" Sure I should have had an external but therein if I had more budget I would have a 1/2" or larger imager camera. In addition, we've heard reports of others experiencing similiar issues and results plus some of the cameras have drum problems.

In the short of it, we since sold the Z7 and as I say picked up a Canon XH-A1 as of yesterday as a replacement for the HD we are doing and I really liked the price drop (finally) to where now for the same price as the Z7 I could just add a few hundred and have two cameras :o)

No displacement to the Sony, I did like that baby I just wished I could have had better performance with it. Here's another way to put it that perhaps reveals my "safety net" with the camera . . when my daughter asked me to tape my grandchildren's materials while I had that camera, I chose to use a DVX100B because I knew without a doubt I would have excellent quality video. And, shooting the DVX in anamorphic 16:9 (not letterbox) will result in an edited video that fills the screen of an HDTV straight out of the box on the DVD (that is without having to do anything special) and look as good as 720 HD (not 1080 obviously)

So for now, we'll wait till the next generation of cameras hit he market and that isn't AVCHD which we tried also and were not pleased with just from a non-back up recording medium plus the power needed to work with it.

Hope that helps :o) BTW, we LOVE HDV . . STILL :o)

[Tom Hardwick]

Originally Posted by Rodger Smith

I chose to use a DVX100B because I knew without a doubt I would have excellent quality video. And, shooting the DVX in anamorphic 16:9 (not letterbox) will result in an edited video that fills the screen of an HDTV straight out of the box

Well my PAL DVX100B gave results that were indistinguishable on a big 46" HDTV screen whether I used letterbox or anamporphic 16:9, which is why I abandoned it and went for a camera with proper 16:9 chips.

The DVX uses 4:3 chips, period. There's no magic hocum-pokum that will restore the loss of vertical resolution that switching to widescreen entails.

tom.