Sony CX700 vs. NX70 = Same video performance?
 

Looking at getting out of my JVC GY HM100. I'm looking at the NX70 and the Canon XF100.

I'm not able to find any test patterns or resolution charts on the NX70 yet but I do see some for the Sony CX700.

It's been said that the NX70 and CX700 share the same lens sensor and post processing circuits.

Question:

Is it safe to assume that the NX70 will have the exact same test results as the CX700?

Same lens characteristics?
Same dynamic range?
Same gain values and video noise levels?
Same color rendition?
Same resolution?

If so, I can properly compare CX700 charts (as though it was a NX70) to Canon XF100's

Does anyone own both cameras and see any real bottom line output difference?

CT

Re: Sony CX700 vs. NX70 = Same video performance?
 

I have been facing the same dilemma. On the one hand, the XF100 has some nice controls, gamma curves adjustment, knee, pedestal etc.. On the other hand, the Sony seems (emphasis on seems) to have just a tad bit better low light performance.

Absent in-depth comparisons, I have decided that the best way to choose between the two is to spend some time at a local store testing the two.

One major plus on the Canon is the 4:2:2 10-bit codec, compared with Sony's 4:2:0 8-bit AVCHD.

But, if like me, you plan on recording straight to an external recorder (either ProRes 422 or XDCAM 422), then it makes the difference in codec a moot point.

Re: Sony CX700 vs. NX70 = Same video performance?
 

Yeah,...that's a tough decision between the two. I already own a Sony NEX VG10 and a Sony EX1R. And, I'm already invested in 7 class 10 Sandisk 32gig SDHC cards and one 64 SDXC gig card. I also have 3 of the large V batteries that the NX70 uses.

I feel the same, the profile settings of the Canon are nice and I like the assignable dial under the lens too. I wish the Canon had the removable handle though. Sometimes I like to go "under the rader" with the consumer look.

The Canon 4:2:2 codec is the same as the 50Mbp/s Sony XDCAM codec. It's actually an 8 bit codec. (not 10 bit) Even the similar Nano Flash codec lives in the 8bit world but at much higher bitrates. But yeah,...I LOVE that codec. It looks great and is so smooth to edit.

Surprisingly, the weatherproof feature of the NX70 is at the bottom of my importance list.

I care mostly about the low light sensitivity and clean gain. (I have read the the Canon isn't the cleanest)

I'm taking an SD card to the Sony style store and shooting with a CX700 there. I'll bring the footage home and evaluate. I just don't know if that is a fair test of the quality of the NX70.

CT

Re: Sony CX700 vs. NX70 = Same video performance?
 

The XF100 records 4:2:2 8 bit MPEG-2, not 10 bit. It should still be superior to AVCHD though.

Re: Sony CX700 vs. NX70 = Same video performance?
 

I have both the CX700 and NX70.

Yes the colour and 'look' is the same on both, but the NX70 has manual gain which even in daylight shots gives a much cleaner picture than the CX700 which is auto gain only.

Both the same on sharpness at the wide end but the NX70 looks a little better at the tele end with a little less pink fringing than my CX700, could be just down to quality control tolerances perhaps?

Re: Sony CX700 vs. NX70 = Same video performance?
 

Paul
Have you checked the backfocus on both cameras ? A lot of small cameras like the Sony handcams do not hold a manual focus through zoom and need to be focused at each zoom range.Perhaps Sony have improved this with the NX70 which may account for the differences at full zoom. All my small Sony's do have this back focus issue ( TRV50, HC96, SR7, SR11, XR500 and CX700 ) Manual focus at any zoom point and zoom in or out and the camera will go out of focus. Not a problem in autofocus, especially full auto operation as the camera will even alter exposure to maintain max depth of field with bias to faces if face detection is switched on.

Ron Evans