tom's FX1 review at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > Sony XAVC / XDCAM / NXCAM / AVCHD / HDV / DV Camera Systems > Sony HDV and DV Camera Systems > Sony VX2100 / PD170 / PDX10 Companion

Sony VX2100 / PD170 / PDX10 Companion
Topics also include Sony's TRV950, VX2000, PD150 & DSR250 family.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old February 18th, 2005, 03:35 PM   #1
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Billericay, England UK
Posts: 4,711
tom's FX1 review

As lots of us think the FX1 will replace the VX2k1, may I take up some bandwidth here to tell you my review of the FX1 is now on line?

http://www.dvuser.co.uk/Reviews/Camc...%20review.html

You're probably all sick of reading FX1 reviews, but there's a deliberate mistake in mine. And if you find more than one, I'm singing loudly with my fingers in my ears.

tom.
Tom Hardwick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 18th, 2005, 05:00 PM   #2
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Santa Rosa, California
Posts: 745
Thanks for the review, Tom. What are your thoughts/feelings on the 24 and 30 frame modes? Have you spent as much time with the DVX100A as you did the FX1? I'm considering getting a 24p camera with excellent audio later this year, and can still only think of one that's on the market. :-]
__________________
Breakthrough In Grey Room

Shawn Mielke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 20th, 2005, 04:59 PM   #3
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Billericay, England UK
Posts: 4,711
I've never been a big fan of the progressive and some-such modes - probably because I spent years with film and I rather like the 'real' look if 50i video.

Haven't spent much time with the DVX100A either I'm sorry to say, though I've much admired it. I always say that when you're in the GL2 and upwards ball park (VX / PD / DVX / XL etc) then all the cameras will bring home absolutely superb footage if you know what you're doing. If you get an FX1 or Z1, the camera s will bring home even better footage with the same level of care.

tom.
Tom Hardwick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 21st, 2005, 10:08 AM   #4
Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Santiago, Chile
Posts: 932
Great article. There is an illustration that says Leica instead of Carl Zeiss. Scary!
__________________
Ignacio Rodríguez in the third world. @micronauta on Twitter. Main hardware: brain, eyes, hands.
Ignacio Rodriguez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 21st, 2005, 10:42 AM   #5
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Billericay, England UK
Posts: 4,711
Well spotted Ignacio!! But there's yet another mistake I've found... How many times did I proof read it?
Tom Hardwick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 21st, 2005, 12:42 PM   #6
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 28
What do I win ?

I’m sure the BBC will be buying skip loads of them....
Dave Ambrose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 21st, 2005, 05:00 PM   #7
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Billericay, England UK
Posts: 4,711
Ah-ha! It's already in the past tense. The BBC have already bought skip-loads of them.
Tom Hardwick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 21st, 2005, 11:22 PM   #8
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Clermont, FL.
Posts: 941
Is this it:

"The image of the HDR-FX1 – even allowing for the advanced chip design and beautiful lens – could appear very slightly soft on an SD set, but only when compared with the incredible sharpness of the VX2100."

I hope not. I would very much like to believe that the HDR-FX1 looks soft compared to the "incredible sharpness" of my current VX2000 ;-)
Laurence Kingston is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 22nd, 2005, 01:51 AM   #9
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Billericay, England UK
Posts: 4,711
Sleep easy Laurence, your 2100's lens is no different from the 2000's lens.

Sherlock Holmes clue: The other mistake is also in the text surrounding the picture. I must've been getting pretty tired when I did those in Photoshop.

tom.
Tom Hardwick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 22nd, 2005, 02:28 AM   #10
New Boot
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 10
Don't know much on the specs/features of this camera so I can't comment if any of those are mistakes. But, is it that analog was spelled wrong, (analogue).

Jim
Jim Vesty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 22nd, 2005, 03:32 AM   #11
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Billericay, England UK
Posts: 4,711
Whoooh, it *you* guys who spell wrong!
:-)

Over here in PAL land it's colour and analogue and stabilise, thank you very much.
Tom Hardwick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 22nd, 2005, 08:03 AM   #12
Major Player
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: St.Thomas, Ontario, CANADA
Posts: 428
Flip out 3.5" top screen folds to hide tape transport?
Tape transport?
Ummm... no ;)
__________________
Toogood Studios
Jeff Toogood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 22nd, 2005, 09:03 AM   #13
Major Player
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: US & THEM
Posts: 827
Tom

How much did the Aspheron set you back?

also how is the CA at the edges of the frame?

I've always wanted a Zeiss Aspheron but way too expensive , maybe a Bolex is a bit cheaper...
__________________
John Jay

Beware ***PLUGGER-BYTES***
John Jay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 23rd, 2005, 03:21 PM   #14
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Billericay, England UK
Posts: 4,711
I thought I knew all the wide-angles John, but I've never heard of a Zeiss Aspheron. The Swiss firm of Kern makes them for Bolex, and Bolex call it the Aspheron. Basically it's a pretty big, 0,5x, single aspherical element, beautifully coated and has an 85mm attachment thread.

I bought mine second-hand for 125 GBP, but if you're rich they can be had new for close to 1000 GBP. That's a loot of loot.

The chromatic aberation is most certainly there and single elements are renowned for exhibiting this fault. If you look at the multi-element 0.65x Century you'll see it's better in this regard, but in my view the lack of barrel distortion when using the Aspheron is much more important, and I'll accept slight CA at the very edges of the image to keep straight lines straight.

tom.
Tom Hardwick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 23rd, 2005, 03:45 PM   #15
Major Player
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: US & THEM
Posts: 827
125 !!!

you got a bargain , I'm jealous


yeah I suppose top of the tree is the Zeiss (rentable @ 40 per diem), but there are others like the Kinoptic and the double aspheron (which is as rare as rocking horse poo)

getting a bargain on these to buy is like queing in the Jan sales!
__________________
John Jay

Beware ***PLUGGER-BYTES***
John Jay is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > Sony XAVC / XDCAM / NXCAM / AVCHD / HDV / DV Camera Systems > Sony HDV and DV Camera Systems > Sony VX2100 / PD170 / PDX10 Companion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:49 AM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network