I've been considering this camera for awhile, but for the price I could easily upgrade my light kit and get two of the newer canon VIXIA HF G20's. For wedding work I really don't need any of the pro features the NEX offers, but I keep hearing it has amazing low-light sens coupled with powerful noiseless gain.

Anyone care to comment ?

Only you can decide if its worth buying it, but you are hearing correctly.
The FS100 is amazing in low light, and you can add in a lot of gain without
seeing any grain. Maybe look into a used one? You can find ones in very nice
shape for around $3200-$3300 these days.

Before I purchased my Sony EA50. I was considering buying a used FS100.

Thing is ... what's the point?

It's hard to use, the form factor is a big NO for me.

I've seen a lot of guys use the camera with steadycam vests ... but then they are using the crippling SEL18200 lens, which isn't that great for low light use.

Personally I wouldn't bother.

Personally I wouldn't bother.
Besides it's weird form factor, especially for run and gun a fs100 is not to be underestimated, it will give you a very clean image at very high gains, much cleaner that what the ea50 can, so a slow lens will become more usable if you can shoot at 10.000 iso without having to worry to treat your footage with neatvideo in post. Also the image quality is better from the fs100 as it's sensor is not a photosensor adpated for video use.

Before I purchased my Sony EA50. I was considering buying a used FS100.

Thing is ... what's the point?

It's hard to use, the form factor is a big NO for me.

I've seen a lot of guys use the camera with steadycam vests ... but then they are using the crippling SEL18200 lens, which isn't that great for low light use.

Personally I wouldn't bother.

Point is it has a chip designed for shooting motion, not a chip that is compromised by being
a high megapixel still chip. FS100 has better low light ability and better dynamic range than the EA50.
Yes, the EA50 is a shoulder mount camera and I like its form factor better than the FS100, but
that is about the ONLY thing that is better on the EA50. So you make your choices and pick which
advantages you want. I wanted the better image. If you do go FS100, I highly recommend
shortening your loupe as it is too long as it come from Sony. That makes a huge difference in
the ergonomics and it becomes much better as a handheld shooter. FS700 would be even
better but that's in another price range. As you can see you got to make this choice yourself
as James thinks you shouldn't bother and I have a much different opinion. See if you can find
a way to shoot a little with them both and see how they handle and the footage looks to you.
I'd try to use some of the PPs that can be found from people like Frank, Nirv and Sam
as neither camera is particularly good out of the box. You are the one that's going to be using it
after all so make sure you like it!

I've started a blog which is based on my experiences shooting with the FS100, on
my website:
www.gforcevideo.com
Feel free to ask any questions.

that is about the ONLY thing that is better on the EA50
Another one is that I can almost buy 2 ea50's for the price of one fs100 :)

Hm, great insight everyone. Gabe, I was looking at your blog about the camera, helpful indeed. I think it may seal the deal for me on it, I need to book a couple more weddings before I can swing it but the longer I wait the cheaper its bound to get! Thanks for the info

Are we talking about the EA50 brand new James?

Unfortunately the longer you wait the more EXPENSIVE it will get.

Sony plan to increase the prices by 9% or so from next month.

Alternatively, a used FS100 with approx 100 hours can still be had for not much more than a new Sony EA50 through sites like eBay.

I shot 2 weddings (I do this just for friends and family) with the FS100, without any lights, mostly handheld/shoulder. Came out great.

The (way underestimated) kit lens has the best autofocus and stabilizer from any lens I ever used.
I was able to get some excellent shots with it, that I could never get with any other camera (maybe the FS700).
Like riding the front bumper of a WWII Jeep at full throttle while shooting the driver (that was not for the wedding). The form factor is ideal for something like that.

And yeah, the FS100 is not only a great lowlight camera, it's a NO light camera.
Queen of the night IMHO.

Frank

Another one is that I can almost buy 2 ea50's for the price of one fs100 :)

You got me there :-). I was comparing a used FS100 to a new EA50 which is not fair.

It all depends what you actually want to spend on a camera, what extra's you would need (in my case 2 camera's is a must) and what your budget is. If money would be no issue I probably would have got a fs100 or a c100 but that was not an option, eventhough the EA50 is not as good imagewise then the FS100 at twice the price without lens (the fs100 is priced high where I live) I don't believe the fs100 is twice as good to justify the price difference. So on a budget the ea50 does offer a lot.
Also you would have to spend extra on accessories if you want to make the fs100 run and gun ready compared to the ea50 which adds again to the price difference. With the ea50 I can shoot handheld with a not stabilized 85mm lens and have footage I don't need to stabilize in post, this I don't see happening with a fs100 out of the box.

This was my first wedding with the FS100. The kit lens was used most of the time but also used the 16mm lens.

Michelle and Peter on Vimeo
Dan

Nice video Dan

Tbh, you can't go wrong with a FS100.

If I could re-wind time, and one came up for sale for approx £2700 (what I paid for my EA50) I would of bought a FS100.

But it didn't ... and I have no regrets either as the EA50 isn't limited in anyway from the experiences I have had so far.

I helped a friend shoot a wedding with my FS100. He was so impressed with the FS100's image, he went out and bought his own. That's a strong endorsement.

Here is an article that will interest you: Sony NEX-EA50 vs. Sony NEX-FS100 (and the Parfocal 3x+ Zoom Challenge) - Streaming Media Producer (http://www.streamingmedia.com/Producer/Articles/ReadArticle.aspx?ArticleID=86298&PageNum=2)

I quote: " I generally don't find I need more than 12 dB of gain on even the most challenging lighting situations with the FS100, but if I had to use the EA50 I would need 21 dB of gain to achieve the same level of exposure. For a camcorder this would result in an extremely noisy image, but for a large-sensor video camera, 21 dB of gain is very usable."

So in other words, it's not the end of the world. 21db of Gain is more than useable from what i've found. I even use footage all the way up to 24db and i've capped my camera to not exceed that.

Here is an article that will interest you: Sony NEX-EA50 vs. Sony NEX-FS100 (and the Parfocal 3x+ Zoom Challenge) - Streaming Media Producer (http://www.streamingmedia.com/Producer/Articles/ReadArticle.aspx?ArticleID=86298&PageNum=2)

I quote: " I generally don't find I need more than 12 dB of gain on even the most challenging lighting situations with the FS100, but if I had to use the EA50 I would need 21 dB of gain to achieve the same level of exposure. For a camcorder this would result in an extremely noisy image, but for a large-sensor video camera, 21 dB of gain is very usable."

So in other words, it's not the end of the world. 21db of Gain is more than useable from what i've found. I even use footage all the way up to 24db and i've capped my camera to not exceed that.

Filming at a very dark Allerton Castle in North Yorkshire a few weeks back my EA50 was all the way up to 30db - 24db would have still resulted in a too dark image - Fortunately Neat Video saved the day and cleaned up the very grainy footage - 30db is just usable if cleaned up

Yeah I've settled on the FS100, I need to wait a bit to be able to swing it, but its what I'll go with. Thanks a lot for all the feedback everyone, that was super helpful.