Speaking of the GH4, does Sony turn off the overlay displays after 10 seconds on the AX100 like the GH3 and maybe the GH4?

Seriously, adjusting the color is needed when matching up to other cameras. Are there no controls on the color? If not, it sounds like the VG cameras all over again.

Les, why would you not do this in post? If you have multiple cameras, regardless of how you have them white balanced, I would think you'd want to tweak this in the editing process anyway.

The typical color level, sharpness and contrast controls that were on some previous Sonys were pretty crude and certainly not how you'd want to 'balance' multiple cameras.

If all I'm doing is using the camera controls to get as close as I can to two cameras like a handicam, I'd just use manual white balance and then worry about it during editing.

As for the info display, no, it does not turn off unless you want it to. Your choice.

Now...24p at 1/24 shutter?....you need to be careful with that. Its the only combination that will really roll on you. All other higher speeds are fine. 30p at 1/30 shutter is not bad and any faster shutter will not be an issue at all.

Interesting, rolling shutter is normally more pronounced at faster shutter speeds. At lower speeds the motion blur tends to mask the skew, the faster the shutter the crisper the motion so the skew becomes more obvious.

There are several "anomalies" that I'm noticing with this camera that I cant exactly put my finger on:

30p "harshness" - Tested footage mostly shot in 30p using a 1/30 and 1/60 shutter. (did others too) Slow pans and large amounts of moving objects seem to move with a certain "harshness". I don't believe it's the frame rate itself. I shoot 29.97p on my EX1r and FS100 and I love it. However, the AX100 doesn't look that "smooth" at the same frame rate and shutter speeds.

Could it be the 60Mbp/s codec struggling? This codec doesn't seem to "block up" or get "jagged" when it breaks. Instead, it seems to protest motion by getting "soft". For instance, bark on a palm tree was tremendously sharp at 1/60 shutter with the camera dead on a tripod. Then,...with an ever so slight and slow camera movement, the bark texture "softens" and when stopped, returns to razor sharp again.

A "dumb" way to put it would be: The image is 4K when still and 2k when there is motion. lol It's funny to say it that way and yes, all camera's can say the same thing to a certain extent. Yes, even faster shutter speeds exhibited the same thing too.

I don't think this it's the shutter speed. I think it's the Long GOP CODEC itself that is stressing under the rate of pixel changes.

Does anybody else see this? I'm not seeing it so much when a fast moving object goes across an otherwise static scene, I'm seeing it mostly on very slow pans where EVERY pixel in the image is moving left, right, up or down. It just looks a bit "harsh" and slightly "soft" no matter what shutter speed is used.

Agian,..I have always loved 30p for years,..so it's not that.

Is it just me that sees this??

Interesting, rolling shutter is normally more pronounced at faster shutter speeds. At lower speeds the motion blur tends to mask the skew, the faster the shutter the crisper the motion so the skew becomes more obvious.

Yeah,...running at 24p with at 1/24 shutter, if you really whip pan fast to the left or right, you could actually take a sharp, straight up and down line and skew it to a very blurry 45 degree angle!l lol

It's not "that" bad. If you know it's there, it's easy to shoot carefully around it. I don't see it causing any significant problems for me.

Alister,...have you signed ant Sony NDA's lately? ;-)

CT

Cliff, I can't say I see this more than in other cameras I've shot with when shooting at that frame rate. I always expect a loss of detail when panning. Just as when I swivel my own head, detail is not as sharp as if I'm looking at something in a static manner.

However let me propose another theory. IMO this camera is sharper than almost any 4K camera I've seen. From the clips thus far presented of the GH4, it's significantly sharper and more resolved than that camera...at least from what we've seen thus far.

Even some very pricey 4K cameras don't seem to have this level of detail. Sooo, perhaps it's that you're starting off with so much detail and sharpness, that when the camera begins to pan, the loss of detail is more obvious because you're starting off so much sharper.

Not sure if that makes any sense, but in my contorted mind, it does.

Ken,

I agree with you. This AX100 is ridiculously sharp. You could also be right about the sharpness and the motion softness too. Maybe with 1080, the resolution difference in motion is not as dramatic because we aren't starting with that sharp of an image to begin with.

Imagine a resolution chart with 2,000 lines on it. If the chart start was moving in front of a camera even slowly, the first lines to get smeared would be the highest frequency lines. Then, the faster the cart is moved, the further down the "blur" would move. So,...it would take more motion to blur the 600 or 700 line mark than it does to blur the 1500 line mark? (shutter speed dependent...but we tend not to really like shutter speeds that are above 1/90 or something like that)

Right? Maybe? Alister, you have been shooting 4K for a while now. Is this accurate or completely off?

I'm still getting used to 4K! Love it.

I've been theorizing that the higher resolution "masks" the motion issues from the 30p - with scenes with motion, the stuff that's not moving remains quite sharp, and the motion blur seems unoffensive enough. I'm sure 60p would be "sharper" on individual frozen frames, but I'm not so sure whether that would appear "more" natural... or less?! All I know is so far the 4K samples look "pleasing" (well maybe not that fly, that was a bit scary!).

There may well be some things going on with how we "see" naturally, vs. a captured image. I know I'm noticing that these 4K videos on my screen (even at 1080) are sharper than my "corrected" vision! it's almost as though the captured images are resolving detail that our brains would generally "toss out", and we may have to readjust "how" we see, if that makes any sense.

The HC1 and FX7 I had would record HDV to tape and simultaneously down-convert and output DV thru firewire to a dvd disc recorder and I did thousands of hours like that.
.

Will the ax100 record 4k to memory card whilst out-putting 1080p via HDMI which would feed the switcher along with several other cams?

The HC1 and FX7 I had would record HDV to tape and simultaneously down-convert and output DV thru firewire to a dvd disc recorder and I did thousands of hours like that.
.

Will the ax100 record 4k to memory card whilst out-putting 1080p via HDMI which would feed the switcher along with several other cams?

Bruce, this has been asked & answered several times. When recording 4K to an internal memory card, the AX100 cannot output via HDMI. I'm theorizing this is due to the intensive processing requirements needed to do both simultaneously.

The workaround, as Mark R. demonstrated, is to output the signal via wifi to a tablet or smartphone which the camera can do while recording 4K. But you cannot feed several other cams.

I shoot live switched sometimes with 4 cameras and the output of the switcher is recorded so the individual camera recording is not so important.
The gist of my question is " If the ax100 is set to record 4k but the record button is NOT pressed, what is the 1080p in-camera down-converted HDMI video like? Is it similar to what everyone is raving about sharper than straight shot 1080?

Yeah,...running at 24p with at 1/24 shutter,

Don't mean to harp, but the shutter should/must be 1/50th or 1/60th AT ALL TIMES.

At 1/24th the shutter is open for the entire frame time which should only be used for low light recording with NON MOVING subjects. Unless, of course, you are after a subjective drunk POV.

The workaround, as Mark R. demonstrated, is to output the signal via wifi to a tablet or smartphone which the camera can do while recording 4K.

This enables a visual check on the camera's capture, but won't support recording of a useable movie.

The AX100 is not like 5 -10 year old DV and HDV camcorders. It records very high-quality images at low-frame-rates. Recording is EITHER internal or to a device connected to the HDMI connector.

If one owns an HDMI switcher, one can do a live mix. If one has an HDMI recorder, one can record. For example, to ProRes.

If one needs HD-SDI, one can buy a converter.

I haven't seen answers to:

1) I assume the HDMI output is 8-bit.

2) Is it 420 or 422?

3) What is the output when shooting 30p? Some tvs don't accept 30p or 60p. At 1920x1080 they expect 60i.

4) What is the output when shooting 24p? Some tvs don't accept 24p (and add 3:2 pulldown) or 60p (with 3:2 pulldown added in the camera). At 1920x1080 they expect 60i with 3:2 pulldown.

5) Has anyone connected to a 4k tv?

Steve if your camera is right there
Plug the hdmi into a 1080 screen and give the word

Bruce, this has been asked & answered several times. When recording 4K to an internal memory card, the AX100 cannot output via HDMI. I'm theorizing this is due to the intensive processing requirements needed to do both simultaneously.

The workaround, as Mark R. demonstrated, is to output the signal via wifi to a tablet or smartphone which the camera can do while recording 4K. But you cannot feed several other cams.

I've asked this before about using the tablet/phone app during 4k recording, but no one seemed to have had occasion to have tried it yet. Maybe someone has by now, so I'll ask again:

While recording 4k, if zebras are enabled in the AX100, will they appear on the tablet's/phone's screen?

What do you use to increase the colours of a 4k video like film? Many people use Neatvideo but I don't like to use it. Some suggestions?

In post. But, it's quite saturated already. Can't imagine you would need more saturation.

Steve if your camera is right there
Plug the hdmi into a 1080 screen and give the word

Not playing much with camera because -- having spent a month with the jvc 4k last year -- the hangups are in post. Want to sort these issues out first.

So far xavc s clips load into imovie, fcpx, and media composer. That's a good start.

But, imove plays at 1-2fps.

Media composer plays at may 3-5fps. One can transcode from ama to dnxhd, but the time required is about 30 minutes for each 5 minutes. One 64gb card would take 12 hours to transcode!

fcpx takes a fair amount of time to generate prores proxy. The problem is that fcpx automatically makes a one-quarter sized proxy. This works fine for FHD when the proxy is 640x480. But with UHD the proxy is 4X larger at FHD. Stupid design. Non-Apple plug-ins generally do not work because they don't use the GPU system so they are way too slow.

Bottom-line, no post solution yet found. So the camera may be of no value to me as I'm wedded to a lightweight laptop and apple seems focused on battery life not performance. :(

I've asked this before about using the tablet/phone app during 4k recording, but no one seemed to have had occasion to have tried it yet. Maybe someone has by now, so I'll ask again:

While recording 4k, if zebras are enabled in the AX100, will they appear on the tablet's/phone's screen?

No. You get only the zoom rocker and start/stop button on screen (with the live picture); no zebras or focus peaking colors show.

Not playing much with camera because -- having spent a month with the jvc 4k last year -- the hangups are in post. Want to sort these issues out first.

So far xavc s clips load into imovie, fcpx, and media composer. That's a good start.

But, imove plays at 1-2fps.

media composer plays at may 3-5fps. one can transcode from ama to dnxhd, but the time required is about 30 minutes for each 5 minutes. one 64gb card would take 12 hours to transcode!

fcpx takes a fair amount of time to generate prores proxy, but the famous green flashers that were supposedly fixed are present. Also some filters just create garbage with uhd.

bottom-line, no post solution yet found. So the camera may be of no value to me as I'm wedded to a lightweight laptop and apple seems focused on battery life not performance. :(

So, dump Apple: Vegas Pro, for example, has no trouble playing, editing or outputting XAVC on any Windows laptop. Almost all the troubles people have had with common video standards (e.g., AVCHD) and post to video forums have been people using Apple computers.

No. You get only the zoom rocker and start/stop button on screen (with the live picture); no zebras or focus peaking colors show.

Thanks, Mark.

And editing on a laptop may be a little iffy unless it's a fairly beefy configuration. I tried some 1080 multicam, and was close with a second generation i7 Ultrabook, going to try again with a 3rd Gen i7...

I understand the joys of a light portable machine, but asking it to do heavy lifting may be a little much - mobile processors and video subsystems aren't usually up to the hardcore computing tasks that editing involves, and too many places for bottlenecks in such a tightly "integrated" system.

I've been spec'ing for a new desktop to replace an aging i7 920, and I'm expecting even a "fast" machine to have a bit of fun with 4K editing - although I'm finding integrated graphics quoting 4K @30p capability, along with the Seiki 39" TV, thinking it might make a decent "budget" setup for a while anyway!

I shoot live switched sometimes with 4 cameras and the output of the switcher is recorded so the individual camera recording is not so important.
The gist of my question is " If the ax100 is set to record 4k but the record button is NOT pressed, what is the 1080p in-camera down-converted HDMI video like? Is it similar to what everyone is raving about sharper than straight shot 1080?

As long as the record button is not pressed, you'll get full 4K output from the HDMI.

This enables a visual check on the camera's capture, but won't support recording of a useable movie.
Never said it would. It's used to monitor, that's it.


I haven't seen answers to:

1) I assume the HDMI output is 8-bit.

2) Is it 420 or 422?

3) What is the output when shooting 30p? Some tvs don't accept 30p or 60p. At 1920x1080 they expect 60i.

4) What is the output when shooting 24p? Some tvs don't accept 24p (and add 3:2 pulldown) or 60p (with 3:2 pulldown added in the camera). At 1920x1080 they expect 60i with 3:2 pulldown.

5) Has anyone connected to a 4k tv?

1. I assume that too
2. The downmixed HD content is, as far as I know, 4:2:2
3. I seem to recall my plasma reporting 1080 60p
4. Not sure, I hate 24p so I couldn't tell you.

So, dump Apple: Vegas Pro, for example, has no trouble playing, editing or outputting XAVC on any Windows laptop. Almost all the troubles people have had with common video standards (e.g., AVCHD) and post to video forums have been people using Apple computers.

Amen to that. I wish I had a $1 for every 'incompatible' question I've seen asked regarding Apples. There are just so many more editing programs for the PC than the Apple and most don't have the issues I see Apples having.

Interesting, rolling shutter is normally more pronounced at faster shutter speeds. At lower speeds the motion blur tends to mask the skew, the faster the shutter the crisper the motion so the skew becomes more obvious.

Playing with more 24p tonight. I need to make a correction:

When shooting you are shooting 24p, you need to be careful with rolling shutter skew at "all" shutter speeds!

I don't normally shoot 24p on any camera I own. Just threw the AX100 into 24p tonight and shot a bit. Ehh...I would only use it in desperate low light situations. You get about a 3db noise advantage with 24p 1/24 shutter over 30 1/30 shutter.

Anybody wonder if 24 frame at 60Mbp/s givs a slight compression advantage over 30p? That's a 6 frame drop...20% improvement?? Prolly not because of Long GOP structure?

CT

So, dump Apple: Vegas Pro, for example, has no trouble playing, editing or outputting XAVC on any Windows laptop. Almost all the troubles people have had with common video standards (e.g., AVCHD) and post to video forums have been people using Apple computers.

You must be joking! First, I have Windows so I know why I never use it. Still not useable at 8.1. Truly a hated OS.

Second, I have Vegas so I know why I never use it. Were I on Windows I would use Edius because at least a few pros use it and it works in real-time. And, while every Tom, Dick, and Harry makes an NLE for Windows -- they are junk aimed at newbies who only want to spend $49.99 -- on sale at 29.99. If one is serious, it's Media Composer -- which I have on the Mac.

I've reviewed camcorders for decades and have never had a problem with any Apple product working with a camera's output. Also, professional magazines do not want one to write about Window's workflow because they know most post-houses use OS X. Apple owns the media creation business.

Also would never give-up ProRes. Nor the reliability of Apple hardware (#1) and the freedom from viruses.

As long as the record button is not pressed, you'll get full 4K output from the HDMI.

What if you want FHD?

Playing with more 24p tonight. I need to make a correction:

When shooting you are shooting 24p, you need to be careful with rolling shutter skew at "all" shutter speeds!

Anybody wonder if 24 frame at 60Mbp/s givs a slight compression advantage over 30p? That's a 6 frame drop...20% improvement?? Prolly not because of Long GOP structure?

CT

Shooting at 24fps, images are taken with longer intervals BETWEEN CAPTURES than when shooting at 30fps. So moving objects will have moved more. I suspect this is why you see more RS.

RS is tied to the shutter-speed system.

Again each image will be more different at 24p than at 30p so they will be harder to compress.

What if you want FHD?

Perhaps you might try setting the camera to the HD mode?

Interesting tidbit on bitrate.....

Shot many 30p 4K test clips today. Some were very slow pans, others had fairly fast zoom ins an outs and somewhat "rushed" pans.

I loaded them into "Bitrate Viewer" and plotted each files bitrate across the length of each.

Files show a very fairly constant average of 50-55 M/bps. However, some spikes did actually touch the 70+ Mbp/s mark! 60-65 Mbp/s peaks were not uncommon either. The absolute lowest rate I found was 48 Mbp/s.

Interesting. It's a fairly "dynamic" VBR codec.

CT

Edit: New tests shooting my Dogs in backyard - Spikes went as high at 81 Mbp/s with "routine" spikes in the high 60's and low 70's. The results are nice! I'm beginning to losing my fear of this CODEC. ;-)

You must be joking! First, I have Windows so I know why I never use it. Still not useable at 8.1. Truly a hated OS.



Say what? I've been using windows for years on a number of computers, and ever since Windows XP it's been solid as a rock. If you've had issues, don't blame windows, blame something in your computer's configuration.

Windows 8.1 is no different, solid as a rock. I've used Edius in all its iterations and recently, some of the 'lesser' programs for 4K, like Power Director 12 and Sony's free program that comes with the AX100. They're all very stable and, like all editing programs, have their pros and cons.

But I agree with Mark. As a frequent reader of many forums, it seems there are far more issues with compatibility from Mac users. I have nothing against Apple, but it's hard not to notice obvious patterns.

Thinking more about performance -- I really doubt Vegas plays XAVC UHD at a steady 30fps with filters and transitions.

In fact, short of FCP X on a MacPro, I doubt anything can play XAVC UHD at a steady 30fps.

And, that's the key! It's not importing or editing. That's no big deal to talk about. Even iMovie can do this.

The issue with EVERY NLE is perfect UHD playback -- especially with filters and transitions. The ONLY solution is to play/edit proxy files.

And, IF your NLE supports proxy video -- which yours may not -- your NLE will take time to convert XAVC UHD to a proxy. No way to avoid this. PC or Mac -- it will take time. Only the speed of the CPU matters.

So the wait has nothing to do with Apple as some have suggested. Media Composer under Windows will behave the same as under OS X. You will wait for XAVC to be transcoded to DNxHD.

FCP X is very different as it automatically makes proxy files. While this must take time, ONE CAN EDIT WHILE WAITING.

The problem I mentioned was with filters. It only occurs with those NOT written by Apple. REPEAT: there is no problem with Apple filters! Some non-Apple filters were never written/tested with 4X larger proxy files. These will get fixed.

So the 2 of 3 NLE's used at post houses, MC and FCP X, I have confirmed do work. I now must check Premiere -- which is the third NLE.

======================

UPDATE:

Premiere Pro CS6 is amazing. It simply imports XAVC UHD and when viewing is set at 1/4th resolution -- which looks fine on your computer monitor -- it plays just fine. I knew it was good for DSLR media, but it seems perfect for XAVC. This might be ideal for the AX100 if you can stand Premiere.


In iMovie, if you check Full-Optimize XAVC UHD will be transcoded to AIC UHD and after that editing is very good considering you are editing UHD fully in real-time as iMovie NEVER renders anything. You must, of course, wait for the transcode to finish.

So everything seems to be fine on all four OS X based NLEs. I must relearn Premiere I guess.


If you work with other NLE's, post your workflow and results.

Windows XP it's been solid as a rock.

Windows 8.1 is no different, solid as a rock.

I've used Edius in all its iterations and recently, some of the 'lesser' programs for 4K, like Power Director 12 and Sony's free program that comes with the AX100.

I have XP on one system and loved it. It was a great OS and folks continue to love it! But, you must have read the years of tirades by XP users against Vista, 7, 8, and it continues with MS still not getting things right with 8.1. (I have another system with Vista and it is a total pig.)

Typical stories: Download Windows 8.1 Update 1 Early, If You Dare; HP Bringing Back Windows 7 'By Popular Demand'; Start Menu Could Return to Windows in Spring 2014 -- That's probably wishful thinking; Windows 8 Support Will End in Two Years; Looks like the "Metro" apps will invade the desktop in the next Windows 8 update; Microsoft Pays Out $100,000 for Windows 8.1 Flaw. These are from a Tom's site dedicated to Windows. MS is now paying folks to leave XP.

It didn't used to be this bad. I've owned and used -- and built PCs -- but since XP something has gone wrong inside MS. Now they hope Windows 9 will make folks happy.

As far as folks posting problems -- I've spent the last few years focused on 4K and Digital Cinema. JVC released 4k OS X software that generated ProRes. All the deBayering software does the same. And, of course BM cameras shoot Apple's ProRes. Sony CineAlta have OS X applications. So in these worlds Apple is the most common computer.

And yes, 24fps is the only frame-rate used. :)

But, were BD and YouTube to offer 1080p60 -- and if Apple TV supported 1080p60, I would be very willing to give-up 4K. I don't think Apple says which YouTube stream Apple TV uses.

Another Apple bitch. Suddenly Safari does not provide the stream selector. Apple, simply says it uses the stream that's best for you! I think they want to prevent you from knowing iTunes doesn't support UHD. So I downloaded Chrome which still gives me the selector. I love Macs, but I really hate the way Apple treats you as an idiot. And, my Samsung Note 2 is so advanced over my wife's new iPhone.

I have Edius Pro 7 ( my main editor), Vegas Pro 12 and CS6( which I really do not use but comes with the Suite that I have mainly used for Photshop and AE ). I have not tried CS6 with either XAVC or XAVC-S but both Vegas 12 and Edius will play XAVC fine, XAVC-S needs to be edited with Vegas at Draft/half for reasonable frame rate and Edius will just play XAVC-S 60P with the buffer just hovering on 2 ( much like running multicam with 5 cameras in my case) with one colour filter setting. Placed in a 1920x1080 project ( my main use for 4k anyway) Edius will again just play with buffer at about 2 with occasional falter to playback. Quite usable for editing. Edius will generate a proxy automatically but I always have this turned off. I have converted to HQX which takes about 1 1/2 realtime on my system and then will run easily in realtime of course with a full resolution file. This what I did for HDV and AVCHD when they first came out and the NLE's of time could not manage native files in realtime. I expect with faster processors and improvements to the NLE's things will progress as before !!!!

My PC is an i7 3770K, 16G RAM, 6 HD of about 5T, GTX560 running WIN 7.

Ron Evans

Edit: I should point out that other than the XAVC files( which were from the PXW-Z100 ) I downloaded from the internet that play just fine, all the files I refer to are from my FDR-AX1 which are 60P 150Mbps files

Thinking more about performance -- I really doubt Vegas plays XAVC UHD at a steady 30fps with filters and transitions.

In fact, short of FCP X on a MacPro, I doubt anything can play XAVC UHD at a steady 30fps.



I guess you're not familiar with Edius Pro 7. That will play XAVC files at a steady 30fps.

I have XP on one system and loved it. It was a great OS and folks continue to love it! But, you must have read the years of tirades by XP users against Vista, 7, 8, and it continues with MS still not getting things right with 8.1. (I have another system with Vista and it is a total pig.)



Couldn't disagree with you more. I have had XP, Windows 7 and now Windows 8.1 on a number of machines and they are all rock solid. In the editing world we're looking for stability and since XP, we've gotten that. In all the machines I've had from XP on, I really think I could count the crashes from all the machines on one hand.

What people are largely bitching about with Windows 8 is that it behaves as 2 different OS. The home screen with the tiles and the desktop. But you can enable the OS to boot right in to the desktop if you don't want the tiles. Easy business.

People are never comfortable with a new OS, especially one that looks so different. I happen to like it, but that's me. However the major point is, and I'll repeat it, the OS is rock solid and has been ever since we got rid of Vista (and there I do agree with you, it was unstable and not fun).

BTW, what I do envy Mac users for is their monitors. I've yet to see a monitor that I can use for a PC that looks as good as the 27" IMac I watched the other day, as I tried my AX100 files. They were just stunningly beautiful.

Les, why would you not do this in post? If you have multiple cameras, regardless of how you have them white balanced, I would think you'd want to tweak this in the editing process anyway.

The typical color level, sharpness and contrast controls that were on some previous Sonys were pretty crude and certainly not how you'd want to 'balance' multiple cameras.

If all I'm doing is using the camera controls to get as close as I can to two cameras like a handicam, I'd just use manual white balance and then worry about it during editing.

As for the info display, no, it does not turn off unless you want it to. Your choice.

Theoretically maybe but in practice, I've found matching is often difficult between cameras. Worse across brands. You are always better off capturing it as close as possible then fine tune as needed in post. The best results are from tweaking the B camera to look as close as possible to the A camera. That's why.

Theoretically maybe but in practice, I've found matching is often difficult between cameras. Worse across brands. You are always better off capturing it as close as possible then fine tune as needed in post. The best results are from tweaking the B camera to look as close as possible to the A camera. That's why.

I would simply use MWB to get as close as possible. I can't see the color controls from past Sonys that give you 3 notches plus or minus as being such a help. I guess everyone has their own favorite approach. :)

I'd add that what constitutes "matching" can also be subjective - I'm reminded of a movie (can't recall the name) where the coloration changed to match the "mood" of the main character - so one scene would be "warm" (red/orange) the next "cool" (blue), and then some GREEN (for "unbalanced"?)...

When trying to match cameras between brands, there's usually still a bit of "signature" that's tough to get rid of... not saying impossible, but a lot of work at best. I've fiddled with it, seen others do it, and I can usually spot the "brand differences". Sony has a look I "like", but I won't complain about Canon or Panny... for the most part (there are specific things I "don't like", but they are minor/picky!).

I've had decent luck with staying "brand specific", even across lines like Handycam and Cybershot, the "look" seems to stay "close enough" that minor adjustments will do the trick. Variations in resolution quality are another matter, but aren't AS noticeable (thus my hopes that the AX & RX will match up "ok"). Most importantly, they both seem to have a "pop" to the images, so maybe it'll work until the RX10M2 shows up with 4k enabled!

EDIT:
I favor Ron's approach of using matched preset WB levels, or if you have the time to do the "one press" WB (which gets tricky!). That way if you're using same brand, the WB presets should be "fairly" consistent... I know the WB menus for the RX's can be pretty "deep", and I've never completely figured them out!

Did some audio tests today with a BeachTech adapter. I'm VERY impressed with the preamps that Sony gave the AX100.

Leaving audio levels on "auto" created very hot levels that will breath and pump under a heavy handed AGC circuit.This circuit tends to peg digital "0" pretty hard with a hard limiter at the top.

Moving it to "manual" appears to kill the AGC completely. It seems to be a "true" manual and not a "quasi" manual control. The top limiter seems to still be there, starting at maybe around -6b or so? (Great job Sony!)

This doesn't seem to be the typical "hissy" audio circuits that Sony has enjoyed placing on "Handycams" in the past. This one is VERY clean. It's actually surprisingly clean and very Beachtech friendly. (Awesome Job Sony!)

I'm pleasantly surprised that Sony allowed this for $2K. In years past, they have always wanted to degrade the bottom market, 1/8 inch audio inputs with tons of high noise floor. This was done to drive more users into XLR handle models.

This AX100 seems to be breaking ALLOT of the old, traditional Sony marketing rules!

Whoever in in charge today at Sony camera design,...I like their new thinking these days. (the RX10 was another "rule breaker" too)

Hmmm,...what would a possible the "pro" sister model add? (besides XLR top handle)

CT

Whoever in in charge today at Sony camera design,...I like their new thinking these days. (the RX10 was another "rule breaker" too)

CT

Cliff, they probably fired the guy by now! :)

At the risk of starting a "platform war", here's my take on Apple vs. M$... as someone who builds and repairs computers somewhat regularly...

If your computer is "unstable", there may be a hardware issue - make sure that's not the problem first. Then it can be a driver issue... update or roll back as needed. Of course there are poorly programmed programs that crash, either use a different one or report the bug until it gets fixed. Lots of crap gets "downloaded" if you're not careful.. Then there's the dreaded malware/virus, more prevalent on Windows because it's a bigger target... or perhaps worse yet, the many "anti" virus programs that slow a computer down ALL the time, almost as bad as the "disease"!

Plenty of reasons a computer may be "unstable", but all resolvable. I'm sure Apple has bugs and glitches too, but by maintaining a "closed ecosystem" (more on that shortly), they reduce exposure to that.


XP was a pretty decent OS, but of course is outdated. Vista was pretty universally hated, Win7 "fixed" most of the bugs and annoyances, and works pretty well. Win8... not sure what you can say about the Play-Skool interface, but the OS itself is actually faster than W7, and stable - W8.1 broke many things I had working on W8, took a while to sort them all out, I was not amused... and to make W8/8.1 more serviceable, installing "Start Menu 8" (free, downloadable) restores the familiar and usable W7 interface, while retaining the W8 speed underneath. I've forgotten the ugly "metro" interface entirely on a W8.1 Ultrabook with Start Menu 8!

Here's part of the problem, Windows is a reasonably "open" system, lots of hardware and software, and sometimes there are just incompatibilities, so Windows gets the blame for a 3rd party goof... Apple keeps their system relatively closed (no Flash for you because it crashes!), proprietary and most importantly priced accordingly... I don't want to pay 2-3x more for a fruit on my box/lid/cover, but it's fine if others do.


The WORST thing we have today is what I call "OTF" (On The Fly... or... Oh... That's F%#!"d) programming - with the web and apps, programmers no longer thoroughly test code, and all too often, users of today are "Alpha testing" (not even fit for "beta"). Unstable glitchy code is not necessarily the fault of the computer, or the OS, and there's PLENTY of it out there - "pretty" whiz bang interfaces that don't work well, or are slow, or don't work at all - see them every day anymore... but it's the state of "programming", like it or not. Bad code is bad code, AKA "garbage in, garbage out", something that has always been true.

Asking a laptop to do the job of a high powered desktop usually doesn't work out the way one hopes, I'm still fiddling with it, hoping maybe it can happen! But I know that at the same time, I'm spec'ing a new desktop so 4K will be comfortable...

Well, the guy at Sony who inspired the RX series seems to be pushing the envelope, maybe they're figuring out that going bankrupt is not a good option, and creativity is needed!

If you think about it, they HAVE to do something, the consumer market is dead/dying, at least when it comes to the traditional Cybershot and Handycam retail sales. IF there is a market left, it's "enthusiasts" who are far more particular about features, specs, and all the petty details (yeah, here's looking at US, guys...).

I don't want to spend big $$ on a "big" camera... but a smaller camera (with a relatively smaller price tag), with excellent image quality... yeah, if I can produce "professional" looking CONTENT with it, without breaking the bank, sure, I'm interested.


The same old "lines" that ALL the manufacturers were releasing, with little tiny incremental "upgrades", at least as far as the final image results, were not "selling" - no compelling "unique-ness"! Even GREAT cameras just were not that much more interesting to todays consumer to get them to sell. Last years (or the year before, or the year before) model does fine for most people!

Sony broke all the "molds" with the RX100, and it was good... The M2 is incrementally "better", and still good... the RX10 completely changes things as far as hybrid cameras go, and it's VERY good... The AX100 looks to do the same thing for the video camera... Sony is trying to find what WILL sell, as any company must do to survive!

IF I were the other manufacturers, sitting around rehashing the same thing they made 5 years ago, I'd be worried right now - Sony has created entirely NEW market niches with NO directly competing products, even as the old niches slowly dry up and disappear. The only "complaint" seems to be that these new higher performing cameras are "kinda expensive" (yes, yes they are... at least 'til you evaluate what you get in the package). But it certainly makes for good times for the end user!

Asking a laptop to do the job of a high powered desktop usually doesn't work out the way one hopes, I'm still fiddling with it, hoping maybe it can happen! But I know that at the same time, I'm spec'ing a new desktop so 4K will be comfortable...

What's interesting is that my little Mac Air with it's dual core i7 and HD5000 gpu on Windows 8.1 can play the 4k footage from my AX100 camera at full speed no problem, it looks buttery smooth. But *only* if I use Windows Media player to play back the video files. The problem is that most software has limited and/or poor gpu support so like using VLC, Media Player Classic, etc results in choppy playback because they have poor gpu support but Windows Media player fully supports the HD5000 gpu in my laptop hence playback works like a dream, my cpu use is only at 3% when playing the raw 4k files from the AX100 with WMP and they play perfect. Vegas Pro 12 alas seems to also have poor gpu support for the AX100 4k files so the cpu gets pegged at 100% and the result is choppy playback. I'm hoping Vegas 13 will have much better gpu support because the HD5000 gpu clearly can play back 4k video files at full speed as WMP shows, Vegas Pro just needs the proper gpu support.


You must be joking! First, I have Windows so I know why I never use it. Still not useable at 8.1. Truly a hated OS.

There's no point in getting into anecdotal comparisons. I mean I can post how when I unplug the thunderbolt to ethernet adapter on my wife's Macbook Pro that it crashes OSX and causes it to reboot whereas Windows 8.1 runs perfectly doing that on the same laptop, or I can say how driver support on OSX is terrible compared to Windows 8.1 from our experience on the same laptop, etc, etc, but what's the point. My experience with OSX is quite frankly that's it's limited and less stable than Windows 8.1 which works like a champ. Mercifully I'm not required to use Apple software for my business which is good because it would be exponentially harder to run my 5 websites on anything other than Vegas Pro since scripting support is an absolute must. But that's my experience, yours will vary.

I would simply use MWB to get as close as possible. I can't see the color controls from past Sonys that give you 3 notches plus or minus as being such a help. I guess everyone has their own favorite approach. :)

I agree. That's why I asked about the controls in the AX100. The 5DMII and GH3 had enough controls that I could match them across brand to a EX1r. So I'll ask again: Are there no controls on the color of the AX100?

I have to jump in here and make a simple observation...

Editing 4K video.. on ANY laptop? Seriously? A laptop is the wrong tool for editing video.
Sure, go ahead.. tell us which apps and on which OS work and don't work... but if you are editing 4K video, it should be on a fast workstation with a 30" screen.

I could go on and on about what makes a good workstation... SSD drives, tons or RAM, etc.

But the GPU topic certainly is very important. Maybe some are not aware, but on the latest OS X — there is a new feature that allows apps to take advantage of multiple GPUs. That means the app needs to be written specifically to take advantage of multiple GPUs. The first two apps are Final Cut Pro and Motion.

Jump ahead to the point... there have been many bench tests now available to show even 2 medium quality video cards, like the ATI 5770 (old cards!) will give really good results in Final Cut Pro. By the way, you need a special benchmark app that actually "sees" that you have 2 video cards installed for benchmark tests, there is a testing app called "BruceX Test.xml" Google it, it is found on a popular Final Cut Pro users site...

I don't see Sony Vegas or even Avid moving in this direction yet, although Adobe Premiere has announced they are moving from Nvidia optimized code to the faster OpenCL code on the AMD (ATI) video cards.. and will also make use of seeing dual video cards.

Laptop users please note.. you can't put 2 video cards in a laptop!

The limit is not just 2 cards either... Final Cut Pro and Motion will combine as many cards as you throw at it. It combines the GPUs of all the cards. The limit has been on the motherboards, as Mac Pros only have two 16X PCIe slots.

I see that Sonnet has just announced a 4U rack unit for the newest MacPro... which allows you to ADD PCI slots! This means you can add even more GPU power to a stock MacPro, yes the garbage can model with the "no PCI slots".

If you want to work in real-time for 4K video... it takes a full-blown workstation with multiple video cards. It's expensive. So are lenses.

Someone mentioned that Macs are 2-3 times more costly than the same PC... not true. Get facts correct. Macs tend to be only about 10% more expensive with the exact same motherboards and exact RAM and video card configurations. So for 10% more cost, you can run Windows and OS X smoothly on a Mac. You only get Windows on a PC. There is a Hakintosh OS where you can run Mac apps on a PC, but unless you like to rebuild your system once a month... it's not worth the time in a working environment.

For me, Final Cut Pro is the only game in town for editing. And I like DaVinci Resolve for color grading. So it is a full blow Mac workstation for me. I have been waiting now 2 months for these Sony AX100s to come out... about to purchase 2 of them. I consider them "cheap" B cameras.. I want to see how far I can push them, especially in grading. My first step into 4K files, and the new MacPro is just another expensive I will need to spend to make it all work.

And my last comment... my workflow has previously been to send HDMI signal and record external to SSD to ProRes. Then I just open all files in Final Cut Pro. But I see with these Sony cams, the HDMI out is not useable.. but I am still going to transcode all my 4K footage to ProRes before editing. I will have to wait until Sony comes out with the "pro" HDMI features on the next cam.

My laptop is a Asus G750J.

i7 Haswell
2 1tb WD Black drives in Raid 0 config
16 gigs of RAM
Nvidia GTX 770
Sony Vegas 12

I thought for sure that I could only edit 4K on my desktop. I was pleasantly wrong! For some crazy reason that I still don't understand, the AX100 Long GOP has been fairly easy! It's nowhere the pain I expected it to be.

Vegas 12, I'm told, doesn't even really support the GTX 770 yet. It's offloading the work to the CPU?

No, it's not as smooth as XDCAM MPEG 2. However, all I can say is that it's much, MUCH better than I expected and certainly workable.

CT

I agree. That's why I asked about the controls in the AX100. The 5DMII and GH3 had enough controls that I could match them across brand to a EX1r. So I'll ask again: Are there no controls on the color of the AX100?

There is a cinematone profile that raises color level and changes the gamma a bit as well as presenting a slightly warmer color rendition.

But if you're looking for a 3 click up or down on color level, no, you won't find it on the AX100. I thought that was clear.

There are, of course, the traditional AWB, MWB, indoor, outdoor and fluorescent presets.

You can read the online manual if you'd like to know other details about the camera.

Editing 4K video.. on ANY laptop? Seriously? A laptop is the wrong tool for editing video.
Sure, go ahead.. tell us which apps and on which OS work and don't work... but if you are editing 4K video, it should be on a fast workstation with a 30" screen.

I connect my laptop to a 30" screen when I'm working from home, and the laptop lets me disconnect and work anywhere which to me in invaluable. I have a desktop as well that does all my rendering overnight, but for general video work I can't be chained to a desk, I need to be able to work wherever.


If you want to work in real-time for 4K video... it takes a full-blown workstation with multiple video cards. It's expensive.

Nah not really, there's enough gflops and hardware h264 decoding support in many gpu's that they can handle 4k video easily. Like my hd5000 gpu example, that's a very basic ~700 gflops gpu and it can play 4k raw files from my AX100 with ease. The current limitations are on the software side, not the hardware side unless you are stacking multiple 4k streams om top of each other which I'll admit I never do.


For me, Final Cut Pro is the only game in town for editing.

Everyone's mileage will vary. For me proxy files are a no go firstly because it costs me more time, and secondly because it would increase my archiving dramatically as I have to revisit old footage sometimes which means I would have to keep all original source and the proxy files. That kills off any video editor that requires proxy files to work, I'll never touch them. Scripting is 100% required for me as well, that alone saves me countless hours as I've written code to automate all sorts of tasks that I regularly do. I know many other people that run websites that have no idea how I run 5 (soon to be 7) websites all on my own with no help. They all have Mac's and use other editors other than Vegas Pro, so they don't realize how much extra work they are hurting themselves with compared to me that does everything with ease on Vegas Pro. I keep that info a secret, but they wouldn't believe me if I told them anyways as many just don't see Windows as a viable video editing platform, which blows my mind but whatever. Ultimately I'd consider other video editing programs, but with Vegas Pro I have not needed proxy files since 2005 when I started using it, and it's scripting is simply too powerful and useful for me to ever forgo it. It's not for trying, I did try Premiere Pro and estimated that it took me 12x longer to run my business with that app compared to Vegas Pro. But that's me and my needs, everyone's needs will vary.


My laptop is a Asus G750J.

i7 Haswell
2 1tb WD Black drives in Raid 0 config
16 gigs of RAM
Nvidia GTX 770
Sony Vegas 12

I thought for sure that I could only edit 4K on my desktop. I was pleasantly wrong! For some crazy reason that I still don't understand, the AX100 Long GOP has been fairly easy! It's nowhere the pain I expected it to be.

Vegas 12, I'm told, doesn't even really support the GTX 770 yet. It's offloading the work to the CPU?

No, it's not as smooth as XDCAM MPEG 2. However, all I can say is that it's much, MUCH better than I expected and certainly workable.

CT

Do you mean it has a 770m gpu? I am thinking of switching to a different ultrabook, hopefully one with a Maxwell based 860m gpu. If your 770m can handle 4k in Vegas Pro then the 860m should be able to as well.

I have to jump in here and make a simple observation...

Editing 4K video.. on ANY laptop? Seriously? A laptop is the wrong tool for editing video.
Sure, go ahead.. tell us which apps and on which OS work and don't work... but if you are editing 4K video, it should be on a fast workstation with a 30" screen.

Yes, seriously. As I posted, Premiere Pro works in real-time directly with 4K XAVC. With Mavericks the Intel GPU becomes supported by OpenCL which may make both FCP X and Premiere faster.

FCP X edits in real-time with ProRes proxy. Yes, it takes time to background convert XAVC to proxy, but one can begin editing right away. The conversion occurs in the background.

Really can't ask for more than that. So what's the need for a monster workstation? I have a loaded MB Air with i7 and SSD. I have edited all over the world. FCP X uploads directly to YouTube and Vimeo -- so all I need to "distribute" is a good ISP. The upload of 4K media limitation is the speed of the ISP -- and a workstation won't help that.

Where a workstation would help is with iMovie and Media Composer. Both will play XAVC UHD, but very slowly. So one must wait for a transcode and a super fast CPU would help this. Once transcoded, however, I can use both to edit 4k in real-time on my laptop.

But, even if you have a MacPro with dual GPUs -- neither NLE can use them. In fact Media Composer really doesn't use the GPU much.

So the only place where a workstation would be of benefit is with iMovie and Media Composer. For me the obvious choice is to let the transcoding occur during the night and have a 3# computer.

But, if I were pressed for time, I have the choice of Premiere and FCP X. Both are good NLEs. FCP X using the GPU for all FX gives it an advantage for FX heavy work.

So I find it odd that you say go ahead and post what works, but then say ignore these data and believe your opinion on what one needs. I can't imagine ever again sitting at a desk to use a computer. However, when the next rMBP 13" is released I might upgrade as it is only a half-pound heavier.

PS: I use the Air for grading as well. I use AE and LightPost. But, will soon have Resolve running -- not that I really need it.

But, you are right about the tiny cost difference between Mac and PC -- considering that there are no sexy PCs. hp and Dell are doing so badly in PC sales they just don't bother to try.

But, you are right about the tiny cost difference between Mac and PC -- considering that there are no sexy PCs. hp and Dell are doing so badly in PC sales they just don't bother to try.

There are some, like this one:

The New Razer Blade Ultra-Thin Gaming Laptop - 14" Notebook Display (http://www.razerzone.com/gaming-systems/razer-blade)

It's same size and weight as a Macbook Pro but with a higher res 3200x1800 display, better 870m gpu, and touchscreen. There's also this one if you don't need such high resolution:

http://dragonarmy.msi.com/home/weapons/GS70-Stealth-Pro

It supports three ssd's in a very thin case so you can have redundant raid in your ultrabook along with an 870m gpu, or go for speed with 1500MB/sec raid 0.