@ Ken -

Yep, the theory would "hold water" for ALL resolutions and frame rates short of ultra high frame rates, but would be "worse" with lower frame rates, and at varying parts of a given image, due to the specific image being captured (and perhaps be NON-existant in many scenarios). BUT, as we've touched upon, "high contrast" and movement are where a problem "might" arise more noticeably, and with highly detailed images, there are perhaps more opportunities. Good reason to try for shallow DoF where you can, and be prepared to watch for problematic parts of a scene (always been a problem, like that checkered shirt I mentioned a couple posts ago!).

Dealing with movement artfully has ALWAYS been a problem, no reason for 4K images to be exempt, and not a particular surprise to see "issues" here or there. Figure out where it's a problem and deal with it as a camera OPERATOR.

From the get go, I presumed 30p won't work for EVERYTHING, and looked on the 60Mbps 1080 XAVC S as a practical workaround, nice to have the option. If I'm shooting fast action, a couple pokes at the screen, I have a capable camera for THAT, more capable than anything else I've got, due to the higher bitrate!

With the last major "bug" in the new computer build squished, I need to go do a few things, like figure out what "my button" in the menus refers to, and maybe shoot some test footage to play with in edit! The AX100 certainly feels solid and good in the hand, well balanced, nice handstrap, lots of buttons to fiddle with to make adjustments, will be a good complement to the RX10 and RX100 as a "camera system".


As far as "brand agnostic", I'll admit to checking out all the options, but I do appreciate it when Sony "gets it right" and I don't have to go buying a whole bunch of new accessories! I don't think I'd think twice about a GH4 IF I had the investment in the GH system, even if it's got some "issues". NO camera is "perfect", but I've been reasonably happy with what Sony produces, though I've owned Panasonic and Canon, and I'm really looking forward to trying the new "Schnookie X10,000" because the number is just so HUGE <wink>!

@ Dave

So we now have a waiting list of 2 for the Schnookie X10,000. Can't wait for the release date!

@Adriano -

Just plugged an AX100 into two TV's one a 4K model, one a 1080 HDTV - both displayed perfectly good images, even in poor light (OK, some noise due to low light, but still, as good or better than my PJ7xx series camera). Actually at the moment, I'm pretty impressed with both the image and the low light performance, wow...

You have developed a truly bizzare pattern...


Dave, as soon as possible I will sell my Ax100 and you will not read my bizzarre post anymore. ;)

It could be shutter speed with some folks, but I shoot at 24p at 1/48th-1/50th. Exactly correct.

You may see it with the GH4 on some samples because it has a Sharpness control and so you never know what it has been set at. Actually, you can see it on HD content when it's been over-sharpened or rescaled without first being passed through an anti-aliasing filter.

It really doesn't matter if one calls it moire, because moire is simply a specific type of aliasing that occurs on closely spaced horizontal (typically) spaced lines.

But, this is well understood and there is no reason for me to explain it here.

What's good is that this thread has now switched from "I see nothing senior, nada" to "I see it but it doesn't matter to me." For some it may be fine to buy and use a 4K camera that can create aliasing even though other 4K cameras do not -- and this issue is not a problem with the HD cameras we own.

But, there are those of us who will not buy a camera that can create artifacts when others view their video. Hell, I won't watch my video with aliasing. We won't because there is no need to! There are other 4K cameras that have an industry wide professional recognition and there will be many more lower-cost consumer cameras! What's the rush to 4K when there are truly great HD cameras at half the price?

But that's your choice--at least everyone now knows what their choice involves. Good luck. Over and out.


All I can say is the AX100 puts out a hell of allot of resolution. It's actually quite shocking to even see how good the 1080 down sampled video looks.

Every single person I have showed my AX100 footage to have all said: "WOW!" I work for one of the largest media companies in the world. I have shown this footage to many of our employees and even our broadcast engineers. The one thought they all have in common is this "Wow,..that video came form THAT camera?....holy crap, thats amazing"

I have spent about 1 hour with the GH4 and I like it. Interchangeable lenses and a great internal codec are really sweet. But honestly, overall, the AX100 impresses me even more. The image "pops" like crazy and shooting with is just downright fun.

I shoot with my EX1r, Fs100, NX70 and RX10. Yes, the AX100 will not "replace" any of them but it does have it's own "niche" in my collection.

All I can say is that I am very very happy with the AX100 and it's certainly knocking people's socks off left and right all over the place.

Now for you Steve? Based on your writings, I strongly suspect that the AX100 really might not be the camera for you. That's too bad. But for Sony to make a camera that pleases 99% of the people I talk too? I'd say they have a home run on their hands!

There are very few 4K offerings for the $2000ish price point. But I can definitely say that the AX100 is ALLOT of camcorder for the price, It's got full manual control, good dynamic range, OK codec and crazy amounts resolution. It covers allot of functional "check boxes" for me. It's easy to carry around and a great "run and gunner".

CT

^ And that's the point. The video is amazingly good, even forgetting the price point. There is no HD camera that can even come close. Like you, I've yet to meet anyone I've shown my videos too that was less than amazed. Nobody but nobody pointed to any artifacts and this includes 65" UHD TVs.

When one person stands nearly alone, with an opinion that runs totally contrary to what everyone else is seeing (including broadcast engineers!), there's usually something that can explain why. ;)

I've even played my videos at Apple and Best Buy stores and have never failed to get a crowd gathered asking 'what camera made that video?'. The BB guys actually prefer it to the demo loops that play endlessly at their Magnolia centers.

All I can say is the AX100 puts out a hell of allot of resolution.

You are right. I made a test: if I put my HDTV the sharpnes=0 (zero) I see a few clips with flickering, it could be I found the solution ... but with sharpness=0 I watch a weak video with so little sharpens. It is better I shot in HD directly because I watch a better video.

You have developed a truly bizzare pattern...I don't think this is a "language" issue any longer, and it borders on "trolling". EVERY issue you've attacked the camera on has been either baseless or apparently unique to... YOU.


Deja vu, anyone? This pattern has been going on for a long time, on a variety of forums, with a variety of cameras, by this poster, who has a long history of this kind of complaint. It's always the camera's fault when someone refuses to read the manual, learn how to properly operate the gear, provide helpful data, or perform simple tests to determine the source of the problem. Steve's cavlier dismissal of playing directly from the cam to a decent monitor in the proper mode, because you can't expect your clients to do this, is completely inappropriate, no disrespect intended. You perform this test as an experiment to find out if it is indeed the cam, not because you expect all future viewers to do this.

If the raw video is perfect in this test, then it is up to you do make sure it remains so for your clients. But you can't blame the cam if you fail to handle the video properly.

The poster may in fact be a very nice guy and a brilliant artist, but this endless series of threads complaining that Sony has promised something they can't deliver and has cheated him out of his money and oh why did I buy this awful camera that doesn't do what they promised, is getting tiresome.

Ken's video looked great. Steve's, less so. But as there are a million links in the chain between camera original and what we download on a variety of viewing devices, any flaws I saw, or thought I saw, I'd never once think of blaming the camera. That would be the last thing on my list. I always assume it is the fault of something in the chain of getting the video from the Net (or the shooter's editing PC) to my eyes. And so far I have never been wrong. On the rare occasion when the video itself is bad, it's because I screwed up some settings somewhere and a simple quick dip into the manual usually resolves the problem.

Dave has, as usual, nailed it. This is like buying a Ferrari and complaining because it won't start when you fill the tank with apple juice.

With all due respect to all involved, my sig line has never been more apt.

@Adriano -

I have set the sharpness to "0" on my Seiki 4K "monitor", everything is still plenty sharp... along with turning the backlight and color WAY down to get it it where it can be somewhat calibrated. Prior to that, I didn't think it looked very good, and I could have gotten a nice tan from sitting at monitor distances.

Sometimes you have to fiddle with things to get the best results... and 4K is a new thing, as I've said, life on the bleeding edge has it's moments! It may be a bit before everything "works" perfectly right out of the box, meanwhilst you must be patient, troubleshoot and adjust as needed.

I don't know what other camera you would find that would be "better", other than just picking up whichever HD camera you think you want (there's NOTHING wrong with that option, it will have a different set of quirks and faults, and I'm guessing the 60Mbps 60P from the AX would blow it away....), and frankly it sounds like it may be some of your OTHER gear that needs updating/adjusting.

I bit the bullet and re-cored my desktop (CPU/Motherboard/RAM to better handle video), plus went cheap on the 4K monitor (otherwise it was a non starter budget wise). Already gotten a lot of file maintenance done while stabilizing the machine, just loving the huge desktop space... years of video, pics, and docs organized in a few days... so even if it's not "top of the line", it's already paying off on the investment, even with the frustration of a new build! Just hooking the AX100 up to the HDMI, it looked stunningly good, can't wait to get shooting more tests...

I have set the sharpness to "0" on my Seiki 4K "monitor", everything is still plenty sharp... along with turning the backlight and color WAY down to get it it where it can be somewhat calibrated.

Just hooking the AX100 up to the HDMI, it looked stunningly good, can't wait to get shooting more tests...

I hope you can make some tests. I'd like to know if you get a better watching the 4K video with TV sharpness = "0" , with turning the backlight and color WAY down or if you get a better watching shoting XVAC S HD directly and editing those clips and exporting in 1920x1080.
I still did not any test but I think a HD video looks better than a 4K video with all those TV presets. I hope I make a mistake.

Adriano, there is very obviously something wrong with your setup. Given the age of your HDTV, that might be the weak link.

But logically you have to realize when so many experienced users, on multiple forums, see nothing like what you report, the problem is in your system. No question.

Your request to Dave to try to turn down his display's backlight and color, make little sense when you're talking about 2 totally different displays from different companies in different set ups. I watch my edited 4K video on my HDTV and do absolutely nothing to the settings differently, other than one minor change, than I do for other material I watch.

That minor change is something I've mentioned several times, the engaging of the frame rate doubler in my HDTV. The sole purpose for this is to smooth out the motion in 30p video. The result is spectacular video that far exceeds anything I've ever shot with an HD camera. To compare this to VHS only demonstrates how horribly wrong something in your setup is.

You don't really seem willing to track down your issue or acknowledge that something in your system may be too old or poorly equipped to handle the 4K>HD down-conversions. But blaming the camera is just silly, it really is.

The many questions you asked prior to getting the camera showed how little research you were willing to do. Members here got frustrated with you because the answers to almost all your questions were so easily found in existing information, like the AX100 manuals.

At some point, if you're really serious about this stuff, you have to make some effort on your own to find these issues. Thus far you just dismiss it as the camera's fault. We can't help you with that kind of attitude. If don't want to make the effort, then I strongly recommend you return the camera, you're simply not ready for 4K. There's nothing wrong with that.

Deja vu, anyone? This pattern has been going on for a long time, on a variety of forums, with a variety of cameras, by this poster, who has a long history of this kind of complaint. It's always the camera's fault when someone refuses to read the manual, learn how to properly operate the gear, provide helpful data, or perform simple tests to determine the source of the problem. Steve's cavlier dismissal of playing directly from the cam to a decent monitor in the proper mode, because you can't expect your clients to do this, is completely inappropriate, no disrespect intended. You perform this test as an experiment to find out if it is indeed the cam, not because you expect all future viewers to do this.

If the raw video is perfect in this test, then it is up to you do make sure it remains so for your clients. But you can't blame the cam if you fail to handle the video properly.

I didn't realize there was a past history with this poster. Interesting.


Ken's video looked great. Steve's, less so.

Thanks Adam, much appreciated.

You are right. I made a test: if I put my HDTV the sharpnes=0 (zero) I see a few clips with flickering, it could be I found the solution ... but with sharpness=0 I watch a weak video with so little sharpens. It is better I shot in HD directly because I watch a better video.

Adriano I'll buy your camcorder for 500 Euro (I'm getting the risk that your camcorder is damaged)

Ugo

As I said, when I played back Adriano's clips without any scaling they looked fine. Even Adriano started off by saying the clips looked fine before encoding and that it was only after encoding that there was an issue. But Steve appears to have ignored that bit.

@Ken -

Adriano was referring to the setting adjustments I had to make to my jerry-rigged 4k "monitor", which I used to try to make him realize that "out of the box" settings may or may not work (and won't even touch on how older stuff may not work at all...). And I'm still not 100% satisfied with my colors, they are "close", but seem a little "off" somehow! The little 21" Samsung looks quite different as well, despite both being "calibrated"!

I'll be the first to admit my "monitor" is a "redneck special solution" to 4K display! But it boiled down to a computer that was overdue for upgrade, a desire to be "4K capable", and minimal budget! Discovering the Seiki 39" TV under $500 seemed like a way to pull off a cheap solution without totally breaking the bank (piggy is bandaged up, and will recover), and I picked up a used one WELL under that price... you can't expect TOO much for that price, it's bare bones... but it's working out fairly well!

That said, I'd read about the backlight, and it was "100%", I adjusted down to about 30-35... sharpness seems to look best at "0", nothing became fuzzy when I adjusted it or anything, so I don't even know if that control works! It did seem to look a little bit "smoother", but nothing spectacular (or horrific). Color was WAY over cranked (and may still be a bit, it's touchy). I couldn't even calibrate it at factory settings, again 30-35% seems to be getting close to the mark.

I only mentioned this to try to wake Adriano up to the facts - sometimes you have to be willing to put some time and effort in to find the "right" settings, configurations, techniques, etc. Simply dismissing bad results as a problem with a device that most everyone else is getting GOOD results from is silly!!

I did many tests. I always get flickering even if I use antiflicker filter or blur filter at 100%. Only if I put HDTV sharpening = 0 (zero) and antiflicker filter on the clips I get enough good video with less flickering.
I inform you I always shot where there is grass and trees, therefore my shot environment is greeen. It is a bad beast. ;)

I did many tests. I always get flickering even if I use antiflicker filter or blur filter at 100%. Only if I put HDTV sharpening = 0 (zero) and antiflicker filter on the clips I get enough good video with less flickering.
I inform you I always shot where there is grass and trees, therefore my shot environment is greeen. It is a bad beast. ;)

You are not the only one that shoots scenes with plenty of grass and trees. We don't get what you say you're getting. It's not the camera, it's not the scene, it's something in your signal chain whether it be the editing process or your TV. We can only repeat this so many ways.

I have been shooting some weddings now with my rx10 (mainly covering the photoshoot with it) and I just saw the excellent review from Darren about the ax100, (see below) and the more I see about what the camera outputs and what functionality it has the more I feel the rx10 is not the right camera for me. I only wished it was not that much more expensive (rx10 is 1200 euro, ax100 is 2000 euro around these parts)

The rx10 is a great hybrid camera that gives me many manual controls for run and gun situations where I wouldn't dare to use my gh3 for, and also the gh4, but it has some quirks that have become very annoying. The zoomspeed is almost unusable for me, hate it as much as my ex, I tried to get over it thinking that I have a choice of several focal lengths at a constant f-stop without changing a lens but boy, it's slower then a snail, often when you start to zoom during record it can take a second before things even start to get moving and then it crawls ahead. As a solo shooter I just need a much faster zoomspeed then this, I missed some shots because of it and that's the last thing I need.

I also don't like it's stabilization, I didn't noticed at first until I saw my images on a big screen, even in active mode I need to apply post stabilization because there are "jitters" in the image when I zoom in too much and shoot handheld, so I loose resolution with the active mode + the image gets another resolution hit if I apply post stabilization, luckily it's a sharp image to begin with so I still manage to match it somehow with my other camera's.

Then there is still that recording limit so it's still not usable to record 1 to 2 hour sessions, like a ceremony or a dance recital.

The ax100 is a lot like my cx730 and with the exception that it doesn't have a variable zoomspeed (I can do very slow to very fast zooms and varying in speed with my cx730) but it seems to have a much more usable zoomspeed compared to the rx10 + can easily be used in a run and gun situation situation, it improves in many ways over my cx730 and there are a lot of videos already out there showing how sharp 1080p it can deliver. It actually is too sharp to match with my other camera's so that is a issue to consider.

Compared to my rx10 I get a sharper 1080p image, about the same shallow dof but with superior handling and functionality + it is a much more versatile camera, there is no recording limit, it has a parfocal(!) lens so can be used to shoot dancerecitals and from what I have seen matches the rx10 low light sensitivity though I have not seen side by side tests.

My rx10 slowly begins to feel like excess weight in my gearbag and the camera is holding me back sometimes so I might eventually sell it, I only find the ax100 a bit too expensive, especially since I still have my 2 handicam style cx730's to use when the going gets though.

Too many choices...:) I just saw the gh3 is being sold for 880 euro while the gh4 is going for 1500 euro, mm, maybe a second gh3 with a 35-100mm to replace my g6, sell the rx10 and wait for the ax100 to come down in price and buy it next year. :)

Full review of the Sony AX100 4k camera - Sharp & pretty, but with some considerable considerations on Vimeo

Adriano I'll buy your camcorder for 500 Euro (I'm getting the risk that your camcorder is damaged)

Ugo

Ugo, with all the problems he has, that's a very reasonable offer! ;)

To show how easily one can blame a piece of equipment or software when the actual problem could be "OE" (operator error), here's a classic case...and yes, I plead guilty.

I was ready to shelve my favorite editing program that I've used for years, Edius Pro, for 4K editing. This was based on some blurring of fine details I was seeing when objects were in motion. Detail was perfect when these objects were static, but as soon as the objects were in motion, the blurring occurred. I was losing some of that 4K 'goodness'.

I tried two other editing programs and I got perfect renders that were visually lossless. So it must be Edius, right? Wrong. I sat there scratching my head as to why my editor of choice had suddenly let me down. So I dug into the settings and found I had a slight mismatch in frame rate. The AX100 records at 29.97fps and unbeknownst to me, the project had mistakenly been set up as 30fps. Pretty close, shouldn't cause much of an issue? Nope, big issue.

Once I correctly set the project to 29.97 and the export to the same frame rate, the motion became razor sharp as it was in the other two editing programs. What a relief! So here I was condemning Edius, when in fact it was my bush league error that caused it.

How careful we must be when pointing the finger!! :)

Update on the Lanc situation. I picked up the two adapter cables I needed to connect my Canon ZR-2000 to the AX100.
Coming out of the camera's MULTI connector, I plugged in the Sony VMC-AVM1, which is the flat-style MULTI plug on the camera end, and a D-shaped jack on the other end. Next, I connected the second adapter cable, A-3AV. This adapter cable has the D-shaped plug on one end and the 2.5mm jack on the other. Total length is about 12 inches. With these, I was able to use my Canon remote, which has a 2.5mm plug.
Functions of the remote which worked: Record stop/start, Display, Zoom, both variable and stepped modes. In variable mode, some of the end-to-end zoom times I got were 5, 6, 11, 13, 16, 18. There are 16 selectable zoom speeds on the dial and here's how those worked: 1-2 = 21 sec, 3-4 = 15 sec, 5-6 = 11 sec, 7-8 = 8 sec, 9-10= 5.5 sec, 11-16 = 5 sec.

Functions that did not work: Magnify, AE Shift, Iris, Manual A/F switch, Push to Focus, manual focus adjustment dial, Standby, Peaking.

I also got a Sony remote, model RM-AV2. It's very small. The zoom lever has two speeds as far as I can tell. In fact, the zoom lever is much smaller than the one on the camera. It has a D-shaped plug, so I can use it with just the VMC-AVM1 adapter cable. You can turn the power off the camera with this remote, start/stop recording, zoom and also a photo button which reacts the same as the one on the camera.

Really liking this 4K for $2K camera.

Mark

@Ken -

One of the travails of my "monitor" is that the Intel graphics likes to switch to "29p/Hz" (no doubt as a flicker reduction measure) under certain conditions.... and the monitor is adamant about 30p/Hz, so it will begin to flash on and off randomly while trying to sync... took a while to sort THAT one out, it's really fun trying to return to 30 while the screen randomly flashes on and off! Seems to be a bug in the Intel driver when the computer goes into and comes out of sleep mode... messy, but now I let the TV turn off, wake the computer, then turn the monitor back on, and let it reacquire the monitor, somehow that keeps the correct 30p...

"Tales From the Bleeding Edge"

@Noa -

I know you've struggled with the RX10 zoom, I'll try to do some comparisons, but the AX100 is also pretty slow, but can be "crashed" - it has a very delicate zoom that almost feels like it has multiple speeds, got to play with it a bit today. Was meaning to take the RX10 out to compare, but didn't get to it.

Low light offhand looks as good or better when in low lux mode on the AX100, interestingly 30p seems cleaner, than the 1080 60p from what I see on the LCD.

Perhaps it's because I like to shoot stills, the RX10 still feels more natural to me, the AX100 is noticeably bigger. I've got to see if I can repro those micro vibrations - haven't noticed it specifically, but the wind around here blows a lot, and I sort of expect vibration from that!




I shot a few short clips today to test motion, haven't had the chance to download them and "process", but one thing I noticed immediately - if you pan using the VF, there's a LOT of stutter evident, you can definitely "see" the 30p. I DIDN'T see it on the LCD... so the "viewing device" seems to make a difference! Switched back and forth between 4K/30p and 1080/60p, the VF stutter disappeared. Not a deal killer, it actually forced me to maintain proper slow moves, but it'd give one a headache quick if you wave it like you just don't care!

Also discovered that if you shoot in different modes, you also have to play clips back with the camera in those modes... a tad inconvenient! At first I couldn't figure out where my clips went!

I'm hoping the "worst case" clips (of a series of small flags on a rope in our typical "stiff breeze") that I shot to test motion will answer my questions on 30p... if I find anything useful I'll try to share. Thus far, I do feel that fast motion and 30p may not be a super happy mix... but again not a deal killer, as I don't always shoot high motion.

General impression was that the AX100 feels quite good to shoot with, isn't overly heavy, and what I could see on the LCD looked very good. Next step, importing, experimenting with editing options, and seeing how it displays on the new computer!

Dave did you try a good Lanc remote. My Manfrotto remote will get a nice smooth zoom from my CX700 for example that is impossible to achieve with the on camera zoom controller. The NX30U is better but the zoom remote is still a lot better. I would find it strange if the AX100 did not have variable zoom like all the other Sony's.

Ron Evans

@Ken -

One of the travails of my "monitor" is that the Intel graphics likes to switch to "29p/Hz" (no doubt as a flicker reduction measure) under certain conditions.... and the monitor is adamant about 30p/Hz, so it will begin to flash on and off randomly while trying to sync... took a while to sort THAT one out, it's really fun trying to return to 30 while the screen randomly flashes on and off! Seems to be a bug in the Intel driver when the computer goes into and comes out of sleep mode... messy, but now I let the TV turn off, wake the computer, then turn the monitor back on, and let it reacquire the monitor, somehow that keeps the correct 30p...

"Tales From the Bleeding Edge"



Yes, 'trailblazers' we are. ;)

Interestingly, I too have had an occasional switch to 29hz on the onboard Intel graphics. However unlike your scenario, it goes unnoticed since my Samsung monitor seems to be OK with 29hz too and I don't get that flashing. I change it back to 30hz when, for whatever reason, I'm in the graphics section, but I don't see a difference.

Ron -

I've got the RMAV2, two speed Sony remote, works fine. haven't had the chance to try to dig up any other old 2.5mm ones, I think there's a variable speed cheap-o buried in the equipment closet somewhere. The rocker is actually not bad, but takes a gentle touch - still feels "slow" compared to say the PJ760, but overall it's good.

Ken -
Yes, there's a driver issue with 30p... it shouldn't change from what you set (30p) to 29p just because it feels like it - I noticed the Samsung keeps going from 60 to 59 as well... but it isn't as picky about the sync signal. See below....


Adriano -

If it makes you feel "better", I played back the clips I shot yesterday with Sony's "play memories home" - which has sometimes been problematic in the past for video for me... results were "interesting" - on the Seiki, as I turned up sharpness, the video became rougher, and yes, the grass flickered like a cheap neon sign, among other bad effects.... 0 sharpness still looked very sharp and crisp, with NO flicker, and frankly as eye poppingly GOOD as you could ask for!! Sharpness will now be left on 0! SO, we have ONE element reproduced, on a "cheap" 4K TV being used as a monitor - I think adding any sharpness to an already sharp picture is BAD? Your old TV may be ruining the AX100 output...

30P is really 30 super sharp STILLS per second, every pause showed a freeze frame of the scene, with no visible blurring I could notice (recall our working theory about what might cause certain "motion artifacts"). Looked great, reasonably smooth, with a little bit of stutter with fast motion, probably because of the above. Strangely, 60p clips showed some motion blur when paused... hmmm. 1080 clips are definitely softer looking in comparison to the 4K. Tolerable, but a bit hard to accept after looking at the 4K... tradeoff of motion smoothness for sharpness... hmmm...

Here's where it gets "interesting" - moving the window over to the 1080 Samsung.... 30p exhibited much more "jerky" motion, pretty much as I observed in the AX100 viewfinder... 1080 clips looked smoother. 4K still looked sharper.


SO, to "sort of" back up Steve & Adriano (observations, but NOT "conclusions") - viewing experience may vary substantially - super sharp video may create issues, and refresh rates are probably more touchy in system setup. I may try playback direct via HDMI to see if results are the same... but it does not appear to be simple "plug and play". Keeping in mind this was close to "native", using Sony's viewer on unedited clips straight out of the camera....

RS is definitely noticeable, this is probably not a good skater/extreme sports/fast action tracking camera...

BUT, overall, this camera is incredibly sharp and crisp, and for most "normal" situations, it should produce the best video one could ask for!! May take a bit of effort to get the best final results in editing, but WELL worth the effort, IMO!

Based on preliminary casual testing, I'm re-thinking how often I would elect to switch to the high bitrate 1080/60p, and still need to drop 4K into Vegas to experiment with pan/scan/crop to 1080. More experimenting ahead, but overall very impressed, warts and all!!

The AX100 records at 29.97fps and unbeknownst to me, the project had mistakenly been set up as 30fps. Pretty close, shouldn't cause much of an issue? Nope, big issue.

Once I correctly set the project to 29.97 and the export to the same frame rate, the motion became razor sharp as it was in the other two editing programs. What a relief! So here I was condemning Edius, when in fact it was my bush league error that caused it.

Do you think also my PAL AX100 records 29.97fps. I have PAL system and on my manual I don't see that number of fps.
If you use Edius can you tell me what do I have to modify on my presets?
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/58542060/Screening/Edius%20project%20settings%202.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/58542060/Screening/1%20a.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/58542060/Screening/H.264%20Edius%20Settings.jpg
May be are they not good presets?
Thanks

@ Dave:

Dave, can you describe your 'Samsung'? Not sure if you're talking about an HDTV or monitor?

I have a Samsung HDTV (64" F8500 plasma) which has been professionally ISF'd. It's very tough to see any AX100 artifacts in my down-rez'd 4K>HD projects and when you do, they're very minor and less than what I'd see with any HD camera I've ever used...especially DSLRs. This is the HDTV I implement the frame rate doubler so that even 30p motion is quite smooth...almost '60p like'. I use the PS3 as my 'player' via a memory card reader that holds the memory card with my project file. The PS3 is connected to the Samsung HDTV via HDMI.

My biggest issue with the above setup is forgetting to disable the frame rate doubler after watching my projects. If we then watch some show on broadcast TV, we get the soap opera effect that is created by the frame doubling. Of course it takes just a few seconds to disable it.

But yes, it is never a good idea to add additional sharpness to an already resolute, sharp video. That's just asking for trouble and any ISF tech would say "NO NO NO" to that approach with any material you watch from any source. Most of these guys are very conservative with their sharpness adjustments.

Now my Samsung 28" 4K monitor, when displaying the AX100 4K video, again looks artifact free, but due to the 30p refresh rate, it's best to avoid fast motion close to the camera. As for artifacts, it's a very rare clip that I can see anything approaching an artifact that hits the threshold of "I can see it without searching for it". Just a non-issue on this setup.

As for playing back AX100 files, personally I'd never use Sony Play Memories as my player. In Widows 8.1, WMP is a far better player. I never said that in Windows 7. VLC is another very good player, but I find WMP to be the best in the new Windows environment.

So the bottom line is that in the vast majority of cases, artifacts are due to something other than the camera. We can create a very extensive list of things other than the camera that can create artifacts. And most of us know this is true for ANY camera, regardless of format.

I just see very little in terms of 4K 'exclusive' artifacts, that don't already exist in other formats and resolutions if one is not careful. I said that before and I'm sticking to it. :)

For NTSC 30P is really 29.97fps ( and so is 60i as timecode is the same though temporal motion is the same as 60P ) and 60P is 59.94fps clearly stated in the Sony information. For PAL it is 25P and 50P. Most NA TV's will refresh at 60Hz or a multiple so will repeat a 30P input ( unless of course it is limited to 30Hz as are some of the lower cost 4K sets/monitors ) However NLE timelines need to be setup correctly or the NLE will try and correct !!!

NTSC AX100 at 3840x2160 is 29.97P and for PAL it is 25P . You really must learn to read Adriano as it is in the AX100 manual.

Ron Evans.

Shutter speeds will also be critical for clean images too. It would be useful if posters would state shutter speed when discussing artifacts etc.

Ron Evans

Do you think also my PAL AX100 records 29.97fps. I have PAL system and on my manual I don't see that number of fps.
If you use Edius can you tell me what do I have to modify on my presets?
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/58542060/Screening/Edius%20project%20settings%202.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/58542060/Screening/1%20a.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/58542060/Screening/1ac.jpg
May be are they not good presets?
Thanks

I would not set this up as an HD project. I would always set this up as a 4K project and output the final project to HD for better results. I would also use 'Super Fine' in your settings.

I've done exactly this and the results on my HDTV can only be described as 'superb'. We have the same camera, the same software and I'm getting drastically different results. You need to do more research and read. So many of your questions are in the literature and you seem to have a habit of refusing to read the material that would answer so many of your questions. As I stated before, I would start with a 4K project, edit the project and output as HD.

I just can't add any more to your questions. You MUST do some digging in to your own system. We can't do that for you. Your TV may be at the heart of these issues too. You can't expect old equipment to keep displaying state-of-the-art results.

Ken, currently if you need to use Lanczos3 for high quality scaling output one needs to use Layouter since the default output scaling from a 4k timeline in Edius does not use Lanczos3. That is why the preferred way at the moment is to use a 1920x1080 project so that Layouter , with Lanczos3 does the scaling in the timeline. It is a known issue . If the intent is to create a Bluray or DVD this is the best way anyway. For a true 3840x2160 project this is of course not an issue as there is no scaling involved.

So if Adriano wants to output a 1920x1080 file it is best to start with a 1920x1080 project and let layouter do the scaling. One could of course export a HQX file from a 3840x2160 project and get TMPGenc with Lanczos3 to do the encode and scaling.

Edius 7 is my main editor too.


Ron Evans

In my previous post I have made a mistake about 3° link that I have just rectify:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/58542060/Screening/H.264%20Edius%20Settings.jpg
Therefore now I but also you understand my presets are all right. My problem was my old HDTV.

Ken, currently if you need to use Lanczos3 for high quality scaling output one needs to use Layouter since the default output scaling from a 4k timeline in Edius does not use Lanczos3. That is why the preferred way at the moment is to use a 1920x1080 project so that Layouter , with Lanczos3 does the scaling in the timeline. It is a known issue . If the intent is to create a Bluray or DVD this is the best way anyway. For a true 3840x2160 project this is of course not an issue as there is no scaling involved.

So if Adriano wants to output a 1920x1080 file it is best to start with a 1920x1080 project and let layouter do the scaling. One could of course export a HQX file from a 3840x2160 project and get TMPGenc with Lanczos3 to do the encode and scaling.

Edius 7 is my main editor too.


Ron Evans

Ron, if not using Lanczos3, I've gotten sharper results with the project in 4K and output as an HD file as opposed to creating the project in HD.

Have you tried that if you don't need Layouter? I try not to use it in any case if I can since, depending on what you're doing with it, you'll lose some resolution. Obviously there are times when it's unavoidable.

All my projects are multicam with NX5U , NX30U and CX700 so by default the AX1 files go into this project. I am told however that currently exporting a 1920x1080 file from a 3840x2160 project will not use the Lanczos3 High Quality scaler which I always use for the best performance. However layouter does use this scaler so the best current performance to get a 1920x1080 file from a 3840x2160 file is to place in a 1920x1080 project so that the layouter can be used to scale in its track rather than the export scaler. At least until there is an update to correct the issue. The standard scaler , if you haven't changed it , is "fast and sharp".

Ron Evans

Ron, if not using Lanczos3, I've gotten sharper results with the project in 4K and output as an HD file as opposed to creating the project in HD.

Have you tried that if you don't need Layouter? I try not to use it in any case if I can since, depending on what you're doing with it, you'll lose some resolution. Obviously there are times when it's unavoidable.

Layouter is active all the time unless you disable it in properties for each clip. If you place a file of different dimensions than the project in a track layouter automatically scales to the project size. No action needed and it will do this using the scaler chosen in the layouter setup. There is no difference in scaling this way than scaling on export. Scaling is scaling and the quality is governed by the scaler used. And at the moment one can choose a better scaler in layouter than on export. This is independent of the encoder chosen for export. My point in going to the AX1 was to crop to 1920x1080 anyway and as long as the crop is still greater than 1920x1080 pixels from the original 3840x2160 I find it is still a very good HD image when matched with the NX5U or NX30U which is the whole point for me and thus makes a good Bluray or DVD with further scaling and encoding. Cropping allows me to set the AX1 as a full stage fixed camera, set wider than the stage to allow people to walk up the stairs etc but still allow crop into the stage most of the time. Works great.

The only way to loose resolution in layouter is if you are using a low quality scaler or are zooming in and interpolation is needed. I always use Lanczos3 high quality and never crop in close to the actual pixel sizes of the project ( 1920x1080 for the AX1 files on the 1920x1080 60i project )

Ron Evans

Adriano - you've already got your answer on framerates, you should have an EU PAL camera, with 25 (actually 24.97?) framerate instead of the US/NTSC 30 (actually 29.97). This is pretty fundamental stuff, and the lack of knowledge is a strong indicator that the problem lies elsewhere than the camera!!

@Ken - I have a dual setup, primary is the bargain basement Seiki 39" 30Hz TV connected via HDMI - the stock settings were INCREDIBLY "off"... current ones are "acceptable", after adjusting... I played with the "sharpness" control just to see what would happen, and sure enough, the details in the grass made all that area "flash" pretty garishly! I already KNEW it looked fine with sharpness on 0, so this was an "exercise", but had I not already tweaked the settings extensively, it would have been shocking! Might have thought there was something "wrong" with "something"... or something....

Secondary is a basic 21-22"Samsung monitor, nothing fancy, it is full HD, on the DVI-I, supposedly at 59Hz. I had just enough room on the desk for it!

Even though both are "calibrated", they don't look identical... both look GOOD, but sure aren't "matched".... I may spend some time trying to get closer... but for the moment, "good enough!"

Agreed that PMH is far from ideal, but didn't feel like dragging everything into Vegas or Media Player. Soon enough...

As I said, I figured I could find ways to "muck up" the output, it's a talent... but I ALSO was able to get EXCELLENT results, same footage and some tweaking. I shot the clips for the express reason of checking both the temporal motion issue, and comparing the 4K to the 1080p options.

I DO "see" the 30p, but it's NOT "artifacts" in the images, but rather in the motion in the series of images. What I had on the primary screen was quite acceptable even if one is picky, the AX100 viewfinder and secondary monitor exhibit more stutter/judder. Slow, careful camera movements are definitely going to be needed for best results.

All my projects are multicam with NX5U , NX30U and CX700 so by default the AX1 files go into this project. I am told however that currently exporting a 1920x1080 file from a 3840x2160 project will not use the Lanczos3 High Quality scaler which I always use for the best performance. However layouter does use this scaler so the best current performance to get a 1920x1080 file from a 3840x2160 file is to place in a 1920x1080 project so that the layouter can be used to scale in its track rather than the export scaler. At least until there is an update to correct the issue. The standard scaler , if you haven't changed it , is "fast and sharp".

Ron Evans

Ron, I'll do an A/B over the next couple of days to compare both methods. It's hard to believe the HD quality could get much better given what I've seen from exporting to HD. I'll let you know.

But the problem here would be that I'd generally want my project archived in 4K and I'd export in HD only when needed. To create the project in HD would mean I'd have to later redo the entire project in 4K.

Unless I'm missing something, this is not very elegant.

Did a direct connect via HDMI to the Seiki, much smoother... at all settings, so definitely need to start "tuning" the computer. Made one mistake of dumping clips to a big but slow archive drive... moving to faster drive helped a lot, but might have to see about a newer faster drive and filling the other two RAM slots!

Fiddling in Vegas with settings, getting the feeling that the integrated video may not be quite up to the full task, but it's certainly usable for editing. Dealt with worse with HD!

I did a couple trial crops to 1080, still looked great, so I'm sure I can pan/scan/crop from a single camera and "fake" a typical multicam event shoot... that's nice... will pay for itself after selling a couple HD cams!

Adriano - you've already got your answer on framerates, you should have an EU PAL camera, with 25 (actually 24.97?) framerate instead of the US/NTSC 30 (actually 29.97). This is pretty fundamental stuff, and the lack of knowledge is a strong indicator that the problem lies elsewhere than the camera!!

Dave,
you always keep telling me the same thing about my lack of knowledge. I understand you, you are right. But on my latest post I have just written only a confirmation about what you wrote, that is my Edius presets are good. My real problem is the old HDTV.

Ron, I'll do an A/B over the next couple of days to compare both methods. It's hard to believe the HD quality could get much better given what I've seen from exporting to HD. I'll let you know.

But the problem here would be that I'd generally want my project archived in 4K and I'd export in HD only when needed. To create the project in HD would mean I'd have to later redo the entire project in 4K.

Unless I'm missing something, this is not very elegant.

What format will you archive your 3840x2160 project? Edius does not do XAVC-S at the moment so it could be XAVC or HQX both large file sizes and both could be placed in a HD project as a file for HD output. Uses two steps but you will do that anyway. Once to archive and once to create a HD output. No editing needed just place archive file on a HD timeline and export. Export times will be the same the only extra time is opening a HD project and placing the archive file on the timeline, at most a couple of minutes. This way you have full control over the scaling and encoding.

So yes edit in 3840x2160 then put into a HD project to create a DVD or Bluray. Unfortunately Edius will not allow a 30P project to be changed to a 60i HD project like Vegas will do though scaling in Edius is better !!!

When you do your A/B take it all the way to a DVD or Bluray and watch on the TV. That is the real test.

Ron Evans

Ron, actually the latest version of Edius does do XAVC-S.

But I've seen no difference between exports in XAVC-S and H264. Both look visually lossless.

A@Ken - I have a dual setup, primary is the bargain basement Seiki 39" 30Hz TV connected via HDMI - the stock settings were INCREDIBLY "off"... current ones are "acceptable", after adjusting... I played with the "sharpness" control just to see what would happen, and sure enough, the details in the grass made all that area "flash" pretty garishly! I already KNEW it looked fine with sharpness on 0, so this was an "exercise", but had I not already tweaked the settings extensively, it would have been shocking! Might have thought there was something "wrong" with "something"... or something....



Yup. Proving once again that if we muck with something and make it 'wrong', we can either acknowledge something is wrong in our setup or blame it on the camera. :)

Ron, actually the latest version of Edius does do XAVC-S.

But I've seen no difference between exports in XAVC-S and H264. Both look visually lossless.

Yes you are correct I forgot that 7.3 included XAVC-S. . I think XAVC-S is much of h264 anyway so not likely much difference.

Ron Evans

Dave,
you always keep telling me the same thing about my lack of knowledge. I understand you, you are right. But on my latest post I have just written only a confirmation about what you wrote, that is my Edius presets are good. My real problem is the old HDTV.

OK, so come prepared to LEARN, not to bash a camera because you don't have the fundamentals down...

I was "glad" I could reproduce your flashing (yes, it is QUITE the garish sight!), but you wanted to flush the camera down the drain because it was such a horrible purchase... seems a tad drastic, especially when it's EASY to take time, be patient, LEARN how to get the most out of the camera, and make it work! Sometimes you even have to read the manual, as horrific as that seems (reminding myself to research that "My Buttion" thingy!).

I noticed right away that the VF stutters, but now I realize it could be VERY helpful to guide camera technique - I don't "like" the noticeable 30p stutter, but now I can spot it and correct my technique, easy peasy... plusses and minuses...

I went into this camera knowing that there will be a learning curve, HDV was a straight up learning WALL at the time! Fortunately there was a LOT of discussion here...

DVi is a good place to come and ask questions, compare notes, and learn more than any human ever thought they could about video... but generally it's considered bad form to baselessly bag on a piece of tech or another member - Please take that into consideration - you'll find things work out better that way!

Yup. Proving once again that if we muck with something and make it 'wrong', we can either acknowledge something is wrong in our setup or blame it on the camera. :)

Oh, I'm looking forward to the adventure, nothing like doing it wrong a few times to make you feel so good when you get it right!

Coming off of a couple weeks dialing in a new computer (finally NO crashes for 3-4 days straight 24/7 running! Only minor program/driver related "bugs" now! And it's the quietest system I've ever owned to boot), it was nice to see the output from the AX100, even if there were some "flaws" that I suspect mean I need a little more tweaking and perhaps (at least I hope) a couple more minor upgrades! Even on the "lo-budget" build, I'm loving a 4K (4x 1920x1080!!) "desktop" on a single screen! I'm sure editing will be a magnitude of multiples better, even IF I'll be stumbling about sorting out the 4K workflow for a bit!

Life on the Bleeding Edge...

Bit the bullet and ordered an FDR-AX100 from B&H this weekend. Bought two extra batteries, since this is my first Sony I don't have any Sony gear. Also got two 128GB Class 10 cards. Then found the "kit" doesn't come with a battery charger (they make you use the actual camcorder to charge the battery), so had to purchase two battery chargers as well.

Does anyone have the info on how much space 4K XAVC-S is per minute on SD cards?

Going to test color this upcoming week with some of my studio LED lights (which have a slight spike in green). Testing flesh tones with different custom white balances and also warming gels on LEDs. I need this camcorder for indoor studio stuff with people.

I work exclusively in Final Cut Pro X ... any other users see any difference in ProRes vs ProRes HQ when transcoding, since the data rate is only 60Mps in 4K?

Looking forward to seeing what this camcorder can do, especially shooting in 4K and then doing post cropping and panning to 1080. I do many close-up facial type fashion shots and slow horizontal slider shots, where models are moving. So shooting a little wider, then doing precise tight cropping is what I need.

[QUOTE=Dave Blackhurst;1845801]Adriano - you've already got your answer on framerates, you should have an EU PAL camera, with 25 (actually 24.97?) framerate instead of the US/NTSC 30 (actually 29.97).



Dave, as I am in PAL country I do believe this is incorrect. PAL is exactly 25 frames per second.

Regards,

Vaughan

@ Vaughn -

It's hard to keep these things straight, and since they typically "round" the numbers, it's hard to keep track! I know my "30Hz/p" monitor is very picky when the Intel driver wants to feed it 29... Somehow I thought that PAL (could have sworn I saw it in the properties menus in Vegas...?) had the same slightly "off" framerate, but could just be us NTSC folks...

MIS-SHOE (DM-Accessories) ***Report***

I received the adapter today and installed it as the instructions state: Thin beveled edge towards front of the camera.

Unfortunately a slight push of the adapter from front to back even after tightening the knob pops it out of the shoe. I've tried it multiple times. I will check with the manufacturer but at this point I cannot recommend this device at this time.

Update—The ebay seller suggested I may have a bad part so I will report back what I find out.

Update #2— The manufacturer is sending me another part to try. They also gave me some tips which do help the part fit tighter. I'll report back soon as it's overall a well made piece of gear and I hope to get it working.

Hi Marc, did you get the new MIS-SHOE? I can not wait to read your review.

It's only NTSC that has the slightly off frame rates. It stems back to the introduction of color where it was found that the color signal at 30fps interfered with the sound sub carrier, so the frame rate was lowered a fraction to make it all work. Bit of a fudge really, but that's what happened.

Hi Marc, did you get the new MIS-SHOE? I can not wait to read your review.

I picked one up to use on the FDR-AX100 - great fit, easy to use, just what is needed.