Sony FDR-AX100 [Archive] - Page 27?login=1

Dave Blackhurst

May 27th, 2014, 02:21 AM

You don't have an option (that I could find) to output an HD file from the 4k internal to the camera. The HDMI downconverts automatically to whatever the display input accepts, but if you want to downrez a 4K file, you'd have to to that in "post". You can also crop/pan with pretty nice results.

A couple observations on the camera - I noticed while using the VF that you definitely see the RS/skew if you "fast pan" in 4k/30p. I found switching to the 1080/60p/50Mbps mode the RS/Skew was greatly reduced, comparable to the PJ760 I had sitting alongside. I'd have to say that to shoot the 4K/30p, you need to have good "traditional" camera technique for best results. Good in some ways, not in others, there will be times that "HD mode" will be "handy".

I also need to spend some time fiddling with the ND's and shutter speed in bright lighting - in lower indoor light, I didn't see the stutter that was very noticeable in bright sunlight (through the VF). Beginning to suspect that shutter speed may need to be watched carefully when shooting in 4K mode... but with the manual controls, that's not a big issue - really like how this is laid out, manual control will take a little bit to get memorized, but it's all there! Also figured out that the "my button" function allows you to select 3 "other" things you'd like immediate touch screen access too, and sets 'em on the left side of the LCD, pretty slick!

Bruce Dempsey

May 27th, 2014, 04:29 AM

Dave Blackhurst

May 27th, 2014, 02:26 PM

USB is used for file transfer for AVCHD and the new higher bitrate XAVC S.

My 920 was feeling a little sluggish with 28Mbps AVCHD multicam, so I just replaced with 4770K, cost wasn't TOO bad, as I did everything as cheap as possible! I'm guessing a 4K capable video card might have helped the old 920, but my Windows install was WAY overdue for a refresh anyway! It isn't about capture, as it's "just" files, it's more about being able to play back in full 4K. You probably could "work with" the 4K XAVC S files, but I wanted to be able to actually display them.

They still typically look sharper than 1080 files on a 1080 display, so to that extent... yes they have additional "value" for certain subjects. The Pan/crop tests I fiddled with looked as good or perhaps even slightly "better" than 1080 when cropped. The camera will very much "fit" what I intended it for, it may or may not be for "everyone" - the casual shooter may not find the additional sharpness worth the challenges of camera stability and how motion "looks".

Here's my overall take so far - 30p is going to require careful shooting, and the 1080 high bitrate XAVC S mode may be preferable for some things. 4K seems to be equivalent to shooting 30 VERY crisp "stills" per second, the individual frames are tack sharp. The resulting video is also very very sharp, making 1080/60p look at least "a little soft".

We are quite early in the "4K' introduction, adoption is probably even earlier. I suspect it will come faster than the SD to HD transition, I'm just trying to stay ahead of it - most people will probably continue to be perfectly happy with "HD", and I can't complain, won't be upgrading "everything" anytime soon! But the added resolution serves a purpose for me, and I'm liking the overall results and "feel" of the camera.

Wait a while and costs will drop, they always do, and the "tech" will likely improve too... or live life on the bleeding edge, have some extra sharp footage "in the can"... neither choice is "wrong", IMO.

Bruce Dempsey

May 27th, 2014, 03:09 PM

@Dave
you've used rx10 for video if I remember, how does its hd video stack up alongside the ax100.
In some ways hd video from the rx10 is like downsampled 5k i've read

Noa Put

May 27th, 2014, 03:20 PM

My rx10 footage is not sharper then what my gh3 produces.

Ken Ross

May 27th, 2014, 05:13 PM

Will they (moms and dads) even notice the sharper/nicer video of little Suzie and Johnny?

If they don't, it's time to take Mom & Dad to the ophthalmologist.

We just got back from Baltimore and I was shooting some video in the harbor area. I first watched on my 64" plasma and it was a treat. But then I watched on my 28" 4K monitor and that was a whole other experience. Unreal.

Dave Blackhurst

May 27th, 2014, 06:46 PM

Frankly I'll STILL be using the RX10 for video (waiting for 4K or at least high bitrate XAVC S, ala the RX100Mk3). As nice as the AX100 feels, I've grown comfortable with the size/weight/controls of the RX10 (and the pocketability when needed of the RX100!) and I like to shoot stills as well... together, the three cameras make a "system", at least for me, and I can grab whichever seems most appropriate, or the lot in a small sling bag. No "complaints" about video quality from them, make a good multicam set as well.

That said, let's see if I can find a way to describe the difference in video quality...

RX10, AX100 in 1080p = you are watching very good video. You feel like you are there.

AX100 in 4K = you are looking through a window. You ARE "there".

This is on a cheap-o 39" TV (4K display), a 24" monitor, and a 22" monitor (1080) - the "effect" is surprisingly consistent, even on a "low resolution" 1080 display. The AX100 is producing a very sharp detailed image (or 30 of them a second).

I suspect that the CODECs and resolution of "HD" are pretty much at the limit of sharpness, and when we see 4K, we're realizing that there is "more" possible. Not entirely sure why 4K downrezed to 1080 somehow produces additional sharpness...

Will the average viewer at an average viewing distance really grasp what they are seeing? I *think* the answer is yes, but then again I walk in on family watching the SD channels all the time, even after I broke down and upgraded to "HD" FiOS... so maybe it doesn't "matter" as much as we want it to?!

Aaron Holmes

May 27th, 2014, 10:18 PM

Frankly I'll STILL be using the RX10 for video (waiting for 4K or at least high bitrate XAVC S, ala the RX100Mk3). As nice as the AX100 feels, I've grown comfortable with the size/weight/controls of the RX10 (and the pocketability when needed of the RX100!) and I like to shoot stills as well... together, the three cameras make a "system", at least for me, and I can grab whichever seems most appropriate, or the lot in a small sling bag. No "complaints" about video quality from them, make a good multicam set as well.
I expect an RX10 redux with XAVC S is imminent. I'll be happy to see AVCHD and its silly bitrate limitations in the rear-view mirror.

Not entirely sure why 4K downrezed to 1080 somehow produces additional sharpness...
I suspect that, in many cases, the additional sharpness is just aliasing produced by quick-n-dirty linear scaling algorithms. I'm still waiting on my AX100, but I look forward to playing with the scaling in Premiere. Of course, before running things back out to 4:2:0, 4K scaled to 1080 has a considerable chroma resolution advantage, but I don't expect to see that on Vimeo. :)

Emmanuel Plakiotis

May 28th, 2014, 04:15 PM

Darren Levine

May 28th, 2014, 04:19 PM

Lawrence Bansbach

May 28th, 2014, 05:38 PM

Sony just announced an 1" sensor with 4K suitable for next year upgrade

4K 60p and even 20Mp 22fps

Sony IMX183CQJ 5K 25fps 4K 60fps CMOS Sensor: (http://cinescopophilia.com/sony-imx183cqj-5k-25fps-4k-60fps-cmos-sensor/)
I hope they develop a better sensor. As I see it, the problems are:

1. 4K is available only in 10-bit mode -- 12 bits (or greater) would be better.

2. No global shutter. Using a stacked desgn, Sony could put the global-shutter circuitry on another layer, something Alternative Vision (http://www.alt-vision.com/lumiense.htm) already does.

3. 4K is windowed, effectively reducing the size of an already small sensor. The sensor should run at full resolution, oversampling the 4K for better post-de-Bayer luma resolution.

Wacharapong Chiowanich

May 28th, 2014, 05:39 PM

If these specs are accurate I don't think this sensor will be available for sale to other OEMs until much later or will probably never be. The current 1" B-CMOS sensor could be relegated to an item for sale like many of the company's 1/2.3" chips then.

Dave Blackhurst

May 28th, 2014, 10:10 PM

Hmmm, so this sensor could drop in to the existing RX/AX lines, and be a solid upgrade path for RX10Mk2 and AX200... fast moving tech! Sony isn't sitting still for long... and so far, I don't think they are "sharing" these 1" class sensors with other mfrs... they are busily creating a market niche around them with little or no competition.

Cliff Totten

May 29th, 2014, 03:01 PM

Can anybody confirm that the AX100 can, in fact, output 4K (UHD) from it's HDMI port when it's not recording internally? (output 4K when "paused")

wondering if the new Atomos Shogun will work with the AX100 the same way it will work with the A7S.

CT

Ken Ross

May 29th, 2014, 06:52 PM

Here's a 4K video shot in and around the Baltimore harbor this past weekend. I think it shows off the potential of the AX100.

For those with 4K displays, I recommend downloading the original 4K file as long as you're a Vimeo member and are logged in.

Baltimore Harbor 1 on Vimeo

Thomas Wheeler

May 31st, 2014, 10:02 AM

Ken

This is some really beautiful video -- perfectly exposed, incredibly steady for what must have been mostly hand-held shots, and nicely edited. Very well done, indeed!

My Sony FDR-AX100 is arriving back from the Laredo Repair Facility today. I am holding my breath as I wait for it to arrive that Sony really fixed my manual ND Filter switch. i handled the repair via Sony's Repair site on the web. I received only two updates to the status of my repair. One said "Your camera is in the hands of a technician, but the repair is not yet completed. Repairs take normally 10 working days." About three days later this changed to "We have returned your camera to you." No mention was made of what had been done to the camera or even if it had been repaired at all. For sure, (The problem with the manual ND Filter switch was certainly not intermittent when I returned the camera to Sony for repair. It was thoroughly and royally screwed up jumping from ND1-ND2-ND3 spontaneously with no input form me, and I could not manually select ND3 at all.) I will know soon as it is out for deliver by FedEx today.

Tom

Noa Put

May 31st, 2014, 11:44 AM

Yes, very well made video Ken, it's not only about the potential of the camera though but the person behind it :) so not all credit should go to a camera.

I personally blame you for putting me in doubt about my next gh4 purchase :), I need to make an investment before the end of next month so I still have some time to think, originally I wanted to replace my g6 with the gh4 and since I have all lenses and accessories that would fit it seems to be a no-brainer. I only was thinking about selling my rx10, I just can't work with it's slow zoom, it's driving me crazy and I get frustrated more and more with every weddingshoot I use it on.

The ax100 is much like my cx730 but on steroids, the only 2 area's where the ax100 can't match my cx730 is stabilisation and variable zoomspeeds but in all other areas the camera is an improvement, the larger sensor should give me the same dof as my rx10 so it should be easier to push the background out of focus.

You can't compare the ax100 with the gh4 though, they are both 2 different camera's for different purposes, you never can match the image of the gh4 combined with a 25mm f1.4 or a 75mm f1.8, or you can't match the versatility of adding lenses ranging from fisheye to tele. I see people only comparing sharpness between the ax100 and gh4 but those are not the main differences that make each camera unique. The ax100 bridges the gap between regular videocamera's and dslr's, it is not the one or the other but if used under the right conditions it is a very versatile camera.

My plan when I bought the rx10 was to use it for run and gun and to get a image closer to a dslr because of it's larger sensor and shallower dof, it does that for me but the slow zoom kills it and I have missed shots because of it.

So when viewing all the ax100 footage so far I"m sure it would be a camera that will be much better for run and gun, it has all the functionality you"d expect from a videocamera and it's sharpness and resolution would allow me to use crops during a ceremony that should easily match my other 1080p camera's, it should also make my life a bit easier having the possibility to reframe so I don't have to touch the camera anymore.

The only thing that is making me doubt is it's price, my nex-ea50 had a price of 3600 euro for over a year and recently took a 900 euro nosedive in price selling at 2700 euro right now so I sold mine in time (sorry Tom if you are reading this, but at the time you bought mine you got it at a good price :)), my cx730 was 1100 euro when it came out and I got it for a bit over 800 one year later. I"m pretty sure the ax100 will go down in price 300 to 400 euro in about a year time, early adopters always pay the price for cutting edge.

So I have some thinking to do, I know the ax100 will be used through a larger part of the day and that it should cut in fine with my other camera's if used right. It certainly will be used a lot more then my rx10, but then again, that gh4...:) One thing is for sure, the gh4 is not a run and gun camera, you can't adjust exposure without exposure jumps, it doesn't have a nd filter and there seems to be a problem with stabilisation in 4K because I have seen enough jittery images even with stabilised lenses. In controlled conditions it's a wonderful camera and I very much like the look I get from my gh3/g6 but I don't dare to use it in any unpredictable situations or longer continuous shoots like the ceremony.

I have to do some more thinking how to solve my luxury problem. I just don't want to waste too much money and regret later not to have waited.

Ken Ross

May 31st, 2014, 02:26 PM

Ken Ross

May 31st, 2014, 02:49 PM

Yes, very well made video Ken, it's not only about the potential of the camera though but the person behind it :) so not all credit should go to a camera.

Thanks Noa, but the camera certainly does help. :)

I personally blame you for putting me in doubt about my next gh4 purchase :),

That was my only intent in posting that video Noa! ;) ;) ;)

The ax100 is much like my cx730 but on steroids, the only 2 area's where the ax100 can't match my cx730 is stabilisation and variable zoomspeeds but in all other areas the camera is an improvement, the larger sensor should give me the same dof as my rx10 so it should be easier to push the background out of focus.

Yes, having had the RX10, I'd say the DOF control is roughly the same and I have little trouble in getting some relatively shallow, nice DOF shots with the AX100.

You can't compare the ax100 with the gh4 though, they are both 2 different camera's for different purposes, you never can match the image of the gh4 combined with a 25mm f1.4 or a 75mm f1.8, or you can't match the versatility of adding lenses ranging from fisheye to tele. I see people only comparing sharpness between the ax100 and gh4 but those are not the main differences that make each camera unique. The ax100 bridges the gap between regular videocamera's and dslr's, it is not the one or the other but if used under the right conditions it is a very versatile camera.

So Noa, my honest assessment of the GH4 between having owned it for a period and viewing some videos from guys I respect for their ability to shoot quality video is this...and I know some will disagree:

* Overall, I really believe the AX100, in general, produces superior video quality. This goes beyond the better resolution of the AX100.

* I find the color on the AX100 to be more accurate. My experience with the GH4 and videos I've watched from others is that the colors can be over-the-top. Despite the better in-camera flexibility of the GH4 and I dialing back the colors to -2 on my unit, I still felt there was too much saturation. Flesh tones would often have an orangey cast to them, particularly in the sun and greens were simply 'too green'. I saw this on my unit and I've seen it repeatedly in other videos from other shooters.

* I feel the AX100 produces better low light video than the GH4. Yes, I know you can use faster lenses than what's incorporated with the AX100, but there's still the built-in low light capability of the camera itself. The sensor & electronics play a role regardless of the lens. So lately I've seen a disturbing (for me) amount of both chroma and luma noise in some videos where the ambient lighting conditions shouldn't result in that much noise. In fact, in some GH4 videos I'm seeing the kind of noise I haven't seen in cameras I've owned for years.

* Yes, the flexibility of lens changing is something that the AX100 doesn't offer, but to duplicate the ONE lens that the AX100 uses, required me to have several lenses on the GH4. I'm paranoid about changing lenses in the field since I have had a bad track record with sensor dust. In my very first lens change during the time I had my GH4, I got a dust spot on the upper left portion of the frame. Had I been on vacation when this happened, my footage would have been tainted from that point forward. The spot was clearly and easily visible with any amount of sky in the frame. I would have been miserable.

So the ability to changes lenses can be both good and bad IMO.

* As you've mentioned, the AX100 is the better run n gun camera and that's what I like to do. So for me, that was certainly a factor. With that said, if I had been more impressed with the actual video quality of the GH4 (and I'm certainly not saying it was bad!!), I might have dealt with these issues. However I would probably have tried to keep something like the 14-140 lens on the camera almost all the time to minimize lens changes.

* The autofocus was clearly better on the AX100 than the GH4. I found the autofocus, with its many micro misses, to be almost unusable. So I looked at the GH4 as a camera that I'd essentially have to use with MF almost all the time. There goes another element of run n gun.

For me the decision was not at all difficult after about a week with the GH4. But that's me. Depending on your needs, you may conclude the GH4 offers things you really need and can't get on the AX100.

I'm glad I'm not in your shoes! :)

Dave Blackhurst

May 31st, 2014, 02:50 PM

@Noa -

Keep an eye on the "slightly used" market - the AX100 will frustrate some users into a return or a sale after their return window closes <wink>. That's how mine came to me, with enough of a discount to at least offset future price drops (price drops happen, sometimes aggressively...). If you can score one at the right price, I don't think you'll regret it, and in my case, I've sold off a couple PJ710's to offset the purchase, which might be an option for you as well?

Took the AX out for the elementary school art show my 4th grade artist was exhibiting in... just to experiment, though I may fiddle with some editing, as that's the next "hurdle"! A couple observations - I very much like the way this camera handles and "feels" - I know, who cares, right? Well, I mostly used the VF to shoot, both for the third stabilization point, and for staying compact in busy areas, and it is quite nice to shoot with. Still learning controls, but it'll come. Camera is not "too" heavy for handheld, well balanced, and big and "serious looking" enough to stop people from darting across in front of it (OK, maybe better than a typical consumer size cam in that respect!).

Slow, careful pans and moves worked pretty well, and when I'd stop on individual artworks, the camera would lock in, tack sharp. I noticed colors were VERY accurate (this was an art show, so color is an important part of "being there"). Reason for mentioning this is that typically "consumer" cameras push saturation and colors may vary... with the AX100, I'd look in the VF, switch eyes, switch back... didn't see any significant color shifts, it was very much a "you are there" capture. Nice! 4K playback via HDMI also was also "you are there",

Just a silly thing, but since I'd handed the wife the RX10, for a moment I was thinking "but I want to shoot stills"... DUH... oh yeah, "photo button"... switch the default mode from 14Mpix to the high 20Mpix mode... yep that works nicely! Seemed to be slow to write, much slower than the RX, but it would certainly "do" as a still camera! NOT going to give up the RX10 (unless a 4K capable version shows up! Update the firmware Sony??), but nice to have another "dual mode" camera that does both at an acceptable level without undue compromise.

There will be more opportunity to shoot with the end of the school year, looking forward to using this beast a bit more, but it's feeling like a very GOOD videocam that will fill that purpose nicely...

Noa Put

May 31st, 2014, 04:09 PM

I prefer buying new, since I buy as a company I can deduct taxes (which is 21%) anyway so second hand would only be worthwhile if it's around 30% or more cheaper then the original price, second is warranty as I want to have the full 2 years so that I am covered for at least 2 wedding seasons.

I still find 2k for the ax100 quite a lot for a handycam, even if it performs well, Sony is known for knocking down prizes at a certain point, especially when a new model is introduced which can be hundreds of euro's that you can save if you can wait. Mm, maybe I"ll get that expensive pana 35-100mm f2.8 that I wanted for a longer time after all and just wait for 4k camera prizes to drop. :) A other advantage of waiting is that eventually you know exactly what the good and bad points are of a camera so you can make a better camera choice, if I knew about that super slow zoom on the rx10 I probably would never have bought it.

Thomas Wheeler

May 31st, 2014, 04:23 PM

Thanks much Tom. Yes, all but about 3 shots were hand held and those 3 were on a monopod I was testing. As I mentioned, I used manual exposure. As I'm sure you know, the zebras are invaluable for nailing exposure.

It looks they've turned your AX100 around fairly quickly. Let's hope they fixed it. Certainly the fact that it wasn't an intermittent problem will help.

Ken, I received my AX100 back from Sony's Laredo Repair Center today, and I am very pleased to say that Sony did a professional and competent repair on the ND filter switch. According to the work report that Sony sent back to me with the camera, the ND filter switch underwent "mechanical adjustment, mechanical alignment, and cleaning lubrication". The switch was apparently not replaced.

I went out for a two hour video shoot with the camera today, and the manual ND Filter Switch (and everything else) worked perfectly. Sony could not have been any more prompt in repairing and turning the camera around in as much as they received it on the Thursday before the Memorial Day weekend, and I had it back by the Saturday following this holiday weekend.

The manual ND Filter Switch is used by me a lot since my preferred mode of using the AX100 is to manually fix gain at 0 dB, shutter speed at 1/60th, and use the iris in conjunction with the manual ND filter switch to adjust exposure and control depth of field using 90% zebras to gauge the proper exposure on important highlights in the scene. Like you, I have observed that shadow detail can be recovered in post processing but blown out highlights are gone forever.

I am delighted to have this fine camera back in use.

Tom

Ken Ross

May 31st, 2014, 09:26 PM

Great to hear Tom! Very happy for you.

Peter Siamidis

June 1st, 2014, 12:45 AM

I just did my 3rd shoot with the AX100 having previously used an NX30 for a few years. Overall it's a large improvement over my old NX30. Focussing seems to be better, I thought the large sensor may cause some issues but auto focus has worked very well so far. Low light sensitivity is improved as well, I use two Socanland Nova LED panels in a large home with dark colored walls and the camera will typically run at 9db to 15db which is pretty good. Picture quality is fantastic, even when viewing the footage on my 65" 1080p plasma tv the quality is just incredible. Auto white balance is ok but still not totally accurate, so I've since switched to manual white balance which I had to do on the NX30 as well. Stabilization of course is not as good as the NX30 but it's ok overall. The lens isn't as wide as I would like but then again neither was the NX30's, I do wish I could get around 24mm from the AX100 but I can manage what it currently offers which with best stabilization turned on seems to be somewhere near 30mm. The video footage is totally manageable in Vegas Pro 13, I get full 30fps framerate on the timeline on my Macbook Pro with Windows 8.1 bootcamp along with its 750m gpu. Render times have increased as expected, with my NX30 I could start a render before going to bed and it would be done in the morning but now a render of a typical shoot will take about 18 hours but that's just the price of going to 4k. Rolling shutter has been a non issue for me. I've had no issues with overheating, camera shutdowns, or other such things that smaller picture cameras sometimes suffer from when used for video. I use Sony FV100 batteries and a single battery can last an entire 5 hour shoot without issue.

Overall I love this camera and simply can't go back to 1080p. I'm hooked on 4k, it looks so damn good that I'm now reconsidering getting a Sony A7s. I need to have a second video camera as a backup just in case hence was considering the A7s, but I don't think I can go back to 1080p anymore. I may just get another AX100 used as a backup instead. My wishlist for a revised AX100 would be first to have a wider lens, and second to have 60fps. Aside from that this camera is a winner for me.

Noa Put

June 1st, 2014, 03:38 AM

Ken Ross

June 1st, 2014, 08:17 AM

Pete, when I'm looking for the widest coverage possible, I always switch to Standard OIS. It's sometimes easy to forget you've got Active engaged and that does reduce your maximum wide angle coverage.

Noa, in terms of rendering, much depends on the NLE and computer you use. Using Edius Professional, I find renders are a bit longer than the length of the project. So a 10 minute project takes about 13 minutes to render. I don't find that too bad considering the fact this is 4K. I don't sit and watch while the rendering takes place, there's always something else to do.

Noa Put

June 1st, 2014, 09:02 AM

that's a bit longer then realtime which I would consider "normal", not sure where the 18 hours where coming from because that seems abnormally long, unless you are rendering 15 hours of footage? As I understood the ax100 starts from 29mm wide (35mm equivalent) which is the same as the sony fx1000 I have here which is a decent wideangle, my cx730 starts from 26,5mm which I would find hard to miss.

Ron Evans

June 1st, 2014, 09:11 AM

That speed would be using Quicksync render from Edius. A software only render from Vegas would take a lot longer. A test I did was 5 to 6 times realtime on my system using Vegas 12 downscaling to 1920x1080 HQX or AVC for Bluray DVDArchitect preset file. My system is an i7 3770K running at 4Mhz most of the time with 16G RAM and lots of hard drives. A slower system would take a lot longer. Vegas can use Quicksync and graphic cards but has to be set up in a particular way ( not the way I have mine set up for Edius !!! ).

Ron Evans

Noa Put

June 1st, 2014, 09:18 AM

That's right, using quicksync in edius as well, something you get used to very quickly :)

Peter Siamidis

June 1st, 2014, 10:57 AM

Whats the length of the footage that takes 18 hours to render? That seems really long, I currently can render an hour of 1080p 50p avchd 28mbs footage to any 1080p h264 format in about 20-25 minutes, what would the render times be ratiowise on a ax100, would it take twice as long?

A typical shoot of mine produces about 75 minutes of final content usually made up of 12 individual clips. The clips all have watermark and color corrector applied, and for my websites I need 4 versions of every clip so it renders out around 300 minutes of footage. I have a Vegas Pro script that will automatically render out a low quality h264 mobile version that can work on most cell phone networks (about 700kbps), two 1280x720 good quality versions one in WMV and the other in h264 MP4 (about 8mbps), and an uber quality h264 4k MP4 version (about 30mbps). My render box is also my pc gaming box, a stock Haswell 4770k quad core with twin 670 gpu's. Vegas Pro uses the 670 on video decode and to apply the color corrector, but the encode part is pure cpu only. I use the Main Concept encoder that comes with Vegas Pro. I used to use the Sony AVC encoder that comes with Vegas Pro which was faster but it seems broken for 4k, so I've switched back to Main Concept. I guess the reason for it being slow is two fold, first because it's dealing with 60mbps of data instead of 28mbps previously so there is more data to churn through. Secondly I guess it would be because it has to churn through it four times more often since it has 4x the final pixels to render out. I asked about gpu encoding support on the official Vegas Pro forum as I remember that NVidia 5xx gpu's are supported to 1080p encodes. However the people there tried 4k gpu encodes with some AX100 files that I made available to them and they told me the results were broken with NVidia gpu's, and while gpu encode worked with some Amd gpu's they said the results were visibly worse than cpu encode. So cpu encode it is. Anyways I'll just get an 8 core Haswell-E when they come out later this year, that should let my shoots be all encoded by the time I wake up.

Also the a7s is 1080p and you need a additional recorder to record in 4k which does make it a expensive combination, not having 50/60p in 4k is something I have thought about as well, 25p would work for most shots but I would prefer 50p for all I shoot, 25p doesn't slow down well at all. I guess next year we will start to see the first 50p 4k camera's appear?

Yeah the a7s with 4k add on does get up there in price and also becomes less comfortable to handle compared to the AX100, not sure what to do there yet. I also lament the loss of 60 fps :( But 4k looks too good to go back now so I'll deal with 30 fps. I view the AX100 as a one year camera, a stop gap solution that I'll probably replace next year once a 60 fps model is available.

Pete, when I'm looking for the widest coverage possible, I always switch to Standard OIS. It's sometimes easy to forget you've got Active engaged and that does reduce your maximum wide angle coverage.

I'll have to test that out and see if standard ois works well enough to use for run 'n gun type stuff.

Rob Cantwell

June 1st, 2014, 03:01 PM

i looked at this with some interest when it was announced, also looked at the CX 900 that's €1,699.00 on the Irish Sony site and they have the AX-100 for €2,249.01. Thats a bit spendy eh?

Its a nice enough system ok, dont like the lens cap even though it's the same as all my stills cameras!
The only thing i could see it being an advantage for me at present would be the ability to crop into the image, then my Canon 5D MkIII should be able to crop even deeper still.

So for me at the moment - I'm out.

Will revisit again in a while and see how things are coming along.

Noa Put

June 1st, 2014, 04:42 PM

the CX 900 that's €1,699.00 on the Irish Sony site and they have the AX-100 for €2,249.01
You are better off ordering in the Netherlands or Belgium, here it's 1498 and 1998 euro which includes 21% tax.

Aaron Holmes

June 1st, 2014, 10:44 PM

Dave Blackhurst

June 2nd, 2014, 12:22 AM

What mode do you have the camera in for 1080? I haven't shot RX10/AX100 side by side, but the XAVC S 1080/60p looked fairly good. Obviously not as sharp as the 4K, but not really "woefully soft", I think the 4K resets out expectations... the RX10 still looks great to me, but I do see it's a "little" soft, until you really get in close, and realize... yes, it's not as sharp as the 4K out of the same sensor/processor combo...

It's not a conspiracy, IMO it's two separate "development teams" that would benefit from some "cross-pollination" of ideas (like how about the VF switching the LCD off with the eye sensor like any EVF still camera?). The DNA of the AX100 is clearly "Handycam" in ancestry, while the RX10 has Alpha/Cybershot bloodlines. The result is some real serious head scratchers like a "MULTI" jack that operates differently between the two cams, the lack of XAVC S and 4K in the RX10, when clearly it COULD have it, and probably a few other "quirks".

IMO a bit of "unification" as to controls/features would actually be beneficial, as the AX100/RX10/RX100 create a powerful "team" for image capture, even with the annoying differences!

Adriano Moroni

June 2nd, 2014, 03:10 AM

DM-Accessories MIS-SHOE Review
Here are my thoughts on this device:

Marc,
are you using the MIS-SHOE without problems? I cannot use any heavy accessory on MIS-SHOE: there is the risk it could fall to the ground. I have already broken a lamp. The MIS-SHOE doesn't settle strongly on AX100 shoe. In fact after installing it on the shoe, if I shake the MIS-SHOE, it comes off.
Thanks for your suggestions.

Rob Cantwell

June 2nd, 2014, 04:39 AM

You are better off ordering in the Netherlands or Belgium, here it's 1498 and 1998 euro which includes 21% tax.
I'm wondering how they do any business here at all, with their prices!!

Last cam I bought was a PAL version from B&H, even with customs and shipping it was still cheaper than anything I could source in the EU.
Of course theres always a risk purchasing outside your own country if you have to return a defective product.

Anyway not buying anything at present, but will see how the 4K market develops.

Ken Ross

June 2nd, 2014, 07:59 AM

I'll have to test that out and see if standard ois works well enough to use for run 'n gun type stuff.

Pete, worst case scenario is that you use Standard OIS when you want the widest shot possible and then switch to Active IS when you want maximum stabilization for longer shots.

Ken Ross

June 2nd, 2014, 08:00 AM

Ken Ross

June 2nd, 2014, 08:05 AM

I've been playing with the AX100 over the weekend. 4k is brilliantly sharp, as expected. 1080p is woefully soft. *scratches head* It doesn't make any sense to me why it's so soft straight out of the camera. Fortunately, a drop of "Sharpen" in Premiere and the 1080p snaps to life, looking about as good on my 1080p monitor as the downscaled 4k -- a relief, because as much as I wanted to fiddle with 4k, I had hoped to do a fair bit of 1080p shooting also!

Unfortunately, at least as far as I can tell, there is no in-camera sharpening like there seems to be in the RX10. Pity. Why?! (Pleeeaasssee?!)

The conspiracy theorist in me is imagining Sony engineers being told to soften the 1080p image so that the 4k looks better. But no, they'd never stoop to something like that...

Aaron, my advice would be to shoot everything in 4K regardless of how sharp or soft the actual HD mode is. Shoot in 4K and simply downscale to HD when you need it. This way everything you've shot is permanently archived in 4K. The day may come when you look back at some of your footage and wished you had shot it in 4K.

I really can see little advantage for shooting in HD with the AX100.

Aaron Holmes

June 2nd, 2014, 09:19 AM

Aaron, my advice would be to shoot everything in 4K regardless of how sharp or soft the actual HD mode is. Shoot in 4K and simply downscale to HD when you need it. This way everything you've shot is permanently archived in 4K. The day may come when you look back at some of your footage and wished you had shot it in 4K.

I really can see little advantage for shooting in HD with the AX100.

The only advantage is 60fps -- which, it turns out, is most of what I expect to be shooting. :) The primary aim of the camera was to replace my (relatively) ancient CX12 as B-cam while allowing experimentation with 4k. Although I enjoy the opportunities I get to plan and execute real shoots, the reality is that I mostly do grab-n-go handheld shooting of family events and whatnot, and I'm not a huge fan of the 30/24fps aesthetic in those situations.

Rob Cantwell

June 2nd, 2014, 12:26 PM

Rob, an argument can be made that both the AX100 & CX900 will produce cleaner, more artifact-free footage than the Canon.
Good point, I'd like to see a real life side by side to see how they compare.

Keith Rollinson

June 2nd, 2014, 12:43 PM

Marc,
are you using the MIS-SHOE without problems? I cannot use any heavy accessory on MIS-SHOE: there is the risk it could fall to the ground. I have already broken a lamp. The MIS-SHOE doesn't settle strongly on AX100 shoe. In fact after installing it on the shoe, if I shake the MIS-SHOE, it comes off.
Thanks for your suggestions.

I am using the MIS-SHOE w/ a RODE Stereo Pro Mic - it is rock solid, no slop at all in the shoe. 100% confidence.

Perhaps you have a defective one, or one that is not securely mounted or fastened. How "heavy" an accessory are you mounting?

Adriano Moroni

June 2nd, 2014, 03:05 PM

I am using the MIS-SHOE w/ a RODE Stereo Pro Mic - it is rock solid, no slop at all in the shoe. 100% confidence.

Perhaps you have a defective one, or one that is not securely mounted or fastened. How "heavy" an accessory are you mounting?

I think my light is too much heavy. My light is like it: 312as Bi-color Changing Dimmable LED Video Light Panel with Magnetic Filter Plate - Laptop Computer Chargers And Adapters - Amazon.com (http://www.amazon.com/Bi-color-Changing-Dimmable-Magnetic-Filter/dp/7544332101/ref=sr_1_fkmr3_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1401743159&sr=8-2-fkmr3&keywords=led+light+camcorder+dimmable+LS)

Dave Blackhurst

June 2nd, 2014, 06:13 PM

The only advantage is 60fps -- which, it turns out, is most of what I expect to be shooting. :) The primary aim of the camera was to replace my (relatively) ancient CX12 as B-cam while allowing experimentation with 4k. Although I enjoy the opportunities I get to plan and execute real shoots, the reality is that I mostly do grab-n-go handheld shooting of family events and whatnot, and I'm not a huge fan of the 30/24fps aesthetic in those situations.

@Aaron -

I'm sure the "worst" HD from the AX100 will be far superior to the old CX12... just p vs. i will make a big difference! Make sure you're using the XAVCS 50Mbps 60p, it looks to me like it improves over the 28Mbps AVCHD. I'll have to do some tests against the RX10, but I think they'll match up OK.

I'm also in the "not a fan of 30p aesthetic" club, but I'm trying to experiment with shutter speeds (manual control rather than letting the cam run auto) to see if some of that can be tamed, I think it is a critical part of the equation, based on a bit of playing with the 30p mode. I'd really rather shoot in 4K whenever possible, but I'm still "experimenting" and learning...