Sony killed the FX1. Any Sony NAB news?

[John Trent]

Sony has quit making the FX1. Most stores are sold out, so they're already rid of their old stock. So, could you NAB reporters please quit drooling over the cameras most of us can't afford (RED etc.) and please stop by the Sony booth and extract the information from them, as to whether they'll release an improved model, a dumbed down one, or no replacement at all?

You have my permission to go all Jack Bauer on their ass and shoot them in the leg if they are not forthcoming with the intel. Just kidding.:) Seriously, if Sony releases a dumbed down version or none at all, they'll already have shot themselves in the foot...again.

[Giroud Francois]

i think the answer is pretty clear.
HC1 has been downgraded to HC3
Z1 is not disappearing, FX1 is almost the same camera, so why should they replace it with a better camera (making the Z1 obsolete).
Certainly sony try to sell a lot of HDV camera because then they will sell a lot of LCD screen and blu-ray.
But selling a lot of camera means selling cheap camera, especially that all people looking for a good SONY HDV probably already buy the FX1 (they sell a lot of them , so market is probably saturated for a while now)
So we will see more HDV camera but with weaker specs (after all the sanyo is selling well, and PANA prooves you can build an HD camera with low resolution CCD).
If you want a good HDV camera for cheap, i think you should get an FX1 now, or wait and get 500$ rebate on a Z1 if you can afford it.

[Boyd Ostroff]

Originally Posted by John Trent

Sony has quit making the FX1.

Well I realize that this is the "net wisdom," but can anyone point to an official announcement from Sony that says the FX1 has been discontinued? All we have is anecdotal information as far as I can tell. B&H doesn't list the camera as discontinued, just "out of stock." And Sony still lists the FX1 for sale at their own "SonyStyle" site. So I'm confused as to what's really going on here....

http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INTE...o&Dept=cameras

[Steven Davis]

Well EVS still has it listed http://www.evsonline.com/merchant2/m...ct_Code=HDRFX1 I know I know, you all are passing out that I'm listing a sponsor............Boyd.....hehe. (just kidding)

So who knows. I also want to know if Sony or anyone is going to release anything comperable with the Z1u. I've been pounding the web all week waitng for something. I need to purchase around the middle or end of May.

[John Trent]

I'm confused as well, Boyd (I'm also confused how to delete my double post, sorry). In the Sony FX1/Z1 thread people are reporting retailers, and Sony themselves, telling people it's been discountinued.

I just called B&H Photo and they said it's just out of stock, not discountinued. I was hoping for a newer better model with 24P or at least something comparable to Canon's 24f.

You guys at NAB can still pester Sony for something new and better from them.

Thanks.

[Boyd Ostroff]

See this other thread: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...t=65575&page=3

And it's true... the FX1 now shows up as being in stock again at B&H for $3,050:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ughType=search

Veeery interesting.... before I made that other post (3 or 4 hours ago) I looked at B&H's website and it was still listing the FX1 as "out of stock." Heh, I bet they're gonna get a bunch of orders now :-)

[Giroud Francois]

the price is up probably simply because the petrol is up and everthing made of plastic and travelling a way or another will be more expensive.

[Brendan Sundry]

Originally Posted by Giroud Francois

HC1 has been downgraded to HC3.

What is the thinking behing this? was the HC1 too good, they did this with the GS500 as well, conspiracy?

[George Ellis]

No, the HC1 was not too good. If you read some of the threads in the HC1/A1/HC3 forum, it is not good enough. The HC1 makes red look a little pink and the HC3 is reported to fix it. And, it is Sony, so rational thought may not have been used in the decision.

[Giroud Francois]

depends what you name better.
for regular consumer whom the cam is targeted to, yes HC3 is better.
better picture, smaller sized, cheaper, better sensitivity, hdmi output, better LCD.

for amateur, like probably most of us here, we loose micro input,video input, manual focus ring, about half milion pixel on sensor, component output.

[Paulo Teixeira]

Brendan Sundry,
The only logical explanation for this is what a lot of people are speculating. Both the GS500 and HC3 aren’t really successors to the GS400 and the HC1 even though both Panasonic and Sony may claim them to be. Both of them will receive true replacements later on this year. If I’m not correct then their truly aren’t any other explanation at all.


Imagine what the picture quality would be if the Z1u and the FX1 both had 3 CMOS chips instead of 3 CCDs as well as an option to run the tape faster to achieve the data rate of XD CAM HD.

[Wayne Morellini]

Originally Posted by George Ellis

No, the HC1 was not too good. If you read some of the threads in the HC1/A1/HC3 forum, it is not good enough. The HC1 makes red look a little pink and the HC3 is reported to fix it. And, it is Sony, so rational thought may not have been used in the decision.

Somebody posted links to the sensor pattern of the HC3, with much less colour pixels then bayer and turned pixels that don't fit rectangular/square pixels. This would mean less colour definition and pixel resolution then HC1's 4:2:0 pixel format.

Originally Posted by Paulo Teixeira

Brendan Sundry,
Imagine what the picture quality would be if the Z1u and the FX1 both had 3 CMOS chips instead of 3 CCDs as well as an option to run the tape faster to achieve the data rate of XD CAM HD.

Yes, that would be a good enough reason to buy. I like the HC1's picture compared to the FX1 (though it is a compromise).

[Marvin Emms]

The ClearVid in the HC3 has poorer colour resolution and a smaller number of total pixels. The HC1 has to downsample, the HC3 has to upsample. The pixel layout is the usual square pixel array turned by 45 degrees. This is actually a very dirty trick, because when an image processing application then compares the HC1 to the HC3 to find out the 'true' resolution, the HC1 sensor is oriented so the weakest spacial lines are vertical and horizontal, whereas the HC3 is oriented so the weakest spacial linea are on the diagonals. So the HC3 has a boosted number for both vertical and horizontal resolution, even though this is hiding the weak diagonals.

Sony's excuse for this, is that most straight lines in the real word are horizontal and vertical, and they do have a point, but this should not be instead of a decent resolution sensor it should be as well as.

Real test shots have shown quite clearly that the HC3 has poorer resolution than the HC1, though Sony have quite clearly tried to compansate for this by using more agressive sharpening on the camcorder.

The single partially redeaming feature the ClearVid chip has, that the one in the HC1 does not have, is progressive scanning. It could just as easily as 60i give us 30p, or even 24p. True 24p. But they haven't bothered to impliment this on the camcorder. My cyncism gland is telling me to watch for a a more expensive camcorder that does do true 24p but with the same poor chip.

I say single, in that better low light performance ought to be, but for me this is just a fringe benifit of throwing away resolution (bigger pixels) lower red/blue resolution (a larger green area means higher signal) and much more processing needed to generate the image (interpolation/sharpening).

[John Ashton]

the FX1 wasn't really a big success.

[Boyd Ostroff]

Welcome to DVinfo John. Do you have any support for that statement, or is it just your opinion? It is contrary to everything I've read elsewhere.