Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

It's my asumption that the AX1 was a bit "rushed" to the market. They wanted to get it out there fast because Sony 4K TV were hitting the streets in stronger numbers too.

I suspect that the Bionz X chip was designed to handle the 2014 wave of new 4K products. Its my guess that the architecture if the chip was designed from the ground up to handle 4K 60p and run cool. Its something Sony intended to use in multiple future products for at least 2 years down the road.

Yes. I suspect the RX10 outfitted with the XAVC codec circuit would be able to record 60p 4k and stay cool.

Its interesting that the RX10 and the new AX100 both have metal bodies. This would be a first in a small handycam. Could this also act as a heat sync? Is the Bionz X chip mounted to metal that runs into the body to disperse heat? Or is the magnesium body there to be fashionably cool? Hmmm..

Lots if questions, philosophy and theorizing! Lol

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Encoding 1920x1080 AVCHD 60P at 28Mbps is very different than 3840x2160 XAVC-S 60P at 150Mbps. I do not think the issue is sampling the sensor its encoding to XAVC-S and writing consistently to memory.

Ron Evans

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

True, that is a solid point.

I dont even really know specifically what functions that Bionz X actually does. Does anybody out there?

Does it handle sensor read out? DeBayer? Level and color balance? Camera operating system. Compression? Data buffering and card writing?

Anybody know? I suppose the last 3 are handled by a different processor? Or multimple others?

I suppose there are only a handfull of Sony engineers that could really answer this.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Well some of us have our own websites and deliver 60p to customers no problem, I've been doing so for many years. Likewise many of our customers are already rocking retina type displays that are already far beyond regular 1080p. So 60p to me and others is very important as we aren't locked to traditional tv's, 99% of my customers are on computer, phone or tablet. So I'm not happy about 30p....but I'm hoping it will just be that way for a year or so and then they will have a new small fanless video camera that will record at 60p. In the meantime I can't wait, while 4k in the tv world is rare in the computer world 1080p is basically old hat and resolutions higher than that are relatively common so I really need to move forward to 4k as soon as I can. I'll just tolerate 30p for now.


I dunno, I remember constantly hearing about overheating issues on some of their small cameras when used for video recording, it was a major issue. Given that the AX100 is also small and fanless I'd imagine overheating with 60p would be a major issue as well. It really needs to work 100% of the time for video, overheating is not an option so I prefer that they err on the side of caution.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

The mockup was show almost a year before so was expected before the main push for the 4K TV's. Also the processing chip in the AX1 and Z100 is supposed to be the same as in the F5/55. So I think it is a case of them trying to fit the high end processors into a prosumer body. This form factor is common to a few camcorders so they needed a 1\3" chip that could be made to do 4K. Hence the present products.

Ron Evans

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Whatever it is, whenever it was conceived, the AX1 is nothing to sneeze at. It produces some remarkable video.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

yes, still now I have to pause for a sec to remember where to put the D

Nikon do buy all the sensors from Sony , and it is my understanding that Nikon writes the software (but I don't buy it, Sony writes the software too in my opinion)


Much better, bravo . see? I'm getting something out of you now. Well done.
but the analysis is limited and a little childish but you are definitely in the right path.
the "thing" is that video involves "broadcasting" (where the money is). That's why our tools will never be able to produce like the broadcast tools. Still productions are not as important as the big video productions. So still cameras can be all the same , but video cameras? no way!
see now why they can't sleep at night to make sure that the limitations will put enough distance between the prosumer and broadcast segments. After the D90 their little world of "limitations" was seriously in danger, and for the first time they had to explain why they sold such limited camcorders to us when a "cheap" D90 produced "broadcast" quality. like a TV studio productions to be clear.: the technology was there even before the D90, but it was "off limits" to us. See it now? now the funny part : because of the D90 they (all) were forced to use real sensors , but now they work twice as hard to put all the limitations possible to defend the "other" business. let's be clear : what do we need? a real sensor, like the DSLR's , a good zoom (30-600), a good lanc, etc : look at the models (all, sony pana,canon) : there is NO WAY we can have all those things in the same camera, NO WAY.

no no: I am talking to you : can you imagine me trying to involve others to come and help me? no. I do it myself.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

no, there is a difference : I shoot EX1 too and there is a difference.
few months ago I proposed blu ray to a soccer team and they said "blu what?". that's what they said. do you use vegas? XDcam? there is no 108030p as an option, correct?
4K and 60p are the future , pretty much like HDV used to be.when they limited the camera to 30p they knew exactly what they were doing

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

OK, now I'M feeling sick to my stomach. I need some sleep!

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

From everything I've been able to glean and surmise, the Bionz X is a "new" processor, very likely designed from scratch, and almost certainly designed to "handle" 4K. I suspect we have yet to see what it can do. It may well be "choked" by other factors (see below).

As far as heat, yes a metal body can help with heat distribution and dissipation, and if Cliff can shoot as described, I don't think heat will be an issue. Having owned a couple Axx series that had the overheat issue, and read extensively on the problem with NEX series, I am pretty sure you'd know it if heat was a problem - the compact bodies DO increase the "potential" issue, and we've not heard of any with the RX's.

Actually, the AX100 should have a much easier time of handling any heat generated, although I expect the 4K and high bitrate 1080p WILL create more heat, all things being equal - just more data being shoveled around inside the thing! It occurs to me that this "could" be the actual reason that the RX's are "limited" to 1080/60p 28Mbps? Oh to be a "fly on the wall" when the engineers are stress testing components!

Of all the factors, I'm betting on it being availability of fast and economical memory that will handle the higher bitrate 4K - the "chain" is only as good as the weakest link - and since Panny was apparently using hand picked and tuned memory to get the GH4 working as expected, that's good enough "evidence" for me!

A "consumer" camera that would cost 50% again as much as the camera itself to buy a decent amount of memory for... would probably not be a wise thing to bring to market!! That doesn't mean that higher speed and capacity memory won't be "cheap enough" in fairly short order if the market demands it. So I guess we keep "squeaking" for more to keep the engineers from slacking off, eh!?


Having had a blast shooting with the RX10 over the weekend just "for fun", I'm just tickled with what IS possible and "relatively" affordable - sure, I'd like it to have had 4K, preferably in 60p "flavor", but "it'll do"! I'm pretty sure the AX100 will "do" as well for a dedicated video camera. I have yet to own a "perfect" camera, but Sony has definitely been hitting the mark lately!

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Anthony -

When you use D90 and "broadcast quality" in the same sentence, I have to scratch my head and laugh... you say my "analysis is limited and childish"... not to worry, duly noted, keep it up and you'll find out where it ends up. Or was that the third swing and whiff?

I think you've already lost ANY AND ALL credibility you may think you have, so you go right ahead and adjust that tinfoil hat, please do yourself a favor and keep the conspiracy theories to yourself, along with the condescension and insults. OK?


We all know there is a difference between 30p and 60p - DUH! What we are discussing is what the practical implications of that are, not some crazy theory that the manufacturers could give us such a camera right now, and aren't doing it out of some whacky evil conspiracy to deprive us of the "perfect" camera of our dreams that they could sell to us for "peanuts"...

Think for a moment, if they COULD release this theoretical "dream" camera with "every" feature, don't you think they'd sell in huge #'s, right NOW, no need to trickle cashflow in over multiple years by selling "deficient" products improved incrementally here and there to try to sell product!?! Sign most of the DVi'ers up for three or four of these "dream cameras"... at least. I'll sell a few of my "crippled" cameras right away! Or NOT... I'm sure we'd all probably buy the "deficient" AX100 that didn't exist 10 years ago over the "deficient" HC1 that did, aside from the simple fact it DIDN'T EXIST... now it does, for the same MSRP... and the HC1 was not bad, in it's day!


30p 4K may turn out to be more usable (or less) than expected... many of us have come to appreciate/prefer 60p, at least as far as 1080 goes, so we have reservations. Until cameras are in hand and tests run, we can't know for sure. There are numerous practical (and factually based) reasons that have been discussed here for the "limitation"... and practical discussions of how to deal with it (or not). You might consider that's what it's about, using the equipment that's available to the greatest extent possible...

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

60p is fine. Yes, it's cool for doing slo-mo effects and all that. And, yes, if you are shooting sports were you are using faster shutter speeds, you can see some nice motion with it.

For me? 60p is not that important. For me, 29.97p is the sweet spot. (I dont like 24p)

I shoot allot of indoor events. Many times I'm stuck in low light situations, or situations where I'm not allowed to control the light. Other times, I just want to run with the lowest gain that I possibly can. So,..a 1/30 shutter is my speed of choice. This of course, renders 60p completely useless to me.

Where do you play TRUE 60p? Youtube?, Vimeo?, Blu-ray?, iPad?, Android?, Projector?

Anything run over HDMI 1.4 and lower is likely running 60i. This is where 29.97p shines. (29.97 PSF inside a 60i signal looks great)

Unless you have a specific "motion" need for 60p to use slo-mo effects or you really want to shelf stuff for future use, than I don't see a huge need for it. For today, you are really just going to drop that 60p down to 24p, 30p or interlace it to 60i anyway. (This is a "general" comment and yes, there are some exceptions out there, I know)

CT

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Hi

There is some sample footage from https://vimeo.com/groups/226931/videos/87997397 where the original can be downloaded.

Note that it has been via an editor and re-encoded, and is some strange hybrid of frame rates, on checking the file it has original frame-rate at 25fps, and frame-rate being played at is 23.976fps, this coupled with high shutter speeds (no 180 degree shutter rule here) I found it nauseating to watch due to the juddering and strobeing. 4K at slow frame-rates in the hands of someone who doesn't know what they are doing is not pleasant to watch.

There is a very strange jelly like affect over the whole image, a mixture of rolling shutter and hunting focus maybe, it gives the impression that nothing is solid, like it's all printed on a sheet of flat plastic pulled tight but not enough to stop a breeze from causing slight undulations. I'd like to see some footage shot with the camera on a tripod and imagine stabilisation turned off as it could be that causing it.

Lots of compression artifacts over complex scenes and moire, although these may have been added by the re-encoding.

Be interesting to see what others think, however I'm getting tired of watching juddery 4K at 24fps already.

Regards

Phil

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Phil, can you provide a timecode for where you're seeing compression artifacts? Many who have seen this video have not seen these artifacts you're mentioning. I believe only Cliff mentioned it too and I also asked him to provide a timecode, but I haven't gotten one from him.

I looked at the new downloaded version and saw no compression artifacts. Even the numerous tree limbs swaying in the breeze in front of the fir tree, showed no breakdown at all...and man, I watched carefully on my 23" HD monitor.

I just took another look, this time specifically looking for moire. I don't see any here either. There's plenty of brickwork where this might show up, but I see none. None in the foreground, none in the background. I'm baffled. I've been plagued with a number of cameras that suffered from moire, but in this footage I just don't see it. Again a time code and reference to an object would help.

So either I've totally missed this or I'm totally insensitive to it even though I've seen breakdown in numerous other cameras on this same monitor and setup.

As far as the jello is concerned, again I see it only at the end. I think it was mentioned somewhere that the shooter hand held it throughout and was not feeling well when he shot it. So perhaps what you're seeing is a shaky hand, but I see no jello until he began to frenetically wave the camera back & forth. Even with his hand shaking, I can't say I see evidence of jello...until the end. We don't even know if he used OIS.

I'll hopefully have the camera a week from today, but I see no signs thus far that I'll be impacted by artifacts. My biggest concern remains the stability of the OIS utilized in the AX100. To me that's the weak point of my RX10.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

My reason for using 60P is to get the smooth motion of 60i. I find 30P is better than 24P but at a slow 1/30 has too much motion blur for me. I shoot 60P with most of my cameras even though output is always 60i as this is the same temporal motion just half the vertical resolution.

Ron Evans

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I seem to have a love/hate opinion with this video. At times is very VERY eye popping. while other times it seems to have a very "un natual" motion to it.

So here is what I see:

0:07 - 0:14 Straight vertical lines on the tall building on the left. It has what I could call a "micro-wobble". A very fast "fludder" on the long vertical edge wall.

0:30 - Vertical line in the dead center of the screen when the camera moves.

2:01 - "heat" shimmering affect appears to be amplified in a "synthetic" way by rolling shudder? It just seems very like an odd distortion that is more than a "normal" heat shimmer. (if that makes any sense...lol)

Overall,..the best way I can describe it is "un natural motion" with a "micro wobble" or even "micro skew"

Could this be just the frame rate conversion? Maybe.

I'm not going to judge the camera on this one video. I need to see allot more in true 29.97p first. I need to see it raw off the camera and not converted for the web.

I'm getting one!

CT

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Hi

Just watch the first 30 seconds, it is as clear as day the encoding is suffering. Note that watching it downsampled will hide a lot of the issues.

Use VLC Media player, play the download clip, right click on on the playing video and unselect 'Always fit to Window' and it should now be playing at full size.

You can clearly see the encoder struggling and see detail vanishing then reappearing. At around 24 seconds look at the stair case and the detail coming and going with very slight camera movement, look at the balcony edges detail come and go, because the encoder hasn't enough bit-rate to cope with the movement.

The fruit at the 1 minute mark, you can watch the mosquito noise all over the fruit.

At the 1:27 mark look at the railings and bricks, covered in compression artefacts that flicker in and out.

Look at 1:47 with the building with scaffolding and the crane, looks a complete mess.

Look at 2:19 with the trees, a complete mess of compression artefacts. I've attached a 100% crop from 2:19. I could go on.

If this was HD no one would be interested, it is horrendous. Because it is 4K that most people are viewing on small monitors and downscaling everyone is having some sort of mass hysteria for it. It's laughable really to hear people go on about this, no compression artefacts, really?

It is what it is, 4 screens of poor quality 15Mbits/sec HD stitched together and shrunk down to hide all the nastiness.

As for the funny wobbling effect, it's all over the place, you'll see it more at full screen resolution.

Regards

Phil

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I'll repost what I posted earlier because it's still applicable.

I'm downloading the 4K version and I'll take into consideration the possibility of a jacked up encode error for what could be considered a newbie in the 4K arena. I'll watch it on the Samsung F9000 4K set and I'll post my findings.

I can't wait until this thing comes out so we can put all this middle-man stuff and differences to bed. Talk about beating dead horses and there are SOO many factors to take into consideration when judging the footage so religiously. One of the biggest if the software/hardware that's it's being played back on.

Again I'll reiterate that it looks like the OIS wasn't enable for the handheld stuff. I own 3 Sony Cams (TRV-25, FX-1000, HD-70U) and Sony does a great job with OIS on it's handhelds and although I don't have a 4K cam other than my Galaxy Note 3, I can't see Sony missing the mark on OIS this bad. I'll pose that question to the original shooter as well.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

The first time I watched the "cat" video (You Tube IIRC) there was some seriously nasty "stuff" starting at around 2:16 - where the trees were moving around in the wind. I've since watched it on Vimeo, and it looks fine in those same spots. I saw similar artifacts one other time, then couldn't replicate 'em.

There are LOTS of points in the "data chain" to goof something up or for something to not work as expected, and 4K is "new". I'm only set up to "properly" display 1080, and even then run into problems sometimes with one program or another "acting up"...

THIS is why a camera that can shoot 4K is a "toe in the water"... which will no doubt be followed ay another "toe" (new computer build to better handle the higher res clips), and another "toe" or two (4K capable screen(s).... another "toe" (big honking HDD's to store clips).... and so on! I remember how the HC1 wasn't an "isolated" purchase, nor were AVCHD cameras... this round, I'm trying to plan ahead for the entire set of "investments" that are no doubt coming!

If the quality turns out to be "good enough" with 30p, it might be a bit of a blessing in disguise, I've been spec'ing out new components for a computer build, and expect 4K to require some serous "muscle", even at 30p - with phones and tablets having reduced computer sales, high end components don't come as cheap as they used to!!

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Hi

The facts are we have 4K with each HD quadrant only getting 15Mbits/sec on the AX100, and that is exactly the quality I see, perhaps worse given the encoder can't make as much savings in motion search given it has to encode the equivalent of 4 HD images at the same time.

The main problem is everyone is viewing 4K down the wrong end of a telescope essentially, you can take anything and shrink it down and it appears to look sharper and more detailed. 4K isn't about shrinking down though, it's about a future of much bigger screens and enlarging.

It astonishes me that people are saying there are no compression artefacts in this Sony AX100 footage, but clearly it is riddled with them, again it is looking down the wrong end of the telescope.

Hopefully the original footage is better and the worst of the compression artefacts are due to poor encoding later, but we still can't get away from the facts. To have AVCHD quality but in 4K would require 28Mbits/sec * 4 = 114Mbits/sec encoding, and many would argue that AVCHD quality is already pretty poor. As the encoders are little more than HD encoders with the LSI overclocked (we've not seen new silicon yet, that will arrive with H265 hardware encoding), on 4K they are even less efficient.

So 15Mbits/sec per HD quadrant, it is what it is, and was always going to be a struggle for any camera. Perhaps the GH4 will be a little better with 25Mbits/sec equivalent per quadrant, then again, that still isn't that many bits per second.

Given the Sony AX100 will record HD in 50Mbits/sec at a smooth frame-rate of 60fps, that will probably be a lot more pleasing.

Regards

Phil

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Cliff and Phil have some valid points where "something" seems to be happening, hard to say what that "something" is... High zoom (and we don't know whether CIZ or digital is involved) seems to show more "issues" - some of which could be, as Cliff suggests, "atmospheric" distortions you'd never "see" until you start shooting super high resolutions and high zooms over distance.. Things you normally wouldn't "see" with your nekkid eyes will definitely look "un-natural"...

I've wondered a bit about how well say a wedding video will be received when EVERY detail (and flaw) will be glaringly apparent. That's one instance where sharpness might be a liability!

I think that that section with the tree branches in the wind would probably stress a codec quite a bit, sort of a "worst case scenario", which leads me to a different take on all this...

What sorts of things might be interesting enough to shoot that would stress a codec to the breaking point?
Are really "busy" scenes what we will be shooting? Or will "real life" shoots be a bit less stressful and more forgiving? If using a tripod or monopod vs. handheld will help, that should be easy enough to resolve.

I'm trying to think in terms of "real life" shooting situations, and real life image quality expectations - I see FAR worse artifacts and noise all the time - the news is a BIG "offender", despite being a "big city, network" news station in a brand new facility... While WE might see every possible flaw, will anyone we're shooting for (other than ourselves) even notice? At the moment, I'd say if camera work is good, and the content is of value or interest, most people won't be picking the image apart looking for the few "bad" seconds in a clip. It's like having a couple out of focus still shots out of dozens of GOOD ones - doesn't make for a "bad" camera, as long as it's not a big pattern or persistent problem.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I don't see it. I see just a bit of movement that I'm attributing to hand holding. Nothing that I haven't seen with every camera that's hand held.
Again, to me it looks like nothing more than hand held movement.
This one I replayed 4 times before I saw anything resembling what you saw. I saw a trace of it, but the lens looks like it's at full telephoto. I often see effects like that at full telephoto with a number of cameras, though it's usually much worse. I also noted vents on the roof of that building, so it could well have been heat waves.
Yeah, man, I don't want to say you guys are truly, really, micro-analyzing this stuff. I mean do you guys actually watch your videos like this??? If so, you'd never see the content you shot! :)

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I've spoken to two guys who viewed this on 4K TVs, one on a 65" Sony UHD TV (the other I'm not sure) and both saw none of what Phil is reporting. I know Phil has never been a fan of this cam, that's no secret, but again, I think this is micro-analysis that no camera would stand up to. When watching on a typical large screen UHD TV, we sit at a normal viewing distance of 8-10' for many people. I watch my HDTV at that same distance. At that distance you just don't see this even if it did exist and was of the magnitude that Phil is claiming. I just don't get the concept of pixel peeping with video. Who does that? Not me at least.

And good God, the 'wobbling all over the place' is precisely the effect of hand holding a camera and not doing a good job at it. I see it with every single camera that's hand held and either the OIS is off, there is no OIS or the shooter just has a shaky hand. This is nothing to do with 4K. This has nothing to do with jello and it has nothing to do bitrates. It has everything to do with a steady hand or lack thereof. No mystery in my mind.

This camera is not perfect, no camera is, but as bad as Phil thinks...I don't think so. Phil continually refers to the bitrate per quadrant as if we're using the same codecs we always have. This is a different codec, that's more robust and doesn't need the bitrate of past codecs used in cameras like this. ;)

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

One more reason for 30p vs. 60p - 30 frames per second should be less data than 60 frames (for instance the RX10 has a top bitrate of 24Mbps for 24p vs. 28Mbps for 60p, the next step is a 17Mbps 24p - not far off from 15...). It may not be a LOT less data, but it should reduce the load somewhat? I think it's safe to say "there's no free lunch" when you start dealing with a lot of data bits. You either have to accept some compression losses, or deal with huge files and data handling issues.

I'm sure this is also part of the design tradeoff that went into this camera, and will of necessity go into every other 4K camera. I'm not sure it's "fair" to judge a camera that's a first of its kind on where it "fails" vs. what it does do? So far what I've seen looks promising, and if it's half as good as the RX10, it'll make a nice dedicated video complement to that camera. I'm sure there will be a few "open box returns" available at discounts when some people discover it doesn't bring them a chilled beer on demand...

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

That IS true Dave and something I forgot. This IS 30p and requires less of a bitrate to avoid artifacts as would a 60p video.

Coupling that with the fact this a new codec, more robust than AVCHD, more efficient than AVCHD and you can begin to see why it's simply not fair to say it's a fail because it's 15Mbps per quadrant. Apples to oranges.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

When watching low bitrate stuff like this, it's hard to seperate what the camera is really recording and what the highly compressed YouTube codec is showing.

The official Sony demo, if you rip it from YouTube is h.264 - high level at a 5.2 profile. But here is the kicker...it's only 15 mega bits per second!!! It looks realy damn good at 15Mbp/s...better than I ever dreamed imaginable for 4k so low.

The Cat video is nice but the official Sony demo has almost non of the problems that the cat video displays.

I can find literally nothing at all wrong with the Sony demo. (I hope it really was an AX100)

I'm going to hold all judgement untill I can see a raw AX100 60 Mbp/s clip straight from the SD card.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I should also note that we're assuming the 60Mbps is a constant data rate and not a variable one.

Now granted this video was edited, but I observed data rates going into the mid 90Mpbs area during the complex scenes. So if this actually occurred during the original recording, we have a variable encoding bitrate and not a constant one. So who knows?

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

A new youtube video

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Looks good except for all the camera movement. Looks like the shooter thought this was an 'artistic effect'.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Not bad! No real Jell-O to speak of. I feel better now. We can all see the macro blocking in the high detail, fast moving scenes but then again, this is highly re compressed for the web.

It's still a bad idea to judge from this internet streaming stuff. It's nowhere close to the original camera bitrate.

The camera work was gritty and artistically shaky but that was good to see because that would have revealed vertical skew like crazy if the AX100 was prone to it. I think it held up well in that regard.

What do we have? 1 more week to wait? I'm also waiting for the Sony Pro sister to this camera to be announced any day now.

CT

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Cliff, this is why I think some are way too quick to find flaws with this camera based on very poor 'evidence'. I saw the same thing prior to the RX10 release.

Based on that insane camera 'Shake & bake' at the end of the cat video, some were condemning the camera as useless because of the jello. I said the 'test' was ridiculous and it proved nothing. This latest video, although I didn't care for the shooter's style, shows this is not the issue that some claimed.

I totally agree that the very obvious macro blocking was due to the YouTube compression. It had that signature throughout.

Prior to the release of some cameras, there always appear to be a few that almost hope these cameras fail. I see it time and time again. Very weird.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Man, I have to say that this is also a Sony promotion. They have some very badass guys to do the post processes and never mentioned anything about it when posting the videos. I believe that they also paid Google to have advanced codec compressing to make the stream bigger for the users watching the video, the waves of sea are much clearer that what I have posted onto Youtube. The actual picture quality into customers' hands are not going to be like this good, and possibly never will be. I also noticed there are some jelly parts in scenes involving fast movements (like on public transit), plus they also intentionally evaded some high contrast part and low light circumstances. At 0:47 when the sunshine comes in the colour noise just becomes way too outrageous, with jellies.
The bottom line is that, if you complain to Sony that you can't do this or that with a camera, they will show that the camera is fully capable to do it and it's just the user's fault. Not to mention what expensive stuff (including post processing filters) and how much time they have used to make it. Sort of like a 'buyers beware' but true.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Consumer malfunction, AKA user error, is a common failure mode for high tech and even many low tech items... If you've ever worked retail or repair in a tech environment, you just laughed...

As Ken stated, the RX10 was criticized for video issues, based on horrible reviewer camera "technique"... it's turned out to be a winner. Not "perfect", but not bad for most purposes once you get to know it... We'll have to see how the AX100 turns out when released into the "real world".

I'm sure there will still be "complaints" (see above), there always are. I'm just fascinated by all the "tinfoil hats" popping up of late... I'm not surprised that a manufacturer will put their gear in the best light, and it's not surprising that they use pros that make the most of it... not even surprised that it might take some extra effort or expense to get "closer" to that level of results... not even shocked that next year, they might have improved performance!

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

After taking some much closer look on the Retina screen of MBP 15" I just feel that Youtube video's terrible to watch in details. Similar area of colours are jellied everywhere, of course it's a problem of compressed codec. It may feel good under 720p or 1080p size, but meh. Maybe I am too much of a perfectionist, but I do have the advantage being a programmer, and know exactly what's caused by the codec or the camera itself. Maybe it's better to post it onto Vimeo and set to downloadable to get better quality, but Sony would never do so. At 0:40 it shows its weakness of DF. Too much detail could expose more. Smile. And to me this colour is 4:2:0 instead of 4:2:2. meh. I would't pick it up once I get into the world of latter.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I'm not interested in credibility : I want them (all of them) to know that the entire industry has changed since the D90. Because we all got to see how easy it was. Dave think about it, for a moment : how easy it is to produce broadcast material with a decent sensor. And what they sold us until then looked like crap a split second after I (and you too I'm sure) saw what a D90 was capable of). What I see now is limitations like we never seen before. Tricks, gadgets to keep the segment alive at over 3K . (they can't sell crap for 7K anymore, at least we did get something out of that splendid D90) but still not good enough to bother the obscene money they want for broadcast stuff.
They are literally trying to resume playing with us like it used to be before the D90. Now let me be clear : which camera can compete against a GH2? Enough now. I did what I had to do for the good of my people. I believe that my message was loud and clear.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Ok im scratching my head here at the last few pages in this thread. We're talking about a 4K consumer camcorder at $2,000. It has a 1" sensor and a 10x zoom. Yes 2.8-4 isnt optimal but what other camcorder is out there that can do what this camcorder can?

The GH4 is a great tool on paper but the samples of videos I've seen have not impressed me at all. Very few scenes where you can see fine detail. The AX100 on the other hand is just so detailed down-sampled its unreal for the price of $2k. There is still a great need for camcorders with fixed lens for some applications. The ease of shooting home videos or family events with a fixed lens cmera means I don't have to lug my FS700 around.

60Mbps for 4k will have its issues as others have stated but again this is Sony and i highly doubt they want to have the headache of customer after customer calling saying their class 6 card won't record 4k. They're just not going to deal with it. If a better 4k bitrate is needed wait for the pro-version and see if it works best. I have no problem with the problems that have been pointed out and for $2k Sony is getting my money.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Looking at that new video, the one thing that stands out to me is how good the lens seems to be, Yes poor camera work but lots of everyday situations -poor light, backlight and flair and the lens seems to cope with it all very well, way better than the CX700 series- can't see any purple fringing to worry about or soft edges.

I am really not getting stressed about the YouTube codec as I saw the main promo video at CES on quite a few monitors large and small and to me it looked amazing.

I'm more than sold, roll on delivery day.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Here we go, more conspiracy theories. I thought we were past that, but I guess not. Sooo, let me ask you:

* What evidence do you have that Sony 'paid Google' to have 'advanced codec compressing'?
* What specifically are you referring to as 'also a Sony promotion'? Are you referring to the last posted video or the original true Sony promo launched a while ago?
* If you were referring to the last video just posted, and it was the Sony 'badass guys' doing the post production, then they should hire some new 'badass guys'. It wasn't particularly good.
* You say they 'intentionally evaded' some high contrast and low light circumstances. Evidence please? Additionally how do you know this last video was a Sony promo? Because of the logo in the lower right? That can be duplicated. To be honest, I never got the feeling this was actually produced by Sony.
* You say the waves of sea are so much cleaner than what you posted? What does this even refer to? Did you download the original YouTube video than re-upload it? If so, did you really expect it to look as good as the original?

Lots of accusations without any evidence...again.

I don't know guys, my head is spinning. I'm thinking it's time to talk about the elephant in the room. As long as I've been on these forums, I've seen many Sony haters out there. I don't know how they became that way, but it's very clear they exist and to deny it is just silly. Yes, there are also Sony lovers out there that think Sony can do no wrong, but that's not what I'm talking about lately with the AX100.

It appears that lately the Sony haters have come out of the woodwork with accusation after baseless accusation. This always seems to happen when a Sony camera gets particular notoriety just prior to release. This is kind of like swatting at bees, they attack.

To be very honest, I noticed this among some BMPCC owners prior to the RX10's release. Many of the attacks seemed to come from that group. It seems some don't like anything 'stealing' the notoriety of their particular gem. This is not limited to just cameras, I see the same behavior when discussion turns to video displays in the different forums. I guess it's human nature. But human nature not withstanding, it does a disservice to those looking for factual information.

Now to be clear, I'm not necessarily saying this is the behavior that Meng Li is exhibiting, but this is the internet where anyone can make any claim against anyone or any company and have no basis in fact to support it. So I see nothing wrong with calling people out when they make claims that are not supported.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Monday, I agree, it's truly amazing. I just sit here and scratch my head in amazement. Some people seem to be expecting $100,000 broadcast camera performance out of a $2,000 consumer camcorder. Rather than approaching it from the point of view that gee, here's a $2,000 4K camera that's offering us something that no other camera near its price class ever did before, they'd rather choose to micro-analyze the camera and/or make baseless accusations of Sony. They pixel peep (who does that with video and what does it prove?), draw 'jello' conclusions based on a shooter swinging the camera wildly as if having a seizure and on and on. I don't get it, I never did and I never will.
I've been a bit surprised by this too, Monday. I've found the GH4 samples posted thus far to be a bit disappointing and at least to my eyes, not looking quite as good as what I've seen from the AX100. Some show promise though. But again, I suspect that once the camera is released, we'll see some excellent video coming from it too. The GH series have been excellent performers and I doubt the GH4 will disappoint.
Correct. But again, people are judging the AX100's bitrates by what they've known from AVCHD. That's a mistake. This is a more robust codec that doesn't require the same bitrate to perform at the same level. I'd say that based on what we've seen thus far, the codec is holding up quite nicely for its intended purposes. The other thing is, I'm not convinced the 60Mbps bitrate is a constant bitrate. It might be dynamic and peak when considerable detail is contained within the scene. Once I get mine, that should be easy to determine.

Would this be the ideal cam for action & sports shooting? Probably not, but even there I'll wait to see how it actually performs under those conditions before condemning it. The only thing I can state definitively, without pixel peeping, is that for the most part, I like what I'm seeing in the video samples released to date.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Yes, Paul, people should note that you are one of the few that's actually had the opportunity to watch the demo unhindered by streaming limitations. In addition, you've actually seen it on a UHD TV and were still very impressed. I've heard the same thing from 2 other people who have also seen it on a UHD TV.

That's why this pixel peeping stuff drives me nuts. Rather than watch a moving video from a traditional viewing distance, some would rather do a frame grab of an edited and re-encoded video and 'prove' that the camera has severe limitations.