Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

BELOW, READ CAREFULLY AS A NEWBIE WOULD.

[26] Adjusting the shutter speed

The procedure to set the shutter speed is explained as follows.
1. Press the PROGRAM AE button to set the IRIS (aperture), gain (ISO), shutter speed, and exposure to [Auto].

EVERY INSTRUCTION TELLS YOU TO PRESS THE AE BUTTON FIRST -- WHICH WILL ALWAYS CANCEL ALL YOUR MANUAL SETTINGS. THAT'S NUTS!

2. Press the SHUTTER SPEED button to set the shutter speed to manual. << OK

Each time you press the button, the setting switches between manual and auto. << NOTE IT CLEARLY SAYS THERE ARE TWO MODES -- NOT THREE.

Descriptions of icons to switch operating mode.
(no icon): manual operation << OK
: automatic operation << OK
: manual operation of [Exposure] << WTF DOES THIS UNEXPLAINED CONCEPT MEAN? SHUTTER SPEED ALWAYS AFFECTS EXPOSURE IF YOU CHANGE IT. I FIGURED e MEANT Engaged.

3. Rotate the MANUAL dial to adjust the shutter speed. << OK. BUT, THE CONTROL REMAINS LIVE. ANY BUMP AND SHUTTER SPEED IS VERY LIKELY TO BE CHANGED WHICH CANNOT BE ALLOWED TO HAPPEN! ONE MUST BE ABLE TO LOCK SHUTTER SPEED AND GAIN.

I'm not making it complicated.

I'm reading the manual and doing exactly what it says to do. And, what it says to do and what it does are simply not compatible with how pros shoot. The fact that other Sony cameras work like this doesn't matter to me. Shutter-speed in every pro camera is able to be set -- almost never to be changed. Likewise, Gain is added by the shooter -- not auto-added by the camera in Exposure mode.

I wouldn't mind if AUTO worked this way, but when marketing claims the camera can be used in manual mode, I expect that the firmware supports this in a logical manner and the documentation describes correctly how to use the manual mode.

Thankfully, by chance, I started with Shutter, went to Gain, and finished with Iris -- leaving IT live. Had I done settings in reverse order, Shutter would have remained live. And, thankfully, I didn't read the manual and learn I had to press the AE button before selecting each mode to adjust.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I never read my manual. ;-)

I just unboxed it and started shooting. I remember that before I even started my first recording, I switched to manual shutter, iris and gain before I hit the record button.

Switching is quick and easy. No matter what the Sony instruction manual says. I promise that you don't need to touch the Program AE button in any way to adjust Gain, Shutter and Iris.

In fact, I don't think I have ever pressed the Program AE button even once yet on my AX100

CT

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I don't know whether you are ranting about the manuals or the controls! You did learn that you can fix the shutter and not worry about bumping the dial, so what are you now complaining about?

Here is another tip you could have learned too: There is a 'manual' button. If you hold it in, you get a menu of additional choices that the dial will adjust, including AE, Exposure, and WB. If you set it to one of those then you could have fixed (beforehand) shutter, iris, and gain - all fully manual and set without any chance of moving any of them by bumping the dial, unless you set the dial to Exposure.

Btw, 'Exposure' adjustment means when you turn the dial exposure changes and the camera (not you) alters the iris, gain, and shutter. I do not find this useful, but that is what it does.

I shoot shutter priority, fixing the shutter and gain, then setting the dial to AE so I can offset the auto iris to my liking. It is exactly what I wanted in a camera/camcorder.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

[QUOTE=Mark Rosenzweig;1839531

I shoot shutter priority, fixing the shutter and gain, then setting the dial to AE so I can offset the auto iris to my liking. It is exactly what I wanted in a camera/camcorder.[/QUOTE]

For the AX1 and NX5U I have AE shift set to one of the custom buttons so that I can do much the same with the option of including AE shift or by making iris manual cancel the auto at this level and go to full manual. For the smaller Sony's I have ( CX700, NX30U ) I also use fixed shutter and AE shift a lot letting the camera chose the best gain and iris for the situation as most of mine is in the darker theatre environment.

Ron Evans

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

"I don't know whether you are ranting about the manuals or the controls! You did learn that you can fix the shutter and not worry about bumping the dial, so what are you now complaining about?"

Because I'm reviewing the AX100 I have to look at it as someone who has no experience and/or does read the manual. Controls, ergonomics, and documentation play as much of a role in my judging a camera as does image quality. In fact, a poor control system and poor documentation prevent someone from getting the best from any camera. What would you think of a camera where the reviewer said "if you have experience with past Sony cameras and do a bit of trial and error, you can use the AX100. If you don't have prior experience, you will find documentation is either missing (not in the box) or wrong."

For example, putting the Magnification button on the right side where it can't be reached without jiggling the camera insures this function will never be used. Where is the "My Button" located? Every camera I've used has one more User Buttons and they are physical buttons. A DSLR has an Intelligent Mode, but it is physical setting. By the way, the words Shutter Priority are not to be found. But, who thought up Program AE when the "program" is never discussed. Seems like the word AUTO is a lot simpler. (Somehow I got the AE shift to work with Auto Exposure. I have to start over today in trial and error mode.)

I look in the manual to find the frame-size and frame-rate of the marketed FAST option. This information is not in the manual. (I do find a Golf mode. Wow.) In fact, the entire menu system is not documented in the manual. Thankfully, I found a full manual posted in Europe.

Moreover, with no Sony camera experience the controls make no sense. How would anyone guess what "blank" "a" and "e" mean? Sony must have some corporate concept of "exposure" operation, but it is sure not obvious. So the buyer grabs the manual and will find no explanation of "blank" "a" and "e". In fact, even with shooting experience, I still have no idea. I'm guessing I don't want to see an "e."

We are not talking about a $900 HDV camera. It's 2014 and for $1000 I can buy a Blackmagic Pocket Cinema camera. For $1700 I can buy a 4K GH4. For $3200 I can buy a Digital Bolex. Sony has competition below it and above it. And, all these cameras offer far better quality images with a better codec. Their attitude toward customers, I think deserve a rant. Could this be why Sony has lost money for 5-6 years?

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Hmm, so this IS a rant about the manual. Got it.

Steve, your review of the manual is one thing, but do you see any owner complaining about this like you are? Most manuals are quite lacking, so I can't get nuts over this. Been there, done that...many times.

As for the cameras that you mention that offer 'far better PQ'. Really? The AX100 certainly offers far better resolution & sharpness than the BMPCC. It's not RAW, but not everyone wants or needs RAW. Additionally, as was seen in the A/B between the AX100 and the BMC 4K camera (same scenes), the AX100 even offered better resolution than that 4K camera.

As for the GH4, how can you say anything when there isn't a single downloadable native clip yet posted? That's just a bit silly. What I can say thus far, based on Vimeo & YouTube clips, it again appears the AX100 has better resolution than the GH4, but we still need to wait for the final firmware and actual native clips. You also list the price at $1,700. Do you use a lens with your bodies? I think in the interest of honesty we can say that the price significantly exceeds that of the AX100 when you shoot the GH4 with a lens. I've always found I get much better pictures and video when I use a lens. ;)

"Far better PQ"? Me thinks you need to take a chill pill, put down the manual and actually work with the camera. It's far better than you make it out to be and just seeing owner's reactions confirm that. Of course they're not obsessing over the owner's manual. :)

Finally, Sony is losing money not for the reason you stated, I think you know that. Just as Panasonic made great plasmas, but lost money doing that, this had nothing to do with the quality of the product or its attitude toward customers. You're really being a bit disingenuous.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Manuals? We don't need no steenking manuals! <wink>

Hopefully the sarcasm font was working?

Seriously, manuals (and documentation in general) are often a major weak point, opening the door to aftermarket "camera operation for dummies" (or people who just can't figger it out on their own) books!

I've run into it when I try a different brand, and it doesn't "work as expected" - cameras, cars, cell phones... ANY complex piece of tech may be designed or implemented "logically" or less than logically... even better is when buttons get "switched" between versions from the expected positions in "user interfaces" - there oughta be a law against that!?

In the end, this is why one needs to spend some time learning how a particular device "works", at a time when the frustration won't cause a major fuss or disaster... the more complex the device, the more this applies.

Not trying to excuse "bad manuals", but some things just need to be "hands on" - which of course then produces "muscle memory", which of course then makes one crazy when the next device is set up completely differently... my A77 frustrates me almost every time I pick it up, while the RX10 makes me smile... without reading the manual of course <wink>!

I've noticed over the years that "Sony design logic" is different from "Panasonic design logic" is different from "Canon design logic"... and so on. It's a PITA for users that have to, for whatever reason switch regularly, but it is what it is. Reviewers seem to struggle a lot with this phenomenon...

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Here I'll help you out with your review. From seeing other websites, what I've gathered is that the correct way to review a Sony camera is as follows:

1) Start with a reviewer that is familiar with Canon or Panasonic gear, then have then criticism everything about the Sony camera because it doesn't work like the Canon or Panasonic gear they are used to.

2) Then spend the next bunch of paragraphs ranting about how the interface is all wrong because it's not identical to the Canon/Panasonic interface they are used to.

3) Next go on about how it is impossible to film anything valid unless you have 14 stops of dr, 600mbps raw codec, full manual everything, zero aliasing and moire and only a fool would ever consider a camera that doesn't have all of the above.

4) Always be sure to include a rant about no prores support because clearly prores is the only valid codec on the planet.

5) Then ignore all positives of the Sony camera like being able to share accessories with other Sony camera gear, oled viewfinder, good battery life, etc...

6) Next ignore all negatives of other competing brands like poor ergonomics, not being able to format memory cards or delete individual files while in the field, shitty battery life, etc...

7) Finally you find the best edge case you can that makes the Sony camera look bad and make a video of it so everyone else can link to that one video as the complete summary of the Sony camera, because everyone knows that a single edge case of failure for a piece of gear clearly reflects upon how everyone on the planet will use it.

There you go, Sony camera review done. At least that's how I gather they are done from reading other websites, your mileage may vary of course.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Dave, true. Additionally, most novices are not going to buy a $2,000 camcorder. This camera is aimed more at the enthusiast or prosumer who wants to get in to 4K. This won't be the choice of the soccer mom who wants an occasional video of the kids.

So the target audience will likely have experience with cameras/camcorders and, I bet, multiple brands. They'll be willing to sit down with the unit and learn it. Further, they'll likely come to forums like this to ask questions and learn.

Camera forums, isn't that what we nerds...err, folks do? ;)

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Peter, can I give your post 5 stars? This is so true that it's scary. What's scarier is that I could have seen myself writing it. Why didn't I? :)

But wait, as one poster here repeats 100s of times on different forums, didn't you forget about the 30p limitation? There, now the list is complete!

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

jeez, looks like i've got catching up to do. just got back from a 2 week getaway and the ax100 just had to arrive back at home smack in the middle of it

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

If somebody "wants" to hate a camera...it's not a very hard thing to do.

Hell, I could hate a Sony F55 and tell you at least 20 reasons why it sucks. If I put my mind to it, I could certainly do the same with any BlackMagic camera or even any RED camera....if I really have that idea in my head.

People's expectations can often vary widely. But again, if you dont like the numbers on paper before you ever see a camera. (I.e....60Mbp/s 29.97p sucks) than its pretty much a self fulfilling proficy once you get it in your doubting little hands.

As far a resolution goes...the AX1 is damn sharp!

From what I have read, the BlackMagic 4K camera only has an 8 megapixel sensor. It does not use the 20% oversample rule before bayer removal. So thats 2 million red, 2 million blue and 4 million green pixels. After bayer, you will lose around 20% of that resolution.

I have read the G4 does the same. It reads only an 8 megapixel crop from the middle of the sensor.

We are told that Sony reads a full 16×9 image which is over sampled "before" debayer and uses all those extra pixles during its internal scale down.

This could easily explain why its tack sharp and loaded full of so much detail.

Ok...ill admit it. I got my AX100 expecting that I would probably return it because I didnt think I would be impressed with it. However, after the 3rd day of shooting, I was completly won over by it. It was "not" the camera I thought it would be. It turned out to be much more than I originally expected.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I had not heard that Cliff. That's a bit disappointing, but does explain why the samples we've seen are not up to the resolution of the AX100. Are you sure about that?


But that's the difference between having an open mind and being steadfast in criticizing the camera when you've never seen the native output on a large screen HDTV, let alone a large screen UHD TV.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Sitting with AX100 and have made the basic menu choices:

1) Set Exposure = AUTO.

2) AGC LIMIT = OFF or 18dB to 24dB. (I'm concerned it's AGC. The word Auto implies gain can vary up to the limit. In low-light, changes in light could cause fluctuations in gain -- something one does not want.)

3) AE SHIFT = 0.7 (tip: must press P.AE in order to menu item.)

4) What does LO-LUX do? Never documented.

5) Set Picture Effect = OFF.

6) Set Cinematone = ON or OFF.

7) Set SteadyShot = ACTIVE.

8) Set Digital Zoom = OFF.

9) Set Auto Back Light = OFF.

10) What is Smile Sensitivity doing here? :)

11) My screen BUTTONs: Monitor Brightness, Spot Meter, and Audio Rec Level.

12) Audio Level does not control level of plugged in external mic -- which seems like when one would need control the most.

13) Set Zebra = 100. (A warning of clipping as the AX records up to 108%.

14) Set Frame Rate. You must then press NEXT and then OK.

15) Set Camera Data Disp. and Audio Level Display = ON.


I'll try to recreate what I did on Tuesday to get exposure control:

1) For auto-shooting, press P.AE to set everything to Auto -- all As. Press AF/MF as needed.

2) If Shutter = A, press Shutter -- the A goes away -- and dial to 48 (24fps) or 60 (30fps). Camera is now in Shutter Priority mode.

3) If Gain = A, press Gain -- the A goes away -- and dial to the value you want.

4) Press Iris twice -- the A stays.

5) Exposure -- which is controlled only by the aperture -- is automatic with AE Shift honored.

6) Briefly press the Manual button and the A switches to E. Use the Dial to control exposure -- which is controlled only by the aperture -- AE Shift not honored. (I would much prefer the Lens Ring ZOOM option be replaced by the Exposure control as it is far more traditional.)

7) When Focus and/or Exposure are in Automatic mode, before starting shooting -- press AF/MF to Lock focus and/or press the Manual button to lock exposure. This prevents unwanted disturbances in images during a shot. After shot, press AF/MF to Unlock focus and/or press the Manual button to unlock exposure and return to AE.

This works for me. And, this may well be what you guys do on your Sony cameras, I don't know.
I'm not seeing many links to 4K movies -- how many folks have AX100s?

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

>> I'm paid to write for professional magazines so reviews must be balanced. Interface design, ergonomics, and documentation are valid topics for a review.

3) next go on about how it is impossible to film anything valid unless you have 14 stops of dr, 600mbps raw codec, full manual everything, zero aliasing and moire and only a fool would ever consider a camera that doesn't have all of the above.

4) always be sure to include a rant about no prores support because clearly prores is the only valid codec on the planet.

>> Equally valid is what technology the camera uses. And, at a price are better technologies available. You sound like a fanboy who want's nothing negative to be written.

5) then ignore all positives of the sony camera like being able to share accessories with other sony camera gear, oled viewfinder, good battery life, etc...

>> And now you want positives. Seems you want marketing copy, not an honest review.

6) next ignore all negatives of other competing brands like poor ergonomics, not being able to format memory cards or delete individual files while in the field, shitty battery life, etc...

>> Not relevant for the current review,

7) finally you find the best edge case you can that makes the sony camera look bad and make a video of it so everyone else can link to that one video as the complete summary of the sony camera, because everyone knows that a single edge case of failure for a piece of gear clearly reflects upon how everyone on the planet will use it.

>> What are you talking about. We don't link to videos.

There you go, sony camera review done. At least that's how i gather they are done from reading other websites, your mileage may vary of course.

>> You watch way too many free reviews done by kids. Try reading professional magazines who hire professional reviewers with decades of experience with all brands. Why do you think sony, jvc, pana loan me cameras to be reviewed?

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

There are tons of them on the internet. Tons.

Here's one that was just posted today. He obviously played with saturation, but that was the look he was after and many found this video great. Feel free to rail away Steve. ;)

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Steve, if you read your posts objectively, you'll see how people can draw this conclusion. It's hard to recall anything positive you said about the camera. However, it's extremely easy to recall the endless negatives you've written.

Frankly some of us are quite surprised by some of your questions. It almost appears as if you haven't handled a Sony in years and years. The camera menus have changed little and the controls are very much the same as they have been in other high end Sonys. In fact, most people feel the controls are laid out quite sensibly.

No, I'm not surprised that people react this way at all. You talk about objectivity, but frankly it seems a bit lacking in all your comments.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

OK, saw a bit of "stutter" in that track meet video... hope it was 24p or something intentional (I've seen some video I think introduces that look on purpose). But freezing frames, they looked pretty clean, and that opening shot... not sure if it was done live somehow or green screened or what... but "wow"... very 3D feel!

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

** From where did you read this?

** Told from who?

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

The first place I start is with the documentation. It's poor. Do you think it's good?

Then I look at control operation. I've owned Sony's from the first Video8 onward. I've never liked their control design and always said so in my reviews which go back to 1993. JVC and Panasonic I feel are much better. But Sony still overall made the best camcorders. So I lived with the controls.

Sony loaned me a prototype of a V1. Do you really think I'm going to remember its controls years later. Once JVC brought out the HD100 and HD10, I've just found them a better fit to my needs. Then I stopped using camcorders entirely.

I wrote a book on the NEX family that covered the VG10, but nothing convinced me to buy a VG10. Same old Sony control issues. The NEX photo cameras were IMO much better. Video DSLRs work like a photographer or filmmaker expects. Now we have the choice of digital cinema cameras that one uses like film cameras -- which is where I started.

In the time since the AX100 was first shown at CES, the market has become a very crowded. The AX100 has to be reviewed in this new context. Our choices are no longer a DV or HDV camcorder from another Japanese company. The real competition for quality are the RAW/ProRes 422HQ (10-bit) camcorders. Resolution simply is not the most important factor. Our criteria for picture quality is now digital cinema because this quality is now in the prosumer price range. IMO once Sony made a 24fps 4K camcorder with a Super16 sized sensor with claims of full manual operation -- they put themselves in the cinema camera business -- even if they call it a Handycam. (Which may be to differentiate itself from something coming at NAB using the same sensor.) I mean who wouldn't want CineAlta-like images at $2000? (Not that the BMCC doesn't have many flaws.)

Moreover, I've posted the low-light tests folks asked for. Strange how these were totally ignored because they were positive. Seems to me folks are hyper defensive about Sony. :) More rolling shutter tests going up tonight. I could see some RS sometimes, but about the same as other CMOS cameras. I don't think this is a problem even at 24p. On the other hand at 4K there is a lot of aliasing around tree leaves and branches. I've seen this same aliasing on the samples posted several months ago. Also, noise is visible at full resolution. Why in bright light there should be noise -- I have no idea.

PS: there are dozens of GH4 samples on-line:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=U...&v=JyB2_COzWsU

http://www.eduardoangel.com/2014/02/...-with-the-gh4/

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

[QUOTE=Steve Mullen;1839622] Sony loaned me a prototype of a V1. Do you really think I'm going to remember its controls years later.

Steve, this is all a bit of a time waste, you actually wrote a full how to use book on the Sony V1/FX7 and guess what?, they have exactly the same method/logic for manual control for iris/shutter/gain as the AX100! - can I loan you a copy.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I have never used any scorpion handle. Can you tell me what scorpion handle you use precisely? I'm thinking to use AX100 with it. But I need a very light scorpion because I will use it for my trips in the rainforest. Do you think it will be useful really for AX100? ..... Or what do you recommend?
thanks

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

What exactly are you viewing the 4K videos on? Your comments on "aliasing' are completely false if you are not watching on a 4K monitor. Any scaling can introduce artifacts.

Slashcam (a non-grumpy reviewer) has done a real review with *test charts* and finds the Sony AX100 to have almost 0 artifacts at 4K. It finds the Sony AX100 to be superior in 4K in resolution compared to the 1 DC, AX1, and the BM4K (has not tested the GH4), inclusive of moire and other artifacts. You can knock the manual and button placement all you want (purely subjective), but your comments on picture require suitable equipment.

Here is the Google translation of the Slashcam.de statement about resolution: "From all previously tested in our editorial 4K cameras (1 DC, BM4K , AX1 ) shows the Sony AX100 , the best so far , almost perfect 4K sharpness. Perfect mainly because the debayering the color channels without moiré pattern or other proceeds."

And, a Youtube video is not a "sample." A sample is a clip/video straight from the camera. There are plenty of those from the AX100. All of the GH4 videos in any case are from "pre-production" cameras, which could be specially tweaked, or have faults, who knows?

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

No,..I'm no expert on the exact mathematics used in the scanning and de Bayering the image sensor of either the AX100 or the GH4. The only people on the planet that know this exactly are the very small hand full of engineers at Sony and Panasonic that designed their circuits. Everything else is just marketing material.

I'm not going to try to retrace everything I have read about it. Just Google it, read about it and decide what you believe is right or wrong. There is plenty more out there too to find and read.

That AX100 is CRAZY sharp! The footage I'm shooting is blowing me away in that category. So far, from the limited material I have seen from the GH4, it doesn't quite seem to compare. (maybe that will change when the GH4 finally comes out)

I'm going to put my AX100 up against my EX1r and FS100 this weekend on a "dynamic range" shootout test. should be interesting!

Read what you want, believe what you want. Do whatever works for you.

CT

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Well remember, this is exactly the kind of event that I wouldn't recommend using a 30p camera. Yet it acquitted itself very well. I know the shooter and he was delighted.

He used rails for the opening shot, not green screened.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

When evaluating a camera for my own use, that's the last place I start. But no, the documentation is not good. And it's not good with Panasonics, it's not good with Canons and so on. Next?
So here we get in to the area of subjectivity and that's where a reviewer can really muck up a review. The control layout is YOUR opinion. An objective review should not say the layout is poor when it's simply the reviewer's opinion. Many find the layout logical and well thought out.
Yes, and there are hundreds of AX100 videos on line too. Not sure what the point is.

Steve, the fact is the thing you've spoken the least about is picture quality. I find that very odd when conducting a review. I'm funny about cameras, PQ is the number one issue in my book.

P.S. As Mark pointed out, SlashCam just did a review on the AX100 and found it the best 4K camera they've yet reviewed. This wouldn't be surprising to you if you actually watched the AX100 videos instead of reading the instruction manual. I don't mean to be sarcastic, but many of us just don't get your point.

There's also a comparison video on the site between the AX100, GH4 and BMC 4K. Differences are dramatic.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Well they go by many names, but it's basically this:

Amazon.com: Opteka MOON Grip (Black): Camera & Photo

A very cheap handle that you mount the camera to. I like it because it means my hands never touch the camera body so camera handling noise doesn't get picked up by the built in mic. I also like it because I'm all over the place with the camera filming at all sorts of angles, and that curved handle makes it much easier for me to manipulate the camera as my needs require. The AX100 mounts to that perfectly even with a FV100 battery on it, but be aware you can't use the viewfinder when using it, you have to use the pop out lcd screen.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

[quote=Paul Rickford;1839638]There seems to be huge confusion between a book and what a review should be.

When I write a book, it only means the camera is selling very well! It does not mean I like the camera. It doesn't mean I would want to buy and own the camera. As I said, I stopped buying Sony prosumer camcorders with the VX1000. But, I'm very happy others love them and buy them -- it's good for my business.

Moreover, the point of my books is to provide shooting workflows that make shooting easy even if -- and especially when -- the documentation and/or control design is poor. I planned to write a book on the AX100. It would, of course, provide a step-by-step on shooting in specific lighting situations. (I already posted a High-contrast technique.) The step-by-step saves folks from reading the docs. and trial and error learning.

The other half of each book is post workflows. And, even though I don't like, for example, Vegas it gets covered in the same step-by-step detail as FCP X. Again, a book is for others -- not me. And, once written, I drop it from memory as I need to focus on another camcorder.

A book needs a theme. I saw the AX100 as a "ergonomic cinema camera." However, after sensing the hostility to 24p here, I have realized that "video" folks seem to not want to become "filmmakers." (In fact, there is outright hostility to even learning about anything other than a camcorder that's just like their HDV camcorder which is just like their DV camcorder.) Likewise, no matter how good the AX100 reviews are, I already know the cinema crowd will never ever buy an AX100.

That is because what is so appealing to many/most here -- and me -- is the AX100's sharpness. That LOOK is exactly the opposite of what filmmakers want. They want a digital version of film. And, film looks "organic" and has a "24fps motion signature" which is why commercials and movies are shot with Cinema cameras -- that in the past cost a fortune. Today, one can buy a Digital Bolex for $3300. With prime lenses and a mic you spend 2X more than for the AX100. This is no big deal because now one can get jobs that pay many times more money because high-end producers have the need to shoot what looks like film.

So, despite the fact that I like the AX100's look, the folks who might buy my book either hate its sharpness or hate 24p. I see no viable market.


"An objective review should not say the layout is poor when it's simply the reviewer's opinion."

This comment reflects no understanding of why a reviewer is hired and stays hired for decades. The reviewer is hired because they bring both technical knowledge AND the background to write their own opinions. In short, not only is there no such thing as an objective review -- no publication wants anything that dull. I'm hired precisely because I know, for example, how a good (pro-camera) control system works. Thus I can judge how well a prosumer system matches that goal.


I haven't yet commented on picture quality because we ALL already know the picture is crazy sharp. I'm far more interested in its flaws. Sorry, but my job is not to be a fanboy. I know what flaws are present in other 2K and 4K cameras and how they are related to their design. If anyone thinks the AX100 image is perfect -- I'm not interested in buying into your judgement. No camera captures a perfect image. And, I don't need to be told how to do my job.

But, all these negatives comments on my opinions are way OT and so are my replies.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Actually the so called cinema crowd needs to understand that a Hollywood Studio bought at least three for their use in the store I purchase mine in (Sammys Culver City CA) two weeks ago so we shouldn't get too stuffy about a Cinema Tool ..

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I just plugged in a fully charged FV100 battery into my AX100, the display says 4h 38m of battery life. Both of my FV100's are a few years old and have been heavily used so they may be reading lower than a brand new one would.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Steve Mullen: Your books are valuable, and your comments on ergonomics useful. But you strayed from a how-to and description of menus and controls and tips when you said "On the other hand at 4K there is a lot of aliasing around tree leaves and branches. I've seen this same aliasing on the samples posted several months ago. "

I asked how you viewed the 4K videos, and you chose not to reply. "several months ago" there were no out of camera AX100 videos, so you were looking at what - highly-compressedYoutube videos at 1080? Not very professional.

You are not required to reply, but this statement on 4K video quality is at odds with the findings of professional reviewers, who precisely marvel at the lack of artifacts. I suggest you get a 4K viewing device before you say anything about aliasing or anything about 4K quality for any camera. Sharpness can be seen even downrezzed at 1080; aliasing in the 4K video seen at 1080 is another matter.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

For those curious, I just tried the Zunow WCX-08 wide angle conversion lens on the AX100. Before and after pics are below. Looks like it ads significant distortion, so I'll probably be returning it.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Looking forward to seeing the outcome Cliff.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

That pull out through the track team was a killer sequence - sort of like a "happy" horror movie shot! Should scare the competition! The effect was visually impressive!

I was surprised that if you pause during the sprint/running sequences, you get a pretty sharp "still", so I guess the "stutter" is frame rate - not sure if shutter speed would help that or not, but it still looked good, even if one is not a fan of that "look", I see it plenty of times in current productions - probably a place where shooting in the 1080/60p mode would have been good, if it would intercut OK....



I sort of see Steve's thinking - he's trying to meet "his" market for reviews and books... you HAVE to find "something" to not like ... even if it's sort of a rehash of earlier criticisms, or a matter of personal taste... I usually can find things not to like too... (I'll admit to spending an unfortunate amount of time frustrated with Windows 8 and especially 8.1, questioning the intelligence of it's designers! And at the moment I'm trying to figure out Sony's varying implementations of the "MULTI" jack between lines... grr)

BUT the balancing factor is whether I get results that make my eyes happy or not... I'm not looking to "learn" a camera that I'm already used to working with because of prior experience with similar cams, so I'm not "the audience". I expect to have to take some time to learn controls on a "new" device... that's how tech stuff is! I'm also not looking to produce "films" or "filmic footage" in general - I prefer realistic (and if possible, artistic) stills and video. I DO like some shallow DoF, in the right places, and sharp clean images, so I suppose again, I'm not in the contemplated "audience"... which is fine...

Now I just hope Phil and Steve will convince a few people the camera is "junk" so some open box return deals show up! Got my RX10 that way, and ready to add this to the mix, but prices are going up, even though they are available....

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

interesting discussions going on here, but this has turned into more of a Steven Mullen topic instead of an ax100 thread...

anyways, i just got to try it out a bit, and as someone very used to sony pro cameras and probably none of sony's consumer cameras, no i don't like the menu system, but no it's not complicated at all, can be flipped through fairly quickly. some of it has to do with the design, things all kind of mush together whereas other sony camera's ive used have a clearer separation of parent/child directories/icons.

neat camera though, but the very strong rolling shutter is a bit concerning for my uses, and seems stronger than the rx10, i'll have to see if it truely is and if so, wonder how that could be....

also, after shooting vacation shots with the rx10 for the past two weeks, by far my biggest gripe was the poor optical stabilization. It may be an improvement over no stabilization at all, but it's far from great. combine that with the extending lens which tends to jitter around(and stabilization can't do anything about that) i've been even more interested in this ax100. thus far it seems that the OS and the stability of the lens are far better than the rx10. the stabilizer doesn't look to be as blow your mind amazing as some of the OS leaders, but looks to take a good edge off of jitters.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Mine just arrived from BH Photo yesterday. I am anxious to try it out on some upcoming vacations.

I am getting back into video editing and curious what workflow people are using as well as the best options for home 4K display.

Native editing or intermediate?

When I first got my FX1 in 2004 I converted to CineForm files. Anyone using CineForm?

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I edit with Edius Pro 7 on my i7 3770K system, 16G RAM, Win7 , which will edit native files XAVC-S 3840x2160 60P 150Mbps from my AX1 with the occasional falter. Vegas Pro 12 will edit fine with preview reduced. For multicam with 3 tracks of native AVCHD I convert the XAVC-S to Edius HQX intermediate and things run fine for me. With Edius on the PC I can use the HQX files in Vegas or CS6 as well.

Ron Evans

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I have been flowing this forum and I would like to make a comment about reading the manual. I got in to shooting in late Dec. 2012. I had only shot before with camera you turn on and point. I put up a Canon VIXIA HG G10 that would let me go manual. When reading around the DVINFO I seen guys asking who to get the best out of there camera. A lot of people said to learn photography so I pick up a Canon t3 1100D and join a camera club, Now I have a good understanding on how aperture, ISO and shutter speed work.

I pick up a Canon 70D a few months after it came out. I look flip though the manual for about a half hour put in down a stated shooting. I would shy if I pick up a FDR-AX100 I would look it over turn it on and start playing and see where the setting are at. I have to say I like the video I have seen out of it. My two cents.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

[QUOTE=Mark Rosenzweig;1839753But you strayed from a how-to and description of menus and controls and tips when you said "On the other hand at 4K there is a lot of aliasing around tree leaves and branches. I've seen this same aliasing on the samples posted several months ago."[/QUOTE]

I didn't stray -- I told you what I see. It's you who made several invalid assumptions and have got yourself in a self-induced tizzy. Calm down. :)

1) The resolution of a TV has nothing to do with seeing aliasing. An mp4 file consists of a series of UHD images. Each image can be examined just as a can a photo. Actually each is a photo -- and a not very high resolution photo. How do you think one looks at 20MB photos? The key, of course, is that the photo must be opened so all pixels are AVAILABLE. Then one moves a window around the image. Every photographer knows how to do this.

2) To see aliasing in motion video -- open it in QT so ALL pixels are available. Now you can see a good sized portion of the moving image.

3) All cameras are routinely compared using the internet -- ones far more expensive than the AX100. We know which effects come from compression and which don't.

4) You also seem to think folks will plug a camcorder into a 4K TV and if one watches video from the internet one is doing something wrong. The vast majority of 4K will be watched as streaming video since it will come from companies like Netflix. But, you'll have to watch you own video the same way! Are you really planning to show unedited movies on your 4K TV?

And, once you edit 4K, how will you get it to your 4K TV. Does your computer have a 4k compatible HDMI connector? How will you show your movie to someone else? Carry your computer to them?

No, you'll upload a high data-rate export. (In which I can see aliasing before it is compressed by YouTube!) I use ProRes 422 and 270Mbps h.264 UHD. Now, just like watching 4K Netflix, you watch a stream. Right now you have to watch on a computer because AppleTV and other boxes don't select YouTube's UHD stream and can't output UHD. Hopefully, the coming new AppleTV will solve this, So those samples I watched were UHD samples -- several uploaded by Sony.And, they had serious aliasing.

5) But what if your computer or TV isn't 4K? How can you see aliasing? Because aliasing has very visible low resolution component. (In fact, aliasing by definition is low frequency information. Frequencies higher than the the Nyquist frequency fold-over and become low frequency information.) Pan across tree leaves. The leaf AREA will lighten and darken -- vibrate. You can also see horizontal lines vibrate.

6) You need to grasp that for years to come the majority of what YOU post will be watched on displays smaller than 4K.

7) What's really strange is that shooting 4K and watching at HD is claimed to look better. Why? Because the HD image has been super-sampled.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Steve must be seeing things most of the rest of us aren't. I don't, nor will I ever, 'pixel peep' either frame grabs or moving video in an attempt to find artifacts. The artifacts that bother me are the ones I can see at anything approaching a normal viewing distance. Pixel peeping or putting my nose up against a 65" screen does not constitute normal viewing distance. I'm sorry, that's just obsessive. Seeing moire and aliasing with video from most DSLRs is easy at normal viewing distances. Been there done that. Such is not the case with the AX100. It simply is not.

I find it interesting that the Slascam review unequivocally stated that the AX100 had nearly perfect 4K resolution with virtually no artifacts. They went on to state that it was the best 4K camera they've tested thus far, bettering 4K cameras costing far more. Steve seems to peg cost to performance. This is obviously not the case when these cameras were tested objectively. The key word here is 'objectively'.

They didn't let button placement or poorly written manuals get in their way of assessing picture quality.

I don't see the artifacts Steve speaks of. I don't begin to make this statement based on YouTube viewings, but rather viewing footage either direct from camera to TV or memory card files to computer monitor.

I plan on buying a 2014 UHD TV that will have the capability of reading 4K files from a memory card. This was missing from 2013 UHD displays. So that addresses Steve's rhetorical question as to how will you view edited 4K projects on your UHD TV. Sorry Steve, that will be quite feasible with the upcoming displays. No computer required. :)

Oh and viewing down sampled 4K on an HDTV isn't 'claimed to be better' Steve, it IS markedly better. I'm sorry, you still sound so cynical about all of this. Very perplexing.