Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Here is a quick and dirty UN SCIENTIFIC test of dynamic range between the AX100, FS100 and EX1r.

I set the bright lit area to the right at just barely 100 IRE on each camera and let the rest of the shadows below it fall as it may. (when you place it into your NLE, your scopes will place the top peak highlight at about 95 IRE or so.)

These are all un graded screen caps. However, please note that there are 2 FS 100 frame captures. One used no profile and the other used the Able Cine flat profile. The FS100 is an 8 bit sensor read out and written to an 8 bit codec so I don't think the flat profile will really add any "true" dynamic range. (FS100 lens is a Sigma 18-35 f1.8 Nikon mount with no F-Stop value)

Grade them any way you want and compare. There is a significant difference in the 3 cameras.

This test was done in a very dimly lit storage room. So it's a really brutal low light test.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...20Shootout.zip

CT

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Steve Mullen has been doing this for a very long time - DV Info's tech troll. His posts are the primary reason why I left active posting years ago. Ironically a Google search looking for reports on this camera popped this thread up high, so I thought I would look at reports, and unfortunately you have to wade through endless back and forth posts with Mullen, yet another thread hijacked.

I'm sure this post of mine won't have long life here ironically if DV Info is still like it was when I left - when wholesale pruning of threads occurred to supposedly "lower the noise floor". However, this thread as is noisy as it gets - looks like over 50 posts from him that amount to "hates the manual, hates the controls". For some reason Mullen has endured by sheer persistence.

There are other places to discuss cameras, fortunately.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I take an interest for Opteka MOON Grip but I like to understand better beause I'm not an expert guy about Steadycam. Unfortunately you cannot use the zoom too and it will a little problem for me. Do you know some tricks to use the zoom with Opteka MOON Grip? Opteka MOON Grip has not a mechanical release, therefore it cannot balance at all the movement. It is a handle only, Is it right?
Thanks for other infos

Sony FDR-AX100 Better Manual
 

Found this online... better than manual found with camera.... Check it out


http://download.sony-europe.com/pub/...X900_HG_EN.pdf

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

That's all true - though I may have been tempted to say "aliasing by definition is low frequency MISinformation" :-)

But any act of viewing 4k on a non-4k TV must involve downconversion, and such can also produce it's own aliasing - even if none was present on the original footage.

So if you do see aliasing on a non-4k display, how can you be sure it's generated by the camera (in the method you accurately describe) and not by the display downconversion?

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Correct. That's why some players are better than others. In Windows 8.1, WMP does an exceptionally good job of this. I see no artifacts when viewing 4K files via WMP.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100 Better Manual
 

Thanks Rodman for a constructive post. This manual may well be more helpful to many than the one that comes with the camera.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I actually never use zoom on any of my video camera's, it's not something ever needed for my filming hence I always have the camera at it's widest settings. So alas I couldn't tell you how it would be to use zoom while using a handle like the moon grip.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

ten characters

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

DIRECT QUOTES FROM THE IN-DEPTH AX100 REVIEW AT SLASHCAM SO YOU CAN CHECKOUT WHAT ANOTHER PROFESSIONAL REVIEWER THINKS OF THE AX100. I GUESS YOU CAN NOW ADD ANOTHER PERSON TO YOUR HATE LIST.

But over similar introductions in the past, the FDR-A100 meets this time on a much different market environment. The camera itself is compared to the larger models clearly designed differently, which leads even partially, that they even have it in some disciplines behind. << BEHIND IN TECHNOLOGY >>

But over similar introductions in the past, the FDR-A100 meets this time on a much different market environment. << AS I POSTED DAYS AGO >>

Compared with real professional models, the FDR-AX100 must be within the Sony portfolios therefore somehow clearly deposed what Sony by an 8 bit Codec limitation, relatively low 4K data rate (60 Mbps)

But it is precisely this lack of time points could ensure that Sony will enter this market strategy to launch 4K not so great successes. << HARDLY A POSITIVE COMMENT AND OUTLOOK >> For the first time in history we experience camcorder there are already considerable competition when Sony this time enters the relatively young 4K consumer market.

Thus, the FDR-X100 limited in XAVC S 4K recording the data stream to about 60 Mbit /s Since this is not yet to be a h.265/HEVC-Codec, this is about a AVCHD FullHD power with 15Mbit /s comparable. For some, moving some details short. << THIS MAY BE CRITICAL >>

Although the Sony camera has a built-Rolling Shutter Correction, but this does not work as unobtrusively as we were used to from Sony 2K models by far. << TAKE NOTE >>

External, manual, separate button / wheel combinations for Shutter, Gain, shutter, and white balance provide in principle with the Sony for good control. However, the buttons are very small and without tactile feedback. << OPINION ALERT >>

The lens ring can be switched between Zoom and focus switch, the zoom rocker is the better choice for zooming, as a rule. This also acts as a very sensitive, but is a bit small for professional use. . << OPINION ALERT >>

Our test model did not allow for any of our test lab cards with XAVC S to write, even if they were quick enough with security (eg SanDisk Extreme Pro). Only a Sony 64GB SDXC UHS-I card made possible the 4K recording. << GUESS THEY DIDN'T READ THE MANUAL >>

Unfortunately occurs, a non-suppressible significant sharpening up without which the sony picture would be significantly cinematic. << SHARPNESS IS AT ODDS WITH CINEMATIC QUALITY >>

From all previously tested in our editorial 4K cameras shows the Sony AX100, the best so far, almost perfect 4K sharpness. << BEST SO FAR AT SHARPNESS -- NOT BEST SO FAR CAMERA >>

The FDR-AX100 does many things right and in itself is a sound device. But Sony is also introducing this new format as in the past, in what could prove to be a strategic mistake.<< !!! >. For the first time, there are already 4K beginning serious competitor, who has heard more clearly on the user requirements in recent years.This is now less in the pure cine niche for the Black Magic 4K, but much more for the Panasonic GH4 which more abundant for the same money, in part, provides professional opportunities, but produce the same for the typical consumer at least can be interesting as well. << LOOKING AT VALUE >>

Panasonic dares (unlike Sony) with the GH4 for the first time, not artificially to protect its own Pro devices, but on with the GH4 any possibility of free, which seems to be somehow justifiable in this price range. Sony would do so, the FDR-AX100 would be much more competitive. << THEY SEE IT AS LESS COMPETITIVE >> But at the moment it looks like as if Panasonic most 4K heart can clearly win in this price range. << THE GH4 IS THE BEST CAMERA >>

Even if scenic and cinematic work is not the strength of the FDR-AX100, << EXACTLY >> it is nevertheless a nice 4K model for all who do not need the flexibility and the data rates of GH4 and / or are looking for a relatively compact all-in-one, which allows users to quickly shoot out of hand. << EXACTLY >>

ENOUGH TIME ON THIS SILLY DEBATE. BACK TO WORK.

THE QUESTION TO BE SOLVED IS WHY THE ARTIFACTS ARE ONLY SEEN WHEN VIEWED AT 4K RESOLUTION AND NOT WHEN DOWNSCALED. IF YOU ARE NOT LOOKING AT THE PIXELS DESTINED FOR A 4K DISPLAY -- YOU ARE SEEING SMOOTHED PIXELS AND SO TINY ARTIFACTS WILL NOT BE SEEN. SO NOT SEEING ARTIFACTS IS MEANINGLESS. ESPECIALLY ARTIFACTS OF THE TYPE THAT ONLY OCCUR UNDER SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. SEEING NOTHING IS A NEGATIVE AND ONE CAN'T PROVE A NEGATIVE.

WANT TO SEE THE ARTIFACTS -- NOT VISBLE IN THE FIRST FHD SLIDE. NEXT THREE SLIDES ARE FROM 4K IMAGES:

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Hi

So over-sharpened and compression artefacts when viewed as 4K presumably due to the low bit-rate use.

Nothing can be done about the bit-rate unless someone finds a hack for the firmware, but can't sharpening be turned off? Still some people like the false look of lots of sharpening, but less sharpening would help a little towards reducing that mosquito noise, and can always be applied later "to taste".

Regards

Phil

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Cliff Totten, thanks for the 'Dynamic Range' shots. For my needs, doing some Pan&Scan in post of theater footage, the darker blacks would be important to me. Could you take the AX100 footage and bring up the blacks without too much noise?

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Steve, you are hysterical. You have mastered the art of suppressing anything positive and accentuating anything negative. Even you editorial remark that the GH4 is 'the best camera', is clearly something you have made up. That is NOT what the review said. You are truly disingenuous in your writing style. If you think your style is 'objective', I would suggest you look the up the meaning. An objective person would have said that the GH4 may be the better camera for SOME PEOPLE. That would depend on their use and application. But a blanket statement like yours simply discloses your motive pure & simple.

I've seen the AX100 output on an 85" UHD TV and I don't see the artifacts and I didn't press my nose up against the screen. "Proving" artifacts by showing a 720p YouTube video, greatly enlarged, is truly, honestly, hysterical. If owners saw anything like that, there would be returns galore. There aren't. Owners, even those that approached the purchase with some skepticism, have been won over by the wonderful output of this camera.

You have bent over 21 ways to Sunday to show your dislike for the camera, we get it. And yes, this is enough of your silliness.

Looks like Stephen van Vuuren nailed it in his previous post. Trolling by any other name.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Back to our regularly scheduled program. A brief AX100 video for which the full rez file can be downloaded if you're a member.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

That's where I was going.

Folks saying they didn't see aliasing had me go back at look at the "artifacts." Most were around tiny details so they certainly seemed like aliasing. But, then I found crap around the big black lamp. No way this could be aliasing -- way too big an object. Moreover, it was blocky -- suggesting compression artifacts.

So I used Pavtube to convert one .mp4 clip to uncompressed 422. No artifacts! So it wasn't IN the .mp4 clips. But I still had no fix. :(

Started with FCP X. I imported clip as .mp4 copy and generated FHD proxy. According to Apple, when the export is done -- the original .mp4 would be used. Export still had artifacts!

Next step, import .mp4 clip converted to ProRes 422 UHD and ProRes Proxy FHD. Surely, during export FCP X would chose the ProRes 422 UHD. Export still had artifacts!

So, I imported making ProRes 422 UHD but not ProRes Proxy FHD. Now I had to switch from viewing Proxy to viewing Optimized (ProRes 422 UHD) video. Thankfully, this still plays fine. Now during export, FCP X had no chance to use the FHD proxy. Export had NO artifacts! Either FCP X has a nasty bug -- or I'm missing something. However, FCP X has always worked fine in the past.

Adding to the confusion -- when a bad export was played at FHD the artifacts were smoothed out and couldn't be seen. But, as I posted, not seeing something doesn't mean something isn't there. Only when I played ALL (1:1) pixels -- could the artifacts be seen. That was my fear. These wouldn't be seen when watched on an HDTV, but as soon as one bought a UHDTV, they would see the artifacts. Too late -- screwed.

One other puzzle was revealed. Why didn't my exports look super high-resolution? Because they were UHD to FHD to UHD.

-----------------------------

Someone posted they were going to export movies to an SDXC card and then plug it into their future UHDTV. Assuming the UHDTV needs -- as I expect it will -- XAVC S clips, the poster will have to find an XAVC S ENCODER that plugs-in to their NLE. So far, it doesn't look like Sony has released one. Someone should check Vegas. If it's there, try writing to an SDXC card and seeing if the camera will play it. If there isn't one, the SDXC card idea won't work. Streaming will be necessary.

============= UPDATE

It seems one does not need to import to both OPTIMIZE and PROXY. Simply import COPY TO FCP X and CREATE PROXY.

Until the Proxy has been made, select PLAY ORIGINAL. Editing may be slow depending on your computer.

Once Proxy is ready, switch to PLAY PROXY.

Before Export, you must switch to PLAY ORIGINAL!

Now, I need to re-edit and post some of what I shot.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

[QUOTE=Ken Ross;1839947[/QUOTE]

Every statement I posted was a quote from Slashcam.

"Doch im Moment sieht es danach aus, als ob Panasonic die meisten 4K-Herzen in dieser Preisklasse deutlich für sich gewinnen kann."

Translate and then please post so others see what they actually said. By the way, you even misquoted me.

Next time use Slashcam's or my actual words with quotes so we know you are willing to stand behind what you say. Your consistent misquoting reveals you are so threatened you are willing to lie -- over and over trying to convince others that Slashcam supports your conclusions.

Actually, there will be no "next time" for your posts.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I'm very aware of artifacts and have always been bothered by them in various DSLRs I've owned as well as the NEX VG20 & VG30. There just aren't those artifacts in the AX100 videos. They are really amazingly clean.

So much can go wrong in encoding/transcoding with these different NLEs and quality can get away from us very fast. So it's wise not to point the finger at the camera before being sure.

My comments were accurate and I stand by them. Slashcam did NOT call the GH4 a better camera. They said it would have more appeal (their opinion) and it might be more cinematic since it isn't as sharp, but they did not say it was 'a better camera'.

I am not 'threatened' by Slashcam or you. In fact I think the review was fair and complimentary toward the AX100. You are again being silly. The camera speaks for itself and owners don't need to be convinced. However when someone talks about 'artifacts' with such a degree of certainty, only to find out later it was their error induced by the NLE, owners know the person has misspoken because they simply don't see what you saw.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I read the translated Slashcam, didn't see it as one way or the other - the AX100 is what it is, it produces some nice output that at least viewing on a 1080 screen doesn't have any major nastiness (I don't have a way to view at 4k).

That 720p YouTube video "proved" absolutely nothing, other than artifacts can happen, every processing stage or conversion adds the opportunity for problems and issues!

One can look for flaws and find them (I'm still contemplating the implications of "glamour" video, like weddings, at 4K...). OR one can run into workflow or operational "issues" with new tech. EVERYONE is entitled to their opinion, even if it's misplaced or wrong.

I've learned to rely on reviews (and reviewers!) only so much - let's take an example of the Slashcam RX10 profile, which shows an "optimized" 12 db image that's entirely blown out... that's not a "good" example, by any means! That's not the first time I've seen UN-representative images, sometimes they get changed later...


Let's quit the spittin' match and get back to the nuts and bolts.

OK, so the manual sucks, that's 98.673% of manuals

OK, so it's really sharp... that's nice

OK, so the 30p thing may make for some issues with fast motion... oh well, nothing we didn't expect

OK, there's some RS - it's a CMOS chip, did we NOT know about this? DO we not know how to work around it by now?

OK, it's a compressed format, there may well be some situations where there are artifacts... again, this is a surprise?

Aliasing? I'm not seeing it, maybe some are... or are imagining it... or something... digital imaging can have "issues", new tech can run into challenging shooting situations, post processing can introduce all sorts of additional problems...

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

The advantage of having Germany as my neighboring country and the fact that I grew up with German tv is that I do understand the language, not perfectly but I don't need a google translation to read and understand the article in it's native language, the problem with quoting a google translated text is that certain nuances get lost and can result in weird, funny looking texts that can even be misunderstood. My personal opinion is that a site like slashcam who uses these kind of translation engines to provide their non-german readers with text can't be taken seriously.

For instance, a better translation of below sentence is:
"Doch im Moment sieht es danach aus, als ob Panasonic die meisten 4K-Herzen in dieser Preisklasse deutlich für sich gewinnen kann."

"At this moment it clearly looks like Panasonic could win most of the 4K hearts in this price range".

It does not mean the GH4 is the best camera like you stated, it only means that the gh4 could become a more popular camera, as you see the difference lies in the small nuances and how you interpret the text.

But that alone is actually a quite ridiculous statement, the gh4 and the AX100 are 2 completely different camera's and they serve 2 totally different markets, the only thing they have in common is that they can shoot in 4K. It's like comparing my sony cx730 with the panasonic gh3 just because both can shoot 1080p 50p and then to say the gh3 is the best camera because it can do higher bitrates.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Steve, since you seem to be trying to make a threat...

HERE is the entire (admittedly rough) translation of the WHOLE sentence/paragraph, not the half portion you posted:

"But at the moment it looks like as if Panasonic most 4K heart can clearly win in this price range"...
<OK, so that supports your OPINION, followed by>

"Even if scenic and cinematic work is not the strength of the FDR-AX100, it is nevertheless a nice 4K model for all which, which allows users to quickly shoot out of hand do not need the flexibility and the data rates of GH4 and / or are looking for a relatively compact all-in-one device. Who wants to spend time with anyway color grading and much material takes almost unedited, also get with the Sony a very coherent 4K image Out-Of-The-Box, which in the editing program on FullHD scaled down looks fantastic. Especially the combination with the XLR adapter K1M could to send a clear buy signal for many users"

<which supports the OPINIONS of the users Sony envisions for the camera, even if these are not people who will rush out to buy your books or read your reviews!>


Context works both ways... and manufacturing a controversy is "modern" journalism I suppose... ain't the Internet grand!? Good theatre, I suppose, thought of it as a "marketing technique" myself in one little niche I'm in!



The GH4 is certainly a compelling upgrade path IF you've already got the lenses and accessories, which one might well have IF they are trying for budget "filmic" output... I've looked at the GH series, nice output, but an investment in an entirely new system isn't of interest...

I'd rather have the AX100 for event and everyday use, and I can re-use some accessories I've already got...

I have no Spielbergian delusions or ambitions, so the "BM" cameras don't intrigue me that much... though they are "interesting".



Here's the best part, there ARE people who WILL find these other cameras useful for what they want to do, ad go out and buy them, helping put food on tables, make house and car payments, keep the economy going, and so on.

Can't we all just be good with that?

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Thank you Noa!

My German is pretty rusty, but you are spot on that "universal" translators, while useful, often fail on nuance and context.

And of course, since EVERYTHING you see or read on the Internet is TRUE... or NOT... one has to come to their own conclusions, and sometimes let opposing "opinions" stand or fall on their own merits, or lack thereof!

I've seen enough output from the AX100 to feel it's worth adding in, and it can replace some existing cameras for my uses. I'll continue to wish the RX10 had 4K enabled...

You've got some GH investment, so I'm sure in the back of your mind... the GH4 is at least gnawing a little!

In the end different tools for different purposes, and this new 4K mountain we are about to climb should be about figuring out how to deal with this new format, not about slogging one or another camera!

WE need a thread or forum section about "4K workflow (and cameras?)", as I'm sure we will all be facing challenges!

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

OK -- if I have to answer one at a time, I'll do it.

You clearly didn't read that the 720p was a sample of the Dual Record function. I put it up so other can see how good it looks.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

OK -- if I have to answer one at a time, I'll do it.

Clearly you didn't accurately read my post -- perhaps because you needed something to attack with.

I said:

"Panasonic dares (unlike Sony) with the GH4 for the first time, not artificially to protect its own Pro devices, but on with the GH4 any possibility of free, which seems to be somehow justifiable in this price range. Sony would do so, the FDR-AX100 would be much more competitive. << THEY SEE IT AS LESS COMPETITIVE >> But at the moment it looks like as if Panasonic most 4K heart can clearly win in this price range. << THE GH4 IS THE BEST CAMERA >>

READ THIS BELOW THAT YOU AVOIDED QUOTING:
Even if scenic and cinematic work is not the strength of the FDR-AX100, << EXACTLY >> it is nevertheless a nice 4K model for all who do not need the flexibility and the data rates of GH4 and / or are looking for a relatively compact all-in-one, which allows users to quickly shoot out of hand. << EXACTLY >>

Threat -- I don't make threats. Ken is no longer an issue for me.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

On the rx10 there was also a review on a site run by a German guy who claimed that eventhough the camera produced nice images he had to delete several shots because they where not usable to him as a result of the codec breaking apart. You will always have people that shoot high detail fast moving scenes, then freeze frame it, blow it up 400% in photoshop, stick their faces against the screen, look for artifacts and then say the camera sucks.

I have shot some footage with my rx10, which can also be seen in my signature under "Videos" and in it's native form it looks fantastic on my big lcd screen viewed from a normal distance, from what I have read the ax100 even adds to that experience by providing a even sharper downsampled 1080p, for me the imagequality of the rx10 is more then good enough for my paying wedding clients.

Also when talking about price ranges, you have to bear in mind you need to add double the cost of a gh4 body for all lenses required, add a good nd filter to that price and the gh4 is more then twice the price of the ax100 (which is a all in one solution) which many people tend to forget. Ofcourse if you already heavily invested in m4/3 glass and have a gh3 like me the step to a gh4 body only is just a small and obvious one. But I"ll say it again, I don't see what the gh4 has to do with the ax100 as they are totally different camera's for different purposes.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

When you "win the heart" of a woman it means she has decided to pick you amoungst others. She sees you as the BEST choice. Your weakening of the clear meaning of their words won't work.

But, I agree that they -- not me -- said something stupid.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Oh my, I've been rendered irrelevant by Steve Mullen. How can I go on? 😃

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Precisely. That was exactly how I too intrepeted it. Of course if you're trying to put the camera in a bad light, you might say something quite different. ;)

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Hmm, I seem to see that EXACT part quoted... but anyway... maybe you really are seeing things that aren't there, and not seeing things that are? I hate it when that happens <wink>!

And your explanation on that 720p clip wasn't informative enough to "read"... but again, whatever. Maybe I missed the part about "dual record function", but I'm not even sure what you refer to or how it's applicable... I "infer" that your point is that YOU are seeing artifacts under the set of conditions particular to your setup, that's fine, and maybe you are "on to" something, but it's not consistent with what others are finding and seeing.


Steve... no "attacks" from my end, I've always taken what you post with due respect, but at this point, as much as I appreciate your apparent frustration with the AX100, lousy manuals, and PC's, and universal translators, and people who just want to grab a camera and shoot with good results, and maybe something you ate for lunch... it's not adding much to the "info"... Lots of things to get frustrated over nowadays, but that's not what DVi is here for...

Take it for what it's worth... if you don't think the AX100 is worth writing a manual or whatever on, try to realize there are others who will find it a perfectly usable device, and RESPECT that...

Sony FDR-AX100 PAL?????
 

Does anyone have an idea on a PAL release for the Ax100??

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Bring it on, I'm still lookin' fer that "open box return DEAL"!

So can I turn <on> the "sarcasm font"...

The AX100 is obviously a terribly flawed, inadequate camera with horrible artifacting and rolling shutter that cannot possibly be used to take pretty scenes and filmic works of art! The manual is the most boring horrible uninformative drek I've read since the Affordable Care Act... and the buttons are just all wrong! The audacity of Sony to release such a horrid product onto the market should result in all Sony execs being hunted down, tarred and feathered! Go buy anything else lest your eyeballs bleed from the tragedy that lies within...

Sarcasm font <off>


Now to go find my "open box deal"...

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Are you sure your proxy step isn't introducing artifacts or other video issues? I've never had to work with proxy files, not once in the past 10 years since my nle's have always worked at full speed with the raw files right from the camera so I don't know what damage proxy files do or don't do to the video footage. Maybe that would explain why we aren't seeing what you see. Can you just skip the proxy files? There's no need to do that nowadays since most every computer can play back the raw files at full speed anyways for years now and you'll save time and a ton of disc space that way as well. Maybe it will also solve your video issues in the process. Because clearly we're seeing two different results from the same camera, which to me seems to indicate a failing in the proxy files process.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

As I explained in my post, the proxy files were fine but were FHD. During export, because they were chosen without my realizing it, they were upscaled from ProRes Proxy FHD to UHD. No wonder they looked so bad before they went to YouTube.

I've updated my post and all is well. Now I can see what correctly edited and 4K streamed files look like. But, better to catch the error and fix it now.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

You are correct -- I never said Dual Record function. It only says, "Sony AX100's 1280x720p proxy from camera." But, that wasn't very clear if you don't have the camera.

But, please go back and read my long post on how I found the source of the artifacts and now know how to avoid them. Still don't know if I found a FCP X bug when working with UHD or if I just didn't read the manual. :)

Sorry, about saying attack. I have always respected you too. Contrary to what folks believe, I really want the AX100 to work because I have a major trip ahead.

Still need to see if RS bothers me, if the stutters that sometimes occur are a problem, and how bad motion judder from 24p/30p are. Low-light in my living room seems fantastic, but must shoot to see the noise present.

Lastly, I want to see if FilmConvert can change color to match motion picture stock and add grain. As Slashcam said, the super sharpness works against a cinema look. But, maybe a blur filter?

And, if folks are open to it, I can link to a movie shot by the Digital Bolex that is so much better than the DSLR stuff we've all seen. It looks like 35mm film -- not the soft crap I think we all hate. Motion judder is very nice. I'd love to have the OPTION to have a more arty look.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

No, No, No, No, and it can't be said too many times!!

It is completely wrong to scale bitrate figures like this.

60Mbs for 4k does *NOT* equate to 15Mbs for HD, you can't do a simple comparison like that. It's a general rule that if you increase the pixel count by a given factor, then to get equivalent quality, you need to scale up the bitrate by a lesser factor. Quadrupling the number the pixels does not need four times the datarate for equivalence.

It's also worth remembering that when AVC-HD is spoken about at "24Mbs" - that figure represents a MAX figure - not average. I think I've heard (??) that the 60Mbs figure spoken of is AVERAGE (NOT max) which further complicates comparison.

(Anybody with the camera can easily check the latter. Film an exact time of shot (say 5 minutes) at HD AVC-HD 24Mbs, then 4k 60Mbs, and compare file sizes. If what I've suggested above is correct, then I'd expect the 4k file to be around 3x the size - not 2.5x as a simple 24:60 comparison would suggest. I'd be keen to get a definite answer to that.)

At the end of the day, the question is "is the 60Mbs mode good enough?"

My own feeling is that it's probably roughly comparable to what the top rate of AVC-HD manages in normal HD. If that's good enough for you in HD, then this 60Mbs mode is probably good enough for you in 4k. It's unlikely to get any "broadcast quality" seal of approval - but neither did AVC-HD. Do you see pots half full or half empty?

Let's all remember what we're talking about here. It's not a top notch, full pro camera, and it's unreasonable to expect it to come with a codec worthy of such. There are good reasons for that - not just manufacturers stunting product - they may have good reasons to keep bitrate down to lower the number of consumer complaints who try to use it with too low spec memory, then blame the camera.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Yup. We've got two of them right here, one of which posts on multiple forums showing us those 400% blow ups. The fact is I know of no camera, at any price, that can stand that kind of scrutiny. But if you're trying to single one camera out, what better 'ammunition'.

Silliness, all of it. I mean really, who the hell watches footage like this???

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Cliff- was this screen cap from the AX100 shot in-camera as a 1080p clip, or was it a 4k clip downresed to 1080p?

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

LOL, thanks, I needed that.

Dave, it seems so many of us are in a trance, unable to see the horrendous artifacts and are simply 'blinded' by all that scrumptious detail. When I went over to Apple a week or so ago, the same phenomena occurred. I had a 'crowd' of about 5 or 6 people gawking at my footage, asking questions about what camera shot it, where is it available and so on. I guess they too were drawn into this trance.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Excellent point and yes, the bitrate is a variable one. I've seen over 70Mbps during complex scenes.
And the important point here is to know the tool you are working with. If you know that rapid pans will either make the codec falter or manifest evidence of RS, then you avoid rapid pans. I typically do that with any kind of shooting, so for me it's no biggie.

But the point is if you abide by these rules, knowing the limitations, your footage can look like it was shot at 100 Mpbs or more. Further, your footage can look sharper and more detailed than even those cameras that actually DO shoot 100Mbps or more. :)

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

FS100 = 1080 28Mbps 60p
EX1r = EXCAM EX 35 Mbp/s 29.97p
AX100 = 4K 30p 60 Mbp/s

All were frame captured in a 1920x1080 project.

Some things I have noticed about grading the AX100. We all know how "tough" the FS100 codec is. You can stretch it and bend it pretty far considering it's 8bit. Even in the blacks. The FS100 alocates a good deal of bits into the shadows and you can play with them a good deal.

The AX100? Well?...not so much. Raising the blacks or bending the mid tones to raise the mid-level shadows WILL reveal compression artifacts. Don't get me wrong,...what Sony has done with 60Mbp/s is amazing. If you don't need to grade it, it holds up to motion pretty well. I have tried to break it and have pushed it pretty hard in dark room tests. It's good. It's solid enough to hold up to "normal" abuse. However, I'm certain that it's 100 Mbp/s sister "upgrade" will be much tougher. Adding 40 more VBR megabits will definitely make the blacks bulletproof. (as you all know, the blacks and shadows on any codec will be the first to "stress out" with complex detail under low but rate.)

Overall, I'm very VERY impressed with the camera. However, it's going back to Best Buy tomorrow. The rumors about the new Sony 4K A7s with FULL FRAME 12 Megapixel sensor are far too tempting! I'm taking my $2000 back from the AX100 and getting ready to pre order this Sony A7S 4K.

I only have 3 days left to return it. Best Buy only gives 15 days for returns and I'll be in Vegas at NAB on Monday. Bye bye AX100...it's be a fun and educational 2 weeks with you :(

Everyone needs to watch the Sony live NAB web stream on Sunday. Keep your AX100 receipts! This new A7S full frame 4k monster looks like the perfect GH4 killer.

CT

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I've seen lots of "broadcast" that wasn't "quality"... cell phone footage is broadcast-able if the content is "important" enough... Go-Pro seems mighty popular as well...

The AX100 is a leg up on much of that!


I caught the A7S "announcement" as well, but considering the investment in FF E mount lenses (I'm presuming this will be a Full Frame camera, not APS-C), I think the AX100 looks "good enough", and as much as I've shot with my RX's for the last year for almost everything video (and of course stills), I still have uses for a "real" video camera... though I can wait until I find a "deal" on an AX! Maybe I won't have to wait too long for those "open box deals" <wink>!

Keep in mind that while the E mount has lots of options for adapters, the selection of FF lenses is a bit more limited... Somehow I'm also VERY skeptical of that "12Mpixel" sensor - that would be VERY "un-Sony" when everything else is 20Mp +, but I'll be watching...


Then again, I'm watching for the RX10M2 and the A77II... I think by this time next year anything other than the cheapest consumer devices will be touting "4K" of some flavor or another! I still wish 4K and higher bitrates were enabled in the RX10, though it would probably mean the AX100 wouldn't be that interesting!