|
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
Quote:
And when you say 'it may be fine to buy and use a 4K camera that can create aliasing even though other 4K cameras do not'. Are you kidding? The GH4 CLEARLY had more artifacts (no pun intended). No, it wasn't 'bad', but it had moire the AX100 did not have or, at the very least, certainly more than the AX100 has. I have no idea where you come up with this stuff, I really don't. I compared both cameras with the full intention of keeping the one that produced the most detailed picture with the fewest artifacts. That was the AX100. As for HD cameras, I have yet to see ANY DSLRs that did not have many times more artifacting than the AX100. None. Zero. Nada. The only one that was in the same ballpark as the AX100 was the RX10. Full sensor read out my friend, full sensor read out. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Stick with HD Steve, you'll be happier. In the meantime, many of us will continue to shoot some amazing 4K footage. |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
Quote:
With that said, I've seen very few instances of this whether watching my 4K footage on a large screen UHD TV, which I've done a number of times at Best Buy, watching the same footage on my own 4K 28" monitor, or watching the down-rez'd footage on my 64" plasma. I've certainly seen no higher instances of this issue and if anything, far less of it. I would say it's very similar to what I saw on the RX10. If one pans slowly (a good practice anyway), when there is a need to pan, you can minimize the issue. I linked a 4K video above that I shot and invited anyone to point out the artifacts in that video. Thus far I have no takers. To be perfectly fair, I can see one instance of this issue in 4K with my nose stuck up against my 28" monitor. But I was focusing on just looking for this issue. If I was watching this the way normal people would watch a video, actually looking at content (wow, another novel idea, instead of searching for artifacts, watch the content) I'd probably never have noticed it. If the artifacts are so significant, they should hit you in the face whether you're looking for them or not. To me that's the test of serious artifacting...not pixel peeping or endlessly searching for them. I really think some folks just can't 'watch' a video without over-analyzing it. That's really a pity. I certainly don't like artifacts and like I said before, it was why I gave up shooting video with DSLRs. But I never had to 'look' for those artifacts, they reared their ugly head far too many times. Such is not the case with the AX100. |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
@ Ken -
This is what has me baffled about Steve's contentions... and it's not the first time I've seen Sony cameras criticized when there was actual visible DETAIL over and above a comparison camera, but somehow there was something "wrong" with the Sony images... and the other camera was of course "superior". I've learned that there is not a lot of love for Sony out there, even when they get it right... or mostly right (I'm the first one to scratch my head and gripe about some "weird" design decisions!) Pause a video from the AX100, where are the "artifacts"... generally it looks like a good STILL, better than you'll typically get from video, but it's got more DETAIL. I've looked at some "4K" from the BMCC online, and it looks PAINFULLY SOFT by comparison... no thanks, not interested in a "4K" camera that doesn't look as good as the RX10 and costs lots more (and is more hassle to shoot with to boot)... just saying it's "4K" does not evidently equate to resolving that resolution, IMO. There simply is not nor has ever been a "perfect" camera under ALL conditions - they only capture a representation or impression of what we "see", and when processed, may "improve" upon that, or make it worse. Some are better than others. Again, post processing and display methods/equipment can factor in in many ways. Some good, some not. I've seen LOTS of badly edited stuff "proving" a camera is flawed, when it only shows "user malfunction". It obviously must be the equipment, not the operator... or not. I for one will admit that the "low" specs of the video/graphic subsystem at 4K, the limits of a cheap 4K TV, and even the limits of the AX100 (OK so all are effectively 30p...) in the "4K" system I've just assembled on the cheap... just looking at all those "30's" gives me pause. I would be surprised if it all worked perfectly and gives "perfect" image results (whatever perfect means....). SO FAR, I'm happy with the sharp image, the color is pretty close, and video playback seems "good enough". My previously shot 1080 stuff looks plenty good too. My text "stutters" when I scroll (yep, 30p "artifact"!), but I can live with it. When I experimented with 24p the mouse "jumps" all over, proving we don't "see" at that rate terribly well... 30 is "working OK", I'm happy with it in the computer/display, and can't wait to do more with all the screen real estate! I expected some "issues", we just don't "see" 30 frames per second, any more than we "see" 24 FPS... BUT, I have yet to find footage from the AX100 to be "offensive" or fatally defective (then again I need to start shooting/editing, I'm sure I can manage to muck it up a bit!). I do see a few things that didn't show up on my 1080 screens, but again, nothing THAT objectionable. Do I see some temporal issues under some circumstances? Yes, exactly as expected, and IF I have to shoot under that scenario, I'll switch to 1080/60p/60Mbps, thank you very much, as this is currently the only "HD" camera with that spec at this price... other than the CX900. Of course the upcoming RX100M3 will do it for around $800, with other compromises that come with that small form factor - no free lunch! Honestly, I want to know where these "truly great HD cameras at half the price" are, I must have missed it somewhere - seriously, what other cameras (not BODIES, complete cameras with lenses) shoot 1080/60p @ 60Mbps? I think that strawman doesn't hunt... Even more puzzling is this entire paragraph.... "But, there are those of us who will not buy a camera that can create artifacts when others view their video. Hell, I won't watch my video with aliasing. We won't because there is no need to! There are other 4K cameras that have an industry wide professional recognition and there will be many more lower-cost consumer cameras! What's the rush to 4K when there are truly great HD cameras at half the price?" I'm not sure which artifact free camera we're talking about here, or which artifact free media and display technology the rest of us have missed? And all low cost consumer stuff no less?? Seriously, where are you getting this "good stuff", please pass it along... In short, yes cameras WILL have artifacts or variance from "reality" to one degree or another, but the AX100 is a good first foray into "cheap" 4K, with high quality 1080 to boot, from a fairly big sensor in a good traditional video camera design... where is this so flawed??? I'll take Cindy, you keep the mole... It's not a "rush", it's a toe in the water, at a decent price, and overall this thing seems to be a very well built camera that will replace at least a couple of others for my use, meaning the cost after selling some things will be nominal. I'm sure I'll be looking at upgrading to something with MORE capability, but I'll have some good stuff "in the can" in the meantime. I still have absolutely no idea how one "delivers" 4K, but that will come... at least I won't be jumping all the hurdles at one time... and if pan and scan delivers good 1080, I'll be thrilled! |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
Ken,
I'm perplexed myself. I didn't look for it but it just manifested itself when there's movement under those conditions. Maybe I have to wait some time to have a proper 4K monitor to see what it is about. |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
I don't think it's that tricky - the high contrast naturally sticks out to the eye, and I do think frame rate has something to do with it being more noticeable, as the series of "still" images exhibit movement between frames, particularly very sharp crisp frames. I suspect the eye detects the sudden moves in the high contrast areas as flashes or pulses of light areas flickering against dark areas. I suspect that the lower the frame rate, the more striking the effect.
If the contrasting edges were less distinct, the frame rate higher so that the movements were smaller, or the image a tad blurry so that the differences between frames were not so prominent, the "problem" would be reduced or eliminated. In that sense the sharpness produced by the larger sensor being fully read and a good lens resolving high detail may be somewhat counterproductive in some high contrast/motion situations. If that theory is correct, the "artifacts" are just the product of how our eyes "see" a series of high detail/high contrast "moving" images, not a "flaw" in the images. |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
Hello friends, today is a sunny day in my town. I have just made some shots in countryside. Then at home I have connect my AX100 to make some tests. I have connected the camera by HDMI: my HDTV read the HDMI of the camera but it was not able to signal pass. Therefore I did another test by USB cable but I get the same problem. Then I have connected AX100 to an external WD TV HD Media Player but despite the player read the USB connection but it was unable to read the clips. A writings told me that file was in reading-only. Yet in the AX100 options everything is enabled correctly.
I cannot watch the video directly from AX100 to HDTV. Later I made the editing and I have exported in H.264/mp4 HD file with these preset: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...creening/2.jpg https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...eening/1ac.jpg The result was a shame. A VHS video is better than 4K video. All video was flickering, it was unwatchable. I made some tests with XVAC S H and the video was almost perfect, there wer some slight flickering but it did not disturb the sight. It looks amazing, I'm embittered for that dreadful 4K sight, I cannot get out of my head the wrong purchase, that is Sony AX100. |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
Quote:
Even if in certain situations the effect were slightly exacerbated, I'd gladly take that for the far greater impact the 4K video has. There's simply no comparison. But again, I honestly don't see this issue to any greater extent in 4K or when 4K is down rez'd to HD. In the latter case, I'd again take the far greater detail in the down rez'd video than any HD camera's HD video. Again, no comparison. I just think so much is being made for something that's only seen occasionally and is simply nothing new to the world of video. I can even remember shimmering with good ol', tape-based, SD recording on my 3-chip Sony VX2000 & VX2100...and those were among the best SD cameras out there. :) |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
Quote:
And yes, I agree, some of these 4K cameras just look too soft to me, not much better than some of the HD I've gotten out of the RX10. I'm in 4K for the 4K experience and that to me is unprecedented resolution. I have yet to see a camera that resolves the detail that the AX100 can. Slashcam apparently had the same conclusion...at least at the point they did their tests. I agree 100% about frame grabs from the AX100, they look like they came from a DSLR. It's really a pretty amazing experience. Quote:
We all want the entire 4K process to be smooth as silk. Unfortunately, as with many new techs we first embrace, that's not always the case and one has to do some digging and problem solving to get at the root cause of issues. But IMO it's well worth it. You and I both agree, without any doubt, the biggest issue with the AX100 is 30fps. However even there you can work around the problem or, at the very least, minimize the issue. To see the results I've been seeing, I'll gladly take 30fps for this kind of PQ. |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
@Adriano -
Just plugged an AX100 into two TV's one a 4K model, one a 1080 HDTV - both displayed perfectly good images, even in poor light (OK, some noise due to low light, but still, as good or better than my PJ7xx series camera). Actually at the moment, I'm pretty impressed with both the image and the low light performance, wow... You have developed a truly bizzare pattern... A: The hinges might break,what a terrible camera... EVERYONE ELSE: The hinges are fine, and seem plenty robust. WOW, look at the image quality A: There is no strap lug, what a terrible camera Everyone else: There's a nice metal "D" ring to attach a lanyard/strap to, if needed. WOW, look at the image quality A: I bought the wrong adapter, what a terrible camera Everyone else: OK, so it might be a little tricky sorting out this new shoe... WOW, look at the output quality. A: My old HDTV I paid a lot for won't display video, what a terrrible CAMERA purchase Everyone else: Hmm, looks really good when connected to HDMI, in both HD and 4K, WOW, that looks GOOD for a $2K camera! A: My video looks worse than VHS tape, and flickers Steve: See, I told ya so... EVERYONE ELSE: Every camera has some degree of artifacting, but this one is pretty clean and super sharp... wow! A: MY video looks bad, what a terrible horrible camera. Steve: See, I told ya so... Everyone else: DANG, the output from this camera looks pretty amazingly good, with "maybe" a few "issues" here or there, Might have to fiddle with adjustments in post to get optimal results, but mostly, WOW... I don't think this is a "language" issue any longer, and it borders on "trolling". EVERY issue you've attacked the camera on has been either baseless or apparently unique to... YOU. If you'd like help, fine, but you appear to be far more interested in bashing the camera than in figuring out HOW TO PROPERLY OPERATE IT! Your absolute refusal to accept that there might be something wrong with your setup, or your TV or... perhaps user malfunction... is tiresome. I think the rest of us know it's not the camera (presuming you didn't get a DEFECTIVE one, which "might" be the case, but seems HIGHLY unlikely). Please just send the camera back and go buy one of those "truly great HD cameras at half the price", whatever they are, and be done with it. Sorry for the rant, but perhaps you just aren't ready for life on the bleeding edge... |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
^ I think that pretty much nailed it, Dave. Thanks for making me smile! ;)
I've given up even responding, I know it's hopeless. How many times did he refuse to look at the online manual and instead asked endless questions that were right there in the manual. Yes, this is no longer a language barrier. When I saw, "a VHS video is better than 4K video", I knew this was getting beyond absurd. But hey, Steve probably agrees. But fear not, he'll have a book that will address all these 'problems'. You see if you don't have 'problems' what's the point of the book. ;) Gotta love it. |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
@ Ken -
Yep, the theory would "hold water" for ALL resolutions and frame rates short of ultra high frame rates, but would be "worse" with lower frame rates, and at varying parts of a given image, due to the specific image being captured (and perhaps be NON-existant in many scenarios). BUT, as we've touched upon, "high contrast" and movement are where a problem "might" arise more noticeably, and with highly detailed images, there are perhaps more opportunities. Good reason to try for shallow DoF where you can, and be prepared to watch for problematic parts of a scene (always been a problem, like that checkered shirt I mentioned a couple posts ago!). Dealing with movement artfully has ALWAYS been a problem, no reason for 4K images to be exempt, and not a particular surprise to see "issues" here or there. Figure out where it's a problem and deal with it as a camera OPERATOR. From the get go, I presumed 30p won't work for EVERYTHING, and looked on the 60Mbps 1080 XAVC S as a practical workaround, nice to have the option. If I'm shooting fast action, a couple pokes at the screen, I have a capable camera for THAT, more capable than anything else I've got, due to the higher bitrate! With the last major "bug" in the new computer build squished, I need to go do a few things, like figure out what "my button" in the menus refers to, and maybe shoot some test footage to play with in edit! The AX100 certainly feels solid and good in the hand, well balanced, nice handstrap, lots of buttons to fiddle with to make adjustments, will be a good complement to the RX10 and RX100 as a "camera system". As far as "brand agnostic", I'll admit to checking out all the options, but I do appreciate it when Sony "gets it right" and I don't have to go buying a whole bunch of new accessories! I don't think I'd think twice about a GH4 IF I had the investment in the GH system, even if it's got some "issues". NO camera is "perfect", but I've been reasonably happy with what Sony produces, though I've owned Panasonic and Canon, and I'm really looking forward to trying the new "Schnookie X10,000" because the number is just so HUGE <wink>! |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
@ Dave
So we now have a waiting list of 2 for the Schnookie X10,000. Can't wait for the release date! |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
Quote:
|
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
Quote:
All I can say is the AX100 puts out a hell of allot of resolution. It's actually quite shocking to even see how good the 1080 down sampled video looks. Every single person I have showed my AX100 footage to have all said: "WOW!" I work for one of the largest media companies in the world. I have shown this footage to many of our employees and even our broadcast engineers. The one thought they all have in common is this "Wow,..that video came form THAT camera?....holy crap, thats amazing" I have spent about 1 hour with the GH4 and I like it. Interchangeable lenses and a great internal codec are really sweet. But honestly, overall, the AX100 impresses me even more. The image "pops" like crazy and shooting with is just downright fun. I shoot with my EX1r, Fs100, NX70 and RX10. Yes, the AX100 will not "replace" any of them but it does have it's own "niche" in my collection. All I can say is that I am very very happy with the AX100 and it's certainly knocking people's socks off left and right all over the place. Now for you Steve? Based on your writings, I strongly suspect that the AX100 really might not be the camera for you. That's too bad. But for Sony to make a camera that pleases 99% of the people I talk too? I'd say they have a home run on their hands! There are very few 4K offerings for the $2000ish price point. But I can definitely say that the AX100 is ALLOT of camcorder for the price, It's got full manual control, good dynamic range, OK codec and crazy amounts resolution. It covers allot of functional "check boxes" for me. It's easy to carry around and a great "run and gunner". CT |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
^ And that's the point. The video is amazingly good, even forgetting the price point. There is no HD camera that can even come close. Like you, I've yet to meet anyone I've shown my videos too that was less than amazed. Nobody but nobody pointed to any artifacts and this includes 65" UHD TVs.
When one person stands nearly alone, with an opinion that runs totally contrary to what everyone else is seeing (including broadcast engineers!), there's usually something that can explain why. ;) I've even played my videos at Apple and Best Buy stores and have never failed to get a crowd gathered asking 'what camera made that video?'. The BB guys actually prefer it to the demo loops that play endlessly at their Magnolia centers. |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
Quote:
|
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
Quote:
If the raw video is perfect in this test, then it is up to you do make sure it remains so for your clients. But you can't blame the cam if you fail to handle the video properly. The poster may in fact be a very nice guy and a brilliant artist, but this endless series of threads complaining that Sony has promised something they can't deliver and has cheated him out of his money and oh why did I buy this awful camera that doesn't do what they promised, is getting tiresome. Ken's video looked great. Steve's, less so. But as there are a million links in the chain between camera original and what we download on a variety of viewing devices, any flaws I saw, or thought I saw, I'd never once think of blaming the camera. That would be the last thing on my list. I always assume it is the fault of something in the chain of getting the video from the Net (or the shooter's editing PC) to my eyes. And so far I have never been wrong. On the rare occasion when the video itself is bad, it's because I screwed up some settings somewhere and a simple quick dip into the manual usually resolves the problem. Dave has, as usual, nailed it. This is like buying a Ferrari and complaining because it won't start when you fill the tank with apple juice. With all due respect to all involved, my sig line has never been more apt. |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
@Adriano -
I have set the sharpness to "0" on my Seiki 4K "monitor", everything is still plenty sharp... along with turning the backlight and color WAY down to get it it where it can be somewhat calibrated. Prior to that, I didn't think it looked very good, and I could have gotten a nice tan from sitting at monitor distances. Sometimes you have to fiddle with things to get the best results... and 4K is a new thing, as I've said, life on the bleeding edge has it's moments! It may be a bit before everything "works" perfectly right out of the box, meanwhilst you must be patient, troubleshoot and adjust as needed. I don't know what other camera you would find that would be "better", other than just picking up whichever HD camera you think you want (there's NOTHING wrong with that option, it will have a different set of quirks and faults, and I'm guessing the 60Mbps 60P from the AX would blow it away....), and frankly it sounds like it may be some of your OTHER gear that needs updating/adjusting. I bit the bullet and re-cored my desktop (CPU/Motherboard/RAM to better handle video), plus went cheap on the 4K monitor (otherwise it was a non starter budget wise). Already gotten a lot of file maintenance done while stabilizing the machine, just loving the huge desktop space... years of video, pics, and docs organized in a few days... so even if it's not "top of the line", it's already paying off on the investment, even with the frustration of a new build! Just hooking the AX100 up to the HDMI, it looked stunningly good, can't wait to get shooting more tests... |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
Quote:
I still did not any test but I think a HD video looks better than a 4K video with all those TV presets. I hope I make a mistake. |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
Adriano, there is very obviously something wrong with your setup. Given the age of your HDTV, that might be the weak link.
But logically you have to realize when so many experienced users, on multiple forums, see nothing like what you report, the problem is in your system. No question. Your request to Dave to try to turn down his display's backlight and color, make little sense when you're talking about 2 totally different displays from different companies in different set ups. I watch my edited 4K video on my HDTV and do absolutely nothing to the settings differently, other than one minor change, than I do for other material I watch. That minor change is something I've mentioned several times, the engaging of the frame rate doubler in my HDTV. The sole purpose for this is to smooth out the motion in 30p video. The result is spectacular video that far exceeds anything I've ever shot with an HD camera. To compare this to VHS only demonstrates how horribly wrong something in your setup is. You don't really seem willing to track down your issue or acknowledge that something in your system may be too old or poorly equipped to handle the 4K>HD down-conversions. But blaming the camera is just silly, it really is. The many questions you asked prior to getting the camera showed how little research you were willing to do. Members here got frustrated with you because the answers to almost all your questions were so easily found in existing information, like the AX100 manuals. At some point, if you're really serious about this stuff, you have to make some effort on your own to find these issues. Thus far you just dismiss it as the camera's fault. We can't help you with that kind of attitude. If don't want to make the effort, then I strongly recommend you return the camera, you're simply not ready for 4K. There's nothing wrong with that. |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
Quote:
Ugo |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
As I said, when I played back Adriano's clips without any scaling they looked fine. Even Adriano started off by saying the clips looked fine before encoding and that it was only after encoding that there was an issue. But Steve appears to have ignored that bit.
|
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
@Ken -
Adriano was referring to the setting adjustments I had to make to my jerry-rigged 4k "monitor", which I used to try to make him realize that "out of the box" settings may or may not work (and won't even touch on how older stuff may not work at all...). And I'm still not 100% satisfied with my colors, they are "close", but seem a little "off" somehow! The little 21" Samsung looks quite different as well, despite both being "calibrated"! I'll be the first to admit my "monitor" is a "redneck special solution" to 4K display! But it boiled down to a computer that was overdue for upgrade, a desire to be "4K capable", and minimal budget! Discovering the Seiki 39" TV under $500 seemed like a way to pull off a cheap solution without totally breaking the bank (piggy is bandaged up, and will recover), and I picked up a used one WELL under that price... you can't expect TOO much for that price, it's bare bones... but it's working out fairly well! That said, I'd read about the backlight, and it was "100%", I adjusted down to about 30-35... sharpness seems to look best at "0", nothing became fuzzy when I adjusted it or anything, so I don't even know if that control works! It did seem to look a little bit "smoother", but nothing spectacular (or horrific). Color was WAY over cranked (and may still be a bit, it's touchy). I couldn't even calibrate it at factory settings, again 30-35% seems to be getting close to the mark. I only mentioned this to try to wake Adriano up to the facts - sometimes you have to be willing to put some time and effort in to find the "right" settings, configurations, techniques, etc. Simply dismissing bad results as a problem with a device that most everyone else is getting GOOD results from is silly!! |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
I did many tests. I always get flickering even if I use antiflicker filter or blur filter at 100%. Only if I put HDTV sharpening = 0 (zero) and antiflicker filter on the clips I get enough good video with less flickering.
I inform you I always shot where there is grass and trees, therefore my shot environment is greeen. It is a bad beast. ;) |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
Quote:
|
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
I have been shooting some weddings now with my rx10 (mainly covering the photoshoot with it) and I just saw the excellent review from Darren about the ax100, (see below) and the more I see about what the camera outputs and what functionality it has the more I feel the rx10 is not the right camera for me. I only wished it was not that much more expensive (rx10 is 1200 euro, ax100 is 2000 euro around these parts)
The rx10 is a great hybrid camera that gives me many manual controls for run and gun situations where I wouldn't dare to use my gh3 for, and also the gh4, but it has some quirks that have become very annoying. The zoomspeed is almost unusable for me, hate it as much as my ex, I tried to get over it thinking that I have a choice of several focal lengths at a constant f-stop without changing a lens but boy, it's slower then a snail, often when you start to zoom during record it can take a second before things even start to get moving and then it crawls ahead. As a solo shooter I just need a much faster zoomspeed then this, I missed some shots because of it and that's the last thing I need. I also don't like it's stabilization, I didn't noticed at first until I saw my images on a big screen, even in active mode I need to apply post stabilization because there are "jitters" in the image when I zoom in too much and shoot handheld, so I loose resolution with the active mode + the image gets another resolution hit if I apply post stabilization, luckily it's a sharp image to begin with so I still manage to match it somehow with my other camera's. Then there is still that recording limit so it's still not usable to record 1 to 2 hour sessions, like a ceremony or a dance recital. The ax100 is a lot like my cx730 and with the exception that it doesn't have a variable zoomspeed (I can do very slow to very fast zooms and varying in speed with my cx730) but it seems to have a much more usable zoomspeed compared to the rx10 + can easily be used in a run and gun situation situation, it improves in many ways over my cx730 and there are a lot of videos already out there showing how sharp 1080p it can deliver. It actually is too sharp to match with my other camera's so that is a issue to consider. Compared to my rx10 I get a sharper 1080p image, about the same shallow dof but with superior handling and functionality + it is a much more versatile camera, there is no recording limit, it has a parfocal(!) lens so can be used to shoot dancerecitals and from what I have seen matches the rx10 low light sensitivity though I have not seen side by side tests. My rx10 slowly begins to feel like excess weight in my gearbag and the camera is holding me back sometimes so I might eventually sell it, I only find the ax100 a bit too expensive, especially since I still have my 2 handicam style cx730's to use when the going gets though. Too many choices...:) I just saw the gh3 is being sold for 880 euro while the gh4 is going for 1500 euro, mm, maybe a second gh3 with a 35-100mm to replace my g6, sell the rx10 and wait for the ax100 to come down in price and buy it next year. :) |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
Quote:
|
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
To show how easily one can blame a piece of equipment or software when the actual problem could be "OE" (operator error), here's a classic case...and yes, I plead guilty.
I was ready to shelve my favorite editing program that I've used for years, Edius Pro, for 4K editing. This was based on some blurring of fine details I was seeing when objects were in motion. Detail was perfect when these objects were static, but as soon as the objects were in motion, the blurring occurred. I was losing some of that 4K 'goodness'. I tried two other editing programs and I got perfect renders that were visually lossless. So it must be Edius, right? Wrong. I sat there scratching my head as to why my editor of choice had suddenly let me down. So I dug into the settings and found I had a slight mismatch in frame rate. The AX100 records at 29.97fps and unbeknownst to me, the project had mistakenly been set up as 30fps. Pretty close, shouldn't cause much of an issue? Nope, big issue. Once I correctly set the project to 29.97 and the export to the same frame rate, the motion became razor sharp as it was in the other two editing programs. What a relief! So here I was condemning Edius, when in fact it was my bush league error that caused it. How careful we must be when pointing the finger!! :) |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
Update on the Lanc situation. I picked up the two adapter cables I needed to connect my Canon ZR-2000 to the AX100.
Coming out of the camera's MULTI connector, I plugged in the Sony VMC-AVM1, which is the flat-style MULTI plug on the camera end, and a D-shaped jack on the other end. Next, I connected the second adapter cable, A-3AV. This adapter cable has the D-shaped plug on one end and the 2.5mm jack on the other. Total length is about 12 inches. With these, I was able to use my Canon remote, which has a 2.5mm plug. Functions of the remote which worked: Record stop/start, Display, Zoom, both variable and stepped modes. In variable mode, some of the end-to-end zoom times I got were 5, 6, 11, 13, 16, 18. There are 16 selectable zoom speeds on the dial and here's how those worked: 1-2 = 21 sec, 3-4 = 15 sec, 5-6 = 11 sec, 7-8 = 8 sec, 9-10= 5.5 sec, 11-16 = 5 sec. Functions that did not work: Magnify, AE Shift, Iris, Manual A/F switch, Push to Focus, manual focus adjustment dial, Standby, Peaking. I also got a Sony remote, model RM-AV2. It's very small. The zoom lever has two speeds as far as I can tell. In fact, the zoom lever is much smaller than the one on the camera. It has a D-shaped plug, so I can use it with just the VMC-AVM1 adapter cable. You can turn the power off the camera with this remote, start/stop recording, zoom and also a photo button which reacts the same as the one on the camera. Really liking this 4K for $2K camera. Mark |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
@Ken -
One of the travails of my "monitor" is that the Intel graphics likes to switch to "29p/Hz" (no doubt as a flicker reduction measure) under certain conditions.... and the monitor is adamant about 30p/Hz, so it will begin to flash on and off randomly while trying to sync... took a while to sort THAT one out, it's really fun trying to return to 30 while the screen randomly flashes on and off! Seems to be a bug in the Intel driver when the computer goes into and comes out of sleep mode... messy, but now I let the TV turn off, wake the computer, then turn the monitor back on, and let it reacquire the monitor, somehow that keeps the correct 30p... "Tales From the Bleeding Edge" @Noa - I know you've struggled with the RX10 zoom, I'll try to do some comparisons, but the AX100 is also pretty slow, but can be "crashed" - it has a very delicate zoom that almost feels like it has multiple speeds, got to play with it a bit today. Was meaning to take the RX10 out to compare, but didn't get to it. Low light offhand looks as good or better when in low lux mode on the AX100, interestingly 30p seems cleaner, than the 1080 60p from what I see on the LCD. Perhaps it's because I like to shoot stills, the RX10 still feels more natural to me, the AX100 is noticeably bigger. I've got to see if I can repro those micro vibrations - haven't noticed it specifically, but the wind around here blows a lot, and I sort of expect vibration from that! I shot a few short clips today to test motion, haven't had the chance to download them and "process", but one thing I noticed immediately - if you pan using the VF, there's a LOT of stutter evident, you can definitely "see" the 30p. I DIDN'T see it on the LCD... so the "viewing device" seems to make a difference! Switched back and forth between 4K/30p and 1080/60p, the VF stutter disappeared. Not a deal killer, it actually forced me to maintain proper slow moves, but it'd give one a headache quick if you wave it like you just don't care! Also discovered that if you shoot in different modes, you also have to play clips back with the camera in those modes... a tad inconvenient! At first I couldn't figure out where my clips went! I'm hoping the "worst case" clips (of a series of small flags on a rope in our typical "stiff breeze") that I shot to test motion will answer my questions on 30p... if I find anything useful I'll try to share. Thus far, I do feel that fast motion and 30p may not be a super happy mix... but again not a deal killer, as I don't always shoot high motion. General impression was that the AX100 feels quite good to shoot with, isn't overly heavy, and what I could see on the LCD looked very good. Next step, importing, experimenting with editing options, and seeing how it displays on the new computer! |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
Dave did you try a good Lanc remote. My Manfrotto remote will get a nice smooth zoom from my CX700 for example that is impossible to achieve with the on camera zoom controller. The NX30U is better but the zoom remote is still a lot better. I would find it strange if the AX100 did not have variable zoom like all the other Sony's.
Ron Evans |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
Quote:
Interestingly, I too have had an occasional switch to 29hz on the onboard Intel graphics. However unlike your scenario, it goes unnoticed since my Samsung monitor seems to be OK with 29hz too and I don't get that flashing. I change it back to 30hz when, for whatever reason, I'm in the graphics section, but I don't see a difference. |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
Ron -
I've got the RMAV2, two speed Sony remote, works fine. haven't had the chance to try to dig up any other old 2.5mm ones, I think there's a variable speed cheap-o buried in the equipment closet somewhere. The rocker is actually not bad, but takes a gentle touch - still feels "slow" compared to say the PJ760, but overall it's good. Ken - Yes, there's a driver issue with 30p... it shouldn't change from what you set (30p) to 29p just because it feels like it - I noticed the Samsung keeps going from 60 to 59 as well... but it isn't as picky about the sync signal. See below.... Adriano - If it makes you feel "better", I played back the clips I shot yesterday with Sony's "play memories home" - which has sometimes been problematic in the past for video for me... results were "interesting" - on the Seiki, as I turned up sharpness, the video became rougher, and yes, the grass flickered like a cheap neon sign, among other bad effects.... 0 sharpness still looked very sharp and crisp, with NO flicker, and frankly as eye poppingly GOOD as you could ask for!! Sharpness will now be left on 0! SO, we have ONE element reproduced, on a "cheap" 4K TV being used as a monitor - I think adding any sharpness to an already sharp picture is BAD? Your old TV may be ruining the AX100 output... 30P is really 30 super sharp STILLS per second, every pause showed a freeze frame of the scene, with no visible blurring I could notice (recall our working theory about what might cause certain "motion artifacts"). Looked great, reasonably smooth, with a little bit of stutter with fast motion, probably because of the above. Strangely, 60p clips showed some motion blur when paused... hmmm. 1080 clips are definitely softer looking in comparison to the 4K. Tolerable, but a bit hard to accept after looking at the 4K... tradeoff of motion smoothness for sharpness... hmmm... Here's where it gets "interesting" - moving the window over to the 1080 Samsung.... 30p exhibited much more "jerky" motion, pretty much as I observed in the AX100 viewfinder... 1080 clips looked smoother. 4K still looked sharper. SO, to "sort of" back up Steve & Adriano (observations, but NOT "conclusions") - viewing experience may vary substantially - super sharp video may create issues, and refresh rates are probably more touchy in system setup. I may try playback direct via HDMI to see if results are the same... but it does not appear to be simple "plug and play". Keeping in mind this was close to "native", using Sony's viewer on unedited clips straight out of the camera.... RS is definitely noticeable, this is probably not a good skater/extreme sports/fast action tracking camera... BUT, overall, this camera is incredibly sharp and crisp, and for most "normal" situations, it should produce the best video one could ask for!! May take a bit of effort to get the best final results in editing, but WELL worth the effort, IMO! Based on preliminary casual testing, I'm re-thinking how often I would elect to switch to the high bitrate 1080/60p, and still need to drop 4K into Vegas to experiment with pan/scan/crop to 1080. More experimenting ahead, but overall very impressed, warts and all!! |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
Quote:
If you use Edius can you tell me what do I have to modify on my presets? https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...ttings%202.jpg https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...ning/1%20a.jpg https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...20Settings.jpg May be are they not good presets? Thanks |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
@ Dave:
Dave, can you describe your 'Samsung'? Not sure if you're talking about an HDTV or monitor? I have a Samsung HDTV (64" F8500 plasma) which has been professionally ISF'd. It's very tough to see any AX100 artifacts in my down-rez'd 4K>HD projects and when you do, they're very minor and less than what I'd see with any HD camera I've ever used...especially DSLRs. This is the HDTV I implement the frame rate doubler so that even 30p motion is quite smooth...almost '60p like'. I use the PS3 as my 'player' via a memory card reader that holds the memory card with my project file. The PS3 is connected to the Samsung HDTV via HDMI. My biggest issue with the above setup is forgetting to disable the frame rate doubler after watching my projects. If we then watch some show on broadcast TV, we get the soap opera effect that is created by the frame doubling. Of course it takes just a few seconds to disable it. But yes, it is never a good idea to add additional sharpness to an already resolute, sharp video. That's just asking for trouble and any ISF tech would say "NO NO NO" to that approach with any material you watch from any source. Most of these guys are very conservative with their sharpness adjustments. Now my Samsung 28" 4K monitor, when displaying the AX100 4K video, again looks artifact free, but due to the 30p refresh rate, it's best to avoid fast motion close to the camera. As for artifacts, it's a very rare clip that I can see anything approaching an artifact that hits the threshold of "I can see it without searching for it". Just a non-issue on this setup. As for playing back AX100 files, personally I'd never use Sony Play Memories as my player. In Widows 8.1, WMP is a far better player. I never said that in Windows 7. VLC is another very good player, but I find WMP to be the best in the new Windows environment. So the bottom line is that in the vast majority of cases, artifacts are due to something other than the camera. We can create a very extensive list of things other than the camera that can create artifacts. And most of us know this is true for ANY camera, regardless of format. I just see very little in terms of 4K 'exclusive' artifacts, that don't already exist in other formats and resolutions if one is not careful. I said that before and I'm sticking to it. :) |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
For NTSC 30P is really 29.97fps ( and so is 60i as timecode is the same though temporal motion is the same as 60P ) and 60P is 59.94fps clearly stated in the Sony information. For PAL it is 25P and 50P. Most NA TV's will refresh at 60Hz or a multiple so will repeat a 30P input ( unless of course it is limited to 30Hz as are some of the lower cost 4K sets/monitors ) However NLE timelines need to be setup correctly or the NLE will try and correct !!!
NTSC AX100 at 3840x2160 is 29.97P and for PAL it is 25P . You really must learn to read Adriano as it is in the AX100 manual. Ron Evans. |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
Shutter speeds will also be critical for clean images too. It would be useful if posters would state shutter speed when discussing artifacts etc.
Ron Evans |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
Quote:
I've done exactly this and the results on my HDTV can only be described as 'superb'. We have the same camera, the same software and I'm getting drastically different results. You need to do more research and read. So many of your questions are in the literature and you seem to have a habit of refusing to read the material that would answer so many of your questions. As I stated before, I would start with a 4K project, edit the project and output as HD. I just can't add any more to your questions. You MUST do some digging in to your own system. We can't do that for you. Your TV may be at the heart of these issues too. You can't expect old equipment to keep displaying state-of-the-art results. |
Re: Sony FDR-AX100
Ken, currently if you need to use Lanczos3 for high quality scaling output one needs to use Layouter since the default output scaling from a 4k timeline in Edius does not use Lanczos3. That is why the preferred way at the moment is to use a 1920x1080 project so that Layouter , with Lanczos3 does the scaling in the timeline. It is a known issue . If the intent is to create a Bluray or DVD this is the best way anyway. For a true 3840x2160 project this is of course not an issue as there is no scaling involved.
So if Adriano wants to output a 1920x1080 file it is best to start with a 1920x1080 project and let layouter do the scaling. One could of course export a HQX file from a 3840x2160 project and get TMPGenc with Lanczos3 to do the encode and scaling. Edius 7 is my main editor too. Ron Evans |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:15 AM. |
DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2025 The Digital Video Information Network