Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

In essence, yes. But always keep in mind the Bayer structure - you can't simply take adjacent values as they will represent different colours. So it's define a group, then take binned values for each of red, green, blue within that group. Since the "values" are electric charge (no of electrons) then it follows each photosite can only be used towards a single "cluster".

You have to consider the geometry, and this is where it all starts to get messy (and more difficult to generalise).

Let's assume a sensor of dimensions 4608x2592 in 16:9 video mode - simple maths shows it's virtually 12 million photosites, so consider it typical for a sensor for a primary still camera.

If you were to read to get 1920x1080 values directly, then how would you do the grouping? Divide 4608 by 1920 and you get 2.4 horizontally, same number vertically. But you need to be thinking of whole numbers - "binning" implies reading the charge from a photosite and putting it in a "bin" along with charges from it's neighbours. Hence each photosite can only contribute towards a single value. And in the past it's been essential to simplify, to speed up the readout, to achieve frame rates.

Thinking of Bayer geometry, the basic pattern is a 2x2 block - 1 each of red, blue photosites, and 2 green. In practice, it's been necessary to think about doing the grouping in terms of 4 such blocks - so a 4x4 grouping of 16 photosites (so 4 R, 4 B, 8 G) So each of these becomes a "basic resolution element".

And it therefore follows that the resolution will be the sensor dimensions divided by the block dimensions, so division by 4 in such a case, which here would predict 1152x648 - something slightly less than 720p standard. For output, it would be scaled up to 720 or 1080 format for recording, though obviously the actual resolution could never be better than 648lpph in that particular case.

And measure the results from such "primarily stills" camera sensors, and that's exactly what they do show - in ball park figures anyway, the exact figures will vary depending on the exact dimensions. And that's why such as DSLRs have tended to give "roughly 720p performance", even in 1080p rec mode. But well, 720p isn't bad is it? And to get it from a still camera sensor......?

But times move on.
No. As a generalisation, such will use much more complex algorithms, and not just simple averaging, same with true deBayering. Without going into detail, such will take full account of relative positions of pixels as well as their value. (And any single original pixel can mathematically contribute towards more than one final pixel - that's not the case with binning.)
Pixel binning is relatively simple to do, and at sensor level - that's the beauty of it.

But as with so many things, the more effort that gets put in, the more you can get out. In the example above, the 4x4 binning approach gives you about 648lpph. Do a full deBayer, and you could expect luminance resolution of around 75-80% of the sensor dimensions - so around 2000lpph. In other words, something like true 4K.

It's worth mentioning again that you can get the best of both worlds (simple and easy processing, with good performance) if you use 2x2 blocks, and make the sensor dimensions twice the desired resolution - 3840x2160, if you want 1080p. That should give full HD resolution via simple processing - and is exactly what cameras such as the Canon C300 do. But such a sensor is 8 megapixel and not nowadays regarded as good enough for still photography.

Now, has my computer finished rendering? Back to work! :-)

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Thing is, this RX/AX combo is going to always be paired with lenses with worser than normal barrel distortion issues. While software can make that somewhat invisible, it's still garbage in, sifted garbage out.

It's way more likely we'll see an E-mount (as I've repeated many times in this thread) EA50 successor. NAB could bring the 4K back to the prosumer en masse.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I agree. This model would have the space in the body for XQD cards and fan too. Would be perfect to push 4K into the wedding marketplace !!! The VG series could be the move up from the FDR-AX100 !!! FS100 update would complete the picture . Whole family of 4K/AVCHD camcorders fixed and interchangeable lens !!

Ron Evans

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I'd agree with this. I too don't see much distortion at all. Looks great to me! If there's distortion in the lens, but the internals are correcting for this, who cares?

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

"$2000 camera" and "consumer" don't make much sense to this fella. I guess the true definition of consumer is whether or not you can buy it in a best buy or pc richard or whatnot

What consumer items that are considered luxuries, not necessities, bridge the $2000 mark?

homes, cars, some high end washer/dryers, all are i would gander the majority of the time: necessities

TVs would be the obvious comparison, but most are way below the $2000 mark. and if people are spending say an average of $1000 on their TV, why would they spend twice as much on a camera, something that is used far far less than a daily use TV...

I think they should have embraced the prosumer nomenclature, or ditched even more features and make it closer to the $1000 mark. this is the first THREE ND filter consumer camera...

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Probably their dividing line for consumer and prosumer is the inclusion of XLR audio input.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Darren, in actuality Sony did embrace the 'prosumer nomenclature'. Take a look on the Sony site and see how they categorize this camera in their 'advanced' camera section, along with $4,500 cameras like the AX1.

I think this is pretty much Sony's acknowledgement that the AX100 is indeed at the 'prosumer' level...whatever that means. ;)

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

There is another term that is tossed about - "enthusiast"... and it is this market that Sony is tapping into. Historically, this market was probably labeled "prosumer", so the terms might be interchangeable for most purposes.


As I stated earlier, the traditional "consumer" market is now dominated by phone/tablet/phablets... compact digitals and low end camcorders are at a DEAD END! The SAMSUNG (yes, ONE BRAND of tablets/phones, and a couple hybrid phone/cameras) display floor at our local "Mini" Best Buy is at LEAST twice as big as the entire "camera" section (including video, P&S and SLRs)! Toss in the Apple section, and cameras are now a tiny "niche" market!! Notice I didn't even mention the PHONE display, taking up much of the prime "just inside the door" real estate... Cameras? Oh I think those are somewhere back in the back... and the "mini" format does NOT stock high end cameras in our neck of the woods!

The writing is on the wall, or more accurately the sales floor! I don't know of very many users that are using much beyond their phones/tablets... some still do, but realistically that market is shrinking fast.


BUT, there are those who spend a bunch on their tech toys, and still realize that they could be getting BETTER pictures and/or video, and maybe they want to learn about silly things like f-stop, shutter, ISO, and all that fun stuff. They have sufficient INTEREST beyond pointing and shooting to be an "enthusiast" - they don't shoot professionally (as in being paid to shoot), but they know and want to know more than some teenager shooting selfies, and like ANY hobby, they will invest some disposable income into it, within reason.

Frankly this is where the mysterious "fun" factor of using a camera sneaks into the equation - if someone is "enthusiastic", and picks up a camera that is easy and fun to shoot, but also has advanced capabilities and relatively good output... it's likely to sell. There are LOTS of "casual" DSLR shooters that have a LOT more than $2K invested on bodies and lenses, so there's a market there (albeit also a shrinking one!).

A 4K camera for $2K may not sell in huge quantities, but it should sell well enough - remember the HC1 was at $2k initially (IIRC the TRV900 was around $2500+), and while the "Handycam" flagships have come down some (think CX900 pricing!), this is a "cheap" entry into the 4K arena for those that are interested and want to experiment with it before making a larger investment (pros), or "enthusiasts" who want the best without breaking the bank entirely.

The next price level is more than twice as much... even an APS-C VG series E-mount or an A77 replacement with 4K is NOT going to be a "$2K" investment, by the time body and lenses are considered.

Economically, for those who shoot multi cam, this might well replace 2-3 cameras for shoots where pan/crop is a viable option, so there should be quite a few sold on that basis alone!

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

^ Good assessment Dave, I think you're right on the money.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

All very true, though maybe there should be a distinction between enthusiasts with a lot of money and ones who are much poorer - just.... enthusiastic! :-)

It's human nature to try to categorise, but all this is an example of how difficult it really is - how quickly you get anomalies, let alone where you draw a line between true professional and prosumer.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

[QUOTE= true professional and prosumer.[/QUOTE]
Professionals earn their living by using the camera. It's what professional means. Doesn't matter if it's a Kodak Brownie or an Alexa. Earning your living from it makes you a professional. Any other interpretation of the word is pretense imo

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Sooo....

Who has considered getting a Z100 or AX1, but are now holding back until the AX100 arrives?

$2,000 is quite a selling point.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Glen, since my use for this 4K cam will be solely pleasure, the size & weight of the AX1 & Z100 were too off-putting for me. The AX100 is absolutely perfect.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I have a FDR-AX1 and if the AX100 had 60P I might consider changing but with just 30P it may just be a replacement for my CX700 but then may as well get the CX900 !! I will wait to see what else comes out I think and what the firmware upgrade to the AX1 contains. I do not like slow frame rates so 30P is almost a no go for me. Maybe a Pro version will have 60P.

Ron Evans

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Ron isn't 30P same as 60i which we've been using forever?

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

No - same amount of data, each has 30 frames every second, but with 30p all the lines in a frame are captured at the same time. With 60i, every other line is first captured, then the other half a 1/60 second later, then all over again.

Most immediate and obvious difference is in the rendition of motion - 30p gives a more "jerky" rendition, 60i gives smoother motion.

Move to 60p and (like 60i) you get 60 separate images each second (so "smooth motion") - but they are all complete frames, not half the lines as with an interlace system.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Remember that the 4K standard finally abolished interlaced video formats, so it's all progressive now.

The AX1 and Z100 proved working with garbage input processing into decent output wrong. No matter how much processing you put on a 1/2.3'' sensor, you will still be limited by noise that the processor is unable to correct for.

There is no justification for garbage in, garbage out. I'm honestly pissed off now that the FS700R refused to add XAVC. 4K RAW from that is absolutely amazing. Sony also limited Convergent Design from recording 4K RAW (I assume permanently) to not cannibalize the AXS recorders.

Panasonic may be moving in a better direction with MFT lenses, and I just hope their processing is also up to snuff.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Yes since there is no 60i the only way to get the smooth motion in 4K is 60P. As I have been corrected several times. 60i is 59.94 fields a second. 2 fields is one frame so the time code increments every 2 fields so 60i is 29.97 frames per second time code NOT progressive frames like film would be. So the temporal motion of 60i is just like 60P just has half the vertical resolution. 30P is very different though unfortunately has the same timecode as 60i. 60i , for the same time period , has twice the exposures in the camera than 30P so much smoother motion.

Ron Evans

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Let me remind folks that if your display has frame doubling like my Samsung F8500 plasma, you can get 30p to look pretty buttery smooth. I've done just that with regular cellphone videos as a test. Those videos had the typical stutter you'd expect at 30p, but engaging the frame doubling made it hard to distinguish from true 60p.

That's one of the reasons (aside from an even better HD quality @50mbps & 4K) why I think I can get away with 30fps.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Yes but how do you do that in your editing to get the output to be smooth for other people to view. I use my Sony 240HZ TV to do the same thing for the crappy cable TV or badly encoded BLuray in 24P. 60P is important to get the smooth motion and is the NEW 60i. If you don`t have interlace you need 60P ( or 50P ) . Also removing some things this way is possible but complex pan and motion shots are not possible and will always have the slow frame rate stutter. Faster frame rates at recording are the only solution for this situation. Fixed camera position can be resolved in playback but pan and motion within the pan not so. Shooting XAVC-S 1920x1080 at 60P should be good though.

Ron Evans

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

If the shutter speed was set to 1/40sec instead of 1/60sec would that not remove the jerky?

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

NO. Its how many exposures are taken of the motion. The more exposures in a period of time ( per second ) the smoother the motion. Faster shutter gives sharper image, slower shutter give more motion blur but not judder removal. A really slow shutter and slow frame rate will give a juddery blurred image !!! Fast shutter and slow frame rate will give really sharp juddery image. One needs to have shutter appropriate for the frame rate.

Ron Evans

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Ron, remember, this was for my own enjoyment, not a paid project for others to view. So 30p, frame rate doubled, might be OK. :)

I too am looking forward to 60p, but I really want to dip in to a small 4K cam now.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I am sure it will work fine for you just keep movements slow and smooth or let things happen in front of the camera. I have even considered this myself for my application which is a fixed camera, wide angle for later cropping but think I will wait for 60P since I already have the FDR-AX1. If you really need 60P for an application it will shoot that way in HD anyway.

Ron Evans

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Thanks Ron. Good or bad, I'll let you know the outcome.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Let's toss around this AS100 codec for a minute.

3840×2160 @ 30P using only 60Mbp/s?

If we compare this to 24Mbp/s (which we know can be fairly robust) at 1920x1080, mathematically this "seems" to be an H.264 "downgrade" in motion handling and durability.

So, pound for pound, 4K at 60Mbp/s would equal 15Mbp/s in 1080. (if you think of 4K in HD quadrants)

XAVC-S has something extra thrown into the mix. It runs at the very highest H.264 "5.2" level profile.

What about AVCHD? It's set at high profile but only 4.0 so it uses a lower H.264 toolset.

So here is the technical question for anybody out there that might know: Does the increased XAVC-S H.264 5.2 profile justify the lower bitrate used in 60Mbp/s 4K at 30p? Does the additional tools and calculations cover that bitrate loss?

Can XAVC-S provide at least an equal amount of motion handling at 4K, 29.97p running at 60Mbp/s as 1080 does at 24Mbp/s in 29.97p?....because it uses a deeper tool set?

Can anybody with a Handycam AX1 shoot 10 seconds of a scene with a modest amount of movement and upload it somewhere for people to test?

This new AX100 60Mbp/s only bitrate might be the biggest question about the overall image quality of this new little camera.

At $2,000 I find it hard not to make it my first jump into 4K. For a full manual camera, there is not much to lose and pretty much forces me to get into 4k sooner than I originally planned. (I'll prolly buy a "pro" 4K camera next year but start "playing" with this one in 2 months)

CT

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I've asked the same thing on another forum, but I don't think anyone knew the answer. Perhaps people don't have enough experience with this new format?

I guess I'll be getting the answer in March when mine comes in. :)

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

There's something you're missing if you make that comparison. If a level of compression gives an element of artifacting which is just visible in an HD picture, then in a quadrant of a 4K image, the chances are it won't be. Any artefact will be a lot smaller as a fraction of the whole picture.

Expressed in another way, it's possible to use higher compression ratios as resolutions increase with no increase in the visibility of artifacting. The other thing to bear in mind is that the 24Mbs figure for AVC-HD is a max bitrate - the average will be lower. Do we know what the 60Mbs quoted relates to? Maximum, average, what?

Taking all that together with the fact that XAVC does indeed use more tricks of the H264 toolkit than AVC-HD, then whilst I can't pretend to know exactly by how much this will allow the bitrate to be decreased from the initially expected 4x24Mbs, I fully expect equivalent quality will be obtained with considerably less than 96Mbs.

So will 60Mbs be adequate? We'll see, but I doubt the figure was just plucked out of thin air without any testing. For now I'm prepared to believe the camera wouldn't have the spec if Sony didn't have good reason to think it would be.

And let's not forget we are talking about a consumer badged camera - not an F55. What is adequate for one may not be at all adequate for the latter. The codec and 60Mbs bitrate is likely a good compromise for a 4K camera in this class.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

The FDR-AX1 will shoot 30p at 60Mbps and 100Mbps so is this like AVCHD at 24Mbps( 21Mbps ave ) and 17Mbps of the consumer cameras? I have not tried the difference on my FDR-AX1 as I shoot 60P so far. I have sent back to Sony for a backfocus check at the moment so will try when I get it back from service.

Ron Evans

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Cliff and Ken -

I think we're all "barking up the same tree" here - this is a "cheap" entry into 4K, something we all know is coming, but probably aren't "ready" for! I've put off a computer upgrade simply because I suspect I'll need even more oomph for 4K...cheap is relative, by the time you include the other probable "upgrades"! CPU, video card, bigger faster drives and memory, 4K monitor/TV...

That 30P does make me nervous, as I don't like the results from 24p typically, and strongly prefer 60p. Will motion be captured in an acceptable way or not... that is the question, and we'll have to wait and see!

In some ways this starts to add some shine to the "ugly stepsister" CX900 - unless that "4K" feature is a total bust, most will buy the AX100, meaning the CX900 might be discounted rather quickly and aggressively, and it should have great 1080 60p... hmmm.

I still think the AX100 is going to be a good "toes in the water" camera for 4K, and likely "good enough" for most users and viewers - sure it may not be "perfect", but at this price point??

As a practical matter, I think most users (and viewers) are still happy with "HD", it will likely be a viable capture and delivery format for some time, 4K just represents the next stage in imaging, I'd rather spend a smaller amount to experiment with it than a larger amount - either way, these first models to market will probably be "obsolete" pretty fast anyway!

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

You may find this presentation on XAVC useful.
Ron Evans

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I am not barking. I find 4k = 3D. We all saw where that ended up.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Only time will tell if 4K gets accepted or if it ends up like the 3D cams and TVs. Each innovation in video runs thru this test. The transition from analog to digital to HD has been amazing and now we are at the precipice of another video evolution. Of course, it usually takes a revolution for that evolution to take place. People literally needed to revolt from analog for digital to become the standard bearer. And once again, for HD to be accepted by the masses.

There were those who questioned whether camcorders would go tapeless or not. But, now I can't think of any major manufacturer who has an active camcorder brand new camera that shoots on Mini DV tapes, although I still have plenty of camcorders which still shoot onto Mini DV/HDV like my trusty HVR-A1.

My point is that technology is moving so fast that today's technological breakthrough or innovation becomes obsolete tomorrow. The speed which things are moving is so rampant nowadays that I question whether the public is as ready as the manufacturers want them to be. It's not that 4K may be a flash in the pan like 3D, it's that it may be too much too soon for some or for many. I know certain friends and families that finally may the jump to HDTVs from their old SDTVs. I doubt they'll be ready all of the sudden to jump to 4K TVs.

Like I said, only time will tell. I'm not ready to believe that 4K or XAVC will becomes a standard bearer or not. I suspect the pros and aspiring filmmakers will love it, but, I suspect the average consumer will still be happy with their little HD Handycams.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

The video that Ron just posted contradicts the whole expected HD 10bit 4:2:2 50/60p spec in XAVC-S. Seek to around 24:46.

So we are getting 4:2:0 50mbps after all. No different from the GH3's 50mbps.

The only camera likely to get 10bit 4:2:2 1080 50/60p at 50mbps is the PMW-300 since it's real XAVC. It will have to be Long-GOP, and there's no certainty it's not the S variant.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

3D is a "gimmick", one that has come and gone more than a couple times... It's known to give some people headaches and eyestrain. No amount of marketing hype will beat that and the funky glasses with limited viewing angles...

4K is an extension of a legitimate demand for sharper images (Retina displays anyone?), and better capture and display devices. It's not "needed" per se (nothing wrong with old "I Love Lucy" reruns in B&W, right?!), but when pretty much anyone can see the improved image quality if the screen is large enough, there WILL be a demand, I don't see it as a "gimmick".

Tablets and phones are already touting 4K, and it's not like there is any big blockage to higher resolutions - people expect high resolution STILLS, and it's logical to expect that if that level of sharpness can be made available at reasonable prices on display screens, and in capture devices, it won't be terribly long before there will be plenty of options at "consumer-y" prices.

A $2K camera is at least in the "consumer" ballpark, and if it represents "better" quality (than phones or tablets), even if not "best" (studio/pro cameras), it will likely be a breakout product. Much will depend on the workflow and overall support for content creators, but Sony seems to have laid out a pretty good roadmap (even if the AX100 wasn't apparently on it - I still say this sensor/processor seems to have come out of nowhere!).

You can look at it and say "why doesn't it do this or that like the $5K camera does", or if it turns out to produce a fairly high quality image for a lot less, be happy with what it CAN do. I suspect the higher bitrate 1080 60p may be worth the price of admission for many, just in case 4K for some reason turns out to be a dud or a speed bump on the way to 8K or holographic 3D or whatever...

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I was under the impression the PMW300 could not do 1080/50-60P, even with the XAVC ungrade. I don't remember why that is.

But there are other 1080/50-60P cameras out there: the F5/55, the Z100, the new Panasonic PX270, the PX5000 and possibly the HPX600, with the AVC/Ultra upgrade. And of course, RED and Alexas.

10-bit 1080/50-60/P, 4:2:2. seems to be a rarity, at least for now. Notice the cheapest camera that can do this starts at $5,500.

It seems there are a lot of people in this forum that want 1080/50-60P, but honestly, I've never had a client request this format, not even from my little FS100. And I shoot mainly for broadcast networks and cables channels. They're very happy with 24P, 30P or 60i. Yup, 60i is still a big format out there.

edit - I forgot about the PMW400. I think it can do 50-60P with the XAVC upgrade. Or not.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Kate, I'd bet the bank that 4K will have no relationship in terms of success to 3D. I knew from the very beginning 3D would not succeed for the simple reason people were not going to wear glasses to watch TV in any great numbers. Add to that, many were prone to headaches while watching 3D. Sure, people bought 3DTVs, but not because most wanted 3D, but because it was bundled with the TV they wanted anyway for other reasons. No, this was a fail from day one.

I see 4K very differently (no pun intended;)). As long as the screen size is large enough or seating distances close enough, the 4x increase in resolution is easy to see...and no glasses required, passive or active, to see the difference!

As is usually the case with a transition like this, content is the bottleneck. But this will change, even though it looks like that change will take longer to occur than our SD to HD transition. People will accept 4K downloading and streaming as the best way to get content early on. But it will happen, the industry is too committed to it not to. Just look at the precipitous drop in 4K display prices in just a few months.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

I can only speak for myself, but I only want 50/60p as an acquisition format. As a delivery format, 25p doesn't bother me.

Same with 4K. I'd like to acquire in 4K and deliver in 1080p. I don't know anyone who apart from enthusiasts who want any higher resolution than that.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Dave, 30p is also my biggest concern, but for my own personal use I'm really thinking it will be fine.

The impact of the frame doubler (or quadrupler, depending on your TV display) can really work wonders for 30p video. The same frame rate increase process that causes that dreaded SOE (soap opera effect) with film, works beautifully with 30p video as it smooths out the 30p stutter. Sure, most of us don't want our film to look like video, but there are few ill-effects from making our 30p video look like 60p or even 120p video. It will still look like video.

For those looking for a filmic look, sure, using frame rate doubters in your display is not the way to go. But then again I really doubt that most AX100 owners will be looking for a filmic look. Personally I love the look of video, always have. I love film too, but there's a place for both.

I think the AX100 will be a blast and, like Dave said, look at this 'cheap' 4K entry not for what it lacks but rather for what it has.

Re: Sony FDR-AX100
 

Ken, I agree with this. 4K and 3D are two different animals. 4K is the natural progression of HD: more resolution, better color. It makes sense to go in this direction.

To those who doubt 4K will catch on, do you really think we're going to stay with 1920x1080 resolution for the next 20-30 years? Is 1920x1080 the highest resolution we're ever going to get for home entertainment?

I see the real problem is delivering all that 4K info through the existing cable and satellite architecture, but that's being worked on now. Isn't that what H.265 and Google's new 4K bandwidth supposed to cure? At least for a start in that direction.

Once that issue is resolved, and with the dropping in price of 4K TVs, I expect 4K to take off. If you've seen a 4K monitor next to a regular HD monitor, you'll see that the difference is dramatic. 4K gives that Wow factor the same way that HD did compared to SD.
Yeah, I know, there are lots of people who still don't see the difference between SD and HD (like my parents), but I think most consumers will gravitate to 4K over time.