Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

Back in November/December, a Sony rep posted that they hoped to have the plugin by late December, early January. If it's out there, I can't find it, and no FCP X update for it yet either. Anyone heard anything?

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

Still waiting on the plug-in for Sony Vegas Pro 13. I have the FS7 and purchased it for XAVC-L use. Been using Mpeg422 and XAVC-I for slow-mo instead and it's annoying. I feel your pain. :(

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

Yep, waiting on Vegas also. Have to wonder with all these variations of Catalyst if they're even going to bother. I know there's a disconnect between Sony divisions, but it's pretty silly to have a Sony camera not work with Sony software.....if I ran the company I'd fix that quick.

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

Next on Sony's to-do list, the release of their new E85 fueled car in Hawaii. :-)

Hawaii E85 Gas Station Locations

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

I losing confidence in Sony personally. Since we're nearing the end of January I'm now thinking I should hold off until NAB and see other cameras coming to market.

I just don't feel confidence in Sonly keeping NLE compatibility current (FCPX user). Over time there will be OS and NLE updates and given this time span between the X70 release and still no support, I can't depend on this for professional work.

I can't help but think Sony has some very serious problems with their software support. Apparently they're not even in a position to update the development timeline for NLE compatibility.

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

Have you tried Catalyst Prepare (not the free one)? I do not have an X-70 (yet) but I imported files (XAVC-S, I think) from a Sony A7s and exported to ProRes and brought that into FCP-X.

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

The free one (Catalyst Browse) works fine and will now even do batch export to all flavors of ProRes. The only thing I've heard about it is that there is a small gamma shift to a bit flatter, less contrasty look upon conversion. I shoot pretty flat anyway so have not really even noticed it. That's easily correctable in FCPX anyway, unless your situation doesn't allow any editing in post.

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

The "gamma shift" is actually a raising of blacks from 0 up to like 10-15IRE, and the lowering of highlights from 108IRE to like 95IRE. It's just a total compression of the entire image, I don't think you can call that flat and simply stretch it back down and up and expect an optimal image?

Paul

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

I was speaking about the paid version, not the free one. By the way, the price through B&H was $50 less than from Sony.

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

Paul, I didn't realize the issue with Catalyst Browse transcoding was to raise blacks *and* lower highlights - thought it was just a shadows issue. For what it's worth, I just looked at some of those clips I shot recently testing some flat settings, and in comparing the luma scopes in Browse (original clip) and FCPX (ProRes transcode done by Browse) I see almost no shift whatsoever. Some things are barely lower or higher, but by nothing even close to 10-12 on the scope.

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

I was guestimating based on my observations using the Sony Vegas histogram, which doesn't give IRE and is quite compressed in appearance. When comparing my individual transcode vs batch transcodes of the same clip, the highlights on the individual transcode exceeded the IRE mark, and the highlights on the batch version stopped right at 100IRE. The lows did similar, with individual blacks hitting down to 0, and batch clips well above 0. I would estimate you would have to set black level to around +5-7 to get that much black lift in camera.

Paul

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

Just to inform that Lightworks 12.0.3.A can read the XAVC-L 1080/60p 50Mbps natively without any transcoding. I'm a Vegas Pro 13 user and it's a bummer that this program as such a big learning curve...

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

A Sony representative posted this elsewhere regards plugin support for XAVC-L for FCPX.

"I will have a concrete update on this within the next week or two once we get done with the latest AMA plugin release."

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

Edius 7.4 will read without transcoding too. Edius is my main editor and is fairly easy to learn as I am also a Vegas user . Try the demo.

Ron Evans

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

month after month this xavc workflow for the x70 pictures in motion makes the old tape workflow look good in comparison . I don't remember ANY workflow made so complicated and for no reason. Where do we stand right now (February the first of 2015) ? We need to spend hours to transcode xavc to xavc . And that makes no sense, none.

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

Anyone have any inside info now that Sony have released their new 3.40 AMA plugin for Avid?

Divergent media writes this in an article about xavc-L which might explain why it takes so long: "... It turns out that the Mac OS X video framework has one set of codecs for intraframe H.264, and a separate set for interframe H.264. The intraframe codecs can’t do interframe, and the interframe codecs can’t do 10bit 4:2:2..."

EditReady supports XAVC-L (PXW-X70, PXW-FS7) on the Mac

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

Latest word I've got from Sony person visiting forums is.

"Not yet. I have a loose target but we are still working out release timing with Apple."

Not that there's anything but tealeaves for me but I'd guess either with the next FCPX update (10.1.5) or otherwise around the camera's 4K update or maybe NABish.

Why do I say that? Because somehow the timing has to be coordinated with Apple.

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

There's actually some precedent for this. Some things seem to just get added by Apple, while others require a plugin. But sometimes even the plugin gets coordinated with Apple.

I've seen Panasonic consumer-cam AVCHD 60fps clips suddenly import as native as an undocumented inclusion in a FPCX update. And the Canon XF series cameras required a plugin, but once the plugin became available Apple actually removed the option to transcode to ProRes and to this day we are required to import native. At the time I had an older Mac Pro and would have welcomed the option to edit in ProRes.

But, I'm glad to hear that Apple is involved in this upcoming native import plugin or feature. After all, NAB is now less than 8 weeks away.

While I'm at it, here's the wish list I've posted elsewhere on dvinfo for firmware updates for the X70 - preferably as part of the 4K upgrade:

-some kind of S-log Picture Profile, but, failing that, tweaking of the Knee settings to work better so I can create my own
-waveform monitor in addition to histogram
-120fps @ 1080p - but I'd even take it @ 720p rather than nothing

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

yes, three important things, I agree. But for now I'd be happy to see a real 10bit 4:2:2 useable with (say) Vegas? that would be super as I'm curious how a good 50mbps 10-4:2:2 looks like out of my camera. (can't see any of it yet): only the good old 28mbps avchd.
:)

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

Well using Catalyst you can convert to XAVC iFrame ( bigger file but full 10 bit ) and edit in Vegas. Or try Edius trial and edit in native XAVC-L.

Ron Evans

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

nah, I don't wanna do that : this is 2015 and I don't want to convert, transcode anything. how 'bout I open the footage from a real editor like every other camera does? I feel like I'm back to the tapes era here... transcoding in order to edit? come on....

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

I am guessing you mean XAVC Long GOP rather than iFrame, since neither the AX100 or X70 record in iFrame?

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

yes but that's irrelevant, at least to me. Sony can call it whatever they want, but it has to work as expected: where is the 10bit 4:2:2 50mbps advertised? I don't see any difference with the avchd : granted there is no way to know since those are just "transcoders" after the fact and by the way I seriously doubt that edius or catalyst actually transform the "unknown" mxf to a "real" mxf 10bit 4:2:2. the bitrate can be manipulated at will, so in the end I'm still waiting for the so-called XAVC (unknown so far) to come to play with us. Until then this X70 is just avchd 28mbps.

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

NO I mean iFrame. Catalyst converts the XAVC-L from the X70 back to XAVC iFrame so that most of the NLE's can edit for Windows and to Prores for Mac. Downside is the files are of course now larger.

Ron Evans

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

Well if you used a real editor like Premiere or Edius you could edit native X70 files. Changing Long GOP to iFrame in Catalyst is in my mind no different than capturing tape and a lot quicker. Your NLE is going to convert the Long GOP files to iFrame to edit anyway.

Ron Evans

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

It is not unknown mxf, it is mxf 10bit 4:2:2 XAVC-L. For instance I have a small clip of 10sec 30frames, 60P file. Catalyst shows all the clip details. Name of camera, even serial number, exposure and focus settings, data rate etc etc. Clip is 66,982KB , data rate is shown as 45Mbps ( is effectively a still image of some flowers ). Converted to XAVC file is now 306,062KB, data rate is shown as 100Mbps. Both files are shown as 10bit 4:2:2. As with AVCHD your NLE will have to convert from long GOP to edit other than on an iFrame so there is no difference to converting to iFrame outside or inside your NLE other than the quality of the converter. I think Sony knows how their own codec works !!!

Ron Evans

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

I thought I had found a solution, but no. Until Sony gives us a native import plugin, in addition to Catalyst Browse there is EditReady ($49) on the Mac side which does transcode to ProRes and several other formats. It's divergent media - same company that does ClipWrap.

Anyway, one of the options is Passthrough - which is supposedly just rewrapping the clips to QuickTime, not transcoding. Takes only a moment and the files don't enlarge. But, in testing it, the rewrapped clips from my X70 will not play in the Finder, nor will FCPX import them.

I've emailed the company to see if I'm just missing something or if this can't be done.

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

I can't help but wonder what's happening at Sony that a camera that was released closing in on 5 months ago still doesn't have a plugin for FCPX or support in Vegas. Add to that the long (and possibly lengthening) time frame for the 4k upgrade.

Are they in more serious financial trouble than they're letting on?
Sorry for venting but I can't help but think theres a serious problem afoot.

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

I don't expect this to be helpful to many people, unfortunately, but I'll tell you what I'm using...

I have Cygwin (Linux command line tools, basically) with perl and ffmpeg installed on Windows. With this, it's just a simple command to re-wrap an MXF file from the X70:

ffmpeg -loglevel error -y -i "Clip0001.MXF" -map 0:0 -filter_complex "[0:1] [0:2] amerge" -acodec aac -b:a 256k -strict -2 -vcodec copy -metadata "date=2014-11-17 00:24:47" "Clip0001.mp4"

That looks pretty scary, but basically "-map 0:0" says copy stream 0 (the video); "-filter_complex "[0:1] [0:2] amerge" -acodec aac -b:a 256k -strict -2" says merge stream 1 and stream 2 into a single stereo audio stream and encode as AAC at 256 kb/s; "-vcodec copy" means copy the (H.264) video without re-encoding it. The output is an MP4 file with the camera's video output completely unaltered; this loads into PP CS6 (at least) with no problems at all. I would expect it would work in any NLE.

If you want samples of the output, check the link here: Sony PXW-X70 Tests: Cliffs on Vimeo

I have a perl script which automates this to do an entire card. If it would be helpful, I'll be happy to share it.

Though this may not work for most folks, it at least demonstrates that the video in the XAVC files isn't a problem, it's just the way Sony have wrapped it. So really, a simple converter should not be a problem. I keep hoping that the Handbrake folks will get this working. Ffmpeg's code is available in library form, so if some Windows programmer wants to have a go, a GUI converter should be fairly simple.

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

They are clearly in a constrained mode as after over a year I am still waiting for all the buttons and features on my FDR-AX1 to work !!! Data code button doesn't work as well as the host USB port. It now records AVCHD ( why when it records XAVC-S just fine in UHD as well as HD ) Why they don't have Vegas working is a puzzle. I can see that Apple may have to do something for plugin for FCPX to work. Also the PXW-Z100 has the UHD Long GOP option already working which by the way is not 10bit but just like the FDR-AX1 is 8bit 4:2:0 which is what I expect the X70 will also get.

Ron Evans

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

I heard back from EditReady...they have a blog post explaining their work:

EditReady supports XAVC-L (PXW-X70, PXW-FS7) on the Mac

...but in an email to me it was explained that Apple's underlying video framework does not support XAVC-L. The way they got EditReady to do transcoding was to not rely on Apple's framework (they called it QuickTime, but isn't it technically AV Foundation now?). They created "a new H.264 decoder, thanks to the open source FFmpeg project." There were other difficulties as well - see the link above. But this solution transcodes to ProRes (and quite a few codecs as well). And of course the software has several other features beyond just transcoding.

But, since all the Passthrough feature does is rewrap, the rewrapped files are still not recognized by QuickTime or FCPX. So to get this to work may take a plugin, or Sony may be working with Apple to incorporate the import in a future FCPX update, or it may be handled by another Pro Codecs update. And it sounds like Atticus's script that just rewraps wouldn't help on a Mac. But I'm told that Premiere Pro CC will do the import, so that has to be due to something Adobe is doing rather than Sony or Apple.

All that being said, I'm really enjoying the camera. I can live with the transcoding, and I have never tested the AVCHD so I have no opinion on the AVCHD vs. 10 bit XAVC issue. I shoot pretty flat in-camera and grade in FCPX so the flatter gamma shift when batch transcoding in Catalyst Browse problem doesn't affect me. I haven't tested to see if EditReady avoids that issue or not.

I just shot a family thing (swim meet) and the combination of custom PPs, Paul A.'s color correction settings, Active Stabilzation, and Clear Image zoom gave really tremendous quality. At $2300, I consider this a medium term camera until I see what comes out in the next year or so. If they fix/add a couple of things and if the 4K is a step up from the AX100 - I'll be even more pleased with it.

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

Ahh, shame. Still, if anyone with a mac wants to give it a shot, some re-wrapped clips are available from the link on that test.

Sony PXW-X70 Tests: Cliffs on Vimeo

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

I think Sony is probably going through a lot of internal turmoil at the moment whilst the top management try and turn it around into a profitable organisation again. Rumors about them abandoning the mobile (cell) phone market etc. probably means every division is being "assessed and re-organised/re-structured". I remember only to well when I worked in R&D for big corporates just what that feels like. Glad I left all that behind :-)

It also seems (at least to me) that some of their recent camera launches have been really rather rushed to market. When the FS7 came out I remember many complaining about the firmware seeming to be "beta" or "work in progress" (and I believe to an extent it still is) and certainly some simple design/hardware mistakes seem to have been made - despite all this I can see why it appeals to many.

I think that's probably what happened with the PXW-X70 too - rushed to market just to get some sales/cash-flow and then "we will sort out the 4K bit later". I'm really hoping Sony will announce details about the PXW-X70 4K firmware update at BVE in London next week...I'll be there to ask them in person too...but even if they don't, I do hope Sony get their act together and release this much anticipated update very soon.

Then I can decide it I'm going to dip my toe in the 4K world by buying it, or save my money a while longer (maybe even for a C300 MkII) since I've decided any future camera purchases now need to be 4K - I'm definitely not buying any 1080p only cams any more, especially now I have a high spec new Mac Pro capable of dealing with 4K sitting next to me.

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

Andy - could not agree more. I could have afforded to get a C100 mk2 (already have Canon glass) and almost did. But for a serious amateur like me that is a huge investment and I would need to get 4 years or so out of the camera. I just couldn't see putting $5.5k into a camera that I will still be using in 2019 but will never have 4K. I hope you can glean more info in person next week!

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

March is nearly done. From the last Sony rep post I saw elsewhere, they are waiting for Apple. My guess is there may be a ProApps codec update along with the next FCPX update. One may well wonder why it's taken so long.

Additionally the 4k paid update (apx. $500) will be available in June and will only be 4:2:0 60mbps (less than their top consumer camera) which I believe will be XAVC-S (not L though) 4:2:0 100mbps.

There's much to like about the camera but I must say that I'm a bit gun shy of Sony's support for it.

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

As many people as possible need to tell apple that this needs sorting out asap....

Apple - Feedback

They do listen !!!!

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

I took a slightly different route since I have an Apple developer account. So filed a bug. If the bug gets answered and doesn't contain any material under NDA, I'll post here.

In my report, I outlined how Apple's and Sony's documentation generally says XAVC support and doesn't provide any specifics as to what flavors would be ommitted. Thus my chief complaint in the report was that importing XAVC Long GOP should actually work.

I referenced these links in my report:

Apple XAVC Support
Sony XAVC Plugin

Edit: Also just provided feedback to Sony (there's a 'Let us Know' link at the bottom of the Sony XAVC Plugin link above). I cross-referenced by Apple Bug report in that feedback.

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

From my understanding support XAVC-L is a done deal. Apple's and not Sony are in control of the release date. I'd bet it'll be in the next FCPX / ProApps Codecs update. I'm disappointed that it's taking this long though. I can't imagine XAVC-L support was that much more difficult than XAVC-S support. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a licensing issue rather than any bugs in the decoding.

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

On fcp.co a frequent, reliable contributor has hinted there will be a solution very soon, which I'm hoping means NAB will bring a new FCPX, or at least a Pro Codecs update that fixes this.

Re: Any word on XAVC-L plugin for FCP X?
 

Ricky -

I've got a question, taking off from what you said about submitting a bug:
With regard to Stabilization in FCPX, one thing I'd like to see (and I've mentioned this before to the FCPX people I've talked to) is a way to select a piece of a clip, say, with a square (kinda like a face recognition square), and tell X to use that area for stabilization purposes?

One example where this would have worked really well for me was with a video taken from a sailboat of a buoy and there was land in the background. The buoy that was in the foreground was swinging around due to the waves and stabilization made jello out of everything. If a piece of the land could be selected and have stabilization put it's effort into into stabilizing things relative to that it would, or should, make for a less jello video.

Unfortunately, it's probably not possible to present this in the context of a bug, ergo, less attention for a problem that could use a solution.