DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   Sony HVR-Z1 / HDR-FX1 (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/sony-hvr-z1-hdr-fx1/)
-   -   Buying the FX1 then what (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/sony-hvr-z1-hdr-fx1/32575-buying-fx1-then-what.html)

Greg Harris September 27th, 2004 06:04 AM

Buying the FX1 then what
So lets say i go out and purchase this camera in mid Oct., and I filmed a whole weekend and wanted to put my work onto a DVD. Thats not possible is it? Because HD DVDs aren't out yet? So its pretty much pointless for me to buy this camera right now right, and just wait for the HD DVD burners to come out?

Mike Gannon September 27th, 2004 06:34 AM

You can burn to a DVD once you downconvert to SD. The big question IMO is how the downconverted image will compare with other sub $5000 SD cameras currently available.

Mark Kubat September 27th, 2004 06:41 AM

What was Sony thinking?
Oh my God! What was Sony thinking?

I mean, who would really want to be able to capture 1080i on 3 CCDs with 3 lux rating on mini-dv cassettes? The notion almost seems preposterous!

I mean, one would have to down-rez and then it would still be quite tough trying to get as poor an image as the XL2...

You know, the more I read here in this forum, the more I'm convinced that Sony are absolute dullards for releasing this camera now. I mean, surely this will be the final nail in Sony's coffin - the HDR-FX1 will prove once and for all that HDV is just a load of B.S. and we should should keep on shooting 525 lines for the next decade. On interchangeable lenses at that. With 24p, of course.

Can't everyone here see that OBVIOUSLY according to the specs that the HDR-FX1 is gonna go the way of micromv?

I know some people at IBC etc. have seen footage and they claim it's amazing - if they weren't on Sony's payroll, they were obviously tricked!

Come on, the idea that anybody is gonna fall for such an obvious gimmick as the FX1? I mean, so what if you can shoot high-definition quality and blow it up to the big screen - it doesn't have 24p! Sony, ohmigosh, what were you thinking! And you forgot to put XLR inputs on the cam, for goodness sake! The most important feature! Besides having interchangeable lenses and being able to shoot 24p! Huh! What a bunch of amateurs, those people over at Sony!

The real deal-breaker for me is that the FX1 doesn't seem to have any sort of "night-shot" mode or any still-capture ability to some sort of memory-stick type media. What a bummer. I mean, all we will be able to do with this thing is film tremendous video! That just bites.

There seem to be a vast array of options and manual features and settings on the forthcoming HDR-FX1 but tell me... does it have a "Sand-and-Snow" preset? Does it?

And gosh darn it, right now at this moment there doesn't seem to be any software that can really handle editing the HDR-FX1 stuff easily, is there? I mean, companies like Apple and Adobe and Ulead among others are promising to one day introduce such capability, but the reputations of these companies precedes them, no? I mean, does anybody really think think this HDV fad is gonna catch on?

Excuse me as I have to go back to the living room and adjust the bunny ears on my black-and-white t.v. - oh gosh darn, there goes the eight-track again...

Ben Gurvich September 27th, 2004 07:51 AM

IT looks like BETA-SP, I agree without 24/25p forget it.

Heath McKnight September 27th, 2004 08:51 AM


A few things for you to think about after I read your post...

1. The FX-1 is being marketed as a consumer camera. There will be a pro version out next year for around $7000.

2. JVC will have a $20,000 or so HDV camera that does 24p.

3. You can take 1080i footage, convert it to 24p and transfer to 35mm film. For more on that, visit DVFilm.

4. No one who is talking about the FX-1 is on Sony's payroll.

5. Sarcasm dully noted, but why?


Rob Lohman September 27th, 2004 08:55 AM

Just to let everybody know, Vegas can edit HDV... now.

Ben Gurvich September 27th, 2004 09:10 AM

HDV will takeover,and theres nothing wrong with it.
I think they just havnt bought out good cam with 24p.

If the dvx100 came in HDV,and performed like the dvx youd buy it for the rez factor.

We cant expect too much yet, b/c if they bring out the top of the line cam first, where does that leave them in 2 years?

MiniDV has probably reahced it pinnacle in 2002 with the dvx100, like 6? years after it came out.

John Jay September 27th, 2004 10:20 AM

For the record,and just comparing retail price , for $5k you have the choice (if you can call it that) between

one Canon XL2


one HDV-FX1 plus one PC-350 (with $1 change)

the latter combination will cater for just about any shooting scenario you can think of in this price range

the abilty to pull focus , aperture and zoom at the flick of a button over a defined time line makes the FX1 even at SD resolution more Filmlook capable that 24p ever will - your production quality and resolution will improve dramatically.

Greg Harris September 27th, 2004 11:54 AM

none of my questions were answered.

Heath McKnight September 27th, 2004 12:11 PM

you can make HD DVDs right now using Windows Media 9. You can also shoot projects to try and sell to Voom! or HDNet.


Paul Henley September 27th, 2004 12:40 PM

Re: Buying the FX1 then what
<<<-- Originally posted by Greg Harris : So lets say i go out and purchase this camera in mid Oct., and I filmed a whole weekend and wanted to put my work onto a DVD. Thats not possible is it? Because HD DVDs aren't out yet? So its pretty much pointless for me to buy this camera right now right, and just wait for the HD DVD burners to come out? -->>>

Greg, it's not possible to store HDV content on standard DVD (at least that I am aware of). Until the release of HD-DVD (or Blu-Ray) to the average consumer, HDV content will have to be converted to SD prior to being recorded on DVD. Note: There are other options besides DVD though. As Heath mentioned, there is WM-9 as well as D-VHS that will record and play back HD content.

Is it pointless to get the FX1? I don't think so, but until its release it's too early to tell. The prevailing wisdom out there is that "dumb down" HDV to SD will inherently look better because of the higher resolution, than if the footage was originally shot on SD to begin with.

So what seems like the smarter option? Buying an SD camera that will never have the ability to go HDV? Or buy an HDV camera that can shoot SD as well as HDV (on a true 16:9 CCD)? Sure, HDV output will not be viable to the average consumer for several years, but at least there is a camera now with future compatibility in mind. Until that moment arrives, record to SD now and archive your HD footage for later. Eventually, you can pull out your old HDV tapes and like George Lucas compose your masterpiece the way it was originally meant to be.

Just my two cents...

Heath McKnight September 27th, 2004 01:02 PM

Paul is right on.


Mark Kubat September 27th, 2004 01:10 PM

so like yeah, wmvhd is viable option...
so go to circuit city or best buy, get a flat panel lcd hdtv-ready 15" monitor on the cheap and hook it up to your pc to watch wmvhd and you should be happy. You can "dumb-down" to 720p from the HDR-FX1 out to disc via Sony Vegas 5.0b if your computer can't handle the 1080i (sometimes recommended for machines 3.0 GHz and up). In time, buy the DVD set-top that plays wmvhd.

The future is now.

Bill Ravens September 27th, 2004 01:13 PM

To my knowledge, there is NO NO NO set top WMV-HD player. Vinc is working on one, but, it hasn'r been released.

Heath McKnight September 27th, 2004 01:21 PM

X-Mas 2004 is what I heard for the WM9HD DVD player.

Otherwise, the standard is H.264 for HD DVDs.


Scott Anderson September 27th, 2004 01:55 PM

Mark, you keep right on going! Your post was the best laugh on this board since the FX-1 introduction. I'm tired of all the naysayers that bash this camera before anyone has really seen it. Those that have seen it are, frankly blown away. Anyone who shoots video of any sort should be absolutely giddy with the prospect of shooting HD at this price, and with this set of features. What I like most about Sony's timing is that by April (read: NAB), the pro version should be shipping with XLR's, 2-channel audio control, and who knows what other goodies. All the major editing platforms will also be ready to run with HDV. So, buy the camera in October, then what? Then start shooting for the future, that's what! Why would anyone plan on shooting standard definition ever again? I can understand being guardedly optimistic after the JVC HD-1, but c'mon. This looks to be the most revolutionary camera since the VX-1000. And yes, I'm a Sony plant.

Heath McKnight September 27th, 2004 02:01 PM

Okay, everyone, let's just calm down a bit here. We're all psyched about this camera, but until it comes out, we should hold off on our final judgment. And please refrain from instigating any fights, etc.

I would also like to refer you all to our handy FAQ. Please review it before you make any more posts.

What seperates us from other boards is our mature, spirited conversation, debates, etc. We don't advocate attacks of any kind, and that's what makes us a unique board with over 12,000 members.


Heath McKnight

Greg Harris September 27th, 2004 02:15 PM

Im not bashing it, Im backing it up for than anyone in the skateboard world. I make skateboard movies, and I sell my movies on DVD. So unless the blue ray dvd burners come out with a cheap price its pointless for me to buy this GREAT camera. What is the WN9DVD player. is it just software, or hardware?

Greg Harris September 27th, 2004 02:21 PM

and how much is it.

Heath McKnight September 27th, 2004 02:22 PM


You asked a legitimate question, and we answered it as best we can. Unfortunately, things went a little off-track, as well. But, this board is still, in my opinion, one of the best boards out there for DV, HDV, etc. postings!

Also, there is nothing wrong with shooting HDV and down-converting to SD and DV. People shoot on film and the widest audience watches it in SD/DV.

Hope this helps,


Heath McKnight September 27th, 2004 02:25 PM

And to answer your question:

Visit the WM9 site! It's pretty cool and can help explain some stuff. It's software and for PCs; there is a Mac version that costs money. Find out about the Mac version in our HDV Editing page.


Jeff Patnaude September 27th, 2004 02:36 PM

One thought I haven't heard yet,
we cant watch 24P on Televisions in the us. You have to convert the image.

Why is everyone complaining about converting the image from the Sony FX1?

If it makes a superior picture, then its worthwhile. The ability to do filmouts is more palpable.

That is still the question though- will the image look good after down-converting? If it does look like BetaSP, then at $3700, I'll dump that 30lb. back-breaker and go with the Sony.

Ahhh, old age...

Jeff P

Christopher C. Murphy September 27th, 2004 02:42 PM

Trying to refrain from negative talk about HDV products...me included!
There seems to be a lot of back and forth about this FX1. It's deja vu - anyone else remember the YEAR of our lives standing up for the HD10U? I sure do. I'm guilty of slamming the HD10U to bits ever since this new FX1 was announced. I am beginning to think it's the wrong approach to moving to the next phase of HDV.

It's funny, but some of you forget that a few of us have already been down the micro analytical road before. If we're going to slam cameras, and the people who buy them it's not going to be a fun place to learn. I remember getting slammed in person at a film festival last year because of owning the HD10U. I'm totally serious - there were a bunch of guys that questioned my professionalism because I owned the camera! It's getting old dealing with people bashing my choices in equipment...instead of helping me get the most out of what I can afford! Anyone else agree?

Please remember that some of us have earned the right to buy this camera! That's right - we've used what will become the worst/best prosumer HDV camera to hit the market for two years. (Hey, I guess that's a good thing to be known for...it's like the worst/best dressed in one?!) Yet, we've achieved some great things by working together with it. I could not have gotten where I did without HDV regulars here at DVinfo.

The FX1 will (just my opinion) most likely be the successor to the HD10U. The specs alone justify that comment - 3 chips, fully manual and overall better design. However, it's true we'll all have to work together and try and squeeze the best images out of the camera....just like the HD10U.

It's just my humble opinion, but this time around we ought to take a look at where we are in the HDV timeline. We're only in round two! Therefore, we have a right to question the FX1 and yet not to destroy people's excitement in upgrading our current HDV equipment!

In the spirit of innovation, teamwork and the love of what we do....we should probably try and refrain from negative talk! I'll try my best!


Heath McKnight September 27th, 2004 04:12 PM

Good points, Murph, but let's move forward from that and onto more.

Like I said, downconverting ain't a big deal, and you're still getting a GREAT image. For instance, watching my film shot on an XL-1 on DVD and, say, Jaws shot on 35mm and on DVD, though the same essential downconvert, you can tell which one was shot on 35mm.

Get what I mean?


Christopher C. Murphy September 27th, 2004 04:38 PM

Interesting observation here...
Something interesting I'd like to chime in about after Heath's comment about 35mm downcoverted for DVD, and noticing the difference.

Has anyone noticed the unbelieveable improvement in DVD quality lately? I'm in the habit of renting older films (pre-1980) with a ratio of about 70:30 to new films. I've noticed that newer films like "The Girl Next Door" which I watched last night look just like HD signals on off my standard DVD player. (I do have an HDTV, but up until about 1 year ago all newer DVD's were on the darker and grainer side just like older titles that were put out a few years ago. Nothing has been touched on my DVD player or HDTV either.) So, anyway...I am noticing that the video quality is superb to what it was a few years ago.

The reason I am mentioning this observation in relation to Heath's comment is....we're heading for unbelieveable compression in the near future. If my HDTV signals (which look awesome) and my standard DVD player playing new movies are looking really similar than I bet 1080i downcoverted with really good compression (WM or H.264) and with a higher bit rate will look totally AWESOME!

Also of note....I have experimented with HD10U footage using MPEG-2 compression for DVD and have gotten amazing results. People I have shown literally said it "looks better than anything on their TV's".

So, I guess I'm saying that with these few "upgrades" in technology (codecs, cameras and HD-DVD burners) - we are looking at some seriously cool times ahead! I believe the FX1 is only part of the puzzle....


Heath McKnight September 27th, 2004 04:52 PM

Most 35mm and 16mm movies have been telecined in HD, then put to an SD DVD. There's a DVD player that shows the even BETTER quality of those telecined-to-HD-to-SD DVDs.


Steve Crisdale September 27th, 2004 04:56 PM

Just my 2 cents worth....

For those wondering about HDV 1440x1080 - 1920x720 to DVD 720x576 - 720x480. The numbers alone should tell the story. Professionals dealing with JPEGs (the 'cousin' of MPEG), are cognisant of the fact that the larger - in resolution, or physical dimension, an image is - the better the down-scaled or down-rezed result will be. It's just the nature of the compression regime used, that more data provided within each sample block, yields greater variation to the finished sample.
This is why you should avoid as much as possible re-downsampling any JPEG style compression regime image, as you can be reducing the sampled data at an excessive rate.
If HDV video is converted to DVD resolution from an uncompressed source (meaning the file type between capture from the camera and the final DVD VOBs), you should obtain a result indistinguishable from a 'Hollywood' style DVD.

As a HD10u owner, I must agree with Christopher regarding the feeling of Deja vu...... Indeed, there are times that some questions being ask regarding the FX1 could be easily avoided with a quick search of replies posted by those of us who've already been down this path.

I suppose it has to do with how eager one is to embrace, or committed to explore a new technology that makes the difference between those who get results, and those who like the hard yards done before tentatively dipping the toe into the unknown.

Greg Harris September 28th, 2004 09:50 AM

what does downconverting it do? is it still HD. why would you downconvert it anyway?

Heath McKnight September 28th, 2004 10:04 AM

On the HD10, you can downcovert to 480p and 480i. Or upconvert to 1080i.


Greg Harris September 28th, 2004 01:50 PM

is that still in HD

Michael Struthers September 28th, 2004 02:35 PM

Mark Kubat must be working for Panasonic *L*

You can shoot with the FX-1, edit in VV (and very shortly FCP, Avid and everything else) save it out to HD tape and uprez to whatever you want at a production facility, or make a DVD at your house that will undoubtedly look better than what is currently available.

What's not to like?

Heath McKnight September 28th, 2004 05:59 PM


720p and 1080i are HD/HDV, 480i is DV/SD and 480p is also DV/SD.


Steve Crisdale September 28th, 2004 07:16 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Greg Harris : what does downconverting it do? is it still HD. why would you downconvert it anyway? -->>>

I'll assume the questions you've asked are directed at enlightening a total novice.

Downconverting from HDV resolution to DVD resolution allows for the creation of 'standard' DVD player compliant VOB files, without another recompression render occuring; thus keeping compression artifacts to a minimum.

At the risk of repeating many previous replies regarding DVD distribution of edited HD to the masses..... Downrezed HDV to DVD resolution video is not 'still HD'. Until HD, or WMV9 capable DVD players are available to the public, there are currently very few means available to distribute true HD video.

Until those HD capable players are available (not too far off...) the creation of standard player compatible DVDs from downconverted HDV provides a product; in the general consensus, that is visually more detailed than those created from an SD resolution camcorder.

Mike Gannon September 28th, 2004 07:56 PM

It's still HD, but downconverted to DVD. Much the same way a $50 million dollar movie is still 35mm film, downcoverted to DVD.

Or, it's not HD, because it's been dc'd to DVD. Much the same way that big-budget film is no longer film because it's been dc'd to DVD.

Some of the quality aspects will be lost in the transfer to a lessor format, but the better the quality going in, the better the quality coming out.

How much quality the 1080i format will give you over DV is in question before we get our hands on the camera and, more importantly, play around with it in post. The compression of the information is huge, and many questions have been raised as to how this type of file is going to react to effects, color correction, etc.

My guess is the NLE providers are betting that Sony is right - HDV is the future - but whether they get it figured out next month or next year to really make HDV a no-brainer upgrade from DV is still in question.

The only thing I want to see is how the FX1, downconverted or shot in SD mode, compares to the XL-2 and DVX. If the quality is better, and it may be, why would you choose either of the other two?

Greg Harris September 29th, 2004 05:59 AM

yeah but another huge point of mine is why by this GREAT cam if you want to downconverrt anything, Its all about the HD DVDs. If i wanted to put out regular dvds i'll just continue to shoot with my DVX100. I hope HD DVD comes out fast and not pricey

Mike Gannon September 29th, 2004 06:33 AM

OK, that's fine. Just like the Beta/VHS formats for 1/2" tape twenty years ago, there are two competing formats for HD DVD. One is Sony's Blue Ray. The other is...HD-DVD. Like Beta vs. VHS, the Sony is better (quantitatively), but more expensive. Both should be available next year assuming Hollywood signs off on piracy issues.

But that doesn't mean everyone will have one. It will take a period of years for many households to add this new technology to thier home. Remember that it will only work (in HD) if they have a HDTV set - something that hasn't exactly flown off shelves considering the % of households owning one and the several years they have been available.

Still, you can webcast using the new HD WM format - or distribute to HD content providers by transfering to HDCAM or DVCPROHD, but those decks are kinda pricy if you're looking to buy.

In your case, if I owned a DVX, especially the 100A version, I would be content to wait and see where this format goes over the next year or so. Let the NLEs iron out the codec issues. Let Panasonic and JVC and Canon counter Sony's move. And put some new camera money into lighting and audio to get the most out of the DVX and your next camera as well.

Heath McKnight September 29th, 2004 08:04 AM


A simple answer is that if you can wait for HD DVDs, then you should wait to buy an HDV camera.


Bill Ravens September 29th, 2004 08:16 AM

Don't hold your breath. The DVD-HD wars are just beginning to gear up in the Orient. This report summarizes the situation:

"While the large majority of the world is happy with DVD and sitting back and watching for a final decision for the next-gen format (there are two players: HD DVD and Blu-Ray - just as there were two players for today's digital video discs, eventually the two teams got together and created a single format now known as DVD), the video disc format battles are much more real in China and Taiwan. China's EVD, which so far didn't have much success, is now being attacked by HVD (High-definition Versatile Disc), a high def video disc format. HVD players are twice as expensive as EVD players (which in turn is 2.5 times as expensive as a DVD player), and about 10 new movies are released on HVD every week. One of the format's main promoters, Beijing K-City expects to shop 100'000 players in 94."

Greg Harris September 29th, 2004 10:49 AM

so prettty much the Sony FX1 is to advanced for making movies with right now? How much do you guys expect the Blue ray or dvd burners to be priced at?? What will be the point to get this GREAT camera if we cant put them on HD DVD yet? Thats my point of this thread..

Joe Carney September 29th, 2004 11:48 AM

>>Also, there is nothing wrong with shooting HDV and down-converting to SD and DV. People shoot on film and the widest audience watches it in SD/DV.
All of Sony's superbit DVD titles are mastered from HD video at maximum bit rate. HDV though is not maximum bitrate for HD. Still should make for superior looking interlaced DVDs.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:51 AM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2019 The Digital Video Information Network