Thanks for the info Jeff.

Does the FX1000 shoot in progressive scan by default?

Cheers

Jamie

No it does not shoot in progressive mode by default. BTW, when I played with 24p, it looked really great through the viewfinder, but I had to pan VERY carefully. There are a number of nice preset modes. This camera has huge potential run manually or using presets.

Focal length starts from 6mm with the vx2100 and on the xh-a1 from 4,5mm and the fx1000 goes even wider. So the lens from a 2100 can't be compared at all, I had a vx2100 and own a xh-a1 now but have seen the difference and it's like you said quite big.

I realy would be curious about a side by side comparison with the xh-a1 and the fx1000, not in auto mode but by manually adjusting the camera's so they show their best image possible under the darkest situation. For the xh-a1 that would be 25f with 1/25th shutter and a max of 6db+ and no preset. Higher then 6db looks quite bad and many low light presets cause ghosting. If you could place your camera next to the canon and adjust it accordingly and point it to a badly lit room with lot of detail and color, now that would interest a lot of xh-a1 users. :)

I might find out soon as my father plans on buying a fx1000, ofcourse a camera is much more then what it can see in the dark but as a event and wedding videographer low light is what I deal with every time.

Coming from a vx2100 I must say that my xh-a1 performce quite well in darker rooms and I don't miss my vx2100. The biggest difference though is once you start zooming in, then the canon image turns black almost immediately while the vx2100 keeps the room lit. But that comes at a cost, the vx2100 needs a lot of gain to get that result which produces tons of noise and to be honest, the xh-a1 gives me a cleaner image at 6db gain, I will loose in light sensitivity against the vx2100 but the image of the xh-a1 looks so much better when the lens is wide.

About 24p and panning carefully, don't know how it looks with the sony but with the xh-a1 it looks a lot worse in the viewfinder and on the lcd then afterwards in your nle or on tv. It looks like that small viewfinder has more problems avoiding that typical stutter when you pan, even slow pans.

Looking at the difference to the Z5 things like the Flash unit attachment and XLR's are obvious. Looking at the FX1000 manual it does have black stretch etc which is nice and miss on my FX1. The Z5 mentions smooth gain and smooth WB switching. I presume this means that when switched the change is smooth so isn't noticed. IS this feature on the FX1000? It isn't mentioned in the manual.

Ron Evans

Ron, the WB switching on the FX1000 isn't smooth. There is a slight transition, but it's very short.

What is black stretch? I'll check it out in the manual, sounds interesting, whatever it is!

Sample Videos on Vimeo
 

film testowy Sony FX 1000e on Vimeo

Brooke & Jeff 11/22/08 on Vimeo

A friend of mine got an FX1000 last weekend and his initial impressions are that the images look awesome but he does not think they are quite as sharp as the EX1 he has been renting. He thought the low light performance was similar to his PD170 and FX2100 but he really preferred the image from the FX1000 to the PD170 under low light shooting conditions. He was amazed at the lens on the wide angle end and was really excited about that aspect. He thought the controls were much better than the VX2100/PD170/V1U/EX1. He felt it was much easier to use with full manual operation than any of the others. He was a little disappointed that the LCD was smaller than the EX1 he has been using. But he didn't realize that the EVF was actually higher resolution than the EX1. He usually doesn't use the EVF so that wasn't an important feature to him. Overall, he is extremely happy with his new toy.

Dziękuję Pedanes! I really like the colors in the footage you took. Did you do any color correction? Tweak any settings in the camcorder? Use a filter? Or is that the higher dynamic range of the CMOS chips showing through?

Well, I am hoping the Z5 will be enough to satisfy me. It's not as if I WANT to spend $6500. Let's be honest, we all want the best we can get for the cheapest we can pay.

The EX1 is a great camera but may not be the best for me. For example I was at 2 weddings this weekend, I tried to pay attention every time I went past 12-14 times zoom. It was often! I was surprised how much I rely on the 20x zoom on my A1. So the Z5 has some great features. better low light then the A1, better LCD to focus with, hybrid recording with the flash recorder, it now has the iris on the lens like the A1, and it has even a wider lens that comes in very handy at weddings.

It's not so cut and dry, plus the Z5 is a lot cheaper to get into. I have varizoom controllers that will work on the Z5 but not EX.

On the other hand, if the picture really was overly soft and it could not be fixed then I would have to lean toward the EX. I for one believe HD should look like HD.

The Z5 fits me better as an overall cam, the EX satisfies my quality wants.

So I am digging for info through Jeff to see example of the image it can create. I think the Z5 is a bit more flexible so it may be better for me. I do a lot of manual tweaking.

I have a few weeks before the Z comes out.

Thanks again to Jeff for keeping the info coming!

Paul

I did not take the videos. I found the them on Vimeo and just posted the links.

The FX1000 footage looks good but i cannot see myself getting a larger cam than the FX-7 i find that one heavy lugging around on long walks with the tripod as well.For wildlife the loss of 158mm on the zoom would be a loss, add ons can be a pain,i know most prefer wide to zoom,yes it looks a great cam if only sony would bring out a real great preforming xm2 sized cam.One thing i would like someone cleverer than me is tell me why all vimeo films are jittery on my packard bell pc and vaio laptop.

The guy is using a 5600k light for indoor white balance, you can see the fleshtone is bluish when the camera is close enough for the on camera light to be the main source, look at footage when the bride just got to the chuppah or inside the chuppah, or any other shot that the camera is very close, I see this alot, using a led light, most led light are 5600k and they shoot indoor with the camera set to indoor or 3200K settings.

I disagree. Brooke and Jeff's video looks fantastic to me.

He was using a light most all of the time, clearly, but still, the colors are excellent and the contrast was very good. It can be picked apart, etc., but all in all that is close to stunning footage.

The FX1000 won't have Black Stretch. Sony only offers black Stretch in the Broadcast Division cameras. So it Black Stretch will be on the Z5U, but not the FX1000.

That said it looks as of Sony has added a lot of picture profile features in the FX1000, that they would have normally reserved for their broadcast cameras. Nice to see.

Jeff, BTW one question...
Can you nor use the "Focus Assist" feature while the camera is running, or do you have to be in stand by, like you had to be on the FX1/Z1?

Nice clips, but did anyone else notice the "rolling shutter" in the wedding clips.

It's not that bad, but definitely still present.

Guess we have to accept this as the norm for a while when using CMOS sensors.

Look at 1:19, both of them have bluish/purple skin tone, look at 1:22, the mother of the bride has good color but not the rabbie, that is because the light could not reach the MOB as much, the guy is using the wrong light I tell you.

Michael, haven't used it. But it has an on/off setting in the menu, and there is no indication in the manual that you must be in standby. I will turn it on when I next get the cam out and play with it, but I feel certain the answer is no.

Yeah I see it, wonder if I can live with it with clips in slomo.

You are correct. He is either using the wrong light, or he forgot to flip the color corrector up out oft he way. It really gets in the way of the look.

On my monitor many of the shots look overblown, but if anything that tells me the cams light sensitivity is high and he just has to learn it.

I'm glad to see footage starting to hit the streets though.

http://www.docs.sony.com/release/HDRFX1000.pdf
This is the manual for the FX1000 and clearly states it has Black stretch etc. As I said it looks like it has most of what was only available in the Z series. There may be other controls that are missing but it has most of what I want. Shockless gain would be nice shockless WB is of no interest to me as most of what I do is in a theatre environment fixed. Maybe it is these things that are the difference this time to the Z series. Maybe Jeff can confirm it has Black stretch etc.

Ron Evans

Ron, I looked for it in the menu, didn't see it listed. I wish I knew what it was...maybe under a different name?

Someone throw me a bone here, what is black stretch?

Yes i said it looks good but would not go to the fantastic stage watching on a pc monitor from vimeo,sr 12 and fx7 film exported and played on my pc look good as well also on my large plasma,the fx1000 does look like a great machine but i did say why its sadly probobly not for me.Who knows things might change in the future.

Page 39 of your manual. You set it in a picture profile, and you can stretch (add more gradations) or compress (crush all dark tones to black). First time this appears in a non-pro cam for Sony. "Knee" does the same or similar for highlights, and this is on the FX1000 as well. Also detailed on page 39.

You got there before me Adam. The value for me in theatre and I am sure for wedding guys, is that with stretch on the blacks/shadows( lowest levels) have more detail, and with knee set lower the whites don't overload. Something that consumer/prosumer cams have just not had compared to the true broadcast equipment. The new Panasonic HMC150 has this too to appeal to the event users. My SR11 seems to do a better job of this than the FX1 giving the impression of more latitude.

Ron Evans

which XLR adapter would you recommend for FX1000;
is there any device allowing to connect HVRMRC1K to fx1000???

This is what I use with my FX1 XLR Adapter XLR Pro Audio Adapter The XLR-BP XLR Audio Adapters For Camcorders XLR Adapter. As far as the HVRMRC1K I think an iLink cable is all you will need to connect to any DV or HDV camcorder.

Ron Evans

These have been recommended for their low noise capabilities.

Camcorder XLR Audio Adapter/Preamp: Buy Direct and Save

I second, third, and fourth the Juicedlink boxes.
They are by far the quietest and best performing of the XLR adapters out there.

The only thing I need to know before I order the camera is LOW LIGHT compare to lets say VX2100; can somebody post some stills from these two, please?

I'm told that it is way better than the vx 2100 in any way plus you have tha option of recording in different formats!

First I have to see this before I believe it, I have owned a vx2100 so if the person that told this to you can provide some comparing shots?

I too am currently using a VX2100 and my main point of interest is the autofocus ability of the FX1000. I shoot a lot of figure skating competitions and ice shows and the VX2100 AF is great for tracking the skaters among busy backgrounds. I've even used the VX2100 through the glass for hockey and it did great. It also handles the cold temperatures found in skating rinks.

I'm really hoping the FX1000 at least equals the VX2100 in these areas as I would really like to get one.

Please read post #38 in this thread. My experience from shooting with the two side by side is the FX1000 is NOT better than the VX2100 in low light. The FX1000 is very good in low light but not AS good. I do not regret the purchase, because I believe for the money I got a lot of camera. Got my money's worth for sure.

I had said in a previous post that the FX1000 is way better, I was mistaken. I was wrong.

I wanted something better in low light than the FX1, and I certainly got it. It produces great images. I believe stunning images are possible in the right hands.

I say that if you watch the Vimeo video posted of Brooke that demo says more about the cam than words can.

In the dark it still looks dark, and it does not perform miracles. My expectations were completely unreasonable while waiting for the cam, but I emphasize I am very happy with the FX1000 anyway.

I still hate the menu scroll wheel, and still have lot to learn about the cam. I've only run it for one wedding and then I put it away and still haven't taken the time to learn it properly, but I know that when I get familiar with it it will be fantastic. I am still bogged down with editing but come January I will be shooting with it lots to learn it better.

I have that VX2100 as well more than many years and still strong.

Just take note on VX2100 user. VX2100 HAD CCD chip set. FX1000 CMOS CCD chip set. For those like to take events with flashing camera alround, than it may not good to buy.

John, the auto focus is stonger on the VX2100 than the FX1000. In fact the auto-focus is downright frustrating at times on this cam. If you don't need widescreen and /or hi-definition footage you will be disappointed. If you do need widescreen or HD it is a great option if you can't afford an EX1 or some other more expensive cam.

Oh no! That is not what I wanted to hear. :-) With fast moving skaters autofocus is critical to getting high quality material. The basic reason for the new camera would be for the widescreen format in SD as Blu-ray is still not a viable distribution media for most of our clients. It would be nice to have the HD master tapes for when Blu-ray players are more widespread and media is reasonably priced.

I had looked at the Canon A1 when it first came out but passed it by based on reports of poor autofocus performance. I was really hoping the FX1000 was finally a suitable HD replacement for the VX2100.

Are you saying the EX1 has better autofocus?

I think that we are comparing two totally diferent cameras as you know high definition cameras will be a lot worse in poor ligthing conditions and the one's that are great cost a lot of money Ijust think that with the technology that we have rigth now this camera is worth it every penny people who think that this camera is worthless problably they're kind of work is more professional than some of us in my case this camera and the fx1 which I owned are great cameras and asa soon you got the rigth settings on them you can make wonders but that's just me, I don't think you have to be agreed with me because we may use this kind of cameras for diferent projects

low light pics
 

These are frame grabs from the VX (SD timeline) and FX (HDV timeline). Both cams are set to F2.8, 0db.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/members/t...re144-vx-3.jpg
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/members/t...re145-fx-3.jpg

I'll try to get some more that are side by side later.

And Tim by FX I'm assuming you mean the new FX1000 not the old FX1.

Those low light results look pretty amazing to me - especially considering the VX has fewer and hence larger pixel sites. This kind of sensitivity is going to be a blessing to HD both for low light situations and for shooting with a 35mm film adapter.

Besides money I can't imagine why anyone who has still been clinging to the shore of SD wouldn't take the plunge to HD. I bought the FX1 right when it came out and have been enjoying HD shooting for a long time now. Now I can finally get back the low light sensitivity I loved with the VX that I had to give up when I started shooting with the FX1.


The FX1000 looks like a well-rounded, well-priced, perfect HD option for anything: docs, films, weddings, corporate, you name it.

Yeah, FX1000, sorry.

Here's some more side by side.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/members/t...fx-vs-vx-1.jpg

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/members/t...fx-vs-vx-2.jpg

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/members/t...fx-vs-vx-3.jpg