HVR Z5 exceptional ignore the rolling shutter malarky
 

Hi Everyone. I have not posted oh here before but have just received my HVR Z5E and woudl like to comment on what a great camera it is.

Firstly, rolling shutter? Load of rubbish. Its all perfectly acceptable. Cameras are like tools. You have several and you dont use a hamer to put in screws you pick the right tool for the job....

Having played with my HVR Z5 for a week Its well built, sturdy, the image quality is superb and rolling shutter is almost non existant. After talking to Sony I also learned a lot... I am an electro mechanical engineer by trade and do analysis on a lot of kit including cameras. I asked some good questions and got good answers which made my mind up.

The Z7 and Z5 differ from older CMOS camera as the sensor is faster and although progressive but reading one line at a time using the rolling shutter the newer sensors by being faster and using parallel processing read many lines at a time so your only likely to notice issues in blocks of the screen. This means that skew over individual lines all the way up the screen is far less noticeable unless you slow down the video and really look.

Id say the menu button is too small and recessed too much and is fiddly. In general the buttons are a bit too small but its nicely laid out and all the assigns are great if you do want to move buttons.

The zoom rocker is great as is the programmable speed selection on the linear switches.

Th erings glide so smoothly you wouldnt want real controls. Although it turns infinitely the object is to be able to smoothly adjust the settings without thinking about it. It acheives this without you even trying.
Unless they are servo assisted mechanical clunky lenses need to cost a fortune for the same silky response. and I just dont have this money.

The viewfinder and display are stunningly good quality and make such a difference.
I like the quick button operated lens cover ad button release for the shade.

The balance is much much better to the Z1 even if the weight is the same. Althogh its a plastic ABS frame with metal reinforcement is weight has not reduced from the all metal frame due to the extra glass on the lens to give it the stunningly good 20x G lens.
It has floors but what doesnt for the price.

The mic mount is good but will not let you attach a sennheisser k6-me66 with rycote softie as its shown in view but adaptors will be available to replace the bracket as with the Z1.

The new firmware upgrades due to a delayed release are spot on. The autofocus, macro, zoom speed etc have all been radically improved from the Z7s mechanical lens which is slow and cumbersome.
The tape mechanism is smooth, quiet and works well but get the MRC1K and a whole new world opens up. You can do CF card or tape separately or both at the same time with HD or SD.
The new audio controls under covers are really well thought out.
It balances towards the lens still but not to be expected with all that glass. Its perfect with a larger battery or MRC1K on the back.

I have a gripe that the charger although charging two batteries fast will also power the camera with an adaptor. I like this but why oh why cant it charge batteries and run the camera? If my batteries are flat I cant use the camera without a third to run it from whilst charging the other one or two.

Its not much to ask for an AC adaptor and a battery charger is it?

Other than this looking at its operation in 1.5 to 2 lux its much better towards two but the quality is stunning. A resolution chart its sharp and as good as I have seen for a HDV camera and the signal to noise ratio is really very good.

Im very impressed with this camera and hope to use it underwater as well once housings become available.

Dont listen to comments about rolling shutter. The older cameras had slower sensors and processed less lines at once, the signal to noise ration was worse, control not so good and unless you are in an unbalanced twin blade helicopter, a racing car or a speed boat travelling at 70 knots I doubt most people will ever come accross the skew issue. unless they slow down the picture. Most things passing the frame will not be straight so you will not even notice it.
Camera flashes are also not really a problem.

If you do a lot of this and it is a problem your using a screwdriver to hammer in a nail go buy a better camera or a cheaper one if it does the job...

Well done Sony for a superb product. I wont miss the Z1.

Robin

...311 and counting
 

Welcome Robin. I've been trying to keep a note of all the active Brits on dVinfo, and you've been just tangoed.

Thankyou for that
 

Please to be here.

I occasionally see people posting questions or rubbish about issues with cameras or technology and keep meaning to put them right but never have. Im now proud to say Ive taken a few steps...


Ive talked to the product manager for sony quite a bit and done quite a few tests now and Im loving the new cameras.

All cameras have problems you cant get away from it but bottom line Sony are listening working on things and its a great time to get into the new technology. Especially with a VAT reduction.

Thankyou for the welcoming notes.
Robin

"Camera flashes are also not really a problem."

What about strobe lights from the mobile disco?

I film quite a few weddings, where the DJ uses strobe lights on the dance floor.

Do you think there will be a "Rolling shutter' issue with strobe lights?

Robin, this is GREAT to hear! I had just about eliminated the FX1000/Z5 from consideration, but this sounds very hopeful. The low light capability and enhanced features of the new Sonys are very tempting!

Thanks much for the info.

Hi Ken,

I use both the Canon XH-A1 (older series) and the Sony EX1 with the cmos sensor.

I used the Canon for a wedding with a 10 watt light, and that worked well. But if you are out of range of the light, the XH-A1 is objectionably grainy. I had the Z1 as well. Other opinions to the contrary, I feel it gets objectionably soft in low light. The EX1 is the first HD cam I've owned that retains the "wow" factor in low light. It's really good. I haven't tried the Z5 or FX1000, but if the reported low light improvement over the other 1/3 inch cam sensors is real, that could be a deciding factor, but I would not be too rash, the Canon image is extremely clean and transparent for HDV, very HD. The autofocus is also faster and more dependable on my XH-A1. (It has that little optical sensor to the side of the main lens, don't know how it works but it does.)

So that probably doesn't help you much, but I would add just one more comment. Rolling shutter artifacts are not rubbish. Can you manage life with them in your images, or mitigate them in your situation?

To comment on one question you posed, "will a slower shutter speed help?" The answer is no. The scan time of the sensor is fixed, and independent of the shutter. The duration of a thyristor flash is shorter than the cmos sensor scan time. If the light from the flash dominates the image, the image will have the banded artifact.

Skew or wobble is real as well, but less of a problem, and can be mitigated. For handheld, you have to pan and shake hard enough that no one would watch your footage even if there were no cmos skewing going on. Skew or wobble can actually be worse on a tripod, because it enforces symetry to the framing, therefore wobble or skew within that symetry becomes visible. It's still fairly rare and not so objectionable. The easy way to make it happen is to set the camera on a tripod on rigid ground like a paved sidewalk. Lock everything down tight, then induce a few vibrations by lightly wrapping your knuckles against the handle a few times while watching the LCD image. That's called the "jello effect." It's real too, but not usually a problem in normal situations.

My personal two cents for a price-is-no-object-guy like you would be to just get the EX1 or EX3 anyway, you'll have no doubt about your images being ready for the BBC or DiscoveryHD network broadcast, when that circus animal rampages or the ground opens up under a magnitude 7.0 earthquake on Long Island...(hope not... ;)

As I said above its screwdrivers and nails
 

What I said above was a highlight of technical responses from a research engineer testing kit properly.
Everything is a tool and you need to buy the right tool for the media. Dont use a hammer to put in screws!

In responce to the previous post about discos. I would use a Z1 or the like for discos. Limit the gain to reduce noise and the lighting will give the the effect and illumination you need. The camer will not have big enough dynamic range to expose the background illumination well with no light and not be blatted out when the lights come on. Low light is only good if you are filming in available light not falsely illuminated scenes.
Rolling shutters are acceptable for disco use but you will get artifacts and effects. Its unavoidable. However with a global shutter a bright light will blank the whole frame where as with a clustered line rolling shutter it will only affect a selection of lines or a portion of the screen.
Dont worry about skew or wobble its there but unless your filming aircraft propellors or highspeed trains with 90 degree edges and flat fronts oh and playing in slow motion you wont notice it.

As I mentioned with regards to the reply previous to this Rolling shutter is not a problem. Its rubbish thrown around after the original cheep cameras performed bad with CMOS rolling shutters processing one line at a time slowly not clusters of lines or many faster.
To be able to get issues from skew and wobble you have to make your target move faster than is viewable. On Film we get motion blur at that speed and yes you also get skew! No one moaned about old classics having skew did they?
The Z5 and 7 will not be quite as good as the EX in low light due to 1/3 inch cmos sensors instead of 1/2 but this isnt that bad. In DVCAM SD the Z5 and 7 shodul be better due to the reduced pixel light density. It depends on if its down converted properly!

Its what you do with it and how you recognise its highlights not how good it is. Film makers recognise your tallent and awareness off issues. Your ability to get around them not your flashy new cam.

The EX1 is indeed good but dont forget its the fore runner of the technology it will improve. The issues you have are that it ill not downconvert so for UK news using DVCAM SD its pointless.
HDV is only a premiere service. You cant force everyone to use HD over SD!
Also the EX1 is 35MB.s the BBC will not accept HD from this camera as anything but SD for 225% use in a HD film because it is below the acceptable 50MB/s threshold.
They want 50 or 100MB/s 1/2 inch chips and minimal compression and a 4:2:2 colour space only achievable on this camera with the HD SDI out and a lot of money software time and effort. I was basing this on a non Hollywood budget.

The EX1 is also heavy and unmanageable handheld for long periods.
Take your pick they are all good but in 4 years you may find an EX2 with 4:2:2 1/2 in ch chips and 50MB/s in order to keep up. They wont do it now as this will prevent sales of high end kit and memory is too expensive for 50MMB/s captures. Also the firmware is available for this for other XDCAMs but if the EX1 and 3 do it why by a shoulder XDCAM!
Sony have their market figured out and put themselves JUST ahead of the game to keep up without showing their hand or releasing too much too soon!

Remember CCD cameras have problems too! CCD bleeding etc but we learnt how to use it, where and when.

Ask questions, buy what you want and think skill and ingenuity not kit! You can think too much and then nothing is good enough for you!

Thanks Tom...I think! :)

Yeah, this is not an easy decision. I'll be headed to B&H over the next week to try the cams out myself (with tape in hand). You know me with my A/Bs!

It does seem the new FX1000/Z5 are for real in the low light department, but like you I dislike the softening that occurs on so many HD cams when the lights get dim. My little HG21 retains its sharpness even in low light...somewhat noisy yes, but sharp. When I had my FX1 I saw that same softening as well and it very evident in the Sony SR12 I just sold.

I'm guessing from your post that the A1 also softens under these conditions? You mention that the EX is the first HD cam you've had that retains the sharpness. Although I know the EX is at the pinnacle of HD for our 'reach', I have a problem with going tapeless for work. Although I like tapeless for my 'fun cam', I don't really do any editing with my own stuff. If I did, I'd find the time I save in uploading would be given back in the transfer to a more computer-friendly codec in my NLE.

I still find tape so much easier to edit with and with my NLE of choice, Edius, it's a workflow that I still enjoy. So I don't see an EX in my immediate future. Further complicating this is the fact that virtually all of my work is still SD (corporate stuff) and the only reason I'm considering the FX1000/Z5/A1S is the fact that it's so easy to shoot both formats with them, and if necessary I can shoot in HDV. For coporate work the impact of flash & rolling shutter is pretty much nil.

I've been encouraged with some of the FX1000 clips I've seen, and the Sony would be a somewhat better fit from the standpoint of already having Sony equipment. I would not rule out the A1/A1S as a result, but it would be a consideration.

BTW, the other nicety about the FX1000/Z5 that doesn't seem to be discussed and is actually important to me, is the high rez viewfinder. Using reading glasses I'm not a fan of LCDs. They have their place in some settings, but for the most part I really need & use the viewfinder. The new viewfinder on the Sonys is one of the highest resolution VFs we've seen in this price class for sure.

Ken,

You've given careful consideration, and make good points. I'll respond in reverse order.
The viewfinder (which I prefer as well), is not as good on my EX1 as my XH-A1, so if the FX1000/Z5 is now better in this regard, it's better than my EX1 as well. Someone may well call me out on that, because I'm not comparing or even aware of what the numbers are for the panel resolution per the spec sheet. It just seems like the XH-A1 is a little better on contrast and color. For resolution, no one would be doing critical focusing with either one, (which makes a small point in favor of the Canon's better autofocus BTW.) Of course the Sony LCD is much better than the XH-A1, or again at least I would expect it to be.

As for your preference for tape, again I agree with you. I predicted that HDV would be replaced by AVCHD in consumer cams, only to reappear in pro cams. And it sure looks to me like that's what happened. And why not? HDV is very viable.

It's easy to look at Blu-ray, the customers demand AVC or VC1. Mpeg-2 is passe. And it's true at that stage. But it's different for cams that have to encode in hardware, realtime. Mpeg-2 is less compressed, and yields better quality at the recording stage. Uncompressed would be even better, but who has the storage for that? Less compressed at the recording stage is the way to go. The appropriate time for AVC is when finalizing to disk, where a 2 or 3 pass encode is not constrained for time.

My tape based workflow for HDV is still faster than my tapeless for XDCAM even without the capture time savings. So no arguments against HDV from me.

As for the familiarity from already having Sony equipment, what I have to say about that is that I HATE SONY! To tell you why, consider that I start with a Sony cam, record to Sony solid state media, edit with Sony Vegas on a Sony laptop, burn to disk with Sony DVD Architect on Sony Blu-ray media, playback the media on a Sony PS3, and watch it on a 32" Sony 1080p Bravia XBR I just added on my desktop. Why do we hurt the ones we love? It's in our HDNA I guess...

Does the XH-A1 soften under low light? Not as much as it gets coarse and grainy. It does have a couple of noise reduction circuits you can enable. NR1 mitigates the noise but causes minor ghost-like trails, and NR2 has no trails but does soften the image. Both NR circuits have some adjustability, choosing one or the other lets you target a static situation or a moving one. Yes, the EX1 is in another league at twilight. Maybe now the FX1000/Z5 is as well?

I've seen people report you should not use the EX1 for weddings because of the rolling shutter. If the client complained, then it would be a problem. But that is situational, whereas coarse and grainy is event long. I wouldn't recommend the XH-A1 for weddings without a light.

Robin is right about the EX1 being heavy. The XH-A1 is not light but does feel like it after the EX1.

Whichever way you go, it will be interesting to read your comments. I would conclude by noting that Sony colors out of the box are more vivid and pleasing. The XH-A1 default profile is very bland, but fully tweakable.

The Canon setup is comparable to their DSLRs, I have the 5D (old series). It's easy and intuitive. The Sony is not quite as logical, but still easy to figure out.

Again, I haven't seen or used the FX1000/Z5. It will have to be really good to beat the XH-A1 in the image quality department. I will not be surprised. I also would not be surprised if there is another Canon HD camcorder in my future. But right now, the tide seems to be riding on the waves of Sony.

Thanks again Tom, some great points as usual. We certainly seem to agree more than disagree. The targets are always moving and keeping pace is never easy or cheap in this field. The still guys have it a lot easier! They don't change their equipment nearly as often as we do. Funny how we don't create problems for them, but they do for us (rolling shutters ;)).

Regarding the 'bland settings' of the out-of-box Canon, I'm always surprised that Canon didn't do a somewhat more 'aggresive' job with their default settings. I've heard so many speak of the picture being a bit flat out of the box. Sure it's something that's easily tweakable (or maybe not quite 'so easy'), but you'd think there would be less of that initial concern if the default settings were a bit more vivid. I think many would rather back off on the throttle than have to hit the accelerator.

I think Sony's approach here makes more sense. I have to confess I was surprised at how much tweaking could be done with the new FX. Prior models always passed the hat to the Z series for those that wanted that level of adjustments. It's somewhat counterintuitive to the way Sony traditionally does things, but surely a welcome change!

BTW, Sony is now using somewhat in excess of 1.5 megapixels in a .45" viewfinder! That's a very high density. I'm not sure how that compares with the EX series, but I know the Canon uses a fraction of that resolution (269,000 pixels) in the A1/G1 viewfinders. As you say though, I'd bet the A1S's autofocus is superior to the Sony. I've found the Canon IAF to be the best in the business. This is not to say that I haven't had some Sony cams that did a pretty good job, but the Canon is just so quick and so accurate. As long as the system doesn't hunt and is reasonably quick, then it shouldn't be a 'deal break'.

I'll certainly post what I find and let you know how I progress.

Z5 Ex1 etc
 

Your comments are all valid but People seem to be put off by small issues as apposed to be putting themselves in the frame of mind of what are the advantages and how can I use it to make good films!

Nobody would sell anything that was useless!

Canon make superb kit but the signal to noise ration is not a patch on Sony. The image stabilization however is amazing.

I predict Canon are the odd ones out and where as Sony and Pany have released for the next 3-4 years Canon will come out with something good in 1-2 years. We are awaiting an XH--A1 replacement. I just hope they get to grips with the S/Nr and include a bigger higher resolution screen thats not on a little flimsy bracket.

As you both mentioned and at the top of the post what I discussed was the amazing resolution and quality of the new screen and viewfinder on the Z5. Its almost like there is a hole through the plastic and its not an LCD! It is an OLED screen though which has won many awards.
With the progressive nature of the cam and the new lens it is good.
Ive used the Z5 on boats, a light aircraft, a car and a train and have had no footage which is unusable. I also like the new natural touch lens rings.
Make your own minds up but I really like it.
Second choice would be a canon XHA1 or a Sony Z1 If panny do a full res HD HVX Id maybe move to that only if they stopped their cameras looking and feeling like cheep plastic but heavy bricks. For underwater this is useless.
Robin

The OLED would be a huge improvement over anything out there, in viewfinders.

I would not recommend a Z1 as a second choice. It was a great cam in its day (I owned one), but is now outclassed image wise.

Z1 outdated?
 

It is outdated true but my comment was a reference to what I would use if I had shutter issues.and needed a CCD based cam.
Canon XH-A1 or Sony Z1.

In terms of it being a good camera, we still film on 8mm and 16mm and thats outdated!

The BBC only a year or so ago bought hundreds of Z1s for ENG roles as a stop gap.

Its a good camera and I doubt there is any point upgrading to anything new from that unless you really rake it in... Professionals with lots of work may be different but for semi pros amateurs or pros with lots of cams its not a huge update for the money.

I wont jump up and down till I see what canon do followed by what Sony do with the new XDCAM firmware in development.
It gives good 4:2:2 high bandwidth recording and would make the EX1 unbeatable but that's not Sony's aim at the moment. Its already pretty good.

Im still not sure about the use of long gop variable bit rate compression on the EX1. Its got some explaining to do and testing to endure before it earns full trust and with a lot of people waiting for the full color space and higher constant rate compression I feel we will be stuck until the market bows to the new cameras in 2011/2012.
Its getting to the point where everyone is converging on a same goal same technology output.
Sony have spent a lot of time on the long gop XDCAM algorithm though and wont budge easily.

To have camera with similar storage, functions, features and capabilities would be wonderful and would mean you could choose what you wanted to do a job not so much of what would actually do the job.

Im happy with PDX10s, Z5 and 7 and an EX for now but Im using the EX as a toy while its loaned to me until Im happy if I want one or not.

For now I think the Z5 is a good camera with vices like any, which, you all need to try it out and decide if you think they are acceptable or not in your situation.

I cant advise one or another as Id feel guilty if you bought it and didnt like it but I can say Im more than happy with it and advise if your interested go check it out. The same goes for this or the FX1000. Most people in the business would not compromise for no XLR adaptors. The XHA1 is good value for this whilst still being a superb camera but the FX1000s main difference to the Z5 is the audio block which immediately makes it a proffessional camera. IT works well, It has good easily accessed and protected switches all the features of the Z1 and PD170 plus negative gain settings in the menu. The Z5 actually comes with an ok/very reasonable short gun mike too which unlike PDX10 and others is metal, nicely screened, has more gain and lower noise. Its phantom powered and comes with a windshield. The Z1 did not come with anything!

I'm sure you are aware the EX1 outputs native 4:2:2 already, just not to the solid state memory card. That's why all the excitement with the Nanoflash, capturing 4:2:2, higher bitrates, pre-compression.

The existing HQ mode, 1920 x 1080, 35mbps VBR, 15 GOP mpeg-2 is a close relative of HDV.

Just a side comment regarding the flash/rolling shutter issue. I watched several wedding and Bar Mitzvah videos on Vimeo that were shot with the FX1000. I also sat my wife down in front of the monitor and asked her if there was anything bothering her about some of the videos.

Interestingly her objection was more to do with some of the editing techniques than the impact of the rolling shutter. The worst clip was, of course, the slow motion clip during a barrage of flashes. It wasn't until I pointed the issue out, paused the video in places (something that would not happen during the normal viewing of a production) and replayed the spots several times, that she understood what was happening. Even then, when again played at normal speed, her reaction was 'so what?'.

My point here goes to the fact that we, as videographers, are much more likely to notice this issue than others watching the production. I can honestly say that most of the flashes produced nothing more than an effect that most would totally dismiss as nothing more than the inevitable impact of a flash during the videotaping. The slow motion piece was another story. But let's face it, even when shot with a CCD-equipped cam, flashes during videotaping are not entirely 'artistic'.

Now, on the other hand, a friend of mine shot a birthday party with an SR12, during which there was considerable flash activity. He emailed that video to me and THAT was bad! Not only was the effect prolonged, but the exposure shift actually rolled up the screen and truly cried out "rolling shutter". It leads me to believe that the rolling shutter issue may be worse with single chip CMOS than 3-CMOS cams.

4:2:2 and SR12 rolling shutter
 

Yes Tom, I am aware that it does this but there are issues with it and for what I want which is underwater or confined space use trying to get nano flash units in a housing or attached to the camera and then get cheap enough and large enough flash to record for hours or weeks is a no go at the moment. This is a shame as underwater is where the colour space would make the most difference! for Full NAT Geo or BBC filming at the moment the only options are the FW 900 or 700 type cameras which you need a mortgage for the camera, lens and housing, lights and lens.
For shoots abroad where your in jungle or out of the way. To be able to send HDV tapes back to base to be rolled, pulled and edited as you go its very easy to copy the tape, keep one in sealed bag and post the other back to base. Until full HD gets like this It wont be feasible for most the sort of stuff I do.

With reference to the previous comment on rolling shutter and the SR 12 most of these cameras not only scan lines slower from the CMOS block (hence show movement worse) they do one line or a few lines at a time hence if you move fast, in the time it takes to scan, while you have panned across your fence post the camera has turned it into a set of stairs with each step one line up. The newer more expensive cameras scan faster so you have to pan faster to move it enough for each line to saw tooth but also handle more than one or many lines at once so you get a block of straight then a step then a block of straight so its not so exaggerated. Also some camera manufacturers put in a false motion blur so that if you pan it too fast you don't see the skew more a blurry picture.

I do agree that most viewers who are not camera crew will not notice the skew, wobble, or flash effects. As I said you need to weight it up from the film and users point of view. Unfortunately for professionals you may find the company contracting you out will not buy the footage if they notice it and do not like it!

As i mentioned before you can get global and rolling shutters on all types of sensor with big enough processing and storage but if you had a global shutter and the flashes went of it would wipe out your frame not just a few lines. Is this worse?

This is turning into a talk on rolling shutter in general now though and started off being a Z5 talk with a bit on its heavily reduced rolling shutter effects from the V1 and SR12. What I was getting at was I do like the Z5 and newer cameras improvements in rolling shutter, wobble and light handling especially over the V1 and its ability to film high intensity light sources its amazing. Try filming a sunset or sun rise, or the sun glinting or glaring off the sea. A reflection of someone or something in a window or mirror or car headlights coming towards you. CMOS does do a very good job of this. No more pixell bleed, blooming and vertical bars from point light sources. They were controllable before if you know how and could get enough light to adjust shutter and aperture but never went away unless you camera cost the earth and was top of the range. Now anyone can do it. with or without general ambient light, ND filters and lots of playing.

Ill enjoy the day when the EX1, Z5 and Z7 combine with newer processing, cheap large capacity solid state memory and large chips. Ill be in my element on land and underwater.
Maybe 4 years time....

Apparently this information does not check out. If you feel I am in error perhaps you should post a link to your source. I am told the viewfinder is LCD.

It would appear you are correct Tom. From the Sony website:

Display
LCD Screen : 3.2" wide Xtra Fine LCD™ display1 (921k pixels)

Viewfinder : 0.45" Xtra Fine (16:9) Wide LCD1 (1,227k pixels)

I was kind of thinking he meant "OLED-Like"? Regardless, the resolution of the viewfinder is extraordinary in this price class. I've never seen anything close. Jeff, does it hit you when you use the viewfinder...more rez than you've seen before?

Oh yeah. You've heard me complain about some things with the cam.

However, on the subject of the viewfinder: I was stunned. It really is WYSIWYG. Gorgeous. Beautiful. It's fantastic. It's high rez.

If you're looking for a cam that gives you exactly what you see in the LCD, this is it.

As much as I loved the VX2100, which I have sold, BTW, the viewfinder left much to be desired. The good thing is the footage always looked better than I expected, but the uncertainty drove me crazy.

Nice to hear Jeff. That's so important for me and yes, I too have the VX2100 and I know exactly what you mean. You really can't judge from the 2100's viewfinder what the footage will actually look like. The other thing I don't like about it is the fact if you're just slightly off-axis, the image becomes distorted. I never had that with the VX2000. Go figure.

I agree, I found I liked the viewfinder better on my PD150. I actually liked the images from my PD150 better also, but that doesn't even make sense, I know. I kept one PD150 just because I like it so much.

I am considering a Z1 or Z7 or Z5 at the moment , too.

I am a XDCAM HD shooter and do a lot of weddings too. For receiption and dancing I´d like to have something HD-like for handheld work. Up to now I used a vx2000 - perfect for this kind of work - but not HD of course.

I have access to EX1 , Z7 and FX1 - so I did some test shootings at some weddings end of this year.

a) I´d prefer a CCD over CMOS - flashlights look horrible , especially if you slow down footage in post... All other footage looks fine.

b) I´d prefer CMOS over CCD - at the moment , Z5 & CO. seem to be better in lowlight (rarely lit dancing etc.)

c) size & weight: EX1 is a wonderful camera - but too heavy for unintrusive handheld work, thats why I consider to go for Z model

d) Z1 runs out, prices are considerably cheaper now (last weeks to buy one!)

e) Z7: I shot some great moments in virtually dark situations (candle lit...) and was impressed - couldnt make such shots with my xdcam hd

f) I am not sure, but probably dont need interchangable lenses - so my choice could be Z5. In a few weeks I can work with a Z5, need to know how it feels and how "manually" the lens operates.

In the end I will have to decide if I go for a cheaper "old" Z1 or with a new "rolling shutter" Z5.

uli

Jeff, I think the PD150/VX2000 had warmer, almost more inviting images. The PD170/2100 are cooler. I initially didn't like it either, but now when I look at my VX2000 (still have it), the image looks too warm. I guess you just acclomate to what you've got. But I suspect the 2100 is more accurate than the 2000/150.

Uli, in looking at several Vimeo projects from the HDR-FX1000, I'm of the opinion that although the flash impact on rolling shutter isn't wonderful, it can be worked around. My wife was totally unaware of the effects until I pointed them out...she just thought a flash had gone off and the picture was momentarily effected just as would a CCD. I think her reaction would be very typical of a bride or other customer.

Of course if you decide to use slow motion in post while the flash is going off and the result is particularly bad, that might not be a great editing decision. It depends on how bad the effect is and how important the moment is.

But most of the clips I saw were not nearly so bad as flashes went off. As I said in another thread, let's face it, even with CCD the impact of flash photography is not wonderful. Having now seen the low light capability of the Z5/1000 with their CMOS sensors, I really think that needs to be factored in relative to the noisier imagery of CCDs under the same lighting conditions.

You pick your poison.

Couldn't agree more Robin. I too find the rolling shutter and its associated 'flash-hash' a real early technology foible that I don't want to buy into until it's sorted. I'll stay with my Z1 until that happens, as undoubtedly it will.

tom.

Well it turns out that Robin's comment about the OLED in the Z5's viewfinder may not be entirely inaccurate. I pulled this from the Z5 pdf document and it's obvious there IS something different about this viewfinder other than its high resolution:

"The 0.45 inch-type XtraFine EVF (Electronic View
Finder) has approximately 1,227,000 pixels (852x3
[RGB]x480). This device has three independent
LEDs for Red, Green, and Blue colors. This
technology allows users to monitor objects with
remarkable color reproduction accuracy and high
resolution*9. The EVF has a selectable display
mode between Color or Black and White. The
XtraFine EVF displays virtually 100% of the picture
area at a color temperature of approximately
6500K."

I saw that yesterday Ken, however in two other places in the same .pdf the viewfinder it is referred to as LCD. It was Alister Chapman, a very respected and in-the-know DVInfo member who called me out on the claim I made about it being OLED, trusting what Robin had said. I even apologized for not independently checking it out before posting the misinformation.

But even so, there is some doubt I have now about it NOT being LED, since as you noted I have never seen a LCD viewfinder's stated resolution to include using all the RGB primary color pixel points in the resolution count. The resolved image size is 408,960, not 1,226,880. To do so makes about as much sense as blinking three times and tripling the number. But there is another disclaimer in there, something about seeing the RGB primaries under fast panning, which does not describe a phenomenon I've heard about for LCD. That too makes me think it actually could be LED or even OLED.

Even at 408,960, that's way better than my EX1 viewfinder which is (I can assure you, LCD) something over 250,000.

So maybe if Robin really knows something about this, he will post a link to an article, data sheet, blog or whatever that said it used OLED in the viewfinder, or point us to those awards he said it has won.

Tom, that caught my eye too! I've never seen any LCD viewfinder exhibit the effect that Sony talks about. So it does make me think there is something unique here. On the other hand, if it were OLED why not say so? Wouldn't that be yet another selling point if true?

So I think we agree it's not OLED, but it may not be a 'classic' LCD. If you recall, Sony came out with an LED backlighted XBR LCD display a few years ago. It was, for the time, by far the most expensive LCD ever made. Instead of convention backlighting, they introduced LEDs instead. It was said to provide greater color accuracy. Samsung continued that trend with their LED 'zoned' displays.

So perhaps it is an LCD but with LED backlighting? To me that might make more sense.

Viewfinder
 

Well it looks like I am wrong, and if so I will apologize but due to the info in the book and a Sony OLED display winning awards in the same doc, I got confused.

It is stunningly good yes we all agree on that, I was of the oppinion that the viewfinder was fine pitch LCD and the flip screen OLED but that is a minor fallacy not intended to confuse.

Both the EX! and Z5 and Z7 all have a way to go to get where we want them to, Rolling shutter is a pile of rubbish but if you know how to use your tools it is perfectly acceptable.

Ill ask Sony about the LCD screen on Monday see if I can get some answers.

I dont test viewfinders at work only the cam resolution and light sensitivity plus customer requested evaluations. My own fun work is wildlife or wrecks underwater with occasional surface wildlife or documentaries. Ive submitted Z5 footage to the BBC for ENG use and they have not returned it.

Its a good camera with issues like any other. I just explain to my customers how they can use it, if it works for their requirement and how to get around issues. Its not my main field though and there are other guys at work who do it day in day out. I specialize in other technologies and kit but we have to be able to adapt.

I was in the post headings trying to dispell the myths floating around that all Sony CMOS cameras are unuseable. If you want to see good films, look on Phil Blooms website using the EX1, it uses mostly the same processing that the Z5 and 7 use yet he has produced world renowned films irrespective of rolling shutter, skew and wobble.
Many people do not know what it is and do need to be educated but at the same time we are scaring them away making it out to be more than it is! The older CMOS cameras were horrendous but they have improved and we cant tar the new ones with the old brush.
Remember when CCD was being reviewed years ago and everyone complained about CCD pixel bleeding on high contrast point light sources! All kit has problems its how you use it that matters.

The Z5 and z7 and even probably!!!! the EX1 viewfinders are all RGB where as the flip screens are LCD finepitch screens. Its the viewfinder which translates to RGB dots on panning.

Ill try not to be wrong in future but irrespective Its a stunningly good viewfinder and flip screen and whatever technology it uses it does a job and well too.

I have some documentation on the screens here somewhere and when I find it Ill post a description and reason for the RGB response in the flip screen. I wont commit anymore until I know since you guys seem intent on shooting me down inflames :-)
It doesn't really matter if its OLED or not so long as it does what it says on the tin does it!

My comments were it was good...

Just finding one doc now it says nowhere that the EVF or electronic viewfinder is LCD it only says the flip screen is XFP LCD!
Sony also says :

The 0.45 inch 1.1cm type XtraFine EVF (Electronic View Finder) has approximately 1,227,000 pixels (852x3[RGB]x480). This device has three independent LEDs for Red, Green, and Blue colours. This technology allows users to monitor objects with remarkable colour reproduction accuracy and high resolution

RE OLED, I can tell you how it works but I dont know if they use it...

This link shows all stuff about Sony using OLED and winning awards at NAB and IBC but they are low resolution 11" units for accurate colour reproduction on the back of HD broadcast cams compared to EFP LCDS.

OLED viewfinder - Google Search
Ill talk to the Sony product manager when I get a chance but Im away for two weeks from Monday.

Rolling shutter
 

At the end of the day if you dont like it you have no choice but to buy a Canon or a Panasonic.
I just feel that Sony have given me better reliability in snow ice, wind water sand etc and when it has packed in they have fixed it under prime support and got it back to me wihtin 10 days.

Id prefer this support to a canon and wait ages to be charged a fortune.
The XH A1 is one of my favorite cams though. Just only for home use.
Robin

Robin, what do you think about the possibility of the viewfinder simply being an LED backlit LCD?

Robin, one other question. When push comes to shove, which camera do you feel produces the best picture quality, the A1 or the Z5?

Robin,
I'm not trying to shoot you down in flames. What I was saying, I went down in flames myself for passing along the misinformation, but after that, I asked you to explain your sources, you did that, everything is fine. No worries, thanks for your comments.

The Z7 (and now the Z5) might well have higher resolution multi-coated (and slightly smaller) screens than the Z1, but have you seen a Z1 and a Z7 side-by side under direct sunlight?

The Z1 wins by a mile, and that's simply because the image is visible. Ah, but we do a natty magnetic-catch screen Hoodman for the Z7 sir, the salesman informed me. That's as maybe, but in my run 'n' gun work any more fiddling about with clip-on this and that is time I'm not running and gunning.

tom.

We hear that the modern sony cams have great viewfinders.
What I'm looking forward to with a Z5's viewfinder/sidescreen is an image that looks sharp enough to clearly identify if you're in-focus properly and that sees virtually the full image that will be recorded - which is something I'm not used to with a VX2100 (I blamed that on the fact that is a consumer cam).
I personally feel that a sidescreen doesn't need to be bright enough for direct sunlight use. The sidescreen image should be bright enough to see well in broad daylight though.

Robin - I've not been able to contact Preston's last week. If the price has gone significantly up, I'll have to wait a bit until more stores actually have these cams.

Rolling Shutter / Britney Spears
 

just watched the "60 days in the life of B. Spears" docu on german TV, some scenes had heavy flashlights - with typical rolling shutter fragments, probably shot with EX1.

Just an example how in many cases content counts, not the "perfect picture".

ULi

Z5 a1, z1, z zzzzzz
 

Thankyou all for being kind, Im still learning to enterpret things on line. Its more difficult than in person and I only recently started to post here.

I think the Z5 is a batter camera than the A1 for profeesionals but the A1 for amateurs.

Purely because for the price it has XLR inputs excellent flexibility and good picture.

The Z5 is more expensive but is sharper and the viewfinder is 100 times better in size and resolution. It has a multitude of options on the audio and video, it shoots DVCAM, it has a great mike, the lens rings are silky smooth and one is assignable to shutter or aperture. The auto focus and image stabilization are not as good as the XH A1 but very good non the less. Its close but th eZ5 has true progressive and uses the first run of new technology.
It will improve maybe by firmware maybe by a new model but not in th enext 2-3 years maybe even 4.
I need to do a proper test on it when I get back to work but I am away for 2 weeks. Work may well do or have done tests on them anyway if the customers have requested or request it.

Backlights are normally CCFL or electroluminescent sheeting unless passive reflective which this is not. LEDs so not have the luminance and power to illuminate the whole screen. And normally one would use a single white source not three coloured ones. Your guess is as good as mine at the moment.

Tom Ive used the Z7 Z5 and Z1 in sunlight. I never shoot at sun unless its a sunset. Direct sunlight is great if you use an ND filter but even so I have stunning pictures from a Z5 pin sharp with good depth of field good control and less pixel bleed, image saturation. I mostly use underwater but I have stunning pics of birds of prey, people and boats one white in direct sunlight on a bright day no clouds, clear blue sea factor 30 sun cream.
Wow was I pleased. Not saturated at all and plenty of detail.

My issue is I use DVCAM for capture for SD as for HD if you capture in HDV it compresses th ehell out of it to fit a tape then down converts. If you capture DVCAM or DV it compresses less to fit on the same tape so as with the BBC you get less artifacts.

The Z1 while good is better than my PDX10s but useless at night or underwater in cloudy conditions. The only good bit is you can get a Gates housing and Fathom imaging lenses for it., in my opinion the best. Also the fringing and aberration on the Z1 is worse than the Z5.

As I said before and others have repeater all cameras no matter what we think are like screwdrivers and hammers. Are you using screws or nails? Use the right tool for the job. If your not professional get an XH A1 or just get what you want and accept it for what it is.

Secondly its what you film and how you film it not with what you film it with. If you film amazing footage they may ask what format and bit rate it is but they wont be interested in what it was taken with as long as they get it. I have used SR12 TRV950 and PDX10Ps to do pro filming on the surface in direct sunlight and underwater and Im by most means an amateur.

Thus anyone can do things if they make best use of what they have and keep trying.

Excuse the grammar Im very busy and was negligent.

For my purposes the housing for the XHA1 is about 5K where as its several K less for the Z1 they both perform similarly in low light.
After tests showed their true colours other than the signal to noise ratio not so good on canons the numbers are never calibrated on the same scales so you cant compare. They are all much of a muchness.
The Canon XHA1 is actually better than the Z1 to 0 gain but wiht gain the Z1 or V1 are improvements.

The Z5 is noticeably better but not stupidly better.
Robin

Robin, thanks much for the responses, I'm sure this helps people looking into the segment of the market. It's interesting that you found the Z5 sharper than the A1...good to know. The new "G" lens may be helping out here.