New Sony HXR-NX70U has crippling problem with "pulsating" blurriness - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 23 Old 11-03-2011, 01:16 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
raargh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 63
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I've had my NX70 for two days after saving $$ for months in great anticipation. I also have an HDR-CX550V which I love.

My tests of the NX70 over the last two days reveal some disturbing problems. They are so bad I might return the camera - but the problem is there are no other viable alternatives in this price range from Sony, Canon or Panasonic that have the features I want. I'm freaking out, man!

I'm working on creating a video that shows the problems , and will try to post it tonight. Until, then here are descriptions of some of the problems, I'm wondering if anyone else is also experiencing them. I'd really appreciate feedback from other NX70 owners.

In low-light, when the gain is anywhere above 12dB and Active Steady Shot is engaged, there is a pulsating effect in the video, about 1 to 2 times a second, where the image will blur. Blur, sharp, blur, over and over again. Does not happen with my HDR-CX550V when shooting the same subject at the same time. (BTW, the 550V has slightly better low-light performance) It reminds me of Auto Focus hunting, but it also seems to happen when focusing manually. The effect is so horrible that it rendered footage of my cat Max pretty much unviewable. The problem seems worse when the camera is pointed at subjects with fine detail - the hair on the cat, cloth, books in a bookshelf, etc - but it is there on anything, just harder to notice. It happens if the cam is on a tripod or is hand-held. It happens in HD-FX in both 60p and 60i. The problem is NOT evident on the LCD screen while shooting, but if you export the video to a computer, you notice it right away. It is also there if I plug in via HDMI to a TV. I noticed it immediately in the first vids I watched.

The problem is horrible, and unexpected. I've never seen anything like it on my CX550V.

If I turn off the Active Steady Shot and just go with Optical (standard), it is not as bad but it is still there.

In general the Steady Shot is not nearly as good as the 550V - this was also mentioned in reviews of the CX700V such as this one:
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content...Comparison.htm
(the NX70 seems to have the same internal "engine" as the CX700V, as far as I can tell)

The other thing I noticed is the color is muted compared to my CX550V - it makes me wish there was a "saturation" control that I could turn up. The sky is a duller, more navy blue, instead of the beautiful cobalt blue I get from the CX550V. The auto white balance is not nearly as accurate.

In general, the NX70 has a terrible picture compared to the CX550V! This is unexpected and disturbing. The clock in ticking on the return window - need some feedback soon. I have not yet called Sony support, but will do so as soon as I have a video posted they can watch.

Any comments greatly appreciated!

Worried and sad,

Steve
raargh is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 23 Old 11-03-2011, 01:28 PM
Advanced Member
 
gso125's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Princeton, MA
Posts: 595
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I had and sent back the nx70 because it had the focus hunting issue and I hated the zoom rocker. Mine had issues holding focus in good daylight also.
gso125 is offline  
post #3 of 23 Old 11-03-2011, 02:26 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
raargh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 63
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by gso125 View Post

I had and sent back the nx70 because it had the focus hunting issue and I hated the zoom rocker. Mine had issues holding focus in good daylight also.

Thanks, gso, I do appreciate the reply.

The problem I am experiencing is not focus hunt, because it happens when the auto-focus is off. It is something else. BTW, the dread "rocker" thing was a non-issue for me - a little touchy, but I can get smooth zoom with no problems.

Steve
raargh is offline  
post #4 of 23 Old 11-03-2011, 05:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Ungermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 3,780
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by raargh View Post

In low-light, when the gain is anywhere above 12dB and Active Steady Shot is engaged, there is a pulsating effect in the video, about 1 to 2 times a second, where the image will blur. Blur, sharp, blur, over and over again. Does not happen with my HDR-CX550V when shooting the same subject at the same time.

Can be errors accumulated in a GOP. 30p and 30i GOP is 15 frames, 24p GOP is 12 frames. Not sure what the GOP is for 60p. I believe the Panasonic GH1 had a similar issue. Also, I see the same issue when I encode with MainConcept MPEG-2 encoder from Vegas, reducing GOP structure to just 3 frames helps, but you cannot do the same in the camera. Do you shoot MPEG-2 or AVCHD?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_of_pictures
https://discussions.apple.com/thread...art=0&tstart=0
Ungermann is offline  
post #5 of 23 Old 11-04-2011, 08:43 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
raargh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 63
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ungermann View Post

Can be errors accumulated in a GOP. 30p and 30i GOP is 15 frames, 24p GOP is 12 frames. Not sure what the GOP is for 60p. I believe the Panasonic GH1 had a similar issue. Also, I see the same issue when I encode with MainConcept MPEG-2 encoder from Vegas, reducing GOP structure to just 3 frames helps, but you cannot do the same in the camera. Do you shoot MPEG-2 or AVCHD?

Wow, Ungermann, I am impressed by your knowledge and insight! I think you have hit the nail on the head.

Unfortunately, it does not help me with this problem (although I will certainly keep it in mind when editing - I do use Vegas Pro 10 (about to upgrade to 11 ) . Yesterday, I did an exhaustive comparison of the NX70 against the CX550V and put some of the results into a little video:

NOTE: The video below contained some inaccuracies; a new video has been posted
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e33EN-Ubi3Y
NEW video with better information:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cEHhvpfhos

As far as compression, I both cams are identical at 1920x1080 with the 60i frame rate, but the new "PS" Mode (1920x1080 60p) is different. The NX70 exhibits the pulsing pixelation in low light at 1920x1080/60i, but the CX550V does not. I see the problem even with direct HDMI output to my Samsung LCD TV. I'm speculating that the changes Sony made to the CODEC to accommodate the new 24p and 60p frame-rates might have broken something. From the NX70 specs:
---
Video Recording Format:
HD MPEG-4 AVCHD format compatible+1080/60p original format)
MPEG-2 PS (Same as DVD)

Recording Frame Rate NTSC Mode
PS (28 Mbps) 1920 x 1080/60p/16:9
FX (24 Mbps) 1920 x 1080/60i/16:9
FH (17 Mbps) 1920 x 1080/60i/16:9
HQ (9 Mbps) 1440 x 1080/60i/16:9
LP (5 Mbps) 1440 x 1080/60i/16:9
FX (24 Mbps) 1920 x 1080/24p/16:9
FH (17 Mbps) 1920 x 1080/24p/16:9
--

If it were just the pixelation and the zoom-rocker problem, I might be able to grit my teeth and live with it. But, add in the washed out colors (no way to adjust saturation on the cam and I'm not going to constantly apply hue/Saturation effects in post-production), crappy auto-while balance (I know that "Pros" are not supposed to use Auto but come on, this is $3K unit and it ought to work at least as good in Auto as the Cx550V), markedly inferior Steady Shot compared to the CX550V, worse auto-focus hunting, less effective zoom in Active Steady Shot, only two brightness settings for the LCD, WAY worse menu layout on the touch screen, impossible to display recording time on the display, no GPS on/off switch - all the other great features don't matter. I just don't like the camera. I've started the return process.

I'm very sad and frustrated. I thought this camera was going to be the ONE. Now I don't know what to do. I've spend months carefully considering and rejecting dozens of other units from all manufacturers ranging in price from $900 to the $4K Sony HXR-NX5U. At this point, even though I can't afford it and it is way to large for my purposes, the only one left is the NX5U. I'd like to rent one to see if I can live with it. No local firms rent.

Anyone have any ideas about rentals where they are willing to ship the camera?

Thanks,

Sad,

Steve
raargh is offline  
post #6 of 23 Old 11-04-2011, 09:33 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
raargh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 63
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ungermann View Post

Can be errors accumulated in a GOP. 30p and 30i GOP is 15 frames, 24p GOP is 12 frames. Not sure what the GOP is for 60p.

Ungermann, quick question. In Vegas, when I click on a clip and select properties, it displays info, for example "1920x1080 12 " . Is that last number the GOP value?

Thanks,

Steve
raargh is offline  
post #7 of 23 Old 11-04-2011, 09:49 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ungermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 3,780
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by raargh View Post

Ungermann, quick question. In Vegas, when I click on a clip and select properties, it displays info, for example "1920x1080 12 " . Is that last number the GOP value?

I don't know what it is, but does not seem like it. MediaInfo shows M=3, N=12 for my 24p footage, and M=3, N=30 for 1080p60 footage from the SD600. N is GOP length. So, Panny uses 30-frame GOP for 60p, don't know about Sony. Obviously, 30-frame sequence accumulates more errors than 15-frame sequence, and 28 Mbit/s may be not enough for 60p. I think that 720p60 @ 24 Mbit/s is more robust than 1080p60 @ 28 Mbit/s: almost no artifacts and about as sharp and detailed.

The NX70 cannot shoot 720p? Too bad. The HMC40 can, with great results and for half the price ;-)
Ungermann is offline  
post #8 of 23 Old 11-05-2011, 01:30 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
raargh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 63
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ungermann View Post

...The NX70 cannot shoot 720p? Too bad. The HMC40 can, with great results and for half the price ;-)

AFAIK, Sony does not support that. My beloved CX550V also does not support it. The modes on the NX70U seems identical to the CX550V, with the addition of the PS 1920x1080 60p and the 24p FX and FH modes.

If I intend to publish 1280x720 at 30P (for example, YouTube). I shoot in the HQ (9 Mbps) 1440 x 1080/60i/16:9 mode and convert in post.

Now that I have been looking at alternatives, I see that JVC, Canon and Panasonic offer that 720, 60p mode.

I just posted another test video, will continue to test under various conditions for as long as I have the camera:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cEHhvpfhos

I'm learning some things that make me dislike it less, but the colors are still less vivid than my CX550V and the iAuto white balance at twilight is messed up. I was able to compensate with a manual "one push WB calibrate" using a white sheet of paper.

I'm wondering if Sony deliberately tuned down the saturation a bit, expecting pros to fix that in post. The CX550V does over saturate reds - roses are way to red, the colors bleed a bit. But the CX550V reproduces sky blue better.

Steve
raargh is offline  
post #9 of 23 Old 11-05-2011, 07:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Ungermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 3,780
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by raargh View Post

If I intend to publish 1280x720 at 30P (for example, YouTube). I shoot in the HQ (9 Mbps) 1440 x 1080/60i/16:9 mode and convert in post.

Why buying an expensive camera only to shoot in crappy mode (low bitrate, interlaced)? You will be getting only 540 lines out of your footage if you want to avoid ghosting. I would rather shoot 1080p60 and downscale. No deinterlacing, just scaling and possibly frame rate adjustment, throwing out every other frame.

I have avoided Sony consumer camcorders for some time because they did not have full manual exposure and progressive recording. I used to have the HC1, a great camera to hold and to operate, but no progressive. Now you have progressive in the NX70, why not using it for YouTube? 24p for 24p, or 60p for 30p.
Ungermann is offline  
post #10 of 23 Old 11-05-2011, 10:00 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
raargh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 63
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
[quote=Ungermann: Now you have progressive in the NX70, why not using it for YouTube? 24p for 24p, or 60p for 30p.[/QUOTE]


Well, I shot interlaced with the 550V because that was all it had. I would use the lower bit rate to save disk space for projects that would only go to YT at 720p. Sure, I would rather shoot 60p - but I won't be keeping the NX70 because it has so many problems. And, right now, I can't find anything from JVC, Canon, Panasonic or any other manufacturer for $3K or less that meets all my requirements. Each comes close, but has some kind of flaw or is lacking a feature I require. I'll mention a few of the problems with the other cam's I've considered, but bear in mind that the things I mention are just some of the reasons I've rejected each one.

For example, the Canon FX100 has no internal flash memory and I'm not going to spend another $1K for the compact flash cards I would need. The Canon XA10 has internal memory and looks great on paper, but has buttons on the XLR pod that rattle like crazy. The JVC GY-HM150U has a fantastic feature set (love the intervalometer) and uses inexpensive SDXC cards, but can't take stills and the CCD chips will not give me the low-lux performance I need. The screen is too small and has insufficient resolution. It also lacks a 3.5mm mic input which means I would need to always use the XLR pod and a 3.5mm to XLR adapter to record from my Rode StereoVideo Mic. Also, JCV is cagey about the low-lux specs (actually about all the specs and they don't seem to send it to reviewers - suspicious) and has not answered my emails. The Panny AG-HMC150PJ would be perfect but is has no 1080 60p and the highest bit rate mode is only 21 Mbps (not as good as my little CX550V). It is also waaay to massive and has no 3.5mm mic input (at least I can't find it on the specs pages). And, none of the above have GPS, which I DO use all the time to geotag photos for Panoramio.

So, I'm totally at a loss. WHY did Sony have to cripple the NX70 with crappy auto-focus, inaccurate manual focus and horrible white balance problems?!? (not the mention the zoom, but I can live with it). I mean, the little CX550V has none of those problems!

It is driving me nuts. Perhaps I should just go back to 35 mm film stills shot from the mud hut I feel like moving to ... my only hope is to try another NX70 - perhaps the one I have is defective? Are there any NX70 users listening? I really, really need feedback from other users - that is the main reason I started this thread.

Steve
raargh is offline  
post #11 of 23 Old 11-05-2011, 10:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Ungermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 3,780
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by raargh View Post

For example, the Canon FX100 has no internal flash memory and I'm not going to spend another $1K for the compact flash cards I would need.

That is the most unreasonable requirement I have ever heard. I myself am against built-in memory. It is bad. No, it is not bad, it is evil. Many reasons why not to have one, some time ago I listed them here on this board. As for CF memory, it is dirt cheap. Have you checked the prices? It is not P2, it is CF. 400x 64 GB for $160? 32 GB are much cheaper per GB, about $40-60 for a card. If this is your only beef against the XF100, then get it. 1/3-inch sensor which is good in low light, 4:2:2, 50 Mbit/s, easy to edit MPEG-2, PCM sound, XLR, what not to like?

Quote:
Originally Posted by raargh View Post

The Canon XA10 has internal memory and looks great on paper, but has buttons on the XLR pod that rattle like crazy.

Crappy ergonomics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by raargh View Post

The JVC GY-HM150U has a fantastic feature set (love the intervalometer) and uses inexpensive SDXC cards, but can't take stills and the CCD chips will not give me the low-lux performance I need. The screen is too small and has insufficient resolution. It also lacks a 3.5mm mic input which means I would need to always use the XLR pod and a 3.5mm to XLR adapter to record from my Rode StereoVideo Mic. Also, JCV is cagey about the low-lux specs (actually about all the specs and they don't seem to send it to reviewers - suspicious) and has not answered my emails.

I had the HM100. It is terrible in low light. Image stabilizer is practically non-existent. Hard to use exposure buttons, but JVC moved them forward on the HM150, which is a plus. Still, two issues are not fixed in the HM150. Nicely designed package, but did not work for me. Low-res screen is actually usable for focusing, focus assist helps. I don't think that using 3.5-to-XLR adapter is a big deal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by raargh View Post

The Panny AG-HMC150PJ would be perfect but is has no 1080 60p and the highest bit rate mode is only 21 Mbps (not as good as my little CX550V). It is also waaay to massive and has no 3.5mm mic input (at least I can't find it on the specs pages). And, none of the above have GPS, which I DO use all the time to geotag photos for Panoramio.

IMO, 1080p60 is overrated. Good 720p60 would have less artifacting considering difference in bitrate. Also, the HMC150 resolves only about 600 lines, it is more 720p cam, not 1080p. And its 21 Mbit/s mode is actually the same as 24 Mbit/s on other AVCHD cams: Panasonic advertises average bitrate, while Canon and Sony advertise max bitrate. You can grab one cheap because it is being replaced by the AC130/AC160. Look for eBay auctions. GPS? To me it is a gimmick. I am surprised that someone uses it.

Summing it all up, get the XF100.

Or, for less than $2K you can have the HMC40 with XLR adapter. It has 3.5mm input, has 720p, has 60p (in 720p mode), its LCD is crap, but focusing is possible. Its controls are way better than on the XA10 and I would say better than on the HM100. It shoots beautiful hi-res images in good light, better than all cams mentioned here aside of AC130/AC160. Records onto cheap SDHC cards. Sensitivity-wise I guess it is about on par with your CX550.
Ungermann is offline  
post #12 of 23 Old 11-07-2011, 02:56 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
raargh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 63
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hi Ungermann,

I was looking at the 128 GB cards, on Amazon they were about $600. I see that the 64 GB are a lot cheaper, about $180.00. So maybee that would not be so horrible. And I do lust for the intervalometer ...

Slashcam reports that the XF100 performs worse in low-light than the NX70. "good" vs "very good" for the NX70. The NX 70 is barely adequate. Have you had a chance to use the XF100? I can't find the actual low-lux specs.
http://camcorder-test.slashcam.com/c...non-XF100.html

I really like vid cams that can do stills, but might not be able to get what I want. GPS is essential for a still cam, but if I repair the CX550V I would be able to use it for a B cam and also the GPS. BTW, for my purposes (outdoor travel stuff), GPS is a must for tagging for Panoramio. I don't need it for video. We each have our needs ...

How does Sony Vegas do with the Canon files? I've heard that one has to convert them before they can be edited with Vegas.

Regarding 720p, the resolution is just not enough for me. I'm a freak about focus and sharpness, and notice little things - the difference between 1920x1080 and 1280x720 is very glaring to my eyes. Now that I have looked at 1920x1080 60p and compared it 60i, it will be hard to go back. The motion is so much smoother. Heck, I with I could afford 2048!

Thanks again for your insight, I need the info!

Steve
raargh is offline  
post #13 of 23 Old 11-07-2011, 04:17 PM
Advanced Member
 
gso125's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Princeton, MA
Posts: 595
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by raargh View Post


Slashcam reports that the XF100 performs worse in low-light than the NX70. "good" vs "very good" for the NX70. The NX 70 is barely adequate. Have you had a chance to use the XF100? I can't find the actual low-lux specs.
http://camcorder-test.slashcam.com/c...non-XF100.html


How does Sony Vegas do with the Canon files? I've heard that one has to convert them before they can be edited

Steve

The xf100 is better in lowlight compared to the nx70. I owned them both and will someday get another xf100 or xf300. Sony Vegas has no problem editing .mxf files from canons 4.2.2 format it just needs to be formatted to another format to view on websites or blu-ray like .mp4. Just seems like your doubling your work flow but it's easier in .mxf to color correct and edit. Adobe premier has presets for working with canon mxf files.
gso125 is offline  
post #14 of 23 Old 11-08-2011, 11:19 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
raargh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 63
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by gso125 View Post

The xf100 is better in lowlight compared to the nx70. I owned them both and will someday get another xf100 or xf300. Sony Vegas has no problem editing .mxf files from canons 4.2.2 format it just needs to be formatted to another format to view on websites or blu-ray like .mp4. Just seems like your doubling your work flow but it's easier in .mxf to color correct and edit. Adobe premier has presets for working with canon mxf files.

Hi!

thanks again for putting up with me ... I can't thank you enough.

This is encouraging (re XF100), but I just called Canon and they flatly said that Vegas is not supported and would not be able to edit the MXF wrapper'd files. So, I am confused.

Do you own Vegas? How do you get the Canon files into Vegas for editing? Is there there a conversion utility, or can I just drag the files into the timeline the way I do with the Sony NX70 and CX550V files?

I used to use Premier but I abandoned it because I just hated the interface and it crashed a lot; I'm sticking with Vegas.

I'm glad to hear you actually owned both the NX70 and the XF100 and know firsthand that the low-lux is better on the Canon. I'm curious - say you put both cams at f1.8 , 1/60th and 24dB gain. The Canon is brighter? What about graininess/noise?

I'm really lusting after the intervalometer, because I do mostly two kinds of videography: indoor orchestra concerts and timelapse.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnD1Ev6kZlM

Steve
raargh is offline  
post #15 of 23 Old 11-08-2011, 11:26 AM
Advanced Member
 
gso125's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Princeton, MA
Posts: 595
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I have a ton of clips from the xf100 and they went on the timeline in Vegas no problem at all but had to be rendered to something else like mp4 and mts files. I may have tweaked the templet but will dig some up later and verify in Vegas 11 pro. Adobe has the preset for the xf files and worked great.


Quote:
Originally Posted by raargh View Post

Hi!

thanks again for putting up with me ... I can't thank you enough.

This is encouraging (re XF100), but I just called Canon and they flatly said that Vegas is not supported and would not be able to edit the MXF wrapper'd files. So, I am confused.

Do you own Vegas? How do you get the Canon files into Vegas for editing? Is there there a conversion utility, or can I just drag the files into the timeline the way I do with the Sony NX70 and CX550V files?

I used to use Premier but I abandoned it because I just hated the interface and it crashed a lot; I'm sticking with Vegas.

I'm glad to hear you actually owned both the NX70 and the XF100 and know firsthand that the low-lux is better on the Canon. I'm curious - say you put both cams at f1.8 , 1/60th and 24dB gain. The Canon is brighter? What about graininess/noise?

I'm really lusting after the intervalometer, because I do mostly two kinds of videography: indoor orchestra concerts and timelapse.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnD1Ev6kZlM

Steve

gso125 is offline  
post #16 of 23 Old 11-08-2011, 12:17 PM
Advanced Member
 
gso125's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Princeton, MA
Posts: 595
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Just tested my .mxf files in Sony Vegas Pro11 and they open,edit, play great. No problems at all.

here is just a random clip I uploaded to vimeo it was a 50mbs 1080i60 best settings on the canon xf100 .mxf file. When I rendered it vegas pro11 I used the xdcam render template for 1080i60 35mbs. This makes it a .mp4 file and this one will not play on win media player but plays great on vimeo, if you need it for win media player you have to render to a .mts file. I have no clue why canon says they dont work in vegas but they do, they just wont render back to .mxf files

http://vimeo.com/31810260
gso125 is offline  
post #17 of 23 Old 11-09-2011, 08:19 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
raargh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 63
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by gso125 View Post

Just tested my .mxf files in Sony Vegas Pro11 and they open,edit, play great. No problems at all.
]

Thanks Gerald! I too found that Vegas 9 and 10 will open and edit the XF100's .mxf wrappered files with no problems.

I downloaded the XF100's manual and have been reading it. It has a lot of great features, but I see some things that bug me.

Can you confirm that each file clip is limited to 2 GB, (which one would string together) as opposed to a single giant file? I know that hypothetically multiple files is not a problem, but I prefer single big files for the 5 or 6 hour shoots I often do.

I'm also bugged that the can seems to use the 8.3 file name format. I've grown very fond of the Sony yyyymmddhhmmss.m2ts format that sony uses - each file has a timestamp as part of the name.

Also wondering about sharpness. I've been able to download some of the raw 50 Mbps files, and they seem soft and a bit blurry.

The tests I've seen with the XF100 autofocus look impressive. I like the way you don't have to take off the hood for nightshot illumination. The controls looks very nice (zoom on handle), and seems like Canon gave a lot of thought to the button layout.

Here's a link to last nights NX70 vs CS550V side-by -side comparison in low light.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeaS1N-zuGM

Do you have any way to upload a high-res 1920x1080 progressive file that I can download and examine?

Thanks!

Steve
raargh is offline  
post #18 of 23 Old 11-09-2011, 10:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Ungermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 3,780
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by raargh View Post

Can you confirm that each file clip is limited to 2 GB, (which one would string together) as opposed to a single giant file? I know that hypothetically multiple files is not a problem, but I prefer single big files for the 5 or 6 hour shoots I often do.

With FAT all you can have is either 2 or 4 GB per file, depending on cluster size. This is not a problem, as files have built-in metadata and point to next/previous one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by raargh View Post

I'm also bugged that the can seems to use the 8.3 file name format. I've grown very fond of the Sony yyyymmddhhmmss.m2ts format that sony uses - each file has a timestamp as part of the name.

MXF uses lots of metadata. BTW, Panasonic does not add timestamp to AVCHD file name... I think Sony does not too. It is what PMB might do when it copies files from cam to disk.
Ungermann is offline  
post #19 of 23 Old 11-10-2011, 10:30 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
raargh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 63
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ungermann View Post

With FAT all you can have is either 2 or 4 GB per file, depending on cluster size. This is not a problem, as files have built-in metadata and point to next/previous one.

MXF uses lots of metadata. BTW, Panasonic does not add timestamp to AVCHD file name... I think Sony does not too. It is what PMB might do when it copies files from cam to disk.

Thanks, Ungermann. I'm wondering if FAT is involved when saving to a card, as opposed to internal memory? I will test with an SDHC card in my CX550V tonight. I typically save the long shoots to internal, and transfer with PMB.

I did discover to my annoyance that PMB will not play (or even see) the .mxf files, but they play OK in VLC. Contrast this to the m2ts files, which VLC can't handle without stuttering - I assume this is due to the higher compression.

I will try to find a card reader and look at the files on the card, to determine if the time-stamping is coming from PMB. I do know that the stamps are accurate to the time of the shot, not the time of the transfer. It is also possible that PMB is not only putting on a time stamp, it might be concatenating the files into single, giant files. That raises the possibility that the Canon EF utility (or whatever it is called) perhaps might be able to do the same?

Hey Ungermann and Gerald - if you guys still have FX100's, I would love to see some tests of the following, all at 50 Mbps:
* Low light - how about a room with a 100w bulb, and shoot at 1/60 with various gain, 0 to 24dB, using auto-focus and auto-white balance
* Outdoor zoom tests, with and without ND filters ( I hear reports of vignetting with the ND filter engaged - this would be very bad and would make me cRaZY 0_o)
* Zoom with and without stabilization - on the Sony's, Active Steady shot boosts the effective zoom from 10x to 14x. This happens because the sensor is way larger than 1920x1080, and the Active steady shot uses a smaller portion of the sensor so that the shot image can "float" around within the bigger sensor space. (this is what gives the CX550V the phenomenal stabilization, it is very, very nice).

I'm probably going to send the NX70 back tomorrow. It is boxed and ready to go. I'm really interested in the XF100, just still a bit nervous. If I get it, I will be spending nearly $1K more than what I paid for the NX70, after factoring in two 64GB CFcards and two batteries.

Thanks again!

Steve
raargh is offline  
post #20 of 23 Old 11-10-2011, 10:51 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ungermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 3,780
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 26
I don't think that MXF can be concatenated, these are not "stream" files. But as I said, they should have metadata that points to next file. Not a problem at all when editing, and cut point is completely seamless. This should be the least of your worries.
Ungermann is offline  
post #21 of 23 Old 11-10-2011, 10:51 AM
Advanced Member
 
gso125's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Princeton, MA
Posts: 595
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I don't own it any more. Where did you download native raw xf100 files. I was unable to upload the .mxf file to Vimeo or YouTube. Great camera just a little more work in the editing workflow.
There is more meta data with the .mxf file than any other file I have used. The included canon import software is awesom the best I have ever used and if you don't back up your copy your crap out of luck if you lose it canon won't replace its been a problem for people letting customers view the raw files that are not near them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by raargh View Post

Thanks, Ungermann. I'm wondering if FAT is involved when saving to a card, as opposed to internal memory? I will test with an SDHC card in my CX550V tonight. I typically save the long shoots to internal, and transfer with PMB.

I did discover to my annoyance that PMB will not play (or even see) the .mxf files, but they play OK in VLC. Contrast this to the m2ts files, which VLC can't handle without stuttering - I assume this is due to the higher compression.

I will try to find a card reader and look at the files on the card, to determine if the time-stamping is coming from PMB. I do know that the stamps are accurate to the time of the shot, not the time of the transfer. It is also possible that PMB is not only putting on a time stamp, it might be concatenating the files into single, giant files. That raises the possibility that the Canon EF utility (or whatever it is called) perhaps might be able to do the same?

Hey Ungermann and Gerald - if you guys still have FX100's, I would love to see some tests of the following, all at 50 Mbps:
* Low light - how about a room with a 100w bulb, and shoot at 1/60 with various gain, 0 to 24dB, using auto-focus and auto-white balance
* Outdoor zoom tests, with and without ND filters ( I hear reports of vignetting with the ND filter engaged - this would be very bad and would make me cRaZY 0_o)
* Zoom with and without stabilization - on the Sony's, Active Steady shot boosts the effective zoom from 10x to 14x. This happens because the sensor is way larger than 1920x1080, and the Active steady shot uses a smaller portion of the sensor so that the shot image can "float" around within the bigger sensor space. (this is what gives the CX550V the phenomenal stabilization, it is very, very nice).

I'm probably going to send the NX70 back tomorrow. It is boxed and ready to go. I'm really interested in the XF100, just still a bit nervous. If I get it, I will be spending nearly $1K more than what I paid for the NX70, after factoring in two 64GB CFcards and two batteries.

Thanks again!

Steve

gso125 is offline  
post #22 of 23 Old 11-10-2011, 11:01 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
raargh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 63
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raargh View Post

I will try to find a card reader and look at the files on the card, to determine if the time-stamping is coming from PMB. I do know that the stamps are accurate to the time of the shot, not the time of the transfer. It is also possible that PMB is not only putting on a time stamp, it might be concatenating the files into single, giant files. That raises the possibility that the Canon EF utility (or whatever it is called) perhaps might be able to do the same?

Good call, Ungermann! I just looked at the raw contents of an SDHC card that I used for a time-lapse shoot. When PMB imported the file, it created a 3.66 GB file named 20110317173355.m2ts. On the card, that imported file came from two raw files, 00264.MTS and 00265.MTS, located on the card in G:\\PRIVATE\\AVCHD\\BDMV\\STREAM . 00264.MTS was created on the card on Thursday, March 17, 2011, 5:33:55 PM

This gives me great hope that the Canon import utility will do the same thing.

Would still love to see some of the test shots I described in my previous post.

Thanks again,

Steve
raargh is offline  
post #23 of 23 Old 11-10-2011, 11:05 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
raargh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 63
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hi;

I found the raw .mxf files here:

http://dl.xplore.tv/xf

Steve
raargh is offline  
Reply Camcorders

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off