RX100 II to replace 4 year old sony CX100 camcorder - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 40 Old 11-07-2013, 09:42 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Dandlewood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 34
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hey guys,

I was wondering what your thoughts were on replacing my CX100 camcorder with the RX100 II. I've been looking at footage shot through my CX100 and have been really disappointed with motion blur, focus hunting, shakiness and low light performance. Not to mention I really hate that the files are M2ts. Do you think the RX100 II would be a worthwhile upgrade to increase video quality?

I've had friends suggest the Panny 920, Vixia G20 (maybe a bit too expensive) and the Sony CX430v.

With a baby on the way, I figured it might be better to have the more compact and easily accessible RX100 II. Although, with using a point and shoot, I am concerned that it may have inferior image stabilization.

Help me make a decision!
Dandlewood is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 40 Old 11-07-2013, 10:01 AM
Member
 
bobk77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
How about Panasonic LX7?
Dandlewood likes this.
bobk77 is offline  
post #3 of 40 Old 11-07-2013, 10:04 AM
AVS Special Member
 
xfws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,468
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 27
RX100 II is a good camera for your situation: small/can always carry for spontaneous shots, large sensor/low light, image stabilization. Plus quality still pics.

A camcorder is going to be bulkier/less spontaneity. Inferior still images and smaller image sensors.

Work on an archive plan/backup drives, cloud storage and/or disks. You have to make sure the files survive throughout the years.
Dandlewood likes this.
xfws is online now  
post #4 of 40 Old 11-07-2013, 12:07 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Dandlewood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 34
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks for responding, guys.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobk77 View Post

How about Panasonic LX7?

Just checked out some sample video and was pretty impressed. At about 1/2 the price of the RX100II, it's a definite contender. It does feel like the RX100II has better low light/IS performance and less aliasing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by xfws View Post

A camcorder is going to be bulkier/less spontaneity. Inferior still images and smaller image sensors.

Work on an archive plan/backup drives, cloud storage and/or disks. You have to make sure the files survive throughout the years.

Thanks for the advice, I'll consider this a +1 for RX100II

My current archive plan is:
(2) 3 TB backup drives and I use Backblaze. I have one backup drive that is always connected and I have a secondary drive which I keep in an anti-static bag that I periodically hot swap in and update. I've been toying around with the idea of getting a closet server to have some redundancy in another area(in case thieves come).

Still, it might be overkill considering I have Backblaze.

Any alternative's you think are better?
Dandlewood is offline  
post #5 of 40 Old 11-07-2013, 02:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
xfws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,468
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dandlewood View Post

My current archive plan is:
(2) 3 TB backup drives and I use Backblaze. I have one backup drive that is always connected and I have a secondary drive which I keep in an anti-static bag that I periodically hot swap in and update. I've been toying around with the idea of getting a closet server to have some redundancy in another area(in case thieves come).

Still, it might be overkill considering I have Backblaze.

Any alternative's you think are better?

Looks like you're covered.
Dandlewood likes this.
xfws is online now  
post #6 of 40 Old 11-07-2013, 04:51 PM
Advanced Member
 
hatchback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NJ
Posts: 597
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Liked: 57
If you want the best videos, get the Panasonic X920M. It has the best video quality by far and outstanding optical image stabilization. You will get great video and unbearably awful stills.

If you want the best still quality and are willing to put up with mediocre video quality with poor image stabilization, then get the RX100MII. You will get great stills and decent video.

If you have money for both, then get both! Then you will have the best of both worlds, great stills from the RX100MII and great video from the X920M as well.
Junglerock and Dandlewood like this.
hatchback is offline  
post #7 of 40 Old 11-07-2013, 06:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 3,032
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 118 Post(s)
Liked: 100
If you want to take stills with a pocket camera, the RX100 is exceptional. Video is good enough. If you want to take video with a pocket camera, the Panasonic ZS30 and Sony HX50V are exceptional. Stills are good enough. If you want a camera that does better stills and better video, the Panasonic LX7 is a great choice. But, the LX7 did not fit my pocket nearly as well as the RX100.

So, to "help you make a decision", rank three thinks.

How badly do you want it to fit in your pocket.
How badly do you want to make big prints
How badly do you want to make HD video.
Dandlewood likes this.
bsprague is online now  
post #8 of 40 Old 11-07-2013, 08:06 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,642
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1422 Post(s)
Liked: 1537
Just came upon this video shot by the RX100 II that I posted in another thread. The video is not too shabby at all.

https://vimeo.com/73986939
Dandlewood likes this.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #9 of 40 Old 11-07-2013, 10:47 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Dandlewood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 34
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
BSPrague:

Do you really think that the ZS30 and HX50V have better video capabilities than the RX100 II? Any reason why? Curious, since they are both half the price. (legitimately curious, not being sarcastic)

Pocketability is crucial, and image/video are about 50/50.


Ken:

Thanks for posting the video. The footage looks really solid, but I'm wondering how heavily it was edited. You can see that they slowed it down.
Dandlewood is offline  
post #10 of 40 Old 11-08-2013, 05:17 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,642
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1422 Post(s)
Liked: 1537
Dandlewood, he's commented in a couple of other videos he's done that he doesn't alter colors in post. However it was mentioned by another member last night, that he sometimes shoots in 'vivid' mode, but I'm guessing the camera produces nice colors in standard mode.

Whatever you wind up with, make sure you get it from a dealer with a good return policy.
Dandlewood likes this.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #11 of 40 Old 11-08-2013, 10:11 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 3,032
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 118 Post(s)
Liked: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dandlewood View Post

BSPrague:

Do you really think that the ZS30 and HX50V have better video capabilities than the RX100 II? Any reason why? Curious, since they are both half the price. (legitimately curious, not being sarcastic)

Pocketability is crucial, and image/video are about 50/50.
My RX100 was new 14 months ago. My primary goal was to have a small camera capable of high quality RAW format still photos. Travel video clips were important, but not as important.

Since a lot of what I've learned about video capable cameras came from this forum, it seemed appropriate "pay back" by starting a thread/topic on the camera. I posted a few "test shots" and thought it would be fun to continue demonstrating, over time, what I could and could not do with the RX100 as a rank amateur. Quickly, a reference to a German camera review site made it clear that Sony provided a poor quality lens for video. It explained a number of aberrations in technical terms I didn't understand nor cared to understand. It killed the thread and established that I made a bad purchase choice. There was no point of providing any additional "test clips" for review. I dropped my participation in my own thread and took the test clips off Vimeo. If you search, you may find a "relic" thread with dead links.

A result of that lesson, was that I will never recommend the RX100 for someone else's video camera.

Since that thread, I ran across interesting articles explaining some of Sony's lens aberrations. They are intentional! Knowing they were trying to stuff a lot into a small package they accepted that the optics alone wouldn't get there. They teamed the lens with software that mostly "fixes" the aberrations or optical limitations that come from the smallish lens. It would have been easier to make a bigger lens, but then it wouldn't fit in a standard shirt pocket. It was suggested that intentionally correcting impossible optics with software in the camera is a Sony pioneering effort.

I thought, and still think, the RX100 does well. (I nearly cried when a dust spot showed up on my sensor a few weeks ago.) I used it as my primary video and photo camera on a trip through four European countries a month ago. I have so many "wonderful to me" video clips and photos of me, my wife and two friends that I'm having an extreme personal challenge getting them into a watchable travel story.

Additionally, I enjoy video editing that does not make lossless output. The standard on the forum is to examine a camera's native, or original, clips. I stopped doing that when I started enjoying editing. If you would like to see what I've managed with the RX100, I have several on Vimeo that have been edited into my version of "stories". You are more than welcome to watch them. Again they have been transcoded by my NLE and prosessed again by Vimeo. My Vimeo account allows you to download the original, but it will still have been trancoded in my NLE.

This is a very much unfinished beginning to my Europe video that is mostly stills. The video clips start at about 3:00 minutes: https://vimeo.com/78107062

This is a story about the Lake Havasu Hot Rod culture where I pushed hard on some low light boosting at the end in the editing process. A black car at night is tough to shoot! https://vimeo.com/62955392

Last spring I went to the Grand Canyon. I don't know who is watching, but it has 1400 view! I had a lot of fun getting the music. There are a lot of still that I processed with multi exposure HDR techniques. https://vimeo.com/64474485

Here are two that were done in really crappy shooting conditions where I had no control over the conditions but were important for someone else. Considering the conditions, I thought the RX100 did fairly well. https://vimeo.com/75152870 and https://vimeo.com/75646929

This is the closest I have up as a test clip. I leave it there because it is such a pretty shot of an Oregon coast lighthouse. It was taken from an RV Campground where my wife just bought a RV parking space! It was uploaded straight from the camera without any NLE interference. https://vimeo.com/57029122

Switching cameras, my record at 1800 views was done with an HX9V, that is an earlier version of the HX50V. There is a 7 frame stop action sequence of my brother shooting an antique canon (now, not a camera, a gun). You may be able to see why I prefer it for video to the RX100. I think I could have almost as well with the RX100 as little zoom was used. https://vimeo.com/36973087

To directly answer your question, the zoom on the RX100 is less than I like for video. The ZS30 and HX50V are much better, but the sensors are too small for the RAW photo capability that I want. In another thread on this forum, Mark demonstrated the ZS30 as a very capable video camera. My own sister asked me for advice and was going to buy an RX100 based on my use. When she told me she wanted to "zoom in" on her grandkids, I suggested the ZS30. She is quite happy with it.

Frankly, the push from smartphones has put enough pressure on that most any of the highly rated cameras at dpreview or talked about here will get you something you will be impressed with when you figure out the controls. In your first post, you expressed concern and interest in video stabilization. Look examples of the 5 axis stabilization used in the ZS30.

Bill
Dandlewood likes this.
bsprague is online now  
post #12 of 40 Old 11-08-2013, 12:17 PM
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dandlewood View Post

BSPrague:

Do you really think that the ZS30 and HX50V have better video capabilities than the RX100 II? Any reason why? Curious, since they are both half the price. (legitimately curious, not being sarcastic)

Pocketability is crucial, and image/video are about 50/50.


Ken:

Thanks for posting the video. The footage looks really solid, but I'm wondering how heavily it was edited. You can see that they slowed it down.

If you want a camera that can take videos and pictures, than the RX100 is the one to get, because its pictures are in another league compared to the other compacts. The RX100 will also do better low light videos.

BUUUUT, if you wont use it as a stills camera and if you are going to shoot in good/average lighting conditions, the HX50V will give you a better resolution. The resolution on the HX50V is something like 15% higher, so you will have more details in your shots. There will be little difference in color depth and dynamic range between them.

Here you can see some video samples from the grandpa of the HX50V, the HX9V. In the right hands, you can do really decent stuff. And remember, in the HX50V you will have a 1100mm zoom IN YOUR POCKET. You will be able to do a close up from a mile away biggrin.gif

https://vimeo.com/26721760

https://vimeo.com/26193028
Dandlewood likes this.
thedest is offline  
post #13 of 40 Old 11-08-2013, 12:52 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,642
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1422 Post(s)
Liked: 1537
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsprague View Post

The standard on the forum is to examine a camera's native, or original, clips. I stopped doing that when I started enjoying editing.

Bill, the best reason, IMO, to download native clips is to see the true quality of the camera that shot them. Once someone has graded them, sharpened them and done God knows what else with them, we lose sight of what actually came out of the camera. Of course that doesn't guarantee that the guy shooting with the camera had any idea what he was doing when he posted the native clips, but you can often 'read between the lines'. That's why I was happy to see the video shot by Steve Huff with the RX10. That was the first video I've seen from the RX10 that was shot by someone that knew what he was doing...and it showed. smile.gif

But once you've got an edited video posted, who knows what it actually started out looking like? As an example, the clips that thedest linked above were not the true output of the camera in question, but rather clips that were altered and graded. For me at least, that does little in terms of telling me what the output of the camera actually looks like. If I'm in the market, show me the native clips every time...especially if I have no intention of grading the output. wink.gif
Ken Ross is offline  
post #14 of 40 Old 11-08-2013, 01:40 PM
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Ken, evaluating a "raw" video is really nice - and necessary, but if the person knows what hes doing, the only way to show the full potential of the camera is grading it. Those AVCHD compacts have some potential in post, so if you dont rape the video too much, you can actually make them look better. Thats why guys like Philip B grade even cellphone videos when they are doing reviews.

An example: you are interested in the RX10. That camera uses something that we call super-white technology. What that means is that 10% of what will be recorded in high contrast scenes you wont be able to see. If you grade it you will be able to increase your V-dynamic range. If you do just a little grading and export the final video with high bitrates, you wont have visible loss in quality.

Here you can see a practical example:

This image was shot with the GW77. Check out how much highlight detail you can recover. Its a bad scene, but its really easy to see how much you can recover.

.



.

Another example shot by me with the GW77

.



.

3 examples shot by mark. One with the GW77, one with the GH3 and the last one with the TM900

.





.

Those cameras are not smart enough to create the best image with the internal algorithms. There are a lot of hidden info on those videos - and im talking about important stuff, like colors and DR.

So its important to see the 2 sides of the coin. "Raw" videos and videos made by people that have lots of experience. Who knows? Tomorrow you may be interested in post processing! wink.gif
Dandlewood likes this.
thedest is offline  
post #15 of 40 Old 11-08-2013, 01:58 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,642
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1422 Post(s)
Liked: 1537
I have no doubt that grading can help in some instances as you've shown, but not all. Some information is unrecoverable, especially if the camera operator is doing a poor job with the camera's controls or the camera itself is not capable of capturing the information we need. Obviously not all cameras are created equal and that's where native clips are essential for my purposes. Even better, carefully controlled A/Bs can be invaluable, especially when one of the cameras is one we're familiar with.

But I will always contend that the more accurate the camera's native output, the less need for grading (unless you insist on doing it for 'artistic' reasons). So I am always striving for a camera that can come closest to reproducing what my eyes saw when I was there. Thus the need for me to see native clips. I certainly engage in editing, but I don't want to feel compelled to do grading because the camera failed to capture, natively, what my eyes saw. This is where you and I always disagree on the BM camera. I contend that once you've left the shooting environment's ambient conditions, it's pure guesswork when you get home what the actual scene's colors and tonalities actually looked like. There is just no substitute, IMO, for accurate color during the acquisition stage. Grading is great, but it's art and not pure science. Therein lies the problem.

Often in the grading process you capture some detail or texture, but lose something else in the process. Rarely is there a free lunch. Likewise, in the examples you gave, a camera with more total control may well have eliminated the issues you highlighted. I have been forced to grade at times in the work I do, but more often than not it's as a result of a mistake I made.

I know you enjoy grading and that's great, but not all of us want to engage in it or feel compelled to do it because of shortcoming in our equipment. Some of us want our equipment to create an image that, in terms of accuracy, simply doesn't need to be graded unless you want to create an image that alters reality. Nothing wrong with that, but not all of us want that. smile.gif
Dandlewood likes this.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #16 of 40 Old 11-08-2013, 03:13 PM
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

But I will always contend that the more accurate the camera's native output, the less need for grading (unless you insist on doing it for 'artistic' reasons). So I am always striving for a camera that can come closest to reproducing what my eyes saw when I was there. Thus the need for me to see native clips


Thats true, but just out of curiosity, there is a nice trick to expand the DR of your 8-bit camera - and that demands post processing.

As we all know, they have a limited dynamic range, but their images is not that bad. Why? Because those engineers are smart. They concentrate those stops of DR in the highlights and midtones, sacrificing the shadows. They do that because most people dont even notice that. They are fooled by the beauty of high contrast scenes and over saturation.

Whats the problem with that? Well, if you are a good shooter, when you are in a scene with high contrast, like a bright sunny day, you will want that blue sky and those pretty clouds. Then you will try to expose to keep that information. What will happen? You will crush the shadows in a way that you cant recover, simply because its not a priority for the camera. You can create artistic scenes, with a pretty sky and some shadow silhouettes, but if you want to keep the sky pretty and still show whats in the shadows, you will have problems.

And thats the beauty of that trick. That way you can overexpose your shot a little bit (exactly 10%) blowing out a little bit the highlights. That will give you more information in the shadows, and then, when post processing, you can recover those 10% of blown out highlights. When you recover only the highlights, you dont create ugly artifacts like when you try to recover shadow info (like macroblocking)

And thats why when you shoot with those AVCHD cameras, the native video (in high contrast scenes) will always have less dynamic range than the post processed ones, even if you are a good shooter and knows how to expose.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

This is where you and I always disagree on the BM camera. I contend that once you've left the shooting environment's ambient conditions, it's pure guesswork when you get home what the actual scene's colors and tonalities actually looked like. There is just no substitute, IMO, for accurate color during the acquisition stage. Grading is great, but it's art and not pure science. Therein lies the problem.

I have to correct something here. You are probably not impressed with the BMPCC because there are lots of lost shooters that have no idea how to deal with ProRes.

The BMPCC shoots in what we call a LOG profile. That means that all the info is there, but hidden. To get real life colors its pretty easy. You just have to click in one white point of the shot to get a perfect white balance. Then you just have to pump up the saturation (in the right way). All the "real" colors are there, they are just muted.

The problem is that most guys have no idea how to grade, then they just throw some Magic Bullet preset and that creates a video with fake colors.

You are having problems finding good example videos of the RX10. Most reviewers suck. Thats also happening with the BMPCC. Most shooters have no idea what they are doing. They are just posting bad samples
Dandlewood likes this.
thedest is offline  
post #17 of 40 Old 11-08-2013, 04:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jogiba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,030
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
Liked: 75
The Panasonic Lumix G5 Mirrorless Micro Four Thirds Digital Camera with Lumix G Vario 14-42mm Lens is $299 w/FS and it does 1080p60.
Quote:
Product Highlights

16.05MP Live MOS Sensor
Venus Engine
Micro Four Thirds System
14-42mm Zoom Lens (35mm Equiv: 28-84mm)
3.0" 920k-Dot Tilting Touchscreen LCD

1440k-Dot Electronic Live View Finder
Full HD 1080p Video at 60fps
14 In-Camera Creative Filters
Optical Image Stabilization
Light Speed Auto Focus System
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/880959-REG/Panasonic_dmc_g5kk_Lumix_G5_Digital_Camera.html


Dandlewood likes this.
jogiba is online now  
post #18 of 40 Old 11-08-2013, 06:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 3,032
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 118 Post(s)
Liked: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Bill, the best reason, IMO, to download native clips is to see the true quality of the camera that shot them.

I was happy to see the video shot by Steve Huff with the RX10. That was the first video I've seen from the RX10 that was shot by someone that knew what he was doing...and it showed. smile.gif

I get it.

But sometimes the OP question is vague. "What camera should I get for taking video of my next vacation?" The answer may be more than "How good do the native clips look?"

If anyone wants me to put up some native clips, I'm more than happy to provide them on Dropbox, Vimeo or wherever. When I started an "Official RX100" thread to do that, it was trashed for having lens aberrations. Had it not been trashed, there would be a small library here with native video clips taken on an RX100 by me.

Regarding Steve Huff.... He was one of the ones that made me believe the RX100 had the makings of a stellar video camera 14 months ago. It was on this forum that it was determined to be crap because it didn't pass slashcam's technical testing! Steve Huff as videographer skills that could make any camera look good! His mission is very different than mine. He finds situations where he can showcase a camera under amazing conditions. I find situations where I want a video recording, no matter what the conditions.

I love the camera. I'm spending $250 to get a dust spot on the sensor removed as I write. From my perspective it takes amazing stills and wonderful video. It is so good, it compels me to consider buying the $1300 RX10 because it comes from the same shop.

Bill
Dandlewood likes this.
bsprague is online now  
post #19 of 40 Old 11-08-2013, 06:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 3,032
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 118 Post(s)
Liked: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedest View Post

If you want a camera that can take videos and pictures, than the RX100 is the one to get, because its pictures are in another league compared to the other compacts. The RX100 will also do better low light videos.

BUUUUT, if you wont use it as a stills camera and if you are going to shoot in good/average lighting conditions, the HX50V will give you a better resolution. The resolution on the HX50V is something like 15% higher, so you will have more details in your shots. There will be little difference in color depth and dynamic range between them.

Here you can see some video samples from the grandpa of the HX50V, the HX9V. In the right hands, you can do really decent stuff. And remember, in the HX50V you will have a 1100mm zoom IN YOUR POCKET. You will be able to do a close up from a mile away biggrin.gif

https://vimeo.com/26721760

https://vimeo.com/26193028
Yeh! Exactly.
Dandlewood likes this.
bsprague is online now  
post #20 of 40 Old 11-09-2013, 09:20 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,642
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1422 Post(s)
Liked: 1537
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsprague View Post

I get it.

But sometimes the OP question is vague. "What camera should I get for taking video of my next vacation?" The answer may be more than "How good do the native clips look?"

If anyone wants me to put up some native clips, I'm more than happy to provide them on Dropbox, Vimeo or wherever. When I started an "Official RX100" thread to do that, it was trashed for having lens aberrations. Had it not been trashed, there would be a small library here with native video clips taken on an RX100 by me.

Regarding Steve Huff.... He was one of the ones that made me believe the RX100 had the makings of a stellar video camera 14 months ago. It was on this forum that it was determined to be crap because it didn't pass slashcam's technical testing! Steve Huff as videographer skills that could make any camera look good! His mission is very different than mine. He finds situations where he can showcase a camera under amazing conditions. I find situations where I want a video recording, no matter what the conditions.

I love the camera. I'm spending $250 to get a dust spot on the sensor removed as I write. From my perspective it takes amazing stills and wonderful video. It is so good, it compels me to consider buying the $1300 RX10 because it comes from the same shop.

Bill

I hear you Bill. I've learned over the years to take some web sites with a grain of salt. Many are so photo centric, they have no idea about the quality of the video their cameras shoot. Like you, I enjoy both stills and videos. I hate to be repetitious, but downloading a native file is the best way to lower the 'noise' from some guys who simply don't know what they're talking about. Your eyes are the best judge of PQ and the downloaded, native clip gives us that opportunity to see it. Those clips provide the highest 'S/N ratio' you can find...of course assuming you can find clips shot by people who know how to use a camera. As we've seen, there aren't too many out there.

Steve's night shots at the amusement park with the RX10, showed some of the best footage I've seen in that kind of setting and that's without even seeing the native file. The bottom line is, regardless of what slashcam says, if you see the video from your camera is sharp, color-accurate with good tonality and dynamic range, who cares what the naysayers are saying? There are times I've read some of these websites and wondered if I owned the same camera they were testing. It works both ways. I've had cameras that a given site raved about and yet I found myself disappointed with. Similarly, I've had cameras they've panned and yet thought the output was excellent. Over the years, slashcam has presented some findings that really made me scratch my head. Even some of their screen grabs from low light scenarios just haven't jived with what I've found with equipment I've owned. When you do some of the comparisons on their sites, you'll find some strange things from time to time.

I've said it before, but for me the ultimate testing scenario is to have two camera in hand while doing your own A/Bs. I just recently did that with the GH3 & GX7 and found the video from the GX7 to be slightly better to my eyes. Certain colors just appeared more accurate on the 7 no matter how I tried to tweak the GH3. You'd probably never notice things like that unless you had both cams in your hand. Of course it doesn't hurt to be anal about this stuff to see these differences. My wife thinks I'm crazy...she's probably right. biggrin.gif

One thing I've learned, no matter how stellar the quality of a camera is, you'll get some guys that will zero on some issue (that may be minor to you) and trash the camera entirely, totally overlooking everything good about the unit. No camera is perfect, none ever will be, but there are some excellent choices out there.
Dandlewood likes this.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #21 of 40 Old 11-09-2013, 09:41 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 3,032
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 118 Post(s)
Liked: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

...I've said it before, but for me the ultimate testing scenario is to have two camera in hand while doing your own A/Bs. I just recently did that with the GH3 & GX7 and found the video from the GX7 to be slightly better to my eyes. Certain colors just appeared more accurate on the 7 no matter how I tried to tweak the GH3. You'd probably never notice things like that unless you had both cams in your hand.

I've got some cash set aside for my next camera and would like to "try before I buy". Do you know of a company that has "trial" cameras for that purpose? I know all the online camera stores have generous return policies, but I can't quite seem to feel good about knowing I'm going to send something back.
Dandlewood likes this.
bsprague is online now  
post #22 of 40 Old 11-09-2013, 11:03 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,642
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1422 Post(s)
Liked: 1537
Tough to say Bill. Generally the camera rental places tend to rent out cameras that have out for a while. Best to check in your area, but I'd think it's doubtful you'll find an RX10 available for rent for quite some time, if at all. In my area the cameras that are rented tend to much larger, shoulder mounted 'pro-level' type cameras.
Dandlewood likes this.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #23 of 40 Old 11-09-2013, 11:41 AM
Advanced Member
 
hatchback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NJ
Posts: 597
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Liked: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsprague View Post

I've got some cash set aside for my next camera and would like to "try before I buy". Do you know of a company that has "trial" cameras for that purpose? I know all the online camera stores have generous return policies, but I can't quite seem to feel good about knowing I'm going to send something back.
Lensrentals (one of the best) has the RX10 for rent:
http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/sony/cyber-shot/sony-cyber-shot-rx10
Dandlewood likes this.
hatchback is offline  
post #24 of 40 Old 11-09-2013, 01:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
brunerww's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,027
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Bill,

I rent from Borrowlenses when I want to test a camera. Neither LensRentals nor Borrowlenses has the camera yet, but Borrowlenses is booking rental dates, while LensRentals is not. As of this post, Borrowlenses has a 12/30 availability date for the RX10.

I'll probably rent one early next year to check it out.

Cheers,

Bill B.
Dandlewood likes this.
brunerww is offline  
post #25 of 40 Old 11-09-2013, 02:35 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,642
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1422 Post(s)
Liked: 1537
If you're not sure about a camera and can't rent one, you can also try what I've done many times in the past. I've simply taken a memory card to a place like B&H, a Sony store or a Best Buy and shot some video in the store. I'll often take my current shooter to the same location so that I can shoot there too, go home and compare results.

Of course this assumes you have a store like this in your area.
Dandlewood likes this.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #26 of 40 Old 11-09-2013, 10:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 3,032
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 118 Post(s)
Liked: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

....Of course this assumes you have a store like this in your area.
There is a dangerous place to go about 45 minutes from where I live. It is in Seattle where there is a Sony store, Microsoft store and Apple store that are all in the same square at a shopping plaza. Sadly, there are no camera stores. Another 30 minutes gets you to Kenmore Camera which I believe is the last camera store in the entire area.
Dandlewood likes this.
bsprague is online now  
post #27 of 40 Old 11-09-2013, 11:41 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Dandlewood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 34
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Bill,
Thanks for posting all those samples, it's a lot of food for thought. I think I'll have to find a way to get my hands on them to test them out myself before I can really make a decision.
Dandlewood is offline  
post #28 of 40 Old 11-09-2013, 11:54 PM
Senior Member
 
SD90's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 368
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Videographer Dan Carter likes his RX100 II and here he shows what it can do: https://vimeo.com/73986939
If hand held image stabilization is paramount, I like the Olympus E-P5, E-M5, E-M1 with 12-50mm kit lens: http://www.getolympus.com/us/en/outlet/reconditioned-cameras/e-m5-with-m-zuiko-digital-ed-12-50mm-ez-silver-body-black-lens-reconditioned.html which gives you a 4x telephoto, 12mm wide angle, plus macro capability like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QczdsLXtQA
Dandlewood likes this.
SD90 is offline  
post #29 of 40 Old 11-10-2013, 01:56 AM
AVS Special Member
 
flintyplus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: yeovil somerset
Posts: 1,296
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 55 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedest View Post

If you want a camera that can take videos and pictures, than the RX100 is the one to get, because its pictures are in another league compared to the other compacts. The RX100 will also do better low light videos.

BUUUUT, if you wont use it as a stills camera and if you are going to shoot in good/average lighting conditions, the HX50V will give you a better resolution. The resolution on the HX50V is something like 15% higher, so you will have more details in your shots. There will be little difference in color depth and dynamic range between them.

Here you can see some video samples from the grandpa of the HX50V, the HX9V. In the right hands, you can do really decent stuff. And remember, in the HX50V you will have a 1100mm zoom IN YOUR POCKET. You will be able to do a close up from a mile away biggrin.gif

https://vimeo.com/26721760

https://vimeo.com/26193028

The bottom video has little of the Moire & Aliasing that haunts a lot of my Camera videos,the colour is not that good IMO though.
Do you have the BMPCC yet,i cant wait to see some video.
Dandlewood likes this.
flintyplus is online now  
post #30 of 40 Old 11-10-2013, 04:41 PM
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Yep. A LITTLE. If you want to get rid of all the artifacts, be prepared to spend the price of a car in a camera. Those are cheap cameras, and those results are more than fine. If you want a little better performance, you should buy a GH3 or a 5DMK3 - but even they have some artifacts.

And the color is not bad. The video was graded. The shadows are blue, and the highlights are yellow. If you want better colors, you should step up the game to 422 or 444. Again - more money.

It looks like you want too much from really cheap cameras. A video free of artifacts and great color depth for 300 bucks? NAH...
Dandlewood likes this.
thedest is offline  
Reply Camcorders

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