Sony 4K Handycam FDR-AX100 thread - Page 3 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 147Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #61 of 3805 Old 01-10-2014, 05:22 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 32,007
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6657 Post(s)
Liked: 7330
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

It's to put in perspective the 4K enthusiasm - the number of pixels is just one dimension of video.

On your last point; you have put your finger on the rub: shooting RAW, one has to do all the things a camera does oneself using software on a computer. And it is not easy. So, as you say, in theory RAW has many advantages; in practice, one often will not see it.

Back to salivating over this wonderful new Sony 4K camcorder...

See my post in your BMPCC thread. 4K brings to the table more than just added resolution, it also brings an expanded color gamut.

I've just seen a Samsung 4K demo and to say the video is stunning is an understatement. What I saw was more than just added resolution. The total impact can be almost 3D in nature.
Ken Ross is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #62 of 3805 Old 01-10-2014, 05:24 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jogiba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,937
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 674 Post(s)
Liked: 361
This quick hands on video shows the camera up close.


jogiba is offline  
post #63 of 3805 Old 01-10-2014, 05:25 PM
Advanced Member
 
P&Struefan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 899
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 292 Post(s)
Liked: 81
True. I'm looking forward to the Sony AX100 as an easy way out for the closest to true 1080p on my displays I'll have had. That YouTube video already looked great on a half way screen like my iMac's 1440p. Same for the Note 3 "4K" videos even with all those aweful artifacts and maybe 6-7 stops of dynamic range.
P&Struefan is online now  
 
post #64 of 3805 Old 01-10-2014, 05:26 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 32,007
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6657 Post(s)
Liked: 7330
Sony may lose some sales as a result of this guy. biggrin.gif
Ken Ross is offline  
post #65 of 3805 Old 01-10-2014, 05:46 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Blasst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: So.California
Posts: 3,596
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 85 Post(s)
Liked: 80
I found this interesting on the Sony site for the AX100: http://store.sony.com/4k-camcorder-with-1-sensor-zid27-FDRAX100/B/cat-27-catid-All-Advanced-Camcorders;pgid=ujxiA7DbRVxSRpVLMfFKIc4A0000a1HfKWq5?_t=pfm%3Dsearch%26SearchTerm%3DFDR-AX100+

Click on: Capture 4k/30p video etc


And it brings up this:


Not sure what they are trying to say regarding 60p recording?
Blasst is offline  
post #66 of 3805 Old 01-10-2014, 05:55 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jogiba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,937
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 674 Post(s)
Liked: 361
I seen that, I bet that was to say 60p at full HD (1080p).
jogiba is offline  
post #67 of 3805 Old 01-10-2014, 05:58 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 32,007
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6657 Post(s)
Liked: 7330
^ That's my bet too. I wish it were true @4K, but it's not.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #68 of 3805 Old 01-10-2014, 08:30 PM
Advanced Member
 
hatchback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NJ
Posts: 702
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 109 Post(s)
Liked: 63
I agree with Ken, the AX100 sample video is better than any other 4k sample video I've seen to date, with more resolution and dynamic range, including those from the BMPCC 4k.
Ken Ross likes this.
hatchback is offline  
post #69 of 3805 Old 01-11-2014, 01:30 AM
Senior Member
 
Philip_L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 348
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Hi
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

See my post in your BMPCC thread. 4K brings to the table more than just added resolution, it also brings an expanded color gamut.

I've just seen a Samsung 4K demo and to say the video is stunning is an understatement. What I saw was more than just added resolution. The total impact can be almost 3D in nature.

The point here is "demo". Most likely a very carefully shot demo delivered on a USB or hard-drive and running at high bit-rates. Demo's of 1080P looked stunning as well and we all seem to agree we are in reality seeing nothing near the level of detail and quality that 1080P was sold at, and now falling for the same marketing on 4K.

Of course we can get the benefits of more colors with 1080P now with x.v.Color which maintains compatibility, or by switching to 10bit. In deed Sony is already doing this, basically to sell on the back of the 4K buzz and marketing spin now, then to resell all the same film titles at actual 4K resolutions, as they've done with Video then DVD and Blu-ray before, taken from the Wiki:

On January 7, 2013, Sony announced that it would release "Mastered in 4K" Blu-ray Disc titles which are sourced at 4K and encoded at 1080p.[5] "Mastered in 4K" Blu-ray Disc titles can be played on existing Blu-ray Disc players and will support a larger color space using xvYCC.

The driving force behind 4K as it was with 3D is the industry, once upon a time we might have replaced a TV once every 15 years or so, I know we had one for 20 years when I was growing up and replaced it with one that was exactly the same in terms of performance because we had to. The TV manufacturers seeing everyone with new flat screen TVs and sales dropping as everyone is happy enough, and that 3D failed to ignite much in the way of replacing perfectly good TVs, they've come out with 4K.

Do we need 4K in our homes? I don't think so, good quality 1080P would be a huge improvement over what we have now for HD carried inside 1920x1080 pixels, but that wouldn't need us to buy new TVs would it. 1080P is a sensible resolution for watching sat away from the TV as we do with sensible sized screens.

Don't get me wrong 4K will improve things and I'm excited about, but the whole industry is mis-selling these products by comparing them to poor implementations of what we have now, of course for their own benefit.

Regards

Phil
Philip_L is offline  
post #70 of 3805 Old 01-11-2014, 02:51 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Chevypower's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,168
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 40
I disagree, I saw 4K footage on a 4K TV 5 years ago, and I have NEVER seen 1080p look anywhere near that good. It could be RAW with 12 bit 4:4:4 chroma, it's never going to look as sharp as 4K. Do we NEED it? Anything other than food, water, shelter, emotional well-being, health, security, and fulfillment is not really a need. So if we're filtering things out that we don't need, then we better start looking at many other things before talking about 4K.
Chevypower is offline  
post #71 of 3805 Old 01-11-2014, 04:45 AM
Senior Member
 
Philip_L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 348
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Hi
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chevypower View Post

I disagree, I saw 4K footage on a 4K TV 5 years ago, and I have NEVER seen 1080p look anywhere near that good. It could be RAW with 12 bit 4:4:4 chroma, it's never going to look as sharp as 4K. Do we NEED it? Anything other than food, water, shelter, emotional well-being, health, security, and fulfillment is not really a need. So if we're filtering things out that we don't need, then we better start looking at many other things before talking about 4K.

That is the point I'm making, demos are one thing. By the time 4K content is compressed a ridiculous amount to make it is as cheap and accessible as possible over Internet connections, remember apart from us enthusiasts here most people put quantity over quality, that 4K picture will look nothing like the 4K demos seen. The film industry will also be very keen to see the quality reduced by compression, they will not want what is essentially almost a cinema master copy sent out to peoples homes, it was this attitude that got us HDCP and delays with Blu-ray.

Lets look at the numbers. The Sony 4K camera is recording 4K at 60Mbits/sec maximum, remember it is still using H264. 1080P using H264 on Blu-ray is at 40Mbits/sec and this 4K camera will record HD at 50Mbits/sec beating that. With 4 times the information as HD to get a similar compression quality we should be getting bit-rates circa 160Mbits/sec if not more for 4K on this camera, as compressing 4K is more challenging especially in real-time as motion searching is a big ask of any processor over all those pixels, so perhaps we'd want something approaching 200Mbits/sec to keep it on par with good HD content from Blu-ray or this camera but just multiplied by 4. It wouldn't surprise anyone if all the Sony 4K camera is doing is cutting the 4K frame into 4 HD images (a trick used by JVC I believe on an earlier 4K camera) and encoding 4 HD frames using 4 hardware codecs, this means we can simply say each HD crop out of the 4K frame is only getting 15Mbits/sec. Does that sound good?

So compression is considerably higher producing less detail, put it this way, take 1920x1080 pixels out of the Sony's 4K frame and play that on a 1080P HD TV and compare it against the same footage captured using the same camera at 1920x1080 at 50Mbits/sec. The 4K frame crop is encoded at essentially 15Mbits/sec, and the HD frame is encoded at 50Mbits/sec, no comparison.

Note that H264 at level 5.1 which Sony are using inside the XAVC-S branding is expected to be used at bit-rates approaching 240Mbits/sec at Baseline, and at High Profile it is 300 to 720Mbits/sec, yet this Sony camera is 60Mbits/sec, can it really get close to 4K resolutions on anything other than carefully shot demo videos with scenes playing to encoders strengths?

The only reason these 4K sample videos are looking so good is because of oversampling the pixels and watching it back on panels that are not 4 times larger and/or down sampled.

Yes 4K should have 4 times the detail of 1080P, and it would do on RAW uncompressed video comparison. However 4K as we discuss here from the Sony camera is considerably more compressed and really is nothing more than a "We're here first" marketing game.

Regards

Phil
Philip_L is offline  
post #72 of 3805 Old 01-11-2014, 05:03 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 32,007
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6657 Post(s)
Liked: 7330
I couldn't agree more with Chevypower. No, we don't 'need' 4K, but it's a hell of an improvement over what we have now. The down sampled demo I've seen from the AX100 certainly exceeds the best 1080p demos I've ever seen and only hints at its potential. The true 4K demos I've seen in-store certainly blow away the best HD I've ever seen when we were seeing those demos in the early days of HD via hard drive.

As good as the PQ was at home when they were doing demo loops on CBS, during the first days of HD, or the scenics on HDNet, which had the full bandwidth available at that time, they weren't close to 4K.

Now I certainly agree with Phil that most streaming, cable and satellite delivery of 4K will be dumbed down due to bandwidth constraints. However even with that said, it should trounce what we see today from those same delivery services.

Going back to the AX100 demo, down sampled to HD, it's very easy to see the incredible potential with this camera. Yes, the demo is 'carefully crafted' but you know what, every camera demo I've ever seen is also 'carefully crafted'. There was nothing in that demo, relative to other camera demos I've seen, that made me think 'what are they hiding?' This was, IMO, a very typical demo in terms of content. The demo of the AX100's bigger brother was no different in content despite the fact that it has both a higher bitrate and 60p.

Going back to colors, the UHD format allows for expanded colors that are not contained within Rec709. You've seen 'expanded colors' touted by some HD hardware for several years, but those colors are not 'legit' as they simply don't exist within the Rec709 standard. So yes, you might get slightly different hues and saturations with that equipment, but those variations were never allowed in the 709 standard. So in a sense, they're simply 'made up', extrapolated or guessed at.

With the new UHD standard, more color hues and saturations are allowed and are 'legitimate' and thus when done right, we'll actually see a greater variation of colors than we did with HD. Those colors will be truer to the original than was possible with HD.

Now with all that said, I stand by what I've said for a long time, to appreciate all the extra resolution we'll see, we'll need bigger screens or closer seating distances to really enjoy the differences.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #73 of 3805 Old 01-11-2014, 05:26 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 32,007
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6657 Post(s)
Liked: 7330
Phil, reading your description of the compression techniques used in the AX10, you'd think the output wasn't as good as a VHS camera. biggrin.gif That's very obviously not the case and I stand by what I said above. There's nothing unusual in that demo relative to any other camera demo I've seen, low, medium or high bitrate, $2,000 or $20,000. The demo and its contents are par for the course.

I've heard people saying the demo at CES on a 4K display looked simply stunning. As I understand it, the XAVC compression scheme is more efficient and thus you can get away with less bits and more compression.

I heard these same arguments with the RX10, especially from one or two guys on the forums. AVCHD sucks, bitrates suck, dynamic range sucks etc. Yet somehow, in reality, when used in situations other than whip pans and high action sports, the RX10 produces amazing HD quality. Owners that shoot for fun or guys that shoot professionally, pretty much say the same thing, they are shocked by how good it actually is.

As I've said for many years, in countless discussions of both audio and video equipment, you can throw all the data sheets, frequency response curves etc.around you like, but in the end the question is 'how does the equipment actually perform'. In terms of what I've seen and heard thus far on the AX100, very very well, thank you. Once I have the camera in hand, I'll let everyone know what I see. If it doesn't perform it goes back. Very simple. But based on what I've seen, I'm not expecting that.

Phil, I should mention my shooting style pretty much mirrors what you see in demos. I rarely do whip pans and I don't anticipate shooting race cars, hockey games or the like. This style allows me to work very comfortably within the AVCHD codec, which I rarely 'break'. wink.gif
Ken Ross is offline  
post #74 of 3805 Old 01-11-2014, 05:54 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jogiba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,937
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 674 Post(s)
Liked: 361
The Sony 4K Handycam FDR-AX100 reminds me of the Panasonic TM700 almost four years ago when we first seen the 1080p60 samples and were blown away by the detail compared to other 1080p camcorders.
http://camcorders.reviewed.com/content/panasonic-hdc-tm700-camcorder-review-37681-2/sharpness-performance
http://camcorders.reviewed.com/content/sony-handycam-ax100-first-impressions-review
jogiba is offline  
post #75 of 3805 Old 01-11-2014, 06:32 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 32,007
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6657 Post(s)
Liked: 7330
I think you're right jogiba, it's that kind of leap, probably bigger. Of course the AX100 isn't the first camera to have this kind of PQ, its big brother has been out for awhile. But this is the first small cam to have this kind of PQ.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #76 of 3805 Old 01-11-2014, 07:10 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jogiba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,937
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 674 Post(s)
Liked: 361
I see Amazon keeps dropping prices on the 4K UHD TVs like the large 65" Seiki to $1,488.59 with FREE Shipping from $2,999 !




http://www.amazon.com/Seiki-Digital-SE65UY04-65-Inch-Ultra/dp/B00FJPO5O8/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1389451934&sr=8-5&keywords=4K+TV
jogiba is offline  
post #77 of 3805 Old 01-11-2014, 08:05 AM
Senior Member
 
Philip_L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 348
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Hi Ken
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Phil, reading your description of the compression techniques used in the AX10, you'd think the output wasn't as good as a VHS camera. biggrin.gif That's very obviously not the case and I stand by what I said above. There's nothing unusual in that demo relative to any other camera demo I've seen, low, medium or high bitrate, $2,000 or $20,000. The demo and its contents are par for the course.

I've heard people saying the demo at CES on a 4K display looked simply stunning. As I understand it, the XAVC compression scheme is more efficient and thus you can get away with less bits and more compression.

I heard these same arguments with the RX10, especially from one or two guys on the forums. AVCHD sucks, bitrates suck, dynamic range sucks etc. Yet somehow, in reality, when used in situations other than whip pans and high action sports, the RX10 produces amazing HD quality. Owners that shoot for fun or guys that shoot professionally, pretty much say the same thing, they are shocked by how good it actually is.

As I've said for many years, in countless discussions of both audio and video equipment, you can throw all the data sheets, frequency response curves etc.around you like, but in the end the question is 'how does the equipment actually perform'. In terms of what I've seen and heard thus far on the AX100, very very well, thank you. Once I have the camera in hand, I'll let everyone know what I see. If it doesn't perform it goes back. Very simple. But based on what I've seen, I'm not expecting that.

Phil, I should mention my shooting style pretty much mirrors what you see in demos. I rarely do whip pans and I don't anticipate shooting race cars, hockey games or the like. This style allows me to work very comfortably within the AVCHD codec, which I rarely 'break'. wink.gif

The picture quality will be good of course it will, just not four times the detail. If we are sold 4K that is what we should get, not something so compressed it barely resolves half the available resolution. If we are sold 1080P that is what we should get as well, and we don't. We are so caught up in the hyperbole we believe it all and don't question it.

It is a myth the XAVC-S is more efficient, it is still H264 just at Level 5.1 which specifies the maximum bit-rates and resolutions etc any level 5.1 hardware or software is expected to work with, and this has been around for long time, it isn't new. The branding and wrapping in MP4 rather than MXF to make a consumer format and calling it XAVC-S is a Sony marketing tactic, it sounds better than H264 MP4 which most people associate with low quality. Level 5.1 as used by Sony might have longer GOPs to provide some more efficiency but that is no different to longer GOPs that have been in use on YouTube and in MP4s for years and years. Blu-ray/AVCHD came with limited GOP (25/30) because it had to work with the hardware at the time.
Quote:
The Sony 4K Handycam FDR-AX100 reminds me of the Panasonic TM700 almost four years ago when we first seen the 1080p60 samples and were blown away by the detail compared to other 1080p camcorders.

It is more like when HD camcorders first arrived recording at low bit-rates to solid state flash cards. The flash cards weren't up to very high bit -rates, the encoders struggled and the results would look pretty poor now compared to something like the TM700.

It took several years before this improved and took dropping interlacing to replace it with 60P, faster so better encoders and faster solid state memory to allow a jump up to 28Mbits/sec encoding to get to where we are now, camcorders that still struggle to resolve anywhere near the detail 1080P is capable off. I bought into the early generation of HD camcorders after all the brilliant demo's of 1080P people had seen and was so disappointed by the fuzzy mess I sent the camcorder back and didn't buy again until the Panasonic TM300, then jumped to the TM900 for progressive and higher bit-rates.

The Sony 4K isn't there yet. It's stuck at yesterday frame-rates of 30p (where 120fps is coming into view), and is encoding the equivalent of an HD frame at 15Mbits/sec, not something to shout about. It will look good because we are using screens much smaller than 4K resolution is actually good for, and we compare it to captured AVCHD at 18Mbits/sec or 60P at 28Mbits/sec. Neither of these bit rates for HD are considered visually lossless, they are nowhere near that and 1080P could improve in detail several fold. 60Mbits/sec on 4K is extremely lossy. Sony hasn't even come forward and said yet what color system is in use, is it still 4.2.0 or 4.2.2?

Of course Sony will soon follow with 4K at 60P recording at 100Mbits/sec upwards using a new more efficient codec like H265, and everyone will be saying how much better that is, it still will not actually capture 4K of detail, but will still be improvement.

To Ken, with all due respect, you seem to have plenty of cash and are always buying the newest camcorder when I visit these forums (to my one purchase you've had half a dozen I bet smile.gif, and it is great if you have that cash and can always have the best, which this is, now for a short while anyway unless you go pro. You will be the first person however in 6 or 12 months, getting all excited about the next Sony 4K with higher bit-rates and 60P and saying how much better it will be, and that is what you will replace this with.

For a lot of us, holding out for something that is actually capable of recording with 4Ks worth of detail, at least closer to it, we'll never get visually lossless anything, rather than something so compressed it is just great 2K carried in a 4K frame, will be wise choice.

Regards

Phil
Philip_L is offline  
post #78 of 3805 Old 01-11-2014, 10:10 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 32,007
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6657 Post(s)
Liked: 7330
Phil, I understand your points, but disagree when it comes to reality based on what I've seen. Again, taking your points literally, it doesn't translate to what I'm seeing on my screen. If that's hugely emasculated 4K downrez'd to 2K, I'll take that every day of the week over anything 2K out there. That's just a fact based on the actual video. I fully intend to take my footage over to my nearest BB and put it on a large screen, 4K TV. I'll then see what it looks like there. I'm not a naïve consumer Phil, trust me. I do plenty of research and often drive myself nuts with A/Bs. I delve in to specs as much as the next guy, but for me, the ultimate decision is based on what I see or what I hear. It's where the rubber meets the road. At that point I throw out every data sheet I've read, every internet post I've read. How does it look? Does the codec and bitrate meet MY shooting style. If it breaks down for the guy that shoots auto racing, does that impact me? No. The equipment must perform in the environment that I use it, not in the environment that some other guy uses it. That's all that matters Phil, it really is...at least for me.

Again, I use the analogy of the criticism that the RX10 has received from a few guys. In practice, almost all owners are utterly delighted with the camera. Does it have 4:2:2? Nope. Does it shoot RAW? Nope. Does it shoot in that utterly 'horrible' crap they call AVCHD? Yup. And you know what? It looks fabulous. Once again, the specs that may mean so much to some, translate to something entirely different once the owner hits the 'start' button. Funny how that happens.

Yes, I confess to being a camera junky and it's the one place I do spend $$$. My wife accepts that has my one of my many failings wink.gif However, thanks to Ebay, it's not quite as costly as it may seem on the surface. Sure you take a hit selling used equipment, but it certainly does defray the cost of the new equipment.

With that said, of course when Sony comes out with a 60p version it will be better and yes, I'll probably be among the first on line to get it. But I have zero brand loyalty. I've had Panasonics, Canons & Sonys. Whichever company is producing what I think is the best equipment, that's what I'll go with. But trust me Phil, whenever you decide to buy your next camcorder, that camera too will be outdated in 6-12 months. You know that's true. You may, at the time of your purchase, be closer to true 4K than I will with this purchase, but by the time you buy you may be hearing the footsteps of 8K. The timeframe of when we buy is largely irrelevant in the area of electronics. The only thing you know for sure is it is soon to be replaced by something better. There is simply no such thing as being 'future-proofed'. Where I have withheld a purchase is in the area of 4K displays. I certainly was not going to venture into 4K displays that were incapable of 60p/HDMI 2.0. I also knew there were going to be precipitous price drops (which we don't see in the area of camera equipment...at least not of the magnitude we're seeing in displays). The price drops we've seen have certainly surpassed what I would have expected.

So in the time I will have this camera (assuming I keep it), I will be recording video in a quality that's better than anything 2K. Of that I'm sure and I'll be happy that I'm archiving in that higher resolution (however short it may fall from all of the available 4K resolution). In this manner I'll have 4K material available whenever I do decide to get a large screen 4K TV. In the interim, from what I've seen of the down sampled 4K from this camera, I'll be delighted.

Rather than being overly critical of Sony for not having high bitrate, not having 4:2:2, having a compressed format, or whatever else you'd like to point out as a failing, I actually applaud them for a) having come out with a sub-$2,000, 4K camcorder b) down-sizing it to manageable levels from an ergonomics standpoint c) bringing us PQ that easily exceeds anything yet in the consumer's hand sans far larger and more expensive equipment. Do I see this from Canon? Nope. Do I see this from Panasonic? Nope. Do I see this from anyone else? Nope. My enthusiasm is shared by many, including many that shoot professionally and know quite a bit about this subject.

Phil, it's easy to be critical of Sony or any other manufacturer, but when they come out with a piece of equipment that can only be described as 'revolutionary' and, at a price point under 2 grand (still pricey yes, but we've been asked to pay far more for far less), I choose to applaud them. And applaud them I will, kudos to Sony! smile.gif
hatchback likes this.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #79 of 3805 Old 01-11-2014, 11:07 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jogiba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,937
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 674 Post(s)
Liked: 361
Compare this Sony 4K with 1" sensor for $2,000 with the JVC 4K with 1/2.3" sensor for $5,000 and four SD slots with four HDMI outputs !
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1022653-REG/sony_fdrax100_b_hdr_ax100_full_hd_handycam.html
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/839193-REG/JVC_GY_HMQ10U_GY_HMQ10_4K_Compact_Handheld.html

jogiba is offline  
post #80 of 3805 Old 01-11-2014, 12:22 PM
Advanced Member
 
hatchback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NJ
Posts: 702
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 109 Post(s)
Liked: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

I think you're right jogiba, it's that kind of leap, probably bigger. Of course the AX100 isn't the first camera to have this kind of PQ, its big brother has been out for awhile. But this is the first small cam to have this kind of PQ.
I wish people would stop calling the AX1 the "big brother" of the AX100. Yes, the AX1 is big and the AX100 is smaller, but their image chains don't have anything meaningful in common. The AX100 has a much bigger sensor and a better image processor. The AX100 demo footage looks outstanding, while the AX1 demo footage is less than impressive. The AX100 will have outstanding low light performance, the AX1 has poor low light performance. Really these two products have almost nothing in common.
hatchback is offline  
post #81 of 3805 Old 01-11-2014, 12:27 PM
Advanced Member
 
hatchback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NJ
Posts: 702
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 109 Post(s)
Liked: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Rather than being overly critical of Sony for not having high bitrate, not having 4:2:2, having a compressed format, or whatever else you'd like to point out as a failing, I actually applaud them for a) having come out with a sub-$2,000, 4K camcorder b) down-sizing it to manageable levels from an ergonomics standpoint c) bringing us PQ that easily exceeds anything yet in the consumer's hand sans far larger and more expensive equipment. Do I see this from Canon? Nope. Do I see this from Panasonic? Nope. Do I see this from anyone else? Nope. My enthusiasm is shared by many, including many that shoot professionally and know quite a bit about this subject.

Phil, it's easy to be critical of Sony or any other manufacturer, but when they come out with a piece of equipment that can only be described as 'revolutionary' and, at a price point under 2 grand (still pricey yes, but we've been asked to pay far more for far less), I choose to applaud them. And applaud them I will, kudos to Sony! smile.gif
Well said, Ken. Sony is the only large camera manufacturer innovating. RX100, RX1, RX10, A7R, AX100... WOW! Pretty soon all my cameras will be Sony.
hatchback is offline  
post #82 of 3805 Old 01-11-2014, 01:20 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 32,007
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6657 Post(s)
Liked: 7330
Quote:
Originally Posted by jogiba View Post

Compare this Sony 4K with 1" sensor for $2,000 with the JVC 4K with 1/2.3" sensor for $5,000 and four SD slots with four HDMI outputs !
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1022653-REG/sony_fdrax100_b_hdr_ax100_full_hd_handycam.html
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/839193-REG/JVC_GY_HMQ10U_GY_HMQ10_4K_Compact_Handheld.html

I was actually tempted by this camera at one point jogiba. Then I found out about the nutsy 4 HDMI connection scheme. My first thought was what display was going to accept these 4 HDMI 'quadrants'? That was the end of the JVC for me.

It does underscore what I was saying before about everything having a short life expectancy if you're after the latest & greatest.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #83 of 3805 Old 01-11-2014, 01:27 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jogiba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,937
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 674 Post(s)
Liked: 361
It's funny now how people were excited about that JVC 4K camera two years ago.
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1386435/jvc-gy-hmq10u-small-4k-60p-camcorder
jogiba is offline  
post #84 of 3805 Old 01-11-2014, 01:39 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 32,007
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6657 Post(s)
Liked: 7330
Quote:
Originally Posted by hatchback View Post

I wish people would stop calling the AX1 the "big brother" of the AX100. Yes, the AX1 is big and the AX100 is smaller, but their image chains don't have anything meaningful in common. The AX100 has a much bigger sensor and a better image processor. The AX100 demo footage looks outstanding, while the AX1 demo footage is less than impressive. The AX100 will have outstanding low light performance, the AX1 has poor low light performance. Really these two products have almost nothing in common.

You're right hatchback. I guess it's natural to use that phraseology given they're both 4K units. I went back and looked at the AX1 demo footage and was really more impressed with the AX100's output.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #85 of 3805 Old 01-11-2014, 01:45 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 32,007
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6657 Post(s)
Liked: 7330
Quote:
Originally Posted by hatchback View Post

Well said, Ken. Sony is the only large camera manufacturer innovating. RX100, RX1, RX10, A7R, AX100... WOW! Pretty soon all my cameras will be Sony.

Yeah, there was a period I wasn't buying any Sony camcorders since it seemed the torch had been passed on to Canon and Panasonic. Times have changed and the above releases you mention, pretty much prove that.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #86 of 3805 Old 01-11-2014, 02:50 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Paulo Teixeira's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 3,006
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 89 Post(s)
Liked: 51
With H.264, their are many different variations and all you have to do is look at all the different GH2 hacks. It was said on Personal-View that the GH3 and even the AC90 I believe allows for even better tweaks in the codec if they were to ever get hacked. It's a bit depressing knowing that the codec in the AX100 is a bit on the low side but we'll have to see native clips. With newer encoders and the right tweak in the codec, it's probably a little better than what we believe. Still not as good as it should be but also may not be too bad. The rumor for the GH 4K camera is said to be 100 if you choose the GOP based codec. If all else was equal, the codec in the Panasonic would handle motion better but theirs no denying that it's still shaped like a DSLR while the Sony is shaped like a camcorder. For event shooting, you'd most likely be better off with the AX100. It all depends on what your shooting. If only both would be hackable so that you wouldn't need to get an external recorder for a stronger codec.

Their was also a rumor that Panasonic would release a big DSLR shaped camera that shoots in 10 bit and 422 but that may or may not be the specs for the GH 4K camera. It would make headlines if the new GH 4K camera had those capabilities. It's still a rumor and wouldn't surprise me if it becomes true or false. It seams like it's both Sony and Panasonic that wants to keep that info under wraps. Still, you'd think if eighter were able to shoot 10 bit and 422, they'd be plastering that info everywhere. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

Theirs still a possibility of 2 other 4k cameras getting released soon. 1 of them is the 4K version of the AC90 that Panasonic showed off a while back and the other is a Canon with a 2/3" chip. Both cameras might be capable of 2160 60p recordings.
Paulo Teixeira is offline  
post #87 of 3805 Old 01-11-2014, 04:58 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jogiba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,937
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 674 Post(s)
Liked: 361
I pre-ordered it with B&H on January 6th and they say "Expected availability: End of March 2014 " so if Panasonic or Canon does not show a 4K camcorder before the end of March I don't think you will see a 4K from them until Photokina in September.
http://www.photokina.com/en/photokina/home/index.php
jogiba is offline  
post #88 of 3805 Old 01-11-2014, 06:35 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
img eL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 17
A bummer is the price of these 256GB SDXC's $449! Price's haven't gone down much, surprisingly exactly a year ago today the price briefly dipped down to $232! http://camelcamelcamel.com/Lexar-Professional-256GB-Memory-LSD256CTBNA600/product/B0090BEWKY
img eL is offline  
post #89 of 3805 Old 01-11-2014, 07:16 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 32,007
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6657 Post(s)
Liked: 7330
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulo Teixeira View Post

It's a bit depressing knowing that the codec in the AX100 is a bit on the low side but we'll have to see native clips.

If after seeing the heavily compressed demo on Youtube on both my 23" monitor and 64" plasma and how excellent it looked, my reaction was hardly depression. My wife's unsolicited 'wow', was also quite unusual from someone that's usually blasé about this kind of stuff. From what I've read elsewhere, nobody else seemed depressed either, quite the opposite. wink.gif

Yes, I'd love to see the native clips, as they can only be that much better. smile.gif
Ken Ross is offline  
post #90 of 3805 Old 01-11-2014, 07:21 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 32,007
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6657 Post(s)
Liked: 7330
Quote:
Originally Posted by img eL View Post

A bummer is the price of these 256GB SDXC's $449! Price's haven't gone down much, surprisingly exactly a year ago today the price briefly dipped down to $232! http://camelcamelcamel.com/Lexar-Professional-256GB-Memory-LSD256CTBNA600/product/B0090BEWKY

Here ya go, I just saved you some money. Buy two of these and save over $300. Not too bad. smile.gif You can get these even cheaper if you shop around.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1016077-REG/pny_technologies_p_sdx128u1h_ge_128gb_elite_sdxc_uhs_1_card.html
Ken Ross is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
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