AX100 Review - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 52 Old 06-19-2014, 02:50 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
AJInstitute's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 31
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 13
AX100 Review

Here's a review with some interesting conclusions:

http://camcorders.reviewed.com/conte...mcorder-review
AJInstitute is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 52 Old 06-19-2014, 03:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jogiba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,704
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Wink

It shows how fast the 4K landscape is changing. I am waiting for the AX200 with 4K @60fps .

Quote:
Needless to say that shooting 4K/30p with the AX100 yields good results. We measured high resolution numbers that are about on-par with the other 4K shooting cameras we've tested thus far, the Panasonic Lumix GH4 and FZ1000. In bright light, the AX100 posted resolution scores of 1100 lp/ph horizontal and 1150 lp/ph vertical.
Conclusion


A perfect specimen of an endangered species

When it was announced, the AX100 was a one-of-a-kind product. In a few ways, it still is. However, its most interesting new trick can be accomplished by less expensive, more flexible devices. Though, the other competitors are both first and foremost designed to be still cameras, you get much of what the AX100 can do for a bit less cash.
We'll give plenty of credit to Sony for pulling the AX100 off with aplomb, but Panasonic has been circling the waters, out for UHD blood the past few months. By releasing the Lumix GH4 and the FZ1000 at under $2,000, the AX100 suddenly has very little ground to stand on. The FZ1000, in particular, takes 4K beneath $1,000—making the feature a solid bonus that happens to also work quite well. This camera features a similar 1-inch sensor, and more zoom. If the AX100 appealed to you as an easy-to-use 4K shooting solution, the FZ1000 can do about the same job in our estimation.


If you're shopping for a pro solution, the GH4 needs to be addressed as well. This pro-grade Micro Four Thirds system camera has a bigger sensor, which makes for a noticeably cleaner 4K signal and better HD options. Not only that, but the GH4 also provides more flexibility since you can put practically any lens you want on it, provided you can find an M43 adapter for that particular mount. Add in the expensive DMC-YAGH adapter, and it becomes even better than the Handycam in a studio. Cinema shooters that pass up the GH4 are missing out on a whole lot of great stuff. The GH4 might not seem as user friendly on the surface, but it's an incredibly polished experience nevertheless. Granted, a GH4 and a lens will cost you more than the AX100, but if you're banking on this camera as part of your professional workflow, why not buy the best equipment you can afford? As it stands, the AX100 is a good tool that just happens to fall short of what competing 4K-capable cameras can do. Among camcorders, you can't do much better for the money, but only if you have an eye towards the future. The AX100 reminds us quite a bit of Sony's HDR-HC1, the company's first consumer-grade HD Handycam—also a solid first effort. That camera found an audience with independent filmmakers once it came down in price, which is what we expect will happen with the AX100 eventually. While we wouldn't wholeheartedly recommend the AX to pro videographers, if you're in the market for a prosumer-grade 4K camcorder, the AX100 is a true champion. It's easy to use, well-built, and gave us some eye-poppingly good results.

http://camcorders.reviewed.com/conte...mcorder-review

Last edited by jogiba; 06-19-2014 at 03:29 PM.
jogiba is offline  
post #3 of 52 Old 06-19-2014, 03:46 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,168
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 357 Post(s)
Liked: 543
IMO, a couple of odd 'findings'. Saying "There's also no way to put the AX100 cleanly into a production setup, since there isn't a breakout solution (yet) for HD-SDI" makes no sense. That's not the target audience for the AX100 so why would Sony do that? I consider myself much more serious about video than the average guy and I have no interest in an HD-SDI solution.

Their resolution #s seem out of whack. They claim the AX100's resolution was in keeping with other cams like the GH4 and FZ1000. They measured the GH4 at 975 horizontal & 1100 vertical, the FZ1000 at 1,000 horizontal & 1100 verical. Their AX100's resolution was 1100 horizontal & 1150 vertical. So even though the did measure a higher resolution on the AX100 than the GH4 or FZ1000, their measured resolution was far less than Slashcam's findings and not much greater than the better HD camcorders. The best 3-chip Panasonic HD cams measured something like 1,000 lines horizontal. Is that why there is so much more detail visible in any of these 4K cameras than any consumer/prosumer HD cams? Something is really whacky with their measurements, unless I'm missing something. Watching videos from the GH4, FZ1000 and the AX100, it's clear that the AX100 is sharper.

They then headlined their Performance section with "The sharpest camcorder we've ever seen". Really, duh? Based on their own measurements the section should have been entitled "The sharpest CAMERA we've ever seen". I'm very used to reading reviews over the years and sometimes there's subtle and not so subtle biases that come out. But here the push was for the GH4.

They then say this relative to the GH4: "This pro-grade Micro Four Thirds system camera has a bigger sensor, which makes for a noticeably cleaner 4K signal and better HD options". I call this utter nonsense. I did close comparisons between the AX100 as did Mark. Both his results and mine were the same, clearly the GH4 had more chroma and luma noise than the AX100. It was very obvious the AX100 put out a cleaner signal. Absolutely no question about it.

It seems they were too ready to jump to conclusions based on preconceived notions about sensor size, bit rates etc. The cameras use different codecs and different electronics. Sometimes it's dangerous to come to conclusions based on what you see on paper.

As an example, here's what they said about the FZ1000 in terms of low light: "In our standard low light test, the FZ1000 required 10 lux to make an image at 50 IRE. This is another test where the smaller, 1-inch sensor showed its weaker side when compared to Micro Four Thirds. A bigger sensor with more surface area usually requires less light to hit that 50 IRE mark."

The problem with this logic is that the AX100, with a 1" sensor, requires only 4-6 lux for a 50 IRE image, a far better performance. So it aint just about what's on the spec sheet. It amazes me these reviewers don't see their own contradictions.

Their bias for the GH4 was clear when they failed to criticize the GH4 for not having built-in ND filters. But somehow they 'expected' that from the higher end Sony offerings such as the AX100. Not sure how that works.

In fact at times I wasn't sure if I was reading a GH4 or an AX100 review.

Yet interestingly, for reasons unknown, they gave the AX100 a '10', the GH4 a somewhat lower '9.7' and the FZ1000 a '9.5'. That's fine, but these ratings seem inconsistent with the verbiage.

So it seems to me that this was not a thoroughly thought out or objective review and I question their testing methodology at least as it applies to resolution.

Last edited by Ken Ross; 06-19-2014 at 04:39 PM.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #4 of 52 Old 06-19-2014, 05:29 PM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,015
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)
Liked: 108
The 1100 lines of resolution makes no sense, of course, except that they say they used an HD-resolution test chart. That cannot be used to test UHD resolution, so this is crazy. All that can be concluded is that 4K is better than HD, but they have no measure of how much better. This is very misleading, to say the least.
markr041 is offline  
post #5 of 52 Old 06-19-2014, 05:32 PM
Advanced Member
 
hatchback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NJ
Posts: 522
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 53
That's an idiotic review. It suggests that 4k is just a feature and the only question is how cheaply you can get that feature. The review is focused on specifications and features the author doesn't understand, oblivious to and unable to evaluate the only thing that matters - image quality. The AX100 clearly outresolves the GH4 by a wide margin with superior dynamic range and I'm sure it will crush the FZ1000 as well. And only an ignoramus would focus on bit rates without considering the underlying codec. A low bit rate with an efficient codec can easily outperform a high bit rate with an inefficient codec. And the fact is, the AX100 footage at 60Mbps is significantly better than the GH4 footage at any bit rate with any codec.
hatchback is offline  
post #6 of 52 Old 06-20-2014, 12:12 AM
Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 105
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by hatchback View Post
And the fact is, the AX100 footage at 60Mbps is significantly better than the GH4 footage at any bit rate with any codec.
depends on what your filming. Is it a stream of water or lots of leafs blowing in the wind or lets say the crowd at the world cup then no, the lower bitrate will break before the higher.
Mattias Burling is online now  
post #7 of 52 Old 06-20-2014, 01:29 AM
Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 105
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 12
IMO
To me it seems they share my feeling that this generation of 4K is rushed.
Im an early adopter and I always want the latest and greatest but I havent yet bought a 4K camera because they all seem like prototypes to me. They are all so far amazing in their own ways but none so far that really is an instant buy.
When even Sony puts "consumer handycam" in the description for the +$4000 AX1 I feel its time to "sit still in the canoe".

But I of course want a 4k camera to experiment with while I wait for the next gen and for me personally it then becomes a matter of which one does it good enough at the lowest cost.
Therefor Im glad to see the recent pricedrop on the AX100 and that its showing up used but the FZ1000 is still half the cost so its not an easy choise.

(Another option for me is the BM4K if and when they update it to raw, but lets just say I would be suprised if it happened before summer ends )

Last edited by Mattias Burling; 06-20-2014 at 01:33 AM.
Mattias Burling is online now  
post #8 of 52 Old 06-20-2014, 05:13 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,168
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 357 Post(s)
Liked: 543
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post
depends on what your filming. Is it a stream of water or lots of leafs blowing in the wind or lets say the crowd at the world cup then no, the lower bitrate will break before the higher.
It may break before the higher bitrate IF we're talking about the same codec, but the point is it generally won't break, period. I've shot running water from a small waterfall and it held together perfectly. So although what you say is true, in the overwhelming majority of shooting, it means very little.

The point we were trying to make is that you can't compare bitrates for different codecs. Sony's codec is more efficient and thus needs less bits than the Panasonic.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #9 of 52 Old 06-20-2014, 05:19 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,168
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 357 Post(s)
Liked: 543
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post
IMO
To me it seems they share my feeling that this generation of 4K is rushed.
Im an early adopter and I always want the latest and greatest but I havent yet bought a 4K camera because they all seem like prototypes to me. They are all so far amazing in their own ways but none so far that really is an instant buy.
When even Sony puts "consumer handycam" in the description for the +$4000 AX1 I feel its time to "sit still in the canoe".

But I of course want a 4k camera to experiment with while I wait for the next gen and for me personally it then becomes a matter of which one does it good enough at the lowest cost.
Therefor Im glad to see the recent pricedrop on the AX100 and that its showing up used but the FZ1000 is still half the cost so its not an easy choise.

(Another option for me is the BM4K if and when they update it to raw, but lets just say I would be suprised if it happened before summer ends )
Well if you want a 4K camera that was 'rushed', you're on the right track with the BM4K.

Aside from the lack of 60p, there was nothing 'rushed' about the AX100 or the GH4. They were both built on tried and proven platforms. Sony went with a new and more efficient codec that has performed brilliantly.

So I don't think owners of these cameras would agree with your 'rushed' assessment, I certainly don't. However if you don't like 30p, then you should wait.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #10 of 52 Old 06-20-2014, 06:11 AM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,015
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)
Liked: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post
IMO
To me it seems they share my feeling that this generation of 4K is rushed.
Im an early adopter and I always want the latest and greatest but I havent yet bought a 4K camera because they all seem like prototypes to me. They are all so far amazing in their own ways but none so far that really is an instant buy.
When even Sony puts "consumer handycam" in the description for the +$4000 AX1 I feel its time to "sit still in the canoe".

But I of course want a 4k camera to experiment with while I wait for the next gen and for me personally it then becomes a matter of which one does it good enough at the lowest cost.
Therefor Im glad to see the recent pricedrop on the AX100 and that its showing up used but the FZ1000 is still half the cost so its not an easy choise.

(Another option for me is the BM4K if and when they update it to raw, but lets just say I would be suprised if it happened before summer ends )
I think that it should give you pause that that obviously uninformed review tends to support your views .


More importantly, I do not understand what you are saying. There is the Sony 4K PRO handheld camcorder available right now that shoots 4K 60p (Sony PXW-Z100). It came out at about the same time as the AX100. Was it rushed too? If you want 60P and Sony's superb 4K codec then you can purchase the Z100 or the AX1, if you can get over the latter being called 'consumer'. What is missing from these models that a next generation will have? And Sony is showing that it improves things with firmware updates too.
markr041 is offline  
post #11 of 52 Old 06-20-2014, 06:27 AM
Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 105
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
It may break before the higher bitrate IF we're talking about the same codec, but the point is it generally won't break, period. I've shot running water from a small waterfall and it held together perfectly. So although what you say is true, in the overwhelming majority of shooting, it means very little.

The point we were trying to make is that you can't compare bitrates for different codecs. Sony's codec is more efficient and thus needs less bits than the Panasonic.
I think we are saying the same thing but with different words. I still shoot most my stuff at 25mbit and that would break even faster but its not a problem in real life. I was just pointing out a statement that I didnt agree on.
Im sure for 99% of the time it wont break on the AX100 but it sure can under the right/wrong conditions.
In the camera stores review they showed a qick example.
Mattias Burling is online now  
post #12 of 52 Old 06-20-2014, 06:40 AM
Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 105
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
Well if you want a 4K camera that was 'rushed', you're on the right track with the BM4K.

Aside from the lack of 60p, there was nothing 'rushed' about the AX100 or the GH4. They were both built on tried and proven platforms. Sony went with a new and more efficient codec that has performed brilliantly.

So I don't think owners of these cameras would agree with your 'rushed' assessment, I certainly don't. However if you don't like 30p, then you should wait.
60p has nothing to do with it, dont know why people are so obsessed with it to tell you the truth.
30p is not a problem since all the 4K cameras we talked about so far shoot 25p which is what I use.

What I feel is rushed is for starters the price. It costs like a professional camcorder but lacks proper manual controlls and xlr. But then theres the AX1 that has all that and 60p for those of you that value that, paint settings and so on but its lowlight is not worth +$4000 and the general IQ is not exactly $4000 either.

The Rx10 is a great example, that to me is a totally non-rushed camera, it might even be the last great all-in-one 1080p camera to be released. I dont get the same feel for any of the 4K cameras so far.

Its like when one of the first 4K shooting smartphones was announced 9 months ago, the Acer Liquid, who remembers that? But almost a year later the Z2 and others are making their way into the bigger market.

Yes the BM4K has so far been a disaster if you ask me, but I would still like to have one as a C-cam if they get it going because I truly loved my BMCC 2.5k. Didnt use it much since its pretty anoying to work with outside a studio but when I did it sure delivered a imo great IQ

(It seems I must point out that in all my posts so far I have written out clearly that it is what I feel and that it is my opinion so please spare me the "your wrong" speech, Im just giving my point of view as a hobby shooter even if I happen to work with TV professionally as well.)

Last edited by Mattias Burling; 06-20-2014 at 06:49 AM.
Mattias Burling is online now  
post #13 of 52 Old 06-20-2014, 06:43 AM
Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 105
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post
I think that it should give you pause that that obviously uninformed review tends to support your views .


More importantly, I do not understand what you are saying. There is the Sony 4K PRO handheld camcorder available right now that shoots 4K 60p (Sony PXW-Z100). It came out at about the same time as the AX100. Was it rushed too? If you want 60P and Sony's superb 4K codec then you can purchase the Z100 or the AX1, if you can get over the latter being called 'consumer'. What is missing from these models that a next generation will have? And Sony is showing that it improves things with firmware updates too.
I dont want 60p.
Mattias Burling is online now  
post #14 of 52 Old 06-20-2014, 06:54 AM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,015
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)
Liked: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post
I dont want 60p.

So far, your complaint is price (not very interesting) and your assessment that the Sony Pro 4K camcorder's IQ is too low. The latter is based on what exactly? We want informed opinion.


You are getting blowback because you use words like "rushed" and your complaints are not specific (until asked) and appear to be based on little experience, again because you provide no information - maybe you know something, maybe not.


What evidence are you using that gives you pause about IQ, in low or high light, from the Sony Pro 4K cams? The AX100 is amazing at 60Mbps, so how could the Pro video be problematic using higher bitrates, 10-bit, 4:2:2 and intra? Or you just don't want to spend the money?


Seems like your opinions are rushed .
markr041 is offline  
post #15 of 52 Old 06-20-2014, 07:06 AM
Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 105
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post
So far, your complaint is price (not very interesting) and your assessment that the Sony Pro 4K camcorder's IQ is too low. The latter is based on what exactly? We want informed opinion.


You are getting blowback because you use words like "rushed" and your complaints are not specific (until asked) and appear to be based on little experience, again because you provide no information - maybe you know something, maybe not.


What evidence are you using that gives you pause about IQ, in low or high light, from the Sony Pro 4K cams? The AX100 is amazing at 60Mbps, so how could the Pro video be problematic using higher bitrates, 10-bit, 4:2:2 and intra? Or you just don't want to spend the money?


Seems like your opinions are rushed .
That the Sony AX1 +$4000 Consumer Handycams IQ isnt as great as I would expect for the price is based on downloading and examining all the videos so far uploaded to vimeo, watching and reading all the reviews plus talking to people that actually own and use the camera (both pros and amateurs).
It of course isnt as good as trying it myself but its the best me or anybody ells can do that havent got access to the camera (Sony sweden didnt have a review unit).

Now regarding the Z100 its not even on the radar since I could buy an AX100 and a used FS700 with money left for a good lens for the same price. And all that would be much more fun for me to own

Im sorry if you get upset from a non native english speaking person using the word "rushed", didnt know it was a curse word
But in all seriousness, Mark take it easy, Im not criticizing your first born Im just saying what I feel about a camera that I actually have had on preorder, would love to buy and have asked Sony to lend me for review.
Speaking of which is sure taking their sweet time and its the hollydays here now so their promise of "this week" isnt happening.

Last edited by Mattias Burling; 06-20-2014 at 07:20 AM.
Mattias Burling is online now  
post #16 of 52 Old 06-20-2014, 07:23 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,168
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 357 Post(s)
Liked: 543
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post
I think we are saying the same thing but with different words. I still shoot most my stuff at 25mbit and that would break even faster but its not a problem in real life. I was just pointing out a statement that I didnt agree on.
Im sure for 99% of the time it wont break on the AX100 but it sure can under the right/wrong conditions.
In the camera stores review they showed a qick example.
Although I generally enjoy the Camera Store's reviews, their 'sample videos' are among the worst I've ever seen for almost any camera they review. I would not assess any camera, in any format, from their sample videos.

Bottom line? I have yet to have the codec 'break' with anything I've shot. IOW, it's a non-issue. It's more productive to obsess over something other than the codec & bitrate in the AX100.

Last edited by Ken Ross; 06-20-2014 at 07:44 AM.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #17 of 52 Old 06-20-2014, 07:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,015
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)
Liked: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post
That the Sony AX1 +$4000 Consumer Handycams IQ isnt as great as I would expect for the price is based on downloading and examining all the videos so far uploaded to vimeo, watching and reading all the reviews plus talking to people that actually own and use the camera (both pros and amateurs).
It of course isnt as good as trying it myself but its the best me or anybody ells can do that havent got access to the camera (Sony sweden didnt have a review unit).

Now regarding the Z100 its not even on the radar since I could buy an AX100 and a used FS700 with money left for a good lens for the same price. And all that would be much more fun for me to own

Im sorry if you get upset from a non native english speaking person using the word "rushed", didnt know it was a curse word
But in all seriousness, Mark take it easy, Im mot criticizing your first born Im just saying what I feel about a camera that I actually have had on preorder, would love to buy and have asked Sony to lend me for review.
Speaking of which is sure taking their sweet time and its the hollydays here now so their promise of "this week" isnt happening.

Sorry, but what we would like is specifics about the IQ that you found wanting - resolution? dynamic range? color? what? We do not have a problem with criticism, but with judgments without basis or analysis.


There is no reason for anyone to care about your or my qualitative opinions (I did not like X; I like Y), what we want is to learn. Posting videos is one way we learn - we can see what a camera produces. Analysis and new facts are others.


You appear to have great knowledge, but an inability to transmit it (and NOT because of your English prowess).


More specifically, what should we be looking for in the Sony 4K videos (Pro) that you think could be better? I have read all (maybe I missed something) the reviews too, and I did not see any that suggested there was something to be concerned about (except perhaps low-light). Most posted videos from pros are heavily altered in editors, so which videos did you see that raised red flags about what the camera produces? What are those red flags? What improvements would you want to the Pro cameras?
markr041 is offline  
post #18 of 52 Old 06-20-2014, 07:37 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,168
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 357 Post(s)
Liked: 543
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post
60p has nothing to do with it, dont know why people are so obsessed with it to tell you the truth.
30p is not a problem since all the 4K cameras we talked about so far shoot 25p which is what I use.
We can agree on that point, even though if push came to shove, I'd still opt for 60p. But that would result in dramatically increased file sizes with the only thing gained, better handling of rapid motion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post
What I feel is rushed is for starters the price. It costs like a professional camcorder but lacks proper manual controlls and xlr. But then theres the AX1 that has all that and 60p for those of you that value that, paint settings and so on but its lowlight is not worth +$4000 and the general IQ is not exactly $4000 either.
First off it's not nearly priced like a 'professional camcorder'. I suggest you research the true cost of professional camcorders.

Further, it has more manual controls than most prosumer or consumer camcorders. With independent control of shutter speed, iris and gain, it's already ahead of many camcorders. Then you add fully customizable zebra stripes, a 3 stage ND filter (missing on the GH4), manual audio control of the onboard mike, and you further jump ahead of the pack. So what exactly do you think is missing...certainly at this price point? Yes, it does not have XLR inputs, but that's not missed by many in the target audience. You can always add that if you so choose.

As for the price, welcome to the early adopter club. That's the nature of anything that's new, particularly a piece of equipment that's ground-breaking in its class.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post
The Rx10 is a great example, that to me is a totally non-rushed camera, it might even be the last great all-in-one 1080p camera to be released. I dont get the same feel for any of the 4K cameras so far.
Huh? Much of what was the RX10 is the AX100. I really don't think you're looking at this objectively. Excuse me for saying this, but being on AVS for many years and seeing posts like yours for other equipment makes me believe you simply don't want to spend the money and are looking for a rationalization for your decision. It's OK to simply say "I don't want to spend the money at this time". But to come up with so many 'reasons' for doing so, that are simply not valid, is a poor rationale.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post
Yes the BM4K has so far been a disaster if you ask me, but I would still like to have one as a C-cam if they get it going because I truly loved my BMCC 2.5k. Didnt use it much since its pretty anoying to work with outside a studio but when I did it sure delivered a imo great IQ
So on one hand you mention the AX100 as being 'rushed', but yet you'd like to have a BM4K which by your own admission 'has so far been a disaster'. I guess I really don't understand your logic.

Last edited by Ken Ross; 06-20-2014 at 07:41 AM.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #19 of 52 Old 06-20-2014, 07:45 AM
Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 105
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
Although I generally enjoy the Camera Store's reviews, they're 'sample videos' are among the worst I've ever seen for almost any camera they review. I would not assess any camera, in any format, from their sample videos.

Bottom line? I have yet to have the codec 'break' with anything I've shot. IOW, it's a non-issue. It's more productive to obsess over something other than the codec & bitrate in the AX100.
Im of course aware of the fact that they also sell the cameras that they review so they might be a little shall we say "easy" on the critizism but I still enjoy it and they at least go out and use the stuff instead of desk reviews.

If it doesn't break for you thats fantastic, would be fun to test how far one has to push before it does, when/if I get the review unit I will. I have friend that has one and we have been talking about shooting a documentary together this summer so at least then I will get to try it anyway.
Mattias Burling is online now  
post #20 of 52 Old 06-20-2014, 07:49 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,168
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 357 Post(s)
Liked: 543
^ I'm sure we'd all love to see that documentary Mattias, if you can post it.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #21 of 52 Old 06-20-2014, 07:56 AM
Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 105
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post
Sorry, but what we would like is specifics about the IQ that you found wanting - resolution? dynamic range? color? what? We do not have a problem with criticism, but with judgments without basis or analysis.


There is no reason for anyone to care about your or my qualitative opinions (I did not like X; I like Y), what we want is to learn. Posting videos is one way we learn - we can see what a camera produces. Analysis and new facts are others.


You appear to have great knowledge, but an inability to transmit it (and NOT because of your English prowess).


More specifically, what should we be looking for in the Sony 4K videos (Pro) that you think could be better? I have read all (maybe I missed something) the reviews too, and I did not see any that suggested there was something to be concerned about (except perhaps low-light). Most posted videos from pros are heavily altered in editors, so which videos did you see that raised red flags about what the camera produces? What are those red flags? What improvements would you want to the Pro cameras?
Dont know what Pro cameras you speak of, Im talking about the consumer oriented AX100, AX1, GH4 and FZ1000.

About the IQ of the AX1 it is mostly the Lowlight, its simply not enough for me. Im a fan of keeping a dark scene dark since thats the point but I still need to get an exposure. From what I have seen this would be verry difficult with the AX1, which I could live with if it was $2000 not +$4000.

The AX100 seems nice but for the price Im a little bit dissapointed about the audio and some of the external controlls. All of which I can work with but its way of handeling highlights is whats keeping me from getting it before I have tried it.
I know this is something thats beem discussed to death here but at the end of the day its important to me.
Now I have seen some videos that looked straight out fantastic from the AX100, really top notch but I need to try it for myself since there are fewer videos that have wowed me than the opposite.

Here is a video where the guy IMO really gets nice control over the highlights. My german isn't super but it seems like he is still using just the internal NDs which is nice because it has been suggested by some that an additional good quality screw on would be better than the internal in really bright conditions.


Why he GH4 dont wow me is hard to pin point. I owned a GH3 and liked it very much but I guess I have to use a word I try to stay away from, "Mojo". In other words I can't really quantify what it is but I just don't like its IQ better than other cameras such as the BMCC, FS100, A7, AX100, C100 and so on.

FZ1000 is a bit of an outsider, I have only seen the promos and I rarely pay much attention to those, Im waiting on real users to get their hands on it. But it is at least cheap and I have a preorder just in case.

Last edited by Mattias Burling; 06-20-2014 at 08:05 AM.
Mattias Burling is online now  
post #22 of 52 Old 06-20-2014, 08:05 AM
Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 105
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
^ I'm sure we'd all love to see that documentary Mattias, if you can post it.
I sure can, it will most likely be in Swedish but Im trying to plan ahead for an English version. It all depends on the people we interview really, if they are great but only speaks Swedish then thats how it has to be. Luckely swedes tend to be pretty ok at english so I have my hopes up.

Its about "Power Big Meet" which is the worlds biggest gathering of American Classic Cars (roughly 20 000 and growing) and I love the fact that its held in a small town in Sweden.
Whats great is that I moved to the centre of that very town so we can have a "camp" at my place for offloading footage, batteries, food and so on.
The plan is to use an FS100, BMPCC and the AX100.






Last edited by Mattias Burling; 06-20-2014 at 08:27 AM.
Mattias Burling is online now  
post #23 of 52 Old 06-20-2014, 08:22 AM
Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 105
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
We can agree on that point, even though if push came to shove, I'd still opt for 60p. But that would result in dramatically increased file sizes with the only thing gained, better handling of rapid motion.
Agree.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
First off it's not nearly priced like a 'professional camcorder'. I suggest you research the true cost of professional camcorders.
Ken, I have yet to meet a man that has a better knowledge about the prizing of cameras and specially professional cameras than me. 4500 dollars will give you plenty of pro cameras. My FS100 was only 2300 dollars with a bunch of expensive accessories, ad a hyper deck to that and TV will accept my footage.
The 50mbit Broadcast Aproved 4:2:2 shooting XF100 costs less than an AX100 and the XF200 is less than the AX1.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
Further, it has more manual controls than most prosumer or consumer camcorders.
Agree, but me personally, I want more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
As for the price, welcome to the early adopter club. That's the nature of anything that's new, particularly a piece of equipment that's ground-breaking in its class.
Im not talking about the sum it costs, Im talking in relation to other cameras (no not other 4K cameras, other cameras.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
Huh? Much of what was the RX10 is the AX100. I really don't think you're looking at this objectively. Excuse me for saying this, but being on AVS for many years and seeing posts like yours for other equipment makes me believe you simply don't want to spend the money and are looking for a rationalization for your decision. It's OK to simply say "I don't want to spend the money at this time". But to come up with so many 'reasons' for doing so, that are simply not valid, is a poor rationale.
He he, Im seriously thinking of spending 2K on a BM4K that I would use maybe once a month, at best, so Im ready to spend. I think it might be you that try to rationalize my opinion

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
So on one hand you mention the AX100 as being 'rushed', but yet you'd like to have a BM4K which by your own admission 'has so far been a disaster'. I guess I really don't understand your logic.
There doesn't have to be a logic if you ask me This is my hobby stuff, for work I would rent but luckily all my employers so far (almost 15 years) have always provided the gear needed.
But the BM4K would be as I said before a C-cam (or even d-cam) and then its not that important if it has a flaw or a thousand like it currently has. It is a camera to use for the fun of it. Its like with stills. I shoot analog and process it at home in my kitchen. Not very logic when my A7 could outperform all my analog cameras and it would also be faster and cheaper. But its not as fun.
Mattias Burling is online now  
post #24 of 52 Old 06-20-2014, 08:29 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ungermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 3,735
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post
The Rx10 is a great example, that to me is a totally non-rushed camera, it might even be the last great all-in-one 1080p camera to be released. I dont get the same feel for any of the 4K cameras so far.
The RX10 seems to be a great compromise all around, but now when 50+ Mbit/s rates are available on other cameras as well as 4K (although I find 30p very YouTube-oriented) I find the RX10 a hard sell, especially for the money Sony wants for it. I hope Sony will release RX10Mk2 with 50 Mbit/s in HD mode and with 4Kp60 and 4Kp24. Maybe 4:2:2 color. Maybe 10-bit encoding. This would be the ultimate weapon.

What is rushed in my opinion is the FZ1000 - only 30p in 720p and in 4K?

Last edited by Ungermann; 06-20-2014 at 08:31 AM.
Ungermann is online now  
post #25 of 52 Old 06-20-2014, 08:29 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,168
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 357 Post(s)
Liked: 543
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post

About the IQ of the AX1 it is mostly the Lowlight, its simply not enough for me. Im a fan of keeping a dark scene dark since thats the point but I still need to get an exposure. From what I have seen this would be verry difficult with the AX1, which I could live with if it was $2000 not +$4000.
I agree with you in concept. One of the failing of so many video cameras is their tendency to want to ramp up the gain in low light to make a dark scene much brighter than it was. That's what manual control is all about. You can do that with the AX1 just as you can in the AX100. If you leave the camera to shoot in 'auto', you'll get exactly the issue you dislike.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post
The AX100 seems nice but for the price Im a little bit dissapointed about the audio and some of the external controlls.
I'm unclear as to what controls you think are missing on the AX100? Can you be more specific?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post
All of which I can work with but its way of handeling highlights is whats keeping me from getting it before I have tried it.
I know this is something thats beem discussed to death here but at the end of the day its important to me.
Now I have seen some videos that looked straight out fantastic from the AX100, really top notch but I need to try it for myself since there are fewer videos that have wowed me than the opposite.

Here is a video where the guy IMO really gets nice control over the highlights. My german isn't super but it seems like he is still using just the internal NDs which is nice because it has been suggested by some that an additional good quality screw on would be better than the internal in really bright conditions.
Maybe it's me, but I'm not seeing anything spectacular in that video. I think most of us that have used the AX100 can control highlights. If the highlights are the subject of the video, and you're using zebra stripes, you can retain detail. In the video above, I really don't see anything special he did relative to highlights. What I did notice is that his DOF was too shallow in his closeups of one of the subjects. As a result, the subject moved in and out of the focal plane as he moved his head.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post
Why he GH4 dont wow me is hard to pin point. I owned a GH3 and liked it very much but I guess I have to use a word I try to stay away from, "Mojo". In other words I can't really quantify what it is but I just don't like its IQ better than other cameras such as the BMCC, FS100, A7, AX100, C100 and so on.
I can quantify the aspects that make me feel the same way. Although the colors are 'pleasant', I find they're often over-the-top..at least for my tastes. I also notice the lesser resolution and higher noise levels visible to me in the 4K videos. With that said, I suspect if the AX100 didn't exist, I'd be shooting with a GH4.

Last edited by Ken Ross; 06-20-2014 at 08:32 AM.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #26 of 52 Old 06-20-2014, 08:35 AM
Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 105
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ungermann View Post
The RX10 seems to be a great compromise all around, but now when 50+ Mbit/s rates are available on other cameras as well as 4K (although I find 30p very YouTube-oriented) I find the RX10 a hard sell, especially for the money Sony wants for it. I hope Sony will release RX10Mk2 with 50 Mbit/s in HD mode and with 4Kp60 and 4Kp24. This would be the ultimate weapon.

What is rushed in my opinion is the FZ1000 - only 30p in 720p and in 4K?
Agreed, and since the rx100iii got the 50mbit I would be very surprised if the rx20 didn't . And I would guess it also gets 4K.

The FZ1000 shoots 25p in 4K so for me in PAL-land thats ok. 25p is our standard, our 30p if you will and since its only one frame from the "film frame rate" I always stick to 25p. That way I can mix and match all my footage at a later point of time if I like.
I once put a 30p camera (e-m5) in the mix because I loved the IBIS but that only led to hardship down the road.
Better IMO to stick to one system and thats why my suggestion to those in 30p-land that are thinking of importing a PAL versions is to reconsider.
Mattias Burling is online now  
post #27 of 52 Old 06-20-2014, 08:46 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,168
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 357 Post(s)
Liked: 543
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post
Ken, I have yet to meet a man that has a better knowledge about the prizing of cameras and specially professional cameras than me. 4500 dollars will give you plenty of pro cameras. My FS100 was only 2300 dollars with a bunch of expensive accessories, ad a hyper deck to that and TV will accept my footage.
The 50mbit Broadcast Aproved 4:2:2 shooting XF100 costs less than an AX100 and the XF200 is less than the AX1.
The last time I looked, $4,500 was over twice the price of the AX100. As for the specific cameras you mention, I'm sorry, but this discussion revolves around 4K. If the camera can't do 4K, it's simply not comparable. Apples to oranges.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post
Im not talking about the sum it costs, Im talking in relation to other cameras (no not other 4K cameras, other cameras.)
I'm sorry, again, to me that's a silly comparison. 4K is a prime feature and if you're comparing other cameras in terms of price, then they too must have that prime feature. If 4K is that unimportant to you, you could be in the wrong thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post

He he, Im seriously thinking of spending 2K on a BM4K that I would use maybe once a month, at best, so Im ready to spend. I think it might be you that try to rationalize my opinion
I was simply trying to point out the flaw in your thinking. Your main thrust in this entire discussion was that these cameras were 'rushed' to market. That was YOUR point, not mine. So now we've shown you that there is really no basis for that idea in terms of the AX100. You then go on to say you'd really like what most people would consider to be THE most rushed to market camera, the BM4K. This goes beyond a failing in logic, it refutes the entire thrust of your discussion of not wanting cameras that are 'rushed' to market. That's just odd.

Why are we even having this discussion?
Ken Ross is offline  
post #28 of 52 Old 06-20-2014, 08:46 AM
Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 105
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
I agree with you in concept. One of the failing of so many video cameras is their tendency to want to ramp up the gain in low light to make a dark scene much brighter than it was. That's what manual control is all about. You can do that with the AX1 just as you can in the AX100. If you leave the camera to shoot in 'auto', you'll get exactly the issue you dislike.
The AX1 can't get a good exposure in a low light situation, tarts the problem. It will be so much noise that no neat video or denoiser in the world can fix it. I never shoot in anything "auto" so that would never be the case.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
I'm unclear as to what controls you think are missing on the AX100? Can you be more specific?
I would love manual audio wheels, a switch for WB presets and also for gain. Also a physical button/swtich for a couple of presets would be nice. There are of course no end to how any buttons I would like but those are the once I would miss the most.
Not having a separate focus and zoom wheel is ok but if it had two it would be better imo.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
Maybe it's me, but I'm not seeing anything spectacular in that video. I think most of us that have used the AX100 can control highlights. If the highlights are the subject of the video, and you're using zebra stripes, you can retain detail. In the video above, I really don't see anything special he did relative to highlights. What I did notice is that his DOF was too shallow in his closeups of one of the subjects. As a result, the subject moved in and out of the focal plane as he moved his head.
In most videos I have seen the blown out highlights look like cartoon spots in the video. In his video the transition from the blown out white to the pixels with actual color is imo really nice. Same when I shoot with my FS100 and my NEX-5t. Both often needs to blow highlights since they don't have the DR of for example a BMD. But in the FS100 it looked much nicer and they have the same sensor, lens, bitrate and so on. It just handles it better.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
I can quantify the aspects that make me feel the same way. Although the colors are 'pleasant', I find they're often over-the-top..at least for my tastes. I also notice the lesser resolution and higher noise levels visible to me in the 4K videos. With that said, I suspect if the AX100 didn't exist, I'd be shooting with a GH4.
Agree, if the GH4 was the only 4K camera out I would have one on my desk as we speak.
Mattias Burling is online now  
post #29 of 52 Old 06-20-2014, 08:53 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,168
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 357 Post(s)
Liked: 543
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias Burling View Post
I would love manual audio wheels, a switch for WB presets and also for gain. Also a physical button/swtich for a couple of presets would be nice. There are of course no end to how any buttons I would like but those are the once I would miss the most.
Not having a separate focus and zoom wheel is ok but if it had two it would be better imo.
There is a switch for WB presets. There is also one for gain. Additionally, with the utilization of 'my button', you can have the ability to place on the LCD screen, a host of other manual controls including WB, gain, zebras and a multitude of others.

But yes, if you want dedicated buttons for every single function, you'd have a very busy layout. But hey, you can get those on true professional cameras.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #30 of 52 Old 06-20-2014, 08:57 AM
Member
 
Mattias Burling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 105
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
The last time I looked, $4,500 was over twice the price of the AX100. As for the specific cameras you mention, I'm sorry, but this discussion revolves around 4K. If the camera can't do 4K, it's simply not comparable. Apples to oranges.
We where speaking of both the +4500 AX1 and the cheaper AX100 and we where talking about Pro cameras, as in cameras used by pros and very few (almost none) of those shoot 4K. But sure we do not have to discuss it, Im just answering your question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
I'm sorry, again, to me that's a silly comparison. 4K is a prime feature and if you're comparing other cameras in terms of price, then they too must have that prime feature. If 4K is that unimportant to you, you could be in the wrong thread.
Its not unimportant to me, where did you hear that?
But I rather come home with a lot of nice looking 1080p footage than a couple of bad 4K once

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
I was simply trying to point out the flaw in your thinking. That was YOUR point, not mine. So now we've shown you that there is really no basis for that idea in terms of the AX100.
Sorry Ken you lost me, discussion is over. You don't have the right to judge other peoples opinion and say that they are wrong or lacks basis and when you try I feel like Im talking to a brick wall.
Its like the whole "all bad ax100 footage is user error but all my bad GH4 footage was the cameras fault" thing.
Mattias Burling is online now  
Reply Camcorders
Gear in this thread

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