Sony NEX-VG10 OFFICIAL Camcorder Thread - Page 4

Is this camcorder even out yet?

Is the interchangeable lens what the $2K as in +$1K more than the competition all about? Aside from the form factor, how does it differ from say a hacked GH1? An LCD the flips out and swivels? Manual controls? 2,000 hour stock battery?

So what you're trying to say here is that your reviewer beats my reviewer up. Is this the same thing as "my Mommy is Stronger than your Mommy"??



Please show me even ONE other Sony consumer class camcorder with " flexible frame rate selections". Why would you expect anything different here??




Don't you think an indi might be better off with a PRO level cam??


And here I was thinking we were staying at a consumer level classification. My... what ever gave me that idea.


60p is little more than a novelty right now.



dead on in your opinion maybe... I think he's a tad overblown myself.... Front release??? Come on... gimme a break!



Then you are not the average consumer because they don't even know what RAW is.



That is one of the few things you have said I will agree with.

If someone doesn't know what RAW mode is, they shouldn't be buying this camcorder.

If someone doesn't know why they would need something better than 30p, they shouldn't buy this camcorder.

If someone doesn't know why they would want level control for their audio, they shouldn't buy this camcorder.

If someone has no idea what a focus or exposure aid is, they shouldn't buy this camcorder.

This camcorder starts at $2K and goes up as you add lenses to it. Its target is people who understand the above capabilities and demand them in cameras in this price range. Folks who just want to shoot family videos, are better off with much lower cost camcorders.

To be sure, there are people who need interchangeable lenses to get their job done. In that sense, this camera does provide unique capabilities. As long as they know what else they are missing , they are good to go in purchasing it.

The lens is almost the same price as the zoom lens on the GH1 and the GH1 package costs just under $1150.

So you're taking it upon yourself to decide what populous should and should not own this cam??? Don't be silly. That's like saying if you don't know about GPS's then you shouldn't own the Sony XR cams.


And interchangeable lenses is what this cam is all about. Not XLR inputs, front releases and other such nonsense.... I mean that's just plain silly. Let's string it up with a crappy review because it won't fold the laundry while we're at it.

You made a silly argument (people shouldn't care about advanced camcorder features in a high-end and expensive camcorder), and I gave you one in return .

What you considering folding laundry, someone else considers essential. Just yesterday I was using zebra-assist focus on my camcorder that costs nearly one third of this Sony. And as I mentioned, I also shot stills in RAW. So the problem is that you are saying since you don't use advanced features, it shouldn't matter to others. That is neither here nor there. Put the facts out there as Michael did in his review, and let people decide. Don't keep saying this doesn't matter, that doesn't matter.

I value interchangeable lenses a lot. I have tens of thousands of dollars invested in such a system for photography. But I also care about usability of the device. This is an advanced camera with some worts. People like hpmon who fully understand it and are able to work around these things are the right audience to buy it. The wrong person is the one who thinks by paying more for this camcorder, they are getting more of everything. That simply is not the case. They will buy this camera and as they start to learn serious videography, they may start to regret some of these things.

So let the deficiencies speak for themselves rather than arguing they shouldn't matter. They matter to many of us. And we get that it doesn't matter to you .

Well, let's just turn that around a little and say that maybe we shouldn't INVENT deficiencies.

amirm, what are you planning to use this camcorder for? Do you think anybody will see the footage and complain that it wasn't shot natively in 24p, 30p or 60p? Nobody who you show your footage to is going to care. Just buy a friggen camcorder, shoot some good videos and have fun doing it. I think that's what Barney is getting at. The footage is going to look awesome! If it doesn't, the deficiency is with the user - not the camera.

Having the NEX5, I can say that I'm a bit disappointed in its video quality. Although the still picture quality is stunning, the reduced frame rate (30p from the sensor) creates issues with moving subjects and panning. Additionally, there are numerous artifacts with some scenes that a number of NEX5 owners are complaining about.

I just came back from vacation and although I was using the Panasonic TMV700, my wife was using the NEX5. She was using it primarily for stills with occasional videos. Simply put, the TMV700's videos were markedly superior IMO. Sharpness, detail and a lack of artifacts were all aspects of the picture that bested the NEX5. The NEX surpassed the 700 in one obvious area, a shallower DOF. For me that would not be enough to compensate for the other deficiencies. I also own the Panasonic GH1 and have the same motion issues with its 1080p setting and the reduced frame rate at that resolution. However with the GH1 you do have the 720p setting which provides buttery smooth motion @ 720 60p.

In all honesty it's no biggie to me since the NEX5 was bought for its still picture capability and not its video section. But with that said, I was expecting a somewhat better picture with less artifacts.

Seeing that the VG10 will produce essentially the same picture as the NEX5, I personally would have no interest in it. I find it very disappointing that Sony isn't providing a true 1080i (let alone a true 1080p). I just can not tolerate the stuttery look of all these digital cameras that shoot at either 24p or 30p. I find the 30p a bit more tolerable than 24p, but it still is no competition for a true 1080i or 1080p in terms of motion smoothness.

Hmm, I've got many drop-dead gorgeous videos produced with this 'novelty'. I wouldn't call the pinnacle of HD video quality, 1920X1080 60p a 'novelty'...but that's me.

With that said, Sony should have positively, absolutely provided 1080 60i (at the sensor, not 30p in a 60i wrapper) as a bare minimum for those that actually value smooth motion in their videos. Smooth motion in many cases is absolutely impossible with 30p or 24p...and no zebras, what's up with that??? There are so many cameras in this price range and far below, that provide this as well they should.

Not that I am a proponent of low frame rates, but seriously, do you watch videos on YouTube or Vimeo? They are at most 30fps. Do you watch any movies at all? 99.99% of them are 24fps.

What about "National Parks" by Ken Burns? HD panoramas in 24fps indeed look too stuttery when the camera begins to pan. Too much detail, too sharp an image. I don't get the point of shooting docos at 24p, especially if it is an HD camera, not a film camera. In a doco, especially in a nature doco, I want as much realism as I can get.

1080p60 from the "700" looks great though. Like watching through a window. Perhaps too real for some. ;-)

No one ever said you can't watch it and no one ever said it was a bad quality. Please don't put words in my posts that aren't there.

It's a novelty because a consumer can not readily play it back in any standard and universal format/machine. That makes it useless on the open consumer market.


And these vid cams also also provide interchangeable lenses too I suppose.... right!

But the content on movies is staged to cope with the stutter. i.e. slow pans, angle to the content, and other things. Your 2yo isn't going to follow that script. And with the fairly new higher resolution, the stutter is now painfully more obvious. More obvious than car tires that spin the wrong way, and helicopter blades that change the direction that they rotate mid flight (according to the video). Not that 60p will remove that optical effect, but it will alter the timing.

They have upped the frame rate on TVs, so maybe someone will invent a 120i camcorder.

No, thanks, but no. No more interlaced crap.

120p would be inevitable IMO. The only one where 24p, 30p, and 60p all divide evenly into. Still a few years out IMO. Alexa shows promise, but until that is the minimum standard in terms of low light, 120p just isn't possible, except for direct sunlight sporting events. And even then, it'll probably be broadcast in 60i for the next decade or more. Oh well....

And this is why I tend to watch only HD videos on YouTube. I'm by no means a YouTube 'watcher' and only use it if I'm looking for something specific.

As for movies, very very few show the stuttery effect so visible in 24p video. I'm not sure if it's the way they stage their shots, but there's no way the degree of stutter even comes close to that of typical 24p video. If it did, my wife and I would not be going out to the movies almost every week as we do now, instead we'd be grabbing the Tylenol bottle for the headaches the stutter causes!

In terms of 'too sharp', that's surely not an issue with me. As far as I'm concerned, it can't bee 'too sharp'...the sharper the better. To me the whole selling point of HD is detail, detail and then more detail. Otherwise I'd still be watching and shooting with an SD camera. Film is an entirely different matter and I'm never after the 'film look' when shooting video.

First off, where did I ever say you said it provided 'bad quality'...please don't 'put words in my mouth'.

"Useless" is an utterly absurd word to describe the utility of the 700 in the 'open consumer market' (whatever that is) as you describe it. In fact, most casual users of videocameras I know, DO play their videos directly from the camera and few do any kind of editing. So please don't tell the 'open consumer market' what's right for them. They know better than you what's right for them. People that come to AVS are not your typical video consumer and never have been. In fact, most buyers of camcorders don't even know that AVS exists, let alone have any great interest in editing.

As far as interchangeable lens capabilities on a camera like the 700, I for one have no great interest. I bought the pancake lens for my NEX5 and have only used it once...for testing. It was a mistake as I greatly prefer the versatility of the zoom lens. So I for one have absolutely no issue in not being able to swap a lens on a video camera.

In terms of what's missing on the Sony NEX videocamera, the list is long and Sony did not think this through IMO. To offer what is alleged to be a high-end videocamera without essentials like zebra stripes, focus confirmation, audio level controls and other frame rates like 60p or 60i...well, I just don't get it. I knew when I bought the NEX5 it was primarily a still camera that COULD DO video and so I wasn't overly disappointed when I saw the videos. But if I bought a NEX video camera, I would definitely be disappointed in its video capability. Interchangeable lenses only goes so far to cover up some very very basic omissions.

But hey, each to his own. For some the "Sony" name is all they need to know to part with their money. I like some pieces of Sony equipment as evidenced by my purchase of the NEX5 and Sony videocameras over the years, but other pieces of Sony equipment often leave me scratching my head...but that's me.

When is a $2,000 video camera considered a "high end" camera? I thought high end had 1 or 2 extra zeros on the price tag.

In the consumer world, 'high-end' is indeed $2,000. I would not call it prosumer since virtually any prosumer camera such as the Sony Z5, is loaded with features that the NEX omits.

The bottom line is that a $2,000 video camera (interchangeable lens or not) should not be lacking as many features as the NEX does. When a camera like the TMV700, that is selling in the vicinity of $750, has many of these features in addition to 60p, the omissions of the NEX become that much more glaring.

At least that's how I see it.

Wait another 1+ years and see what the streetprice will be on that by then old Sony camera. Remember that the Panasonic was 1550 till recently.

Well 60 FPS is where things start, we need 600, especially with higher spatial resolution to have both clean frames, the associated mtf/contrast, and smooth motion. But try telling that to the no depth of field crowd, who produced nothing but blurry pictures :666: .

That was a while ago that it was $1,500 and even the previous $1190 have been their for a while. Regardless, it's better to compare current prices and the VG10 does look expensive compared to a GH1 and when you include the hack, even worse.

Still, the GH1 isn't shaped like a camcorder like the VG10 which is why I wanted one badly until I read about all the negatives. That's really the biggest benefit that I see and I don't think that should command that much more money than a GH1 and never-mind the fact that the GH1 appears to have more manual controls.

-EDIT-
I almost forgot about the external output of the VG10. That's another benefit over the GH1.

Then you have blinders on. There are threads in this very forum asking how to get 1080p60 onto disk.

It's an entirely new kind of cam.... first one of its type and Sony is well known for high prices at the start. The price will come down.


Again I ask... does the 700 have interchangeable lenses?

You keep comparing apples and oranges here. These 2 cams are built for very different needs. There is no way in the world that you can get a shallow dof on the 700 the way you can on the vg10. Now clearly that's not important to you but that's no reason to discount it from your argument. You don't seem to understand that the people who are looking at cams like the vg10 are those (for the most part) who are actively looking to accomplish such feats (ei; shallow dof) that normal cams like the 700 CAN'T do.

Also, for $750 I would expect a cam that DOES NOT present jitter or fan noise problems.

There sure is a lot of Jealousy in the videoing world

blurry pictures which are a limit of their consumer gear. Very slow shutters to compensate for poor low light sensor abilities. And very low bitrates that don't show ANY details if there's significant movement (i.e. handheld, not 50lbs tripod).

Given that you can get a used XH-A1 for $2K-ish, why waste the money? Wasn't there a $2K 35Mbps camcorder in the past couple of years.

-----

NEX-VG10
=====
# Video Format : AVCHD (MPEG-4 AVC (H.264))
# Video Mode : AVCHD: 1920 x 1080/ 60i (FX/FH); FX- 24Mbps, FH - 17Mbps; 1440x1080/60i HQ -9 Mbps
# Video Resolution : 1920 x 1080 captured @ 30p (29.97p), recorded in AVCHD 60i (59.95i)
# Audio Format : Dolby Digital (AC-3) / MPEG-4 AAC-LC

Aside from the interchangeable lens, and some controls, how does this camcorder differ from it's CHEAPEST models? In terms of recorded content? Same old 30p in 60i and 24Mbps AVCHD.

Um, seems to me I said the typical casual user was not someone who comes to AVS. Of all the people I know, nobody knows about AVS.