Sony FDR-AX100

[Ron Evans]

As an example Ken for one of my 32G XQD cards formatted in exFat the usable space is 29.8G. Similar record times are quoted in my FDR-AX1 manual and I can confirm they are about correct from my recording. Subject matter does effect the recording so they will not always be the same. My FDR-AX1 in its present form does not take stills or have metadata both these require other directories to be created on format and thus allocate more space. With this in mind I think the data rates will be about what is quoted. For AVCHD at 60P the quoted data rate is 28Mbps but the average is in fact closer to 24Mbps.

Ron Evans

[Adriano Moroni]

Hello, do you know when will Handycam Sony FDR-AX100 go out? It is a 4K. When will it posible to get it?
Thanks

[Cliff Totten]

The rolling shutter on the AX100 seems to be relatively heavy. I'm used to dealing with the EX1r and FS100 but this seems to be a good deal more Jell-O than those guys.

I also own an RX10. Now,..this camera does not have the same skew problem that the RX100 seems to have. (It's of course there, but better controlled)

But why? Many believe that the RX10 and the AX100 share the same sensor and Bionz-X processor. Both are reading the same surface area and the same pixel count. (But the RX10 uses a pixel binning scale-down for HD and the AX100 uses different math for 4k)

So if the AX100 rolls this much,...why doesn't the RX10 also display similar artifacts?

Could this artifact be "intentional" to allow some "separation" between the AX100 and other Sony 4k cameras to be announced soon? Let's not kid ourselves. This camera NEEDS to have "limitations" that persuade higher customers to buy Sony's higher 4K cameras....it's downright vital.

The AX100 needs to be a good camera.....but not "too good" for just $2,000.

The lower market cameras have a lower profit margin than the upper models. We as consumers hate this talk but it IS a business consideration in the design stage of any camera today. Sony is already giving us allot for a little money. Giving us more would probably be crazy cannibalism on Sony's part. You can be certain that Sony has MANY other new 4K camera designs in the works right now.

CT

[Ozzy Alvarez]

Originally Posted by Cliff Totten

The rolling shutter on the AX100 seems to be relatively heavy. I'm used to dealing with the EX1r and FS100 but this seems to be a good deal more Jell-O than those guys.

I also own an RX10. Now,..this camera does not have the same skew problem that the RX100 seems to have. (It's of course there, but better controlled)

But why? Many believe that the RX10 and the AX100 share the same sensor and Bionz-X processor. Both are reading the same surface area and the same pixel count. (But the RX10 uses a pixel binning scale-down for HD and the AX100 uses different math for 4k)

So if the AX100 rolls this much,...why doesn't the RX10 also display similar artifacts?

Could this artifact be "intentional" to allow some "separation" between the AX100 and other Sony 4k cameras to be announced soon? Let's not kid ourselves. This camera NEEDS to have "limitations" that persuade higher customers to buy Sony's higher 4K cameras....it's downright vital.

The AX100 needs to be a good camera.....but not "too good" for just $2,000.

The lower market cameras have a lower profit margin than the upper models. We as consumers hate this talk but it IS a business consideration in the design stage of any camera today. Sony is already giving us allot for a little money. Giving us more would probably be crazy cannibalism on Sony's part. You can be certain that Sony has MANY other new 4K camera designs in the works right now.

CT

I've been saying that we haven't seen Sony's Pro division have a hand in this yet. So far, FS700 upgrade excluded and the expensive high end Cine Alta cams, we haven't seen an affordable 4K Sony cam from their pro division. The only semi-affordable cams have come from Sony's consumer Handycam line like the AX1 and now the AX100. I've been saying that at NAB, I expect to see Sony reveal some 4K alternatives for their NXCAM and XDCAM line of camcorders. NAB is only a month away, so, we'll see.

[Ken Ross]

Originally Posted by Cliff Totten

The rolling shutter on the AX100 seems to be relatively heavy. I'm used to dealing with the EX1r and FS100 but this seems to be a good deal more Jell-O than those guys.

I'd agree Cliff, relatively heavy, but I still believe easily avoided. Now of course if your work does involve whip pans or something akin to it, you may have an issue. But for those of us that don't, I don't think this is too serious an issue.

I've had Canons with bad jello and with the kind of shooting I've done, I've had no significant issues. I've seen a few videos now from the AX100 and the only time I've noticed rolling shutter issues was at the very end of this last clip we're discussing.

Time will tell though, but I'm not overly concerned about it. In fact, as I stated before, I'm more concerned about the OIS than anything.

[Ken Ross]

Originally Posted by Ron Evans

As an example Ken for one of my 32G XQD cards formatted in exFat the usable space is 29.8G. Similar record times are quoted in my FDR-AX1 manual and I can confirm they are about correct from my recording. Subject matter does effect the recording so they will not always be the same. My FDR-AX1 in its present form does not take stills or have metadata both these require other directories to be created on format and thus allocate more space. With this in mind I think the data rates will be about what is quoted. For AVCHD at 60P the quoted data rate is 28Mbps but the average is in fact closer to 24Mbps.

Ron Evans

So Ron, would you think the XAVC bitrate is dynamic in nature on the AX100? Is this something you've observed on the AX1? I think it's true for most cameras I've used. Complex scenes see a jump in bitrate as opposed to scenes where little changes and detail is modest.

[Dave Blackhurst]

Originally Posted by Adriano Moroni

Hello, do you know when will Handycam Sony FDR-AX100 go out? It is a 4K. When will it posible to get it?
Thanks

Most seem to be quoting mid March (seen Japan seller quote the 14th). So it shouldn't be too much longer!


I suspect we will see 4K/UHD is going to come a lot faster than any of us would expect - and cameras (and phones, and tablets, and phablets) will be coming from every direction... and at every price point possible...

For the moment, breaking the $2k price point for a standalone video camera is probably just an opening shot. over the next year, there will be plenty more fireworks...

[Adriano Moroni]

Out of curiosity: in general with a 4k camera if I like to get a good HD file, is it better to rec in XAVC and to convert it into HD files or directly to rec in HD? In other words what are the differences of image quality (video) between a HD converted file and a HD file (with same camera)? Thanks

[Rodman Bourne]

The instruction manual shows a recording format of XAVC-4k 3840X2160 bit rate of 60 MBPS

[Ken Ross]

Originally Posted by Adriano Moroni

Out of curiosity: in general with a 4k camera if I like to get a good HD file, is it better to rec in XAVC and to convert it into HD files or directly to rec in HD? In other words what are the differences of image quality (video) between a HD converted file and a HD file (with same camera)? Thanks

You'll get a sharper, more resolute HD image by starting in 4K. Further, and perhaps more importantly, you'll have an archived 4K file for when you eventually watch it in 4K...and that time will come.

[Doug Tessler]

I see the camera does not have XLR inputs for mic so I guess a beach tech adapter will work ?

Doug

[Ron Evans]

Originally Posted by Ken Ross

So Ron, would you think the XAVC bitrate is dynamic in nature on the AX100? Is this something you've observed on the AX1? I think it's true for most cameras I've used. Complex scenes see a jump in bitrate as opposed to scenes where little changes and detail is modest.

Yes, XAVC-S is a long GOP H264 codec so is really a "better " version of VBR AVCHD. As to difference between shooting in 1920x1080 or 3840x2160 in the few tests I have done shooting in 3840x2160 and downconverting gives a better image than shooting in 1920x1080 on my FDR-AX1.

Ron Evans

[Ron Evans]

Just to clarify. The FDR-AX100 uses XAVC-S as does the FDR-AX1 which is a long GOP, 4:2:0 8 bit codec. The PXW-Z100 ( more pro version of the FDR-AX1) uses XAVC 10bit 4:2:2 codec like the F5/F55 cameras. XAVC on the PXW-Z100 is currently an intra frame codec( each frame is individually encoded) whereas the XAVC-S is longGOP inter frame codec. Data rates of course are then very different. the FDR-AX1 at 60P is 150Mbps but the PXW-Z100 at 60P is 600Mbps and will consume a 64G card in about 10mins !! Hence the reason I got the FDR-AX1 !!!

Ron Evans

[Ken Ross]

Man oh man, 64gigs in 10 minutes. That's just really painful!

[Joey Atilano]

I just read a comment on Vimeo from the guy made who shot the cat video and he said it was all handheld. That is pretty impressive for the OS.

Man , where are the in hand reviews? The GH4 has a bunch all ready, come on Sony!