Just how significant is the strobe test failure as outlined in the following:

http://techthoughts.org/2008/01/02/sony-pmw-ex1-cmos-fails-strobe-test/

as a potential buyer should this put me off ?

Whereas I am sure that the EX1 will fail many a "strobe test" I think that the test cited in the article was not very thorough. I plan to do one of my own.

That said, if you need a camera that will exhibit none of the "rolling shutter" artifacts at any time, you might want to consider something else.

But on the balance, there is nothing out there that comes close to the EX1 in terms of performance/size/price.

The HVX200 has no such artifacts but pales significantly in every other way in my opinion (except that it's a bit cheaper!).

I have just finished editing my first wedding last weekend with the EX, and I love the footage.

I stopped using my FX 7 for weddings as I couldn't get over the hurdle of the photgrapher's flashes, especially during the bride's preparations, when I use a lot of slow motion.

I found the EX codec to be MUCH better in handling the video distortion with flash guns, with only one or two frames affected, whereas the FX 7 would wreck up to 7 frames when slowed down 50%.

I can live with that, and the beautiful images I got throughout the day and night at a very dark reception just blew me away.

The EX does show noise in dim conditions, but just hit it with some light (sony camera light even with the dimmer almost fully on) and the image was like the old PD 150 days, only better.

Cheers Vaughan

Hi Vaughan,

Happy New Year!!!

Did you filmed wedding in 1920x1080 HQ/35Mb mode?
How You managed emptying of cards on location?
How dark was it actually? Did You used on-camera light or You filmed all event without???

With
Best
Sulev

I'm a bit confused on the image resolution, 1024x576?
Was it possible for you to attach the native frame resolution. These are of course resized. I realize that they might of been resized for the internet, but since they were close to 1.7 MB per image, this must not be the case.

I'm a bit confused on the image resolution, 1024x576?
Was it possible for you to attach the native frame resolution. These are of course resized. I realize that they might of been resized for the internet, but since they were close to 1.7 MB per image, this must not be the case.

Agreed 100%. Vaughan, you're not doing the camera justice by resizing the picture, outputting it at a lower quality, etc. Not to be harsh, but if I was looking to purchase this camera and I thought THAT was what it's going to look like, I wouldn't buy it. The images do not look good, although clear, they appear to have a lot of aliasing.

Could you repost some raw grabs?

Thanks

let's keep this thread focused on the issues brought up by the initial post. the strobe performance is an important question to answer with this camera, and i'm curious to hear relevant user reports. anyone else have any input?

maybe I'm misunderstanding the issue with flash affecting the EX1 footage....

Isn't it very very easy to fix in post??? you just insert a white frame over the flash area... or blow it out with exposure compenstation...
and add in a audio flash sound...

anything wrong with that?

there are workarounds you can use in some situations, but that doesn't make it a non-issue, especially if it's a rapidly recurring flash. notice in the police car footage that the flash illuminates rain drops on the lens- you're not going to be able to correct for that on the dark side of the frame.

That looks like it was shot through a window or windshield. If it was, I can't think of a worse way to demonstrate anything this or any other camera is doing. Or how it can be cleaned up in post.

Well,
you have to decide if it's a deal beaker, because it's there. That's all there is to it.
All of these cameras have shortcomings, and this artifact is one for a "current" CMOS based camera.

If it's occasional flashes, yes you can fix in post, but if it's continuous, you could probably fix it, but it will chew up some time.

I was happy to see the EX1 under the strobe effect with my moving head lights do not have obvious partial exposures. In fact it looks great.
Why? I'm not sure, probably due to the mechanical shutter on these type of fixtures.

I had a look to some footages I took in Notre Dame de Paris, France. While flashes are not allowed inside, people seems to have nothing to care about. I have many shoot with flash.
Looking closer to my footage, I noticed that two of them made a "partial exposure".

Seems I can't upload the files. Here are the URLs :

http://www.lecentre.net/video/stills/partial-exposure1.png
http://www.lecentre.net/video/stills/partial-exposure2.png

While you clearly see this, it only involves 2 consecutive frames and you won't notice it in a normal playback.

FYI, the shot was 1080@25p, shutter off (1/25) wide open (no gain I think).

So is this a CMOS problem or could it be from the GOP? If the GOP is basically using information from other frames in the GOP, it seems like the camera could just be confused...

It's a CMOS problem. Just about every CMOS video camera suffers from it to a greater or lesser degree.

Alister:

Have you or anyone else used a Sony PMW-350 for aerials from a chopper? I don't want to go up in a chopper on a client's dime with a camera that will be problematic with the rolling shutter effect....I'll rent a 2/3" CCD camera if I have to....but is this necessary?

Thanks.

Patrick McLoad

I too have experienced half frame flashes, to get straight to the point I am not sure what all the fuss is about. Full frame flash or half frame flash on your footage etc. it all looks bad. It's just one of those facts of life we have to accept. I have never had a client complain about a partial flash frame and I very much doubt if anyone else has, unless of course it is during an expensive production involving actors and a hired location.

I know it is annoying, but then if you are doing a wedding then you should point out to the bride and groom before the event that flashes could affect some of the frames, then it is their responsibility to ask guests not to use flash. However, the paparazzi effect of lots of flashes going off, often adds to the buzz of a successful wedding coverage.

Happy New Year to you all

Patrick I did this Helicopter shoot in Vegas last year. I did not have any issues with my EX1...I am also doing a shoot of the downtown area in Houston soon.
YouTube - Bellagio fountains and Vegas Helicopter Video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSxdJfGFgW4)

I have not used the 350 in a chopper but I have used EX1's and 3's in choppers and planes and provided you isolate the camera from direct vibration (ie camera not touching airframe) I have found them to be fine.

I've been using EX's for 3 years and rolling shutter has never caused a problem so bad that I can't use the footage. With care even thunderstorms and lightning can be shot successfully by using 25/24P an either no shutter or a 2 frame shutter. Sure I wish I didn't have to do that but all the other EX benefits over my previous small cameras outweigh the down side of the rolling cmos shutter.

The post that inspired this doubt was somewhat clumsy in the way it 'tested' the camera. It says
If you take white strobes firing at precise, regular intervals, and shoot it with a camera recording video frames at precise intervals, then you should have a regular pattern of flashes, not a seemingly random series of flashes
The camera is shooting at precise intervals, but the strobe from a police zenon flash unit? There's no timing at all to speak of - it charges through a capacitor/resistor and fires - you don't get any timing accuracy whatsoever? Why would it need to be synced to a common reference? That's why when you see multiple strobes all working together the pattern constantly shifts. Or have I totally misunderstood the complaint in the report?

The complaint is a nonsense --- the strobe was not synchronised with the camera frame rate and often the shutter would have been closed when the strobe fired. If it had been synchronised with the camera then it would have been possible to arrange all flashes to fire when the shutter was closed, so then you would see no flashes at all.

Thank you Alister, that makes me feel abit better. Aerials are hard enough to pull off without worrying about shutter artifact.

My usual mode of camera work is with the sliding door tied back with me sitting on the floor with legs out the chopper, camera on my shoulder. I rarely have the luxury of using a Tyler mount. I recall using an expensive-to-rent image stabilizing lens many years ago, but it seemed to be a pain-in-the *** to use. Seems that without full axis gyro stabilization, you're simply at the mercy of the pilot and the winds. Some days diamonds, other days coal.

Thanks.

Patrick McLoad

Thanks Brian, that looked good with no apparent shutter problems.

Patrick McLoad

You might want to consider hiring a pair of kenyon gyros. They can work minor miracles. Hope you have a proper dispatchers harness.

Thanks, will look into them. We have a motion-picture supply / rental outfit here in Houston called Texcam, and they can probably rig up a set for me. I had heard of these but had forgotten.

Yes, of course, the chopper crew wouldn't let me off the ground without ALL safety harnesses in place and of the right type. I personally own 4 full-body harnesses and shock absorbing lanyards.
I also tie-off the camera.

Thank you.