Hey we got our hands on a LOT of the new AVC-HD (AVC-CAM Panasonic is calling it) that many are touting as "the" low end HD format and quite frankly other than difficulty in accessing it and challenging computer consumption, we see NO IMPROVEMENT in image quality over HDV. In fact, we have imported HDV into 1920x1080 from a Sony non-square HDV file and it looks astonishingly identical to the AVC-HD that was shot side by side with it. The HDV was shot with a Z7.

Agreed. Panasonic makes it sound like avccam destroys hdv, but thus far I've found to look about the same. Sure there's tapeless, but other than that, looks the same.

It seems like the Z5U is about $800 overpriced. At $4950, Sony has priced the Z5U only $400 less than the Z7U (street price).

Yet the Z7U includes the $940 HVR-MRCK1 and supports interchangeable lenses.

It seems like the Z5U is about $800 overpriced. At $4950, Sony has priced the Z5U only $400 less than the Z7U (street price).

Yet the Z7U includes the $940 HVR-MRCK1 and supports interchangeable lenses.

Yeah it's a confusing move. It seems like sony wants to throw a billion darts at the board and let whatever hits stick.

Could it merely be a tactic to make the Z7 look like a great deal?

Hey guys
I will posting up sample footage of the FX1000 - the latest Nov 6th 2008. I will let you guys be the judge of it - there are some bad footage shot by us (me and another colleague of mine) not because of the camera but of settings. Will it take over their competitor A1? you guys decide...

See you in a bit...

Hey guys
I will posting up sample footage of the FX1000 - the latest Nov 6th 2008. I will let you guys be the judge of it - there are some bad footage shot by us (me and another colleague of mine) not because of the camera but of settings. Will it take over their competitor A1? you guys decide...

See you in a bit...

Are the sony guys going to leave it with you for a couple days? Because I'm gonna be by tomorrow night.

unfortunately no - he had to take it back, we asked him.

Hey guys
I will posting up sample footage of the FX1000 - the latest Nov 6th 2008. I will let you guys be the judge of it - there are some bad footage shot by us (me and another colleague of mine) not because of the camera but of settings. Will it take over their competitor A1? you guys decide...


This is where Canon's marketing job with the 5D trumps anything I've seen out of Sony. Many of us will get our first look at the FX1000 with what is admittedly "some bad footage" whereas the first shots we saw from the 5D were polished professional pieces. Sony could learn a thing or two from this strategy. First impressions are important and having consumers seeing sub standard quality footage from your product isn't the way to generate positive buzz.

I've got a MRC1K. Here's some unboxing photos via picasa:

Picasa Web Albums - Evan - Sony HVR-MRC1... (http://picasaweb.google.ca/ecking/SonyHVRMRC1KUnboxing#)

So the CF card unit came in - nice! Can't wait to use them with my A1 and do some tests and post those up.

Would someone please be kind enough to post a link
that explains the folder structure on a CF card.
I know I have seen it already but cannot recall where.

Or even better: post a file with the folder structure and
maybe some short videos files.

Such everybody can test how ingest works.

Thanks in advance. pe.

It seems like the Z5U is about $800 overpriced. At $4950, Sony has priced the Z5U only $400 less than the Z7U (street price).

Yet the Z7U includes the $940 HVR-MRCK1 and supports interchangeable lenses.OK my personal guess that its streetprice would be priced very close to the Z1U seems to have come true.

The Z5U is stickered at $4,299 on B&H's site right now, PLUS they have a 'Add to cart for a lower price' except you cannot add it to your cart yet as its not in stock until next month. So the price will be lower than US$4,299 when its in stock next month.

Pretty good deal i'd say. Z5's definitely on my shopping list.

anyone knows if the FX1000 will work with the CF card recorder? The housing looks good but I remb reading somewhere there is no internal connection for the FX1000

So then how long till we get a dedicated forum to these cameras. Looks like they will be a hit!

anyone knows if the FX1000 will work with the CF card recorder? The housing looks good but I remb reading somewhere there is no internal connection for the FX1000

Yes it will work using the firewire port. It will not connect directly to the camera like the Z5 though.

Would someone please be kind enough to post a link
that explains the folder structure on a CF card.
I know I have seen it already but cannot recall where.

Or even better: post a file with the folder structure and
maybe some short videos files.

Such everybody can test how ingest works.

Thanks in advance. pe.

There's nothing special to the folder structure at all. It's just 2 folders then the files.
1. Video, 2. HVR, 3. all the recorded m2t files.

The beauty is no need to capture the footage as the video files are ready for transferring to your pc. I'm a PC user don't know the process for MAC

Yes it will work using the firewire port. It will not connect directly to the camera like the Z5 though.

Oh that would be cool. For the price diff, I think it will be worth it to bear with the wire!

Hmm...where's the menu selector on these cameras? The back looks bare

Hmm...where's the menu selector on these cameras? The back looks bare


http://i302.photobucket.com/albums/nn113/Madhawk1/SonyHDR-FX1000005-1.jpg

Ah thanks there it is! Doesn't seem like such a great design to have it there though.

No mention anywhere in the limited specs lists for the Z5 or FX1000 of optical image stabilization with this new lens. That could be a real deal breaker for me, especially with a much longer lens.

Does anyone know for sure if it has one or not?

UPDATE: I found the brochure, this confirms it has Steadyshot

http://ws.sel.sony.com/PIPWebServices/RetrievePublicAsset/StepID/SEL-asset-129380/original/HVR-Z5U_brochure_final10-08.pdf

Hi got the Pal version last Thursday very impressed but noticed that the lens took 3 times longer to de mist on a very cold day than the fx1 in exactly the same conditions

De-mist Roy? You mean coming into a humid atmosphere after being outside in the cold?

Hi Tom
Yes shot a wedding on Saturday freezing cold conditions My operator was using an FX1 and his camera was clear in about 2-3min it took the fx1000 nearly 6-7 min to clear and it was on the inside element may because it was new? but it did the same at the evening reception but ver impresed with the picture quality ps you will need a lcd shade as well as it has the glossy type screen hard to see in bright conditions

Condensation on an inside element - rather worrying I'd think. Worth investigating further maybe. Nothing to do with being new - more to do with ineffective sealing.

I agree entirely with you about these new multi-coated side-screens. The Z7's screen is not a patch on the Z1's out in bright sunlight. Now this is indeed a retrograde step on Sony's part - though they do make a nifty, magnetic catch fold-flat screen as an extra.

tom.

hdv_01 (http://pro.sony.com/bbsccms/assets/files/micro/hdv/flash/hvrtutorial/index.html)

Sony did good job !!

For other info:
Sony | Micro Site - HDV (http://pro.sony.com/bbsc/ssr/micro-hdvsite/)

Personally, we weren't overly impressed in the picture of the Z7 over the much cheaper and better balanced Canon XH-A1. Anyone else care to comment?

I mean for the price of a Z7 I could own an XH-A1 and have 20x Canon lens and enough month left over to may add a few bucks and get another one :o)

Rodger, I am surprised by your comment about the Z7 picture quality because you posted previously: "I also like that HDMI OUT and with the Sony Z7U front end . . wow what a picture. I can assure you that my HVX never gave me this picture. Whew, it will scare you it's so HOT. I guess it's true there just is NO REPLACEMENT for a removable lens." Sounds like you had a change of heart for some reason. Since I have been considering a Z7, what has been disappointing with the image of your Z7?

Rodger, . . . Sounds like you had a change of heart for some reason. Since I have been considering a Z7, what has been disappointing with the image of your Z7?

Yes I did have a change of heart. I shot a totaly of 22 principle videos with the Z7 (lots more non-commercial and tests) but 22 that mattered. While I loved having tape as my medium over the HVX and it's challenging medium AND poor low light performance, the Z7 had 9 of those videos of poor quality. Where the camera stands out a winner and stunning is with outdoors, bright colors, vidid composition. Where it fails is artificial light, low light, quick and dirty run and shoot. Those 9 bad ones way outweight the few good ones. In fact, I am this very moment going to be spending nearly 500 to fix a video (frame by frame) in photoshop wherein the image looked great in the view finder but the recorded video is as poor as the HVX material would have been. In other words, the LCD displays "excellent" video excellently but also "marginal" quality video "excellently" Sure I should have had an external but therein if I had more budget I would have a 1/2" or larger imager camera. In addition, we've heard reports of others experiencing similiar issues and results plus some of the cameras have drum problems.

In the short of it, we since sold the Z7 and as I say picked up a Canon XH-A1 as of yesterday as a replacement for the HD we are doing and I really liked the price drop (finally) to where now for the same price as the Z7 I could just add a few hundred and have two cameras :o)

No displacement to the Sony, I did like that baby I just wished I could have had better performance with it. Here's another way to put it that perhaps reveals my "safety net" with the camera . . when my daughter asked me to tape my grandchildren's materials while I had that camera, I chose to use a DVX100B because I knew without a doubt I would have excellent quality video. And, shooting the DVX in anamorphic 16:9 (not letterbox) will result in an edited video that fills the screen of an HDTV straight out of the box on the DVD (that is without having to do anything special) and look as good as 720 HD (not 1080 obviously)

So for now, we'll wait till the next generation of cameras hit he market and that isn't AVCHD which we tried also and were not pleased with just from a non-back up recording medium plus the power needed to work with it.

Hope that helps :o) BTW, we LOVE HDV . . STILL :o)

I chose to use a DVX100B because I knew without a doubt I would have excellent quality video. And, shooting the DVX in anamorphic 16:9 (not letterbox) will result in an edited video that fills the screen of an HDTV straight out of the box

Well my PAL DVX100B gave results that were indistinguishable on a big 46" HDTV screen whether I used letterbox or anamporphic 16:9, which is why I abandoned it and went for a camera with proper 16:9 chips.

The DVX uses 4:3 chips, period. There's no magic hocum-pokum that will restore the loss of vertical resolution that switching to widescreen entails.

tom.

Rodger, I am really surprised at the poor low light performance you experienced with the Z7. Virtually every reviewer has said it has superior low light performance to the Canon. Spec wise they are 3 lux (Canon) compared to 1 1/2 lux (Z7) according to B & H for example. I can understand seeing great images on the LCD and not on tape. If I find the LCD and the final tape output do not match, I will try to tune (detune?) the LCD to match the tape output. WYSIWYG. I still find it useful to use the viewfinder much of the time. I just feel like I can trust it more.

I chose to use a DVX100B because I knew without a doubt I would have excellent quality video. And, shooting the DVX in anamorphic 16:9 (not letterbox) will result in an edited video that fills the screen of an HDTV straight out of the box on the DVD (that is without having to do anything special) and look as good as 720 HD (not 1080 obviously)

That must be a very special dvx you have there Rodger :) I happen to have a dvx100b and a xh-a1 and if it comes to overal look I like the dvx better because it has much better color straight out of the box but in sharpness? Not really and then we also have to consider the difference in resolution between ntsc and pal.
You can choose the "squeeze" option in the dvx to get anamorphic 16:9 but that doesn't add any resolution whatsoever, it's still a 4:3 camera producing a 16:9 image to be played on a widescreen tv. You will loose vertical resolution.

You also have the anamorphic adapter which produces the highest resolution possible but that's virtually impossible to work with for run and gun because the autofocus will not work correctly and you have to use a focus chart to get it right.

If my output is dvd then there certainly is a visual difference in sharpness when the lenses are wide between the dvx and a1 and you can see the a1 doesn't loose any resolution.
but comparing 720p to standard definition when viewed on a full hd tv, sorry, but there is no comparison, the hd image will blow away the pana anytime, then the difference is hugh.

Now that we have a dedicated Z5 / FX1000 forum, please start a new thread or respond to other existing discussions, as we're finished with this one. Thanks in advance,