surprise

http://www.sonystyle.ca/commerce/servlet/ProductDetailDisplay?storeId=10001&catalogId=10001&langId=-1&productId=1000282

Thanks for posting Neil. There are already several posts on this topic. Here (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=31489) is one for your reading enjoyment.

Just wanted to post my thoughts about this . . .

MPEG2 is a much more efficient (i.e., quality per Mb) compression than DV and its cousins (DVCPro50, DVCPro HD, HDCAM, etc.).

For example, MPEG2 at 8Mbps looks just as good as DV at 25Mbps.

DV wasn't chosen because it was necessarily the most efficient compression method, it was chosen because it was a very efficient in editing. That was of primary importance when computers had not even broken the 1GHZ barrier yet.

I don't think many people will argue that point.

Having said that, wouldn't it make sense that if HDCAM looks great at 100 Mbps, that HDV at 25 Mbps should be pretty dang close?

Just remember when comparing bitrates between formats you aren't necessarily comparing apples to apples.

Ben

Comparing codecs, especially bit rates of MPEG2 based ones is very, very tricky. DVD's are usually encoded with 2 pass VBR with a 15 frame GOP, and even then, you'll see artifacts. I don't see the full DVD MPEG bandwidth as being transparent to the source.

HDV is using a 6 frame GOP, so it won't be as efficient as the MPEG2 used for DVDs, but it's also a higher bit rate, and also a higher image resolution, which probably means it will get greater efficiency.

Also, hollywood movie DVDs are often encoded as 24p progressive, which again, is going to give you more efficiency over encoding 30p or 60i.

So not only can you not compare apples to oranges, but you can't even compare types of oranges easily.

The proof, they say, is in the pudding, which means getting an FX-1 in your hands and seeing what the image looks like and moves like, and if there are issues, what can be done to get around them, just as we learned to get around the issues with DV.

Graeme

Any info re FX1 RGB output

what format & bandwidth?

please anything you find out post here

in regular DV mode which cam do you guys think will come out on top. I think dvx will because its progressive scan. I would like to see test shots of the 2 cameras take of the same things so we can compare them.

That's probably a debate best left to when the camera comes out. Specs say a lot, but the visual says much more.

heath

I thought it was like $3,700????

http://www.sonystyle.ca/commerce/servlet/ProductDetailDisplay?storeId=10001&catalogId=10001&langId=-1&productId=1000282

Since that site is in Canada I presume those are CANADIAN
dollars, not US. So that should be around $4125 US.

Difference is probably in tax and import and such.

Question-
I'm using FCP 4.0...
would I be able to use Lumier to import the Sony HDV cam footage to edit on my mac?
It sounded like Sony is using a different codec.

Thanks,

Jeff P

How many pixels will the DV part of this camera have? Also, do you think it will be better than the DVX. I have the DVX100 and i think it is the most AMAZING picture.

Anyone know if this simulated 24P mode can be use in SD mode?

Not yet on my front.

hwm

Sony Japan site mentions that the LSI is programmed in the C language.

I wonder whether there will be downstream 3rd Party support for this camera such as improved encoding and other goodies and even updates?

could this be the birth of a camera with open architecture?

Here's a few links I found about the FX1.

Interesting photos and videos:

http://homepage.mac.com/homp/santen/iMovieTheater4.html

http://members.stvnet.home.ne.jp/xtw/index.html

http://www.geocities.jp/gyvsvx/HDRFX1.html

http://ascii24.com/news/i/hard/article/2004/09/09/651470-000.html

Very good link hunting Frederic . Post more if you find others. Thanks!

Aloha,

I am a little confused. Does the FX1 or the Pro version have a 25p or 30p mode? I know there is no true progressive mode on these camera, so is it PsF or something else or do we have to wait to know?

Thanks,
Dusty

It's not progressive so it's not 25p. It's 25fps (frames per second). The difference is that there'll be a loss of vertical resolution compared to a true progressive frame rate.

Hi Guys

Today i talked with a Guy from Sony in Berlin.
He told me that the professional version will arrive in january.

The consumer version will be in shops in december 2004.

I asked him for a demo cam.
Just for a few days.
He said, I should call him again in december.

Hope i get one for a weekend and then i will shoot my
next short movie on HDV.

The demand for this cam is sooo big here, he told me.
EVERYBODY wants to test this cam.
So they don´t where were to begin at sony.
They don´t have enough cams for demo or test events.

So let´s see how the picture quality REALLY is.
Hope, i can tell you in 2 months....


Greetings from Steffen

You might want to check this out...names are a little weird? Anyone know if this is for non-USA countries?

HDR-FX1(JE) & HDR-FX1E(JE) - ?
http://www.ecat.sony.co.jp/tourist/videocamera/cate01.cfm?B2=85&B3=386&LG=1

Murph

Hey guys. My college is considering buying this new Sony cam. However, I do A LOT of visual effects. Since I do not have access to this camera, I was wondering if someone could do me a small favor.

When one of you guys get your hands on this camera, I was wondering if someone could shoot a blue/greescreen setup for me to test the ability to key the footage.

I am in college studying to be a visual effects compositor, so I wanted to try it out.

Thanks.

JE is probably tourist model?

Check it out here. (http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/eCS/Store/en/-/USD/SY_DisplayProductInformation-Start?ProductSKU=HDRFX1&Dept=dcc_DICamcorders&CategoryName=dcc_DICamcorders_HighDefinitionVideo)

I put one in my cart just to see when they were shipping and I got this...

Shipping date not available. We will notify you by email when this product has shipped.

Troy

I'll have to check with our sponsors and find out who will have it and when.

As I've said before, Sony's biggest problem with this camera will be... meeting the demand for it.

What kills me about this is, why are these demos not being held in good numbers in the States. ( In Portugal? ) , Here in LA we can't even get to touch it and it's the buzz around town. Uuuhhh!

Link to the review:
http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/lofiversion/index.php?t2782.html

Edited by Rob Lohman

Aloha,

Can the HDR-FX1 output SD while shooting HD? Can I use my SD LCD on my steady system for framing with this camera?

DUSTIN:
You have the option to view it letterboxed or squeezed on your regular SD monitor.
-EDWIN

Suitable spring is number "2".

I'm also testing Manfrotto head and 503 works beautifully. The new 700RC2 was going to be great since it is the lightest video head, but it won't match the weight of HDR-FX1. Too bad!

There are so many test chart clips i have not even looked at them. There are res charts, color chart etc. Shot under all conditions.

Here are the links, There are three pages of links:

http://www.sonyhdvinfo.com/showthread.php?t=384

Now when will someone start filming medium to close-ups of people. Go to a public square and film people talking to one another etc, interaction. Tripod footage preferred...

They released the news and Sony will be updating the software to support HDV in late November.

Sony HiVision de Vaio Page (http://www.vaio.sony.co.jp/Products/Solution/Hd/Edit)

They will have the update on the capturing software, DVgate and components to make the pre-installed Premiere Pro 1.5.

Just for the information. I'm not inclined with Vaio much.

Thank you Kaku

Its rewarding to know my S16 notebook will capture a HDV stream soon.

If I buy an HDR or (more likely) HVR camera, then editing is going to become very demanding, and I know I'll need to upgrade. But to what?

I'm sure I'm not the only one here in this position.

I'll need a new motherboard - the old Abit BL7 with DIMM memory will have to go. But will I also need a new graphics card? Or just a separate video capture card? Or will a firewire port do the job of capturing?

In my current machine I have a 2.4 Gig Pentium4, a Matrox P750 running two SVGA and one PAL monitor, three WD Caviar Hard Drives - two running in RAID 0, and various peripherals. I don't video capture (yet) since that's brought in on DVD.

I use Premiere 1.5, and am starting to toy with Vegas. What else will I have to buy? Cineform? And....?

Many thanks

Karel


(BTW I've done a search, but didn't find anything in the rest of the HDR forum with PC in the title - and the demands of HDR are higher than, say, DVCAM so there's no point in looking in there. Anyway this kind of info changes so fast that it's worth hearing any recent points of view)

Just read this interesting thread PC requirements for editing? (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=30739) here in DVi.

So maybe I don't need to worry too much? Just upgrade my motherboard and RAM for now? (But to what?)

It seems that one way of working is by using something called proxy files (a bit like offline editing?). If I understand it correctly, I'd create low-res copies and edit with those, then when I'm finished replace these with the original hi-res files, and render from there.

And this file substitution is all automated?

Can anyone able to tell me more about how to do this in Premiere?

hey guys,
downloaded some m2t files and wanted to look at them on my TV. How do I convert these m2t files to a format that I can burn a DVD with? I use FCP HD and IDVD. If these two can't do it, tell me how I can. I won't be viewing them on a HD TV, just SD TV, but I want to see what it looks like compared to the XL2. Thanks,
Josh

Have you tried importing the m2t files into FCP? You might need
to rename them to MPG. If that doesn't work I'm not sure what
could read those files on a Mac. Sorry.

Can be found here (http://www.speakeasy.org/~robertg1234/hdv/elect-reporter.wmv) and here (http://www.speakeasy.org/~robertg1234/hdv/nightshot.wmv)

Troy

you may need a canopus login to see this but i thought some might find it interesting

http://forum.canopus.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=222400

Hey, I know this probably isn't too important, but I just needed to express my feelings when I saw the FX-1 for the first time.

Ok, last night I went out on the town with my parents who are visiting. My brother and I decided to take them to see the newly added Forum Shops section of Ceasar's Palace and what do I see they've added? A Sony Style store. YES!!!! So I go in and look at their camera section and I of course see the VX2100, but no PD170's in sight (they never have those at the stores =P why?) and sitting right next to it is this BEAST of a camera! I look at it and realize immediately that it is, of course, the FX-1. Holy shite it's a BIG camera! I couldn't believe that it is like twice the size of the VX2100 (which I thought was a pretty big camera to begin with, really long). But this is good for me because I've got big hands and I've never liked those teeny-tiny little buttons on cameras nowadays anyway. But for everybody else, this is a WHOPPER of a camera, especially for one that is supposed to be "handheld." But, of course, the Sony sales guy was too busy helping people with some little $150 Cybershot camera and the dude looking at the $3k videocamera wasn't as important =P. So I have no idea how this camera's footage looks first hand, but I can always make another visit. Can't wait to see the HVR-Z1 when it comes out, I wonder, will it be bigger?

<<<-- Originally posted by Jack Felis : So I go in and look at their camera section and I of course see the VX2100, but no PD170's in sight (they never have those at the stores =P why?) -->>>

The PD-170 and PDX-10 are part of Sony's broadcast/professional line while the VX-2100 and FX-1 are from the Consumer division. The website for the pro cameras is here (http://bssc.sel.sony.com/Professional/webapp/SubCategory?m=0&p=2&sp=11&sm=0&s=&cpos=).

Just gotten a FX1 for review for 24 hours before Sony needs it back. These are my notes in no particular order - hope that they are of some help.

Out of the box.

No sw what so ever in the box.

Found a Cleaning tape?! in the box – nice but a HDV certified tape might be a better idea.

Special component out cable


First use: .

Keeps fumbling for the LCD-screen on left side of the camera – bur LCD is very very clear and bright.

There is a control for switching between zoom- ring and the normal zoom rockers. Not instinctive.

Feel is very PD-170-ish. No - strike that, more like the DV300 that JVC never could make

Set up – well we got skin tone, details, color, ae-shift, but no knee, color-matrix or gamma-controls. Xl2 and DVX100 wins hands down in picture control.

Picture has normal cold Sony-look. PD-170'ish

Audio – very hidden control, needs external solution for any serious audio work.

Not as sensitive as Xl2 ( or PD170)

Nice ND-filters

Snappy autofocus.

Can have peaking or Zebra, but not both at the same time.

Some new controls – 3 levels of steadyshot, white balance sentivity. Cinegamma (one level only)

Nice wheel for menu selections.

Important - Can downsample HDV to DV on playback, so always shoot HDV. Use camera to downsampe and edit in DV. When HDV software is ready – just capture again.

Can mix HDV and DV shots on tape

No headphone level control.


Closer look.

The picture presets and shot transitions are very nice. A programmers camera. No memorystick to save settings on – bummer!

Nice wide lens. Slight flare in contrast situations.

Shot transitions are really nice – duration 2 sec to 15 sec, so no instant Kurosava here.

Nice balance and handling.

Not too good for impressing chicks – XL2 far better.

FANTASTIC picture on a HD monitor using component out. WOW! interlaced artifacts seems less intrusive than SD. Many many details. Have to be much more focused on getting everything right. Just like 16 mm.

First conclusion

Due to the limited amount of picture control it is not an obvious choice for filmmakers. XL2 has less noise and a more 3D-ish look and far better picture controls. But if you want fast, fantastic detailed pictures – go for FX1. Good camera for the fast productions with limited setup time. For those with specific looks on their mind a XL2 might be better.
But this is a classic just like VX1000, and it might be just as revolutionary as this.

If anyone coming to InterBEE in Tokyo, please feel free to stop by and say hello to me at HONJO booth. I'm asked to demonstrate their Reflecmedia, so we are taking our Final Cut Pro HD with PowerBook G4 17inch, Sony HDR-FX1 and Lumiere HD to show hot it works.

Took a long lunch break today from work and went down to seee the new FX-1 at Showcase Photo in ATlanta.
BEEFY!
Very slick, nice button config's. Didn't have time to do a shoot-out comparison between all the cameras hey have. Fondled the DVX-100A, XL2, JVC HD cam, and the Sony FX-1. If size matters (dont go there), the Sony is impressive in that aspect alone. It will go on rental soon I'm told. I might have to cough up the rental rate to see what can be done in the field with this thing. Reports I hear from users here are exciting.

http://www.showcaseinc.com/site/

Jeff Patnaude

Is the XL2 avaliable for rental from Showcase?

Brush up on your French with some light reading: FX1 review by Michel Rempenaux and Sébastien Gaillard:

http://www.repaire.net/site/tournage/hdv_sony/

Hi Chris

Yes an excellent site and vibrant forum... for those who read French.

also some really neat tutorials for Premiere Pro animated in WMV.

The hands on review gives good feedback on the new camera..

Regards

Gareth

So does anyone know what are the models that will be released, the price difference between then and what are the actual functional differences?

I'm working on another chart to cover this. Should have it ready over the weekend.

A lot of stuff that appears to be logical (HD will require 'better' converter lenses than SD) doesn't become the truth simply because it's been written down. 'Show me, and I shall see' is not even a valid argument as many magicians have proved.

Zoom-through converters are made for those people where convienience rates more highly that picture quality, and there's no
getting away from that. There are good solid arguments for leaving a w/a converter on the Sony PD/VX at all times, and Panasonic (with their DVX100A) have recognised this and responded to the market forces. Sony have admitted their choice of focal lengths was wrong on the VX/PD and the new FX1 follows the Panasonic lead.

Take the case of a single element wide-angle converter. They're made by countless manufacturers - Red Eye, Century, Raynox, Kenko, Schneider and so on. In its simplest form this is just a negative element (the reverse of a {positive} close-up lens). This bends the light that's about to enter the front element of the camcorder's zoom lens. This is all it does, and apart from making the lens surfaces uneven or having the two concave surfaces
miss-centred from one face to the other, there's little that can be changed to make the element perform better for hi-def applications.

The multi-element zoom-through variety come into the same category. But build tolerances and inspection weigh heavily in
the argument, yet the lens is doing exactly the same job as the single element converter. If they produce soft images on SD (as my Cavision 0.5x did) then this would simply be more obvious on HD pictures. Sharp, beautifully made optics like the Century 0.65x I tested should do just as well on HD footage. It's just bending the light before the zoom gets hold of it. The more you bend it, the greater the opportunity to distort (blur) it.

The camcorders fixed zoom lens does all the work and you can hold up anything in front of it. Double-glazed and tinted bus
windows, underwater housings, electrically heated car windscreens, multiple, stacked filters and misty mornings.

tom.

HD doesn't need better lenses due to its increased resolution or anything like that. However, what you get (with any camera system) by using higher quality glass is just that -- higher quality glass.

Cheaper glass can lead to color fringing, haze, image distortion, etc.. Going from SD to HD resolution with the same quality of glass is essentially going to give the same results between the two formats. If you have a mediocre lens that gives purple fringes on highlights in SD, you will have them in HD as well.

To some extent, HD may show the flaws in your glass a bit more than SD will simply due to the increased detail available to the format, but it can work the other way too. The increased resolution of HD can create more variation within the details captured through a lens so it could help to smooth out undesired lense effects or tone them down a bit. I guess the differences between DV and HD are about like film vs. DV, but not necessarily as extreme -- as HD still only provides about 1/4 of the detail available with a quality 35mm film system and HD still relies on much of the same tech as DV. New superHD or digital film cameras that shoot at resolutions higher than HD close that gap, but that's a different matter.

What it all comes down to is higher quality lenses are available for higher quality camera systems. Sony chose a certain grade of lens for the FX1/Z1 as it fit within the price and quality parameters for this level of camera.

When you start looking at add-on converter lenses like the wide angle and teleconverters - zoom-through or not, you're adding another set of variables into this equation. As you said, some may produce a soft image and others a sharper image. I doubt the effect of the soft image would be magnified in HD, but the same general softness would occur.

When will the Z1 be in or near Dallas so I can see it with my own eyes? Can't make a judgment until then.