I am looking for some feedback on the low light results for the FX1 & Z1U. I read Shannor Rawls review of the low light results that didn't seem to give any hope at all to the new sony line of hdv's. Kind of sucks for shooting in night conditions underwater....

Specifically how do they compare to the PD150 & PD170?
And the FX1 vs. the Z1U?

I just bought the FX1 a month ago and haven't even touched it since i sent it off to have an underwater housing made for it....and of course in that small amount of time---walah, along came the Z1U, with apparently lower lux lighting requirements. So I'm now considering selling off my FX1 and ordering the Z1U right away. BUT....can anyone give a fair opinion of the low light conditions of FX1 vs. Z1U? It would be interesting to see if there is much of a differance. I'll still get the Z1U for its other options....

Thanks for any help out there. And any insight on this matter would be greatly appreciated.
Johnny

Except for the "hypergain" I don't think there's any difference between the light sensitivity of the FX1 and Z1, but I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong. In another thread there was a comparison between the VX-2000 and FX1 and my recollection was that the FX1 was about 2 stops slower.

Sony claims the following on the two cameras as I recall:
FX1: 3 lux light level
Z1: 2 lux light level

From what I continue to read......that is merely marketing hype and that shooting both in low light produces poor results---more so with hypergain....and using the hpergain is I've used it produces quite a bit of grainy look.
thanks....

Just read Adam Wilt's review in the March DV Magazine. He states the FX-1 is between 1.5 and 2 f-stops slower than the PD-150.

Just read your shortened synopsis of Adam's review.....and I guess that is the case....if either the FX1 or Z1U were what we all wanted it to be, then there would be no need to step into the professional line of Sony HD cameras.
Was hoping there might be some LIGHT of hope for those of us shooting in low light conditions and underwater. But looks like it's the take it or leave it aspect of what's available at the moment.
Since I've already got the FX1 and am considering the Z1U, I might opt for the PD170 instead.....at least it gives reveals a much clearer image in low light without having to play around with gain adjustments.
thanks....

Why not just add light where you need it. Underwater, even.

From all I read, it sounds like the FX1/Z1 is around 1 stop faster than my PDX-10. That would be terrific for almost anything I want to shoot, especially since it sounds like you can add several dB of gain without any problems. And in DV/DVCAM mode you could gain another stop by shooting at either 1/30 or 1/25 shutter speed without significant loss of vertical resolution.

I understand your desire to shoot in very dark places, but to me it sounds like Sony has made some reasonable trade-offs. Another thing which Adam Wilt mentions in his review is that the FX-1 is selling for $3,700 whereas the VX-1000 was introduced for $4,200. Not a bad value, especially if you consider inflation.

Figured someone would mention lights...you're right about that Chris...but lights work well enough underwater in set up macro conditions, but in low light situations at 100+ ft depth and shooting an animal passing in the distance....or in just low light murk at 30ft for that matter---lights do no good and often inhibit every sea creature in the ocean from passing within a reasonable distance. I've shot with the 150 & 170 and loved the low light results in natural conditions and with the vx1000 in those same conditions and the results are literally night and day. So without having tested the fx1 or z1.....i only have the poor feedback that i've heard to go on. I guess I'll soon be able to post those results when I get my housing and camera back two weeks or so. But all was hinging upon me now buying the z1 if the results were favorable--So remains to be seen....

Point take on that Boyd....That's why I'm considering just biting the bullet and picking up the z1 as well.

Cheers....

Look at it this way, for your situation I see how important it is, it will take the FX1 12 to 15 db gain to equal the PD150 at 0db, so if you have been shooting underwater at 0db, the FX1 will do ok, plus you are getting HDV quality, but if you had to gain up on the pd150 6db or more then the FX1 won't be as bright.

I'll be trying that out preety soon when my camera returns....I'm not keen on the resulds of turning up the gain however. HOwever....I'll soon see and post those results.
thanks

Is the low light capability of the Z1 good enough to make decent footage in church or living room average ligthing conditions????? I can not imagine that such an expansive cam is that bad!!!! Can someone post some footage from a church or living room?

When I went on the sony road show this month I had a chance to get hands on with a Z1. It was able to get good pictures from the other end of an unlit ballroom, which was darker than every church I have been in, without gain or hypergain. In practical terms it shouldn't be harder to work with than a vx2000. I always use a small light anyway.

What do you mean by good ?? From such a cam I expect exellent quality footage in low light environment like churches, in house, pop concerts, evening city senery etc. To be clear I do not want to film in a dark room!!!

Johnny, where did you send you camera to? What housing maker?

I bought the FX-1 for underwater use as well, but so far, all my footage has been above water.

Hi Mike,
I went with Equinox in MI. They have made some pretty nice hosuings in the past.....for my pd150 and pd170. I used to purchase only the gates housings...but since they changed ownership they no longer have the pro deals and the housings are just way to expensive with them now. I've found the equinox every bit equal to my gates housings but at a fraction of the cost. They are a bit larger I must warn you than some of the other housing manufacturers, but the upside is they are more stable in the water.
The guy I talk to there is TJ.....and he offers a pro deal if you're a professional shooter.
cheers....

I tried out the Z1 at a tech exhibition last week and tested it specifically for low light levels. I put it on full zoom and aimed at the darkest corner of the exhibition hall (no lights shining at it directly and little indirect light) and was surprised to see that, at least on the LCD, the image looked pretty good. I did not have the opportunity to view footage on a monitor.

That's the best news I've heard all week now. I was wondering if what i was hearing in bad low light reviews was actually the view on the monitor vs. what was on tape.....So again that remains to be known.

<<<-- Originally posted by Johnny Friday : I'll be trying that out preety soon when my camera returns....I'm not keen on the resulds of turning up the gain however. HOwever....I'll soon see and post those results.
thanks -->>>

I've heard similar statements about the new Sonys and the XL-2 with respect to adding gain. It is becoming less of a taboo on newer cam designs. People are reporting noise free video at 6db gain and surprisingly good video as high as 12db.

I'd love to show you the night footage taken in Vienna, Austria when the XL-2 was introduced. It was after seeing that footage that I was sold. It was originally linked from over at the DVXUSER forum as they were very keen on how the XL-2 would stack up against the DVX-100. You might see if you can find it there. I have it copied to my hard drive but it's too large to email. I could FTP it to you if you have or know of a server.

regards,

=gb=

Drop by http://www.yousendit.com

Put in that you want to email it to yourself. They will then send you a link you can post here. It allows up to 1GB, and has a limited number of downloads. I do not know the number, but I heard 25.

So go there and give it a shot.

would love to check the link to it....if possible.

Just as an example, I posted a short (48598 KB) M2T file here:

http://s19.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=36ODQJAOR55GF0GWLWDEL70XPP

Please ignore the audio. This is directly off of the FX1 and I often talk to myself to leave notes when I know I will be deleting the audio anyway. I know how I edit, and I know that this will be part of a show with Hawaiian music and new age stuff, not much ambient sound.

I don't know how many downloads I have left, so if it expires, don't be surprised. Also, they are only good for seven days.

Steven,
Just tried the link and says it's expired...any chance that there's an error?

No error, just too many downloads. Here is a renamed version. First come, first served.

http://s7.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=3R8BWY7QL0OC1039L0E263ITY1

To see a small version of the download, look here:

http://www.premiereuser.com/videos/Kilauea_Coast.wmv

Johnny, any chance of seeing that Z1 U/W footage, assuming you are allowing yourself at least a couple hours of surface intervals these days? I very interested to see the differences between the Sony and JVC HDV cams for shooting underwater footage.

I've uploaded some footage from my first caribbean trip with my HD10U for anyone interested, at least until the max # of downloads has been met ->
http://s28.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=3V13QH03FQTZ716B22PGFTCDUN

Thanks in advance!

ScubaBob

Hi Bob,
As soon as i have my housing in hand....I'll do just that. Have the Cameras now...both the FX1 and Z1, but the housing is not yet complete. Should have it in about one to two more weeks....at which time I'll post some footage from underwater shots...

Hey Bobby,
One question...What is the resolution of the file you posted?
I can play it with Media Player and it look great!
Thanks for the movie!

Johan- 1280x720p, taken with the HD10U using the Gates HD1 Housing.

Johnny - thanks for the update, looking forward to it! (as I'm sure you are too).

Too often low light performance of cameras is ignored. And many forget about the lens ramping implications. But a word of caution. I've recently seen posted a comparison of a PD150 with a DSR500 in low light, with findings that initially (using the PD150 side screen) suggested them to be evenly matched - they both seemed to just manage to expose the "test scene" at full gain. But later looking at the results on a proper monitor showed that the PD150 had only managed it by considerable degradation and softening of the image - I suspect it may have averaged neighbouring pixels, or some such. Hence I don't think it can simply be said "camera x needs this much light, and camera y this much", without considerable qualification.

Hence my suggestion of a controlled test scene for different cameras, and the ability to post sample frames along the lines of "this is the quality you get from camera x at light level y". Two cameras may give similar quality in good light, but in poor light one may either not give full exposure, or look substantially worse. Or both.

tom.

I liked the video. I would love to have a copy in WM9 format at around an 8Mbps data rate. It would look great on my HDTV I'll bet.

You know, I haven't actually been that impressed with WMV9 for my U/W stuff. I will post one this weekend though at 8Mbps. For showing on my HTPC->HDTV (720p) I've been using transport stream. It may take some tweaking to get the WMV encode right, that I just haven't figured out yet. The main issue has been with the blue water in the background. Anyway, I will post one to this thread for comparison.

Thanks. At 1280X720 and 8Mbps, I have seen good results with underwater video. Give it a try. I would love to see it through my Linkplayer on a 60" Sony HDTV.

Oh, please use the regular WM9 audio codec, and not the Pro. The Linkplayer needs an update it hasn't received yet. 128K at 48KHz should do the trick as well.

It would be interesting to see, or at least hear about the comparison between the two on the LinkPlayer. I'm still waiting for the DVI version of the LinkPlayer to be released. Have you tried to play the m2t file on the LinkPlayer? I know at least for the Roku player you have to rename the m2t files to *.ts, but the results on a Plasma HDTV are quite nice.

I haven't gotten m2t to play on the LinkPlayer2, but I can strip away the TS container with Womble Mpeg Video Wizard, losslessly converting m2t to 1280x720p30 mpeg2 program stream without re-encoding. That plays perfectly on the LinkPlayer2, even from a burned DVD disk. You can do the same thing with VLC, and it's free.

My opinion about WMV9 at 9.2 mb/s is that it's virtually indistinguishable from the native mpeg2 stream, if you encode at the slowest speed, which takes forever, i.e. highest quality encoder setting + 10 bit with error checking.

A 30 minute video could easily take 7+ hours to encode to WMV9 on a P4 3.0GHz.
The temptation is to use a speedier encoding stategy, but at the cost of quality.

Since most people are probably as unlikely to be able to play WMV9 as mpeg2 or TS from a disk, I just do what's best for me, which is to losslessly transcode the m2t to mpeg2 program stream, where I can fit up to about 30 minutes onto a DVD disk for playback on the LinkPlayer2. If it's any longer though, I have to use the WMV9 encoder to keep the same quality while fitting more content onto a single layer DVD disk.

Here is a link to the WMV9 encode, given the specs Steven requested (8Mbps WMV9 and 128k48KHz WMA9). The encode took about 15 minutes, on a dual Xeon 3.06Ghz. Tom, I'll give the encode you mentioned a try. I'm actually happy with the encode I got here with 8Mbps. I think my previous encodes had been at the default 5Mbps, and definately showed quality loss. Please let me know what you think playing the file with the LinkPlayer.

http://s34.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=0QG5DXA711VOU1QDX8FRMRIQFI

Looked great. Very nice.

I feel that I must mention that viewing it on a 60 inch Sony LCD HDTV enabled me to see that the focus was not always perfectly sharp. Usually, but not always.

No criticism intended. I have no idea how you guess take such great footage underwater. But it really is much more apparent on a large screen.

All in all the WM9 stands up very well. I compared it to a copy of The Living Seas that I keep on my DVR for comparison purposes. It certainly held it's own. As good as real HD? No. Noticeable when not comparing directly? No.

Steven, thanks for the feedback. Now, if I can just get a housing for a 60" DLP :) I did notice on my footage from my first outing with the HD10U, and I'm guessing this will be the case for FX1/Z1 as well, focus is much more complex with HDV over DV. I know that Gates offers a 4.5" lcd now, which I would recommend to anyone shooting U/W HDV.

I'm interested to see the differences between 1920x1080i (even if anamorphic in Sony's current incarnation) and the JVC HDV. While we definately aren't going to get the same results as IMAX rez'd down to 1080i (ala Living Seas, Coral Reef etc) I definately see a lot of promise for HDV in the underwater world.