Hi Guys

Most have already seen the new Sony NEXEA50 which is essentially a shoulder mount video camera with interchangeable lenses and a 16.8 megapixel still sensor in it.

What do the wedding fraternity here think of this as a run 'n gun camera ..it seems to have the advantages of a video camera like servo zoom (yes, with a proper rocker) shoulder mount form factor OR handheld (the mount slides under the camera ...it has what looks like a fairly good LCD/loupe setup for good framing (loupe comes off too) It comes with an 18-200 zoom but quite slow (F3.5)

What would you guys expect from this lens and the big sensor in a Church compared to a faster F1.8/1.9 and 1/4" or 1/3" chips on a conventional camera?? Better?? Worse???

The New Sony NEX-EA50UH Camcorder | BH inDepth (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/indepth/sony/news/new-sony-nex-ea50uh-camcorder)

It has all manual PLUS autofocus, autoiris and auto ISO (in movie mode too!!) and AGC and has proper XLR inputs.

Where can you see downfalls for weddings here for what I would call a hybrid (or maybe a BITSA??) It has a bit from DSLR's and a bit from video cameras, but it has caught my attention.

Comments ?? I know Don Bloom was eyeing it out too but a comment from our DSLR man Nigel would be interesting ?

Chris

This looks really interesting. I've haven't used a Sony E series lens system, but it seems like the lens choices is rather limiting (if you wanted to use primes and not just the kit lens).

This part of that article is really interesting:

"The rocker zoom is a familiar feature for long-time camcorder users, but those who are familiar with interchangeable lens systems may wonder, what good is a zoom lever if you're using a prime lens or a manual zoom? Sony's answer to that question is a lossless digital zoom. The effect is achieved by cropping the image sensor in real-time, which changes the angle-of-view with no sacrifice in resolution. This is possible because the sensor has a native resolution that’s much higher than 1080p to begin with."

The ability to digitally zoom without loss of quality would be fantastic.

Daniel

Thanks Daniel

My initial concern is that it's still a still camera chip inside a video camera and after attending a talk by Alaister Chapman of Sony, my friend Philip says that the still camera chip is still noisy for video....The still camera chip, says Philip, satisfies the still guys by having lots of tiny pixels which have a low capacity each (not an issue on stills) Video however to achieve a big dynamic range needs bigger pixels that have a higher capacity each.

Chris

Good Review and pics here:

HD Warrior Blog Archiv The NEW Sony NEX-EA50 (£3000) (http://www.hdwarrior.co.uk/2012/08/17/the-new-sony-nex-ea50-2740/)

and here:

http://nofilmschool.com/2012/10/sony-nex-ea50-footage/

I'm looking to pension off my Sony Z1 soon - this might be in the running! - lack of ND filters might be an issue though

Pete

My initial concern is that it's still a still camera chip inside a video camera and after attending a talk by Alaister Chapman of Sony, my friend Philip says that the still camera chip is still noisy for video....The still camera chip, says Philip, satisfies the still guys by having lots of tiny pixels which have a low capacity each (not an issue on stills) Video however to achieve a big dynamic range needs bigger pixels that have a higher capacity each.


Is this different than a DSLR?

Hi Daniel

I'm a total dummy when it comes to DSLR sensor technology so I was simply quoting Philips comments from the Sony "talk" .... Hopefully Nigel Barker will comment here ?? Nigel shoots on Canon5DIII's so I do really respect any opinion from him.

Thanks for the links Peter.... The lack of ND's for me isn't a big deal as I shoot solo so the last thing I want is a camera shouting to switch in ND's which I'm busy with the 2nd camera! The Panny AC-130 switchable ND's were a nighmare to use at weddings!

Chris

The sensor in the NEX-EA50 is indeed that from a stills camera (Sony Alpha NEX-5N). They already put the same internals in a consumer camcorder the VG20. The disadvantage of using a stills sensor & downsampling is that you get moire & aliasing unless you can perform the sort of magic that the Canon engineers have done with the 5D3.

It is true that theoretically the more pixels you have then the smaller they are for the same sized sensor & that large pixels can be spaced further apart so that there is less interference from adjacent pixels & thus less noise. However that is all theoretical & not necessarily true in practice.

Hi Nigel

Thanks for the insight and comments. I watched a video done in Europe at a trade show and the presenter was wearing a striped shirt..WOW the moire is really really bad .....At weddings you have no control what the people wear and imagine a groom deciding to wear a pin stripe suit...the result reminded me of the good ole VHS days!! Yeah I think Sony has a lot more work to do before they catch up with Canon's 5DIII

Pity, cos the form factor is really nice and I love the look and weight of the camera.

Guess it's a no-go for doing weddings!!

Chris

I've seen a few tv commericals for the Sony NEX-5 still camera. I would have to assume it's the same sensor as the NEX-EA50 since both do stills and video and have the NEX classification.
I wish any of the camera mfgrs would come to realize that some of us prefer the shoulder type factor but want and need something that is not necessarily capable of doing stills and something that you can hang a wireless receiver off of. While I do a fair amount of weddings I also do a lot of other work that I need a shoulder cam much like the JVC HM/HD series form factor. Hmmm, maybe I'll just get a 7XX series with something to go with it (small cam as a 2nd for weddings) and just be done with it.

Westside AV has a superb shoulder mount for the FS700 that turns it into a shoulder camera.

I question the assertion this is a run and gun wedding camera. Without NDs and frequent moire/aliasing, the camera is just plain fiddly and you'll come home with missed shots.

ND filters are important for run and gun. They let you move indoors and outdoors at the flick of a switch and not have to fuss with any additional glass on the end of your lenses. No ND Filters means your camera will blow out when the house lights come up or you move outside.

Also, last I looked at the Sony e-mount camcorders and DSLRs, the A mount adapter that lets you get to nice Sony A mount glass doesn't let you use an aperture lower than 3.5 (this might be only when AF or AE is enabled, I forget). SO you should check that our first.

Ouch on the FS700 price as a rig!!! it's a bit overpriced for me!!

Don?? The JVC is still pricey and according to George Kilroy the low light sucks!! At wedding receptions I really need a more sensitive camera so the 700 series isn't really a solution.

There isn't a lot around with shoulder mount and the Sony really did look good BUT what will brides say about moire ..sure they would pick that up???

My HMC82's are brilliant cameras and great colour and pristine image BUT at a miserable equivalent ISO of around 40 - 60 they struggle at wedding receptions...other than that they are the best value for money I have ever spend (on my 3rd set already and never an issue ) I replace every year to offset tax BTW!!!

Chris

I've used the JVC HD100 and 200 series camera at weddings and other low light type of activities, corporate social gathers where the lighting isn't much different than a wedding and while the HD series in particular the 100/110 isn't good in low light situations the 200/250 is far better and no I haven't used the HM7XX series but I know some folks that do and according to them, the low light is even better on that than the HD2XX.
I'm working on some things right now that might just make my decision for me but honestly, other than a PMW3XX series (which I can't really afford anyway) I'm trying to make a choice between the NEX-EA50 or the JVC-HM7XX. Nothing concrete yet but close and soon. (I hope). I'll let you know!
BTW for the corporate type stuff, most of it is MOS, talking heads so lighting isn't an issue. For 99.9% of the stuff I've got some sort of additional lighting. Hell even at a wedding reception I've got additional lighting so unless the camera absolutley sucks in low light that issue really doesn't bother me.

Just to pop my take on this Don.

I use HM700s and I have in the past mentioned to Chris that I was disappointed with the low light performance, however as with many things it is all relative. I had come to the JVC from larger DV cams: Panasonic DV200s which have well know good low light abilities so the difference was very noticeable. However before I bought the 700s I had a HD201 and that was really poor, the HM700 is much better, so much so that I sold the HD201 for another 700.
Having used them now for a couple of years and had chance to see how others perform (including EX3), I don't think they are that far away from others. When I do need a bit more I through up the gain and if necessary smooth it out with Neat Video.
However I have found that in general my Sony CX550s out perform most other camcorders when it comes to capturing clean images in low light conditions.

Hm700 are around £4000 in UK (before batteries/power supply though). The NEX-EA50 will be about £3500 all up.

Thanks Guys

'BIG SIGH' There isn't very much on the market that are shoulder mount so I did get excited when I saw the Sony... I really do like the form factor and I think it will do well in low light with the right lenses ..the Sony promo movie shows the 18-200 at a wedding ceremony and it looks pristine to me BUT all promos look like a million dollars!! We tend to get very technical on the forum down to each and every pixel but the bride on the other hand (or even commercial shoots) couldn't care less about tech specs as long as it looks good.

Am I fooling myself or would Sony really release a camera that produces such bad moire and aliasing that it's un-watchable ?? I would surely doubt it!! I'm just wondering if we are 'nit picking' here and the footage that the EA50 produces is perfectly adequate for "normal" viewers and clients rather than "tech heads" that we tend to be???

I really would like to see a wedding shot on the EA50 ....it's half the price of the JVC and has to be better in low light and has the weight and form factor that seems almost perfect. No offence but the JVC is very old technology.

I have seen on other forums people talk about Panasonic's new GH3 and it's terrible moire on video shoots so it not just this camera .... Can you minimise the unwanted effects of shooting video on a large format sensor with NLE plugins or is that a pipe dream??

It will be interesting what you select Don (maybe get one of each and test them both for us???)

Chris

Hi there Chris.

I can see that you are in perpetual search of the ideal camera and are happy to change frequently in the hope of finding it, whereas I tend to find one I'm happy with and stick with it until it either shows signs of faulty performance or I get complaints from my customers.

As you know I am not taking on weddings for next year so I'm out of that race at the moment (though who knows what will be in the future) but I will be keeping an eye on where the technology takes the industry. I thought that the DSLR/Videocam debate had settled down but notice that it is still as lively as ever.

The last work I did in England was with a crew of recent college leavers who work exclusively with handheld videocameras and DSLRs. It was interesting to find that whereas I find shoulder mounted cams the most natural and comfortable to use they found them awkward and cumbersome as they have been schooled in the use of handhelds and find that to be the most normal way to work.

Chris, I think you are looking at it wrong. It's not about people being pixel peepers or "Tech Heads" when critisizing moire and aliasing from large sensor cameras. Similarily, a camera with insufficient low light won't bring home good stuff from a reception and it's not to do with pixel peeping.

It's a matter of how much of the stuff you bring home is usable. That percentage is affected by moire and aliasing from large sensor cameras and other factors. Each camera's abilities combined with your skill at operating the camera along with the subjects you are shooting will determine that percentage.

Form factor also contributes to whether footage is a keeper. I've shot with Handycams and DSLRs since 2008 and can't stand their handheld footage compared to what I was able to do with a camera on my shoulder. YMMV.

@Don: Are saying the single chip Sony CX550's are better in lowlight than the 3x1/3" CCDs of the HM700?

Chris in answer to your remark about Sony (or any mfgr) releasing a camera that produced a truely bad image, I would tend to agree with you. I don't think Sony or anyone else, would do that. It could really kill their market. However as was said, there is no one perfect camera and what might be right for George wouldn't be right for me. I have always loved the compact full size form factor, like the JVCs and the Sony NEX50 does look like it could be the right stuff with a few exceptions. first off, being about 40% less than a new JVCHM710 is a turn on. Second, I already have all the battery power I'd need to power that camera so big saving there. Thirdly, I can always turn on more light at a reception and since I have 2 of the CN160s on remotes, a 312AS that will run for hours and soon to have the 5080 that you so smartly turned me on to, PLUS my LP Micro AND my trusty old AB Ultralight, I could light up pretty much any venue without having to turn to my big old tungsten softbox kit. The negatives to me are 1) figuring out a proper way to hang my AT1821 receiver and 2) the lack of switchable NDs. As was said before, in run and gun going from inside to outside and back in a short time slot really calls for switchable ND at least for me.
George, I agree with your statement of the lowlight capability of the HM7XX cameras. I agree, they're not as good as say the Sony PD series but then how many true vidcams are but all in all, that camera series has most everything I would be looking for so it's up there on the list.
Chris like you, I'd like to see some footage in untouched form from a NEX-EA50 before I were to make a decision but as I said before, some of the work I'm working on getting is also playing into the decision.
Man I'm getting too old to have my head clogged with all this stuff. Sometimes I yearn for the old days. Sometimes! ;-)
As for my getting an NEX-EA50 and being a crash test dummy, I did approach my boss (the wifey) about this and she gave me "THE LOOK". I think we all know what that means so I'll sit and wait before I make my decision and MAYBE I'll win the big lottery and it'll all be a moot point! (sure and maybe I get to be 6'5" and look like Brad Pitt-you know just to please my wife) lol!
Les, No not at all. I don't know if they are or not, I just mentioned the fact that it appears the sensor in the NEX-EA50 is the same as the sensor in the NEX5 still camera that I've seen advertised. I wouldn't say it's better at anything untilo
I could compare both handling and footage.

The EA50 must be a DSLR after all. Zacuto has a rig for it:
https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/283199_527908520571850_1964265680_n.jpg

@Don: Are saying the single chip Sony CX550's are better in lowlight than the 3x1/3" CCDs of the HM700?

Les it was me who made that comparison, and yes I own and use both and find that in low ambient light the CX550 well out performs the HM700.
I'm off system at the moment but when I get back I'll grab a couple of screen shots and post them.

Hi Les

Point taken exactly but I was simply mentioning that compared to, especially brides, we are super critical of not only our own work but also the camera performance. I'm sure you have had bad shoot days and so have I but I did a wedding where everything went wrong..terrible backlighting at the ceremony with half the wedding party in the sun and half in the deep shade, and so on and the footage on preview at home didn't make me a happy chappy at all...it was just a bad shoot with poor amateur results!! I edited as best I could and gingerly handed it over to the bride and mother...This woman was absolutely thrilled with the DVD and has over the years sung my praises and given me subsequent refferals ...I'm still scratching my head as to why BUT maybe I expect better from cameras and myself???

I guess someone will shoot a wedding with the EA50 so we can see....I'm have been a pansonic person for 20 years but they seem to have dropped the SM except in DVCPRO hence the look at Sony.

BTW: Don ??? To us you look like Brat Pitt already so quit worrying. We like you just the way you are!

There is actually a big thread right here on guys using handicams at weddings and getting awesome results from them. Noa Put from Belgium is a small camera user at weddings along with his DSLR's and reports amazing results.

Shucks maybe the answer is to rig 3 handicams and 3 GoPros all on remotes and sit down on the job with a control box on your lap???

Chris

Chris I couldn't agree more - I have shot weddings in appalling light conditions, rainy days where all the guests are huddled in a dark bar feeling miserable, weddings that are completely unorganized with things happening at the wrong time so you don't get the 'must have' shots - edited to the best of my ability........and the couples love the DVD!!!!!

It's because we strive to produce the best we can (and we probably compare ourselves to the best) that we get frustrated when we are let down by the event itself - rather than our own shortcomings.

Traditional video cameras for me so far (Z1/FX-1/HVR-A1E) and I have yet to have an unhappy customer in 5 years. I am going to pention off the Z1 next year however for a camera that performs in low light better - won't be a DSLR though for me

Pete

Hi Pete

Doesn't seem I am impressed either!! I wonder how the guys with big sensor DSLR's cope with moire and aliasing??? AFAIK the only DSLR to totally solve the problem is the Canon 5DIII (according to Nigel)

Do other DSLR shooters just live with it or work around it???

There isn't much out there that impresses me ..The new Pansonic AC-90 however produces amazing images and almost no video noise even at 30db gain!!

Chris

Chris thanks for the tip - I've always been a Sony guy but I'll look into the AC-90 - has XLRs which is good also - I'll need to have a play - I suspect the focus ring might be of the type in my A1E though (some sort of servo focus I think) which I don't like - the price is favorable too :)

Hi Pete

The Panny cameras lens rings are not connnected to the servo motor at all!! The one really neat thing is that you can use autofocus to get into the ball park and also trim with the focus ring, even in full auto...the same goes for iris...you can keep the camera in auto iris and then use the ring to add a still camera style positive or negative EV value to the image. Very useful if you have just a tad too much backlighting and need to adjust the iris.

The gain is truely amazing...the image is razor sharp at 24db ..dunno how they do it as my HMC's are decidedly grainy after 18db ..there is virually no noise at 30db but the image goes a little soft...On my current cams I use no more than 15db as grain appears after that!!

Chris

You're selling it to me Chris - I'm thinking of a new purchase early next year and I think this is def a contender - going to check out some footage now

Hi Peter

There is a pile of footage and reviews on the DVX forum as Barry Green is writing the book on the camera..he has a VERY comprehensive review there but lots of others have posted videos too!! You need to look on both the Panasonic HMC and AC130/160 forums as they are shared on both.

Chris

I wonder how the guys with big sensor DSLR's cope with moire and aliasing??? AFAIK the only DSLR to totally solve the problem is the Canon 5DIII (according to Nigel)

Do other DSLR shooters just live with it or work around it???

On MkIIs, I think the basic answer, apart from turning your sharpness down to minimise it, is to just suck it up and live with it! Do clients notice? I'm sceptical they do. Or if they do, whether they care. I've had rainbow patterns across brides' veils, and they've never complained... Maybe they even liked it.

There's a filter available from Mosaic Engineering that solves aliasing for the MkII and other cameras. Works beautifully, but it's a PITA to use under event conditions. $400 sitting in a box on my shelf, unused. With filter installed, every time you touch the zoom, the image goes out of focus. Not sure why. Something to do with back focus not working properly.

Eg, when I'm not 100% sure about focus, I sometimes zoom out a little to give myself more depth of field --but with filter installed, everything just goes out of focus even more...

Hi Adrian

I am told by Nigel Barker than Canon solved the moire problem completely on the Mark III 5D ...there is your answer! Sell the 5DII and buy a III and no more moire....It sucks a bit that even something like a veil can cause it. I've had it I think once when the bride was standing next to a huge face brick wall and my then 3 x CCD camera did display some minor moire.

Hmmm maybe brides think that's how it's supposed to look???

Chris

I am sure that we obsess about image quality far more than our clients. They don't notice aliasing & they accept moire as just one of those things that happens with video as they see it on the striped shirts of newsreaders on the TV. It's not a terrible defect like something being out of focus or audio that is distorted. Even with the 5D2 it's not an awful problem it just happens sometimes on some brickwork or roof tiles you will see this shimmering effect. I doubt that the new Sony has awful moire & aliasing as Sony wouldn't have brought it to market if it were so terrible that lay people noticed.

The Panny cameras lens rings are not connnected to the servo motor at all!!

Chris,

I'm following the AC-90 with interest, as a second camera (hurrah, it's not released in the UK until January.... Grrr). I'm confused by your comment above.

The AC130 and AC160 have direct, mechanical control of the zoom and focus. From everything I've read, the AC-90 has "fly by wire", with the zoom and focus rings controlling the lens using motors (aka servos). Am I missing something here?

Hi Mike

AFAIK All newer Pansonic camera use the lens rings to directly control the function mechanically so when you turn the zoom ring you zoom...however you don't have to fight the servo motor gears like you have to on other cameras..the servo motor/gearbox will only engage if it's powered up by a zoom button so the ring isn't trying to fight against the "dead" motor and gears in any way..purely mechanical ....some cameras did have a switch on the barrel marked "manual/servo" so you could disengage the motor but I think it's totally mechanical on the ring on all the new cameras.

Maybe check with Barry Green with this to be 100% sure but YES my 130's didn't connect back to the motors and neither do my HMC82's so I don't see why anything would change. Remember with Panasonic manual focus rings they are also used as "tweaking" rings in full auto so you can physically tweak the focus point after AF has locked the lens in and definately on the 82's there is no motor involved at all.

Chris

There's a review of this camera up from at Sony NEX-EA50 Review. | (http://www.xdcam-user.com/reviews/sony-nex-ea50-review/).

He was very positive about the camera.

Chris,

I think I see what you mean. It's "fly by wire" but not "bad fly by wire". So it's electronic control of the lens, but not in a way that has you fighting motors. That's pretty much what I'm used to on all handycams, including my current Sony NX70.

But it's not true mechanical linkage to the lens for crash zooms and repeatable focus etc.

The AG-AC90 sounds like a great camera. I use the AC160 and a Sony Z1 for my second camera which is due to be replaced any day now. I won't be going for the AC90 even though it meets all but one of my requirements and at a great price....no ND's. When I need ND's, it's always in a hurry which is a great pity because I would have bought this camera for sure.
I switched to Panasonic when I bought the AC160 after a long time with Sony but they bewilder me. The lesson I learned with Panasonic is don't jump in too early (the 160A being a very sore case in point). It's as if they suddenly remember what should have been on the release model months down the track and then add it and then charge the customer for it...yeah, great shame, the AC90 would have been perfect.

I have to be honest. I've been looking at the NEX-EA50 AND believe it or, the Panny AC90s. different I know but both nice in their own respects. Since I'm going to be using whatever new I get for both weddings (last season-so help me) and run and gun MOS interviews at trade shows and some of both take place outside I think I really need the switchable NDs. I've always had them and they've saved my bacon on many occassions. so what do I do? I'm leaning towards......I don't know. this is the first time in my career that I am not 110% absolutely sure of what I'm going to spend my money on.
I do like the JVC series both the 7XX and the new 600 but frankly don't want to spend that kind of money at this point in my shooting life. Since I'm fairly clear except for a couple of weddings at the end of the year, I think I'm going to sit tight until I see some real world footage from the Sony and get some real world user reports back on both the Sony and Pannys. Man I hate being in this spot. I'm a decisive person and being indecisive is making me crazier than I normally am.

O|O
/--\

Hi Guys

The AC-90 DOES have ND filters!! They are a set of automatically actuated filters that auto insert when needed...As I'm sure you already know, any 1/3rd chip camera has resolution problem from F8 onwards and 1/4" is closer to the F3 mark so what the 90 does (and the HMC40/80 too) is automatically start to slot in the internal ND's as soon as the aperture gets to F3 ..as the light increases more ND's are added. The only difference is that in full auto iris once all ND's are in the camera will change shutter speed..In manual iris as you close the iris the iris in fact only closes to around F3 and then the the wheel actually starts bringing in the ND's gradually ..the display actually shows the iris at F11 but is really only at F3 with 1/64th ND applied so the F11 reading is a pseudo reading which is easier to show on the LCD instead or displaying "F3.5 + 1/64 ND" If you are working on a bright beach or in very bright sunlight the camera might hit limits at 1/64 ND and 1/2000 shutter and in those cases an front ND might be needed!

The system works brilliantly and more importantly is totally seamless!! On my AC-130 cameras if a cloud when over the sun I had to rush over to the camera and drop out an ND filter manually which caused a flash on the footage..not good!!!

I still want to se the Sony EA50 handle checks and stripes at weddings...I can forsee issues with things like Adrian already has with his DSLR's like rainbows in the bride's veil netting and I hate to think what would happen if all the guys were in pin stripe suits!! Time will tell....I have only see one really bad case of moire so far with the EA50..the presenter (in Germany I think) had a shirt with square checks on it and the camera went crazy with the pattern!

Decisions, decisions

Chris

Hey Chris,
I think you said that in another post here and while I generally pay close attention to whats being said, today is post-thanksgiving turkey coma day so I probably forgot you said that. Sorry buddy.
In the mean time, I'm kinda thinking at 2 grand a pop, I might just pick up a couple of the 90's for the wedding side and go for the JVC HM7XX seires (probalby gently used) for my corporate work. Since they shoot in MOV OR MP4 and with the attachment in an MXF wrapper, that might just be the satisifing end to all the mind games I've been playing with myself. I have a system already in place for shooting weddings with small form factor cameras so all I'd be changing is the cameras. Hmmmm, more to consider.
Damn you Chris Harding.....Me thinks you just made my decision.

O|O
\--/

Hi Don

You will probably hate me for this but I'm not 100% convinced on the AC-90 yet either!!! Two main issues worry me ...Firstly on the AC-130 running audio with loud music at the reception I had to use ALC as the ambient level changes drastically! The AC-130 limiters don't reduce the audio signal at all but physically clip just the top half of the signal and the audio was crappy..I'm trying to get someone to record music (maybe just a hifi and use ALC and see if the 90 does the same thing?

My second issue is the background smearing I'm seeing in both YouTube and Vimeo footage in normal outdoor lighting....things like trees when shot at full wide are great and crisp in the foreground but sorta over 1/2 mile or more a line of trees look smeary..one person described the effect as "spray painted"

If it's just the compression on the hosts no problem ..but it might be something else???? Take at look at sample footage that's shot outdoors and wide angle and look at large areas in the far background and see you you think????

OK, now you can say "damn you Chris" as I have brought up two obstacles..Don I was burnt with the 130's so I'm ultra careful now!!!! Maybe wait until after the festive season before deciding???

Look at the trees behind the lake here?? http://youtu.be/kJ1cM72MlRk


Chris

Hey Chris,
As to the 1/2 mile away image-for me even if it is a little smeared I don't think it would bother me since I'm not looking for clarity at 1/2 mile. Plus in my are I think about the only place I'm going to get that kind of range is if I go to downtown Chicago and go to the observation deck of the Sears...oppps, I mean Willis Tower (it's on the 104th floor) and then only on a clear day ;-)
HOWEVER.......the audio is an issue for me. While I generally run my audio in manual configuration I need to know that it's going to be as good as it is now. Since the camera isn't even out yet until next week sometime AND it is the holiday season and I am taking off the month of January (family cruise time again) I do think I'm going to wait until the first of February to make my final decision and I'm sure by then there will be plenty of footage on YouTube and Vimeo to go thru and disect. Hopefully there will be plenty of audio to listen to as well.
damn you Chris....(just kidding) Thanks for all the information you have thrown in on this thread!

Hi Don

That's my plan too..wait for some decent user feedback...review videos done in the backyard are really no use to us..seeing a wedding done on the camera is far more useful.

The manual audio on the 130 was great, if not a bit inaccurate...setting the channel to -40db and using a -38db Rode Videomic gave almost no output so I wasn't sure how they calibrate sensitivity!! The Audio limiters were the ones that gave me uphill and clipped the signal so hopefully by February I can get someone to show me you can use ALC on the 90 and it won't "haircut" the waveform. On another forum people seem to be carefully ignoring my request about the limiters which was worrying.

For you Christmas is quieter, for me it's a nightmare with bookings every weekend as it's Summer here!!

Hopefully we might also find a more meaningful review of the Sony by then as well???

Chris

Hi Chris,

I am expecting UPS to deliver the AC90 tomorrow. I will check out the ALC audio asap as well as the "sprayed hair look". I am also very interested in the low light capabilities of the 90. It will have to do better than the FX1000's I'm using now......or at least equivalent to. The only other camera I have to compare it to is the GH2.

I will start a new thread in the Pany section.

Tim
That would be great. Looking forward to a real world review.

Wow!! The great Don Bloom just might consider switching teams!! They are certainly reliable cameras from Panasonic with all my Panny cameras I have never had any issues and never had to send one in for warrany repair either.

Tim that would be awesome...I found one video where the guy actually filmed some people and they talked to the camera..usually it's just shots of the backyard which give the viewer no idea amount how the camera will work in a typical usage environment.

You can just add to this thread too..it has gone wildly off track anyway as we started with Sony and ended with Panasonic.

Chris

It's funny how the thread went that way.....thought it might turn to AG-AC90, that's why I was reading it. I have been scouring the net for any info I can find on the AC90.

I have a wedding on Dec 15th so I can share some real wedding footage after that. I'll be using a combination of the FX's, GH2 and the 90. It's a fairly big wedding with a great band at the reception.

Awesome Tim

It will be great to see the camera actually doing a wedding and I'm sure Don will be happy with that too!!
That will also be a good opportunity to test out the audio ALC when the band starts up as they will be pretty loud!!

Judging from what I have seen so far I think you will be happy...it has the same sensitivity as my HMC80's BUT the gain is squeeky clean whereas my cams start getting noise at anything over 12db!! Cos it's only an "effective" ISO40 camera I would definately slip on a video light during the dancing and evening when the lights are turned down so the venue becomes a dark cave!!

Is the ceremony at a Church or outdoors ?? We look forward to some "meaningful" footage!!

Chris

It's in a church. That's where my concern is with any camera. I use lights at the receptions so its never really a problem there but the ceremony.......those can get pretty dark.

The FX1000 does decent at 9db of gain which is as high as I go and that has to be cleaned up with NV. Even at 9db it still gets kinda muddy looking, especially when zoomed in.

Hi Tim

With the HMC82 I can push it to 18db in a Church but I prefer not going over 15db and I seldom need to.

The 90, according to Barry Green has a really clean image right up to 24db!! So I reckon it could handle any Church....Our churches don't allow lighting and so far I have yet to find one that has defeated me!!!

If iAuto on the 90 asks for as much as 18db just use it..the result will be way better than the FX even though it's higher gain it will be a noise free image!!

Chris

Thanks Chris,

As far as picture profiles, do you think the 90 and 82 would be similar? Do you have any suggestions as to what kind of picture profile would be best to use? I've always been a Sony guy so I have no idea what makes the panny look it best.

Out of the box I like the look, weight and feel. One thing I see I'm not going to like is you have to remove the battery to plug in the AC power cord......this is not good for me!!

Hi Tim

With the HMC82 I can push it to 18db in a Church but I prefer not going over 15db and I seldom need to.

The 90, according to Barry Green has a really clean image right up to 24db!! So I reckon it could handle any Church....Our churches don't allow lighting and so far I have yet to find one that has defeated me!!!

If iAuto on the 90 asks for as much as 18db just use it..the result will be way better than the FX even though it's higher gain it will be a noise free image!!

Chris

Chris, did you say the AC90 was an ISO40 camera? Doesn't that mean that at +24db its really only at effectively ISO640? Getting back to the original topic of the Sony cam, it appears to be clean and still sharp through at least 2500ISO. I'm not sure what I'm missing but what makes you still lean toward the AC90?