I wait for the day 3x1920x1080 global shutter CMOS sensors emerge. Rolling Shutters are a plague.

Jack, look no further than the Sony F55 and the Blackmagic 4K Cinema cameras which both have global shutters on CMOS chips.

But not separate chip arrays for R, G, and B.

But not separate chip arrays for R, G, and B.

Well, you can still find 3-CCD cameras out there.

If you had a Sony F55 with (3) 4K Super 35mm sized sensors that would make a very big and expensive camera!

Sony F55 and the Blackmagic 4K Cinema cameras which both have global shutters on CMOS chips.
I know the Sony has the Frame Image Scan that's suppose to mitigate CMOS Distortion and judder. Is this what your calling the global shutter?

Frame Image Scan is Sony's implementation of a global shutter. The entire sensor is read out at the same moment in time. Zero Jello, skew or flash banding.

You can't have a 3 chip prism for S35, the size of the prism would make it impossible to use PL or DSLR lenses and the longer the flange back distance the harder it is to design a decent lens.

Frame Image Scan is Sony's implementation of a global shutter. The entire sensor is read out at the same moment in time. Zero Jello, skew or flash banding.

You can't have a 3 chip prism for S35, the size of the prism would make it impossible to use PL or DSLR lenses and the longer the flange back distance the harder it is to design a decent lens.

Sounds good to me. I just returned from the F65 Operator Class @ the Sony DMPC. The next day I was fortunate enough to have a one on one session with a Sony engineer hand on the F65. He answered any question I had. It was really very nice and informative visit. Seeing the original 4K footage of the famous one candle scene in oblivion on a true 4K projector was also very cool.

Why did the discussion suddenly go to my signature? I don't expect S35x3, I expect 2/3''x3 or 1/2''x3. And I only expect 1080p. 4K Global shutter is of course only possible with S35 and a single sensor. (that and CCD cameras are out of my price range)

It might take another 6 years or it may never happen for Global shutter to come to small sensor 4K, let alone 1080. There is a lack of focus on Global Shutter tech for mass production.

Also, the BMCC lacks 60p. Huge letdown on Blackmagic's part.

Does anyone knows if the Z100 will have pre-record buffer?

Alas no cache record.

No histogram either.

Nor is there a proper 'Clock' option for the TC (though you can jam TC).

We're having to balance 'hot hatch' and 'family sedan' here. If only Top Gear did a show on cameras.

(and there's always the F5 LOL)

Cache record is only firmaware, probably histogram too, If they want or see that will sell more they will do it.

I do wildlife and use a RE ONE, that has a pre-record time of 10' or 30', 5' or 10' is this camera would be great...

Always have the camera in pre-record, cause I canot film lots of footage until I got the sttuation I want, I folow the subject when when he does something different I press rec and will pic up the 10' before...its a must...

I'll bet that with pre-record cache, a lot more wildlife filmographers would buy this camera as primary camera or to use as B camera with other 4K cameras like RED ONE, EPIC, F5 and F55.

If they put a pre-record mode, will buy one probably two in November, If they don't, will wait to see market evolution and then decide...

As promised, the video and written 'first impressions' review - though as I mentioned before, I couldn't review the picture quality, just workflow, playback etc. The prototype has gone back to Sony for IBC and to have its software updated to a point where hopefully we can start actually seeing what it can do.

Matt Davis? in-depth PXW-Z100 4K Camcorder review : United Kingdom : Sony Professional (http://www.sony.co.uk/pro/article/broadcast-products-introducing-the-new-pxw-z100-4k)

Please note that I'm now flying off onto another shoot for 10 days, probably not going to have much time to answer many questions here during that time but I will try checking in from time to time.

Thanks, Matt!

Nice review, Matt. Very informative.

I'm amazed at all the codecs this camera will be able to utilize, after next year's upgrade. XAVC HD, XAVC 4K, XAVC-S HD, XAVC-S 4K and AVCHD. That pretty much covers most shooting situations.

Thanks Matt.

Now I wonder if this cam is ready for doc work. WB on the fly seems impossible as there seems to be only presets. And the WB does not go less than 3200K. Hey this is the land of fluorescent bulbs at 2900 and below. Even the KinoFlos we use are 2900K. No way to quickly reset WB to be accurate. Have to go into menus.

Delibrately leaving out Cine Modes,

No WFM or histograms.

Still have to see image quality but it seems like a cam designed by a marketing department, a cam with pro codec thrown on top of a delibrately down scaled consumer cam. Neither fish nor fowl.

And we really really need a Compact 10 bit 4K ENG cam.

Thanks Matt.

Now I wonder if this cam is ready for doc work. WB on the fly seems impossible as there seems to be only presets. And the WB does not go less than 3200K. Hey this is the land of fluorescent bulbs at 2900 and below. Even the KinoFlos we use are 2900K. No way to quickly reset WB to be accurate. Have to go into menus.

Delibrately leaving out Cine Modes,

No WFM or histograms.

Still have to see image quality but it seems like a cam designed by a marketing department, a cam with pro codec thrown on top of a delibrately down scaled consumer cam. Neither fish nor fowl.

And we really really need a Compact 10 bit 4K ENG cam.


Agree and also need a compact 10 bit 4:2:2 4K camera...

Also wish for a pre-record buffer of 5 or 10'... and a good image quality at end zoom range...

And we really really need a Compact 10 bit 4K ENG cam.

And 10bit goes to waste if the source image is noisy. Remember the HPX300? 10bit codec but any gain kills the grading advantage. 2/3'' may be a better domain for a 4K ENG cam. bigger pixels means more light gets captured per pixel.

With a single sensor design, it doesn't necessarily have to be full shoulder sized.

How about the Sony PXW-Z100 with a 4/3 size sensor. Now that makes much more sense. that about 5.7 times the size of the little 1/2" sensor on this 4k camera. then it could have upgrade models that take 4/3 style lenses.

Sensor Sizes:
Image sensor size comparison (http://www.creativevideo.co.uk/index.php?t=helpCentre/page/39/image+sensor+size+comparison)

Keep in mind Sony had the G lens ready already for the 1/3'' chip size. To make a zoom lens for a 4/3'' design that doesn't extend like a typical 18-200mm may be more R&D than they were able to do.

2/3'' sounds more within the range of possibility. My only hope is that it is not limited to a full shoulder design and that it could be fitted in a compact body similar to the PMW-200. (which is possible if it's only a single sensor design)

Nice review Matt. If the firmware set for next year was in the camera at launch it would be my choice. I need long record times and as was mentioned in your review my main use will be to crop a HD image from the 4K for my theatre shoots just like I used my FX1 when it first came out. In fact at first I shot the FX1 in 4X3 DV for a while !!! The FDR-AX1 is a better NX5U in some respects, newer sensor , even though its only 1 chip, better codec than AVCHD and will do 60P to match my other cameras. I will choose the FDR-AX1 for my use as the other cameras in the multicam shoot will be my NX5U, NX30U and occasionally EX3. They should all match up for this use quite well.

I am trying to note the difference between the kit supplied for the FDR-AX1 and the PXW-Z100. When I bought my NX5U the differences to the AX2000 were the NX5U included the mic, a bigger battery, HD-SDI, timecode interface, connection for FMU128 and some settings in the menus that were excluded from the AX2000. This time I would like to know if the menu settings will be the same for the two cameras and the real difference is the codec and SDI/timecode interfaces. The spec in Canada for the FDR-AX1 are still showing all the frame rates which was something I thought may also be a difference.

Ron Evans

Having played with the Z100 now, I have to say I am pleasantly impressed. It is not a sensitive as the PMW300 or an EX1, I estimate it's about 1.5 stops less sensitive at 0db. But it is remarkably noise free. Even at +9bd the (which brings it back up to similar sensitivity to a PMW-300/EX1) the noise is not too bad. Fast pans at +9 or +12db will reveal some image smear due to the 3D noise reduction having to work harder, but it's not too bad.

I thought it would be worse than this.There must be a lot of noise reduction and processing taking place to produce this clean image but overall the NR is very transparent and well executed. I estimate dynamic range at about 10 stops.The PMW300 on the Sony booth is showing more dynamic range than the Z100 and I did expect this due to the small pixel size. The standard 709 gamma curve with knee works quite well. The Cinematone gammas don't bring any more dynamic range as far as I can tell,but the highlight roll of is more pleasing and a little more natural looking with the Cinematone gammas.

My biggest reservation is focussing the camera with the built in viewfinder or LCD. The rear finder is really not up to the task of focussing for 4K. The LCD panel is better, but with no magnifier or monocular your going to have to have damn good eyesight to be able to use it for accurate focus at 4K. This is not an issue unique to this camera, as no camera I know of has a viewfinder better than 1080P and most are only 720P or 1/4HD 960x540. But not having a magnifier makes this even worse than most. So, your almost certainly going to have to rely on autofocus to get the focus spot on in many situations. Fortunately the autofocus is fast and accurate. I think with these smaller cameras the use of autofocus will be common even for us old "I never use autofocus" operators, just as autofocus is now normal even for professional photographers.

Build quality is good, the camera feels very solid yet lightweight. Minor gripes are that the shoe on the handle in front of the LCD means that if you have a large light or radio mic attached to the shoe you can't open and close the LCD panel.

The menu system is lifted straight from the PMW-F5 and F55 and most of the menu pages are very similar. Scene file settings are quite comprehensive and there is a lot of scope for fine tuning the pictures with matrix, detail and gamma settings. However no extended dynamic range Cinegammas or Hypergammas.

Overall, it's better than I expected. The 4K images are sharp and clear, not overly sharpened and they look quite natural. AT 0db the noise levels are very low and the image is quite clean, but sensitivity is lower than we expect from a modern HD camera (no big surprise). Dynamic range is also a little lower than you can get from a good 1/2" camera but not significantly so.

Of course, if the camera is recording at a resolution significantly higher then can be produced by the EVF, auto focus would become essential. So this would mean that a system that's generally been ignored and unused on this level of camera, the auto focus, will suddenly become one of the most critical systems on the camera; because if you can't focus it the camera is pretty much useless.

That is where spot focus on the other consumer Sony's is so useful and which I use all the time on my CX700 and NX30U. I miss this on my NX5U and clearly it is not on these new 4K cameras which is a pity. My NX5U is very difficult to get a crisp focus and I always use the expanded focus to finally check as well as peaking. The autofocus on NX5U is not that great so I hope it has been improved for these new PXW-Z100 and the FDR-AX1.

Was the FDR-AX1 on the Sony a well as the PXW-Z100 ?

Ron Evans

Nice review, Matt. Very informative.

I'm amazed at all the codecs this camera will be able to utilize, after next year's upgrade. XAVC HD, XAVC 4K, XAVC-S HD, XAVC-S 4K and AVCHD. That pretty much covers most shooting situations.There isn't much information about the upgrade but everything I read referred to a Long-GOP codec, which I assumed would just be a 10-bit 4:2:2 Long-GOP XAVC. Does that exist on the F55? Or would it be 8-bit 4:2:0 Long-GOP XAVC-S

Burning through 64GB cards in under 15 minutes is going to be an expensive habit to support!

In looking at this AX100 and Z100 sensor, it looks like Sony used a 18-19 megapixel count chip.

But why so high and so dense? Wouldnt 10-12mp been a far better choice for 4k?

At 4k / 8 mp...wouldnt a 20% over sample be all that was needed for good de Bayer processing?

I wonder if this sensor was used from ther Sony Cyber-Shot point and shoot camera line.

Interseting!

Whoa, that is significantly higher count than expected.

The only issue I see from some sample footage is low light high contrast de-bayering, A strong light source can overwhelm the debayer process and cause pixels to bloom.

Is this a standard Bayer pattern or the ClearVid pattern? If it's Clearvid, the extra resolution is actually needed, since a ton of pixels in a Clearvid pattern are interpolated.

I'm willing to bet some of the new Sony Android phones are also using this same sensor: (Coincidentally called the Xperia Z1. That states a 20.7 Megapixel resolution.) Sony's Xperia Z1 aims to be the biggest and best Android cameraphone yet | The Verge (http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/4/4682518/sonys-xperia-z1-specs-features-release-date)

Hi Alister,

Thanks for your little "review"...

Can you please tell us what is the quality of the lens? Does it behave well at end zoom range?

My CyberShot HX30VB appears to have the same sensor spec !!! If you look at the specs for Z100 or the AX1 they clearly say " effective " pixels 8300K. There is a crop down as mentioned elsewhere to a 1/3" size when looking at the lens dimensions/spec. I have not done the cropped sensor calculation assuming uniform sensor arrangement which is a big assume with Sony !!! What this means in actual sensor elements and arrangement is unknown unless Sony explain to us sometime. I expect it is a Clearvid pattern of some sort though.

Ron Evans

My biggest reservation is focussing the camera with the built in viewfinder or LCD. The rear finder is really not up to the task of focussing for 4K. The LCD panel is better, but with no magnifier or monocular your going to have to have damn good eyesight to be able to use it for accurate focus at 4K. This is not an issue unique to this camera, as no camera I know of has a viewfinder better than 1080P and most are only 720P or 1/4HD 960x540. But not having a magnifier makes this even worse than most. So, your almost certainly going to have to rely on autofocus to get the focus spot on in many situations. Fortunately the autofocus is fast and accurate. I think with these smaller cameras the use of autofocus will be common even for us old "I never use autofocus" operators, just as autofocus is now normal even for professional photographers.
Do you think that the new Sony 1920x1080 DVFL-700 mini-monitor
Sony Product Detail Page DVFL700 (http://pro.sony.com/bbsc/ssr/product-DVFL700/)
that has built in Contrast, Peaking, Focus Magnification and high Brightness function controls would work correctly on the SDI connector? Maybe that could help in getting better focus.

Wait, this AX1/Z100 sensor,...."IF" it truly is a Cybershot-type 18+mp sensor, can anyone confirm if it's a native 4x3 aspect or a 16x9?

I don't think Sony would put a 4x3 sensor and crop it to 16x9. (hopefully) If so, that shows Sony REALLY wanted to keep this camera in a true "entry level" 4k market. Something that would easily be outclassed on the day when the "Z200" was finally released. ("Z200 = 1/2 inch, THREE sensor with PMW 200 Fujinon lens)

I was a bit excited about this Z100 but if I'm going to drop $600-7000 on a new camera, it's going to have to be one that I feel will have a long shelf life. (like the EX1 had)

From the early specs that we have, this camera has a AWESOME codec but it's sensor is too small and has an unnecessarily high pixel count. (10-12mp in a 16x9 aspect would have been fine...not 18+mp)

Will wait for NAB 2013!

CT

I think it is 4x3 as used in the still cameras. Spec for still from the 1/2.3 sensor in these are 4x3 18.2 Mpixels ( 4896x3672 ) the spec quote for 16x9 is13Mpixels ( 4896x2752 ). For video in these cameras the spec says effective 2M for 16x9 clearly interpolated. For the FDR-AX1 and the PXW-Z100 the lens needs to crop to 1/3 " which I expect to be this 16x9 crop that is also on the CyberShot still cameras. So it will cover the same surface area as the 1/3 chips used in the NX5U and the AX2000 for which the lens was designed. My read is the sensor has approximately 13Mpixels interpolated to 8300K effective 4K video or down to 6500 for HD etc. It is back illuminated so is much better than the original 1/3 sensors in the NX5U or AX2000 and with gain could equal the larger sensors until one gets to really large sensors like APC or S35. My small Sony CX700 and NX30 easily outperform my NX5U in low light and they use a similar sensor type.

Ron Evans

Hi guys:

Finally my account has got approved to post a reply here. Upon viewing this thread, I have so much confusion regarding the selection of my next camera, especially with my pre-order of PMW-300 on BH site for some time. So I come here for help.

The first matter I seriously consider is the *noise*. I have a HVR-Z5U which is similar to this, and it gives me a picture full of noise, sometimes splotches when shooting under low light condition. Most of my shootings are concerts and interviews, and occasionally landscape in the field for documentary use. When I use it in the field, it works well as I thought; but when I am shooting indoor like concerts, the noise becomes not quite acceptable even in the afternoon. On Final Cut Pro X I see a lot of it on the picture, and I have to use post-processing filters like NeatVideo to render for a super long time to eliminate part of them. Not even saying when I use it during the night concerts when there’s little ambient light but strong light beams, it just looks terrible.

Now I wonder if PXW-Z100 is capable of doing all of this. I have seen some demo videos of PMW-300 on Youtube made by Sony, which are impressive with scenes like bonfire and concert in late nights, making me biasing to PMW-300; but when I saw the demo video of Z100, I had the impression of ‘not too bad’ with noise (DR is a bit worse) in dark scenes, and its sharpness seems quite good. I don’t know about the recording time and storage capability when it goes onto 4K/60p, which may easily fill up the entire 64G card. After all, noise has been a bane of existence of my records and I wish to have as less of it as possible.

The 2nd concern is broadcasting capability. As everyone knows, PMW-300 can be a major workhorse of broadcasting, yet such capability of PXW-Z100 is still to be determined. Recently and in the future I have a bunch of concerts to shoot along with live webcasting with at least 720p resolution, and most likely it will be 1080p with the allowance of bandwidth. Originally when I saw PMW-300, I thought ‘oh, this is what I want’ since it has 2 SDI outputs and Genlock interface, which means that it could be connect to most of switchers to perform multi-camera tasks. Suddenly, PXW-Z100 comes also with one SDI interface, and since ATEM 4K switcher does not even need Genlock connection, it strongly pulls my mind back in between. When the live task is finished, often I need to edit and post the record onto Youtube. Do I really need 4K to appreciate the online audience?

Still, there is some more advantages of PMW-300 that Z100 doesn’t have: future wireless accessories that Sony provides for 300 does need dual SDI outputs; multi-camera switching and editing is unrealistic for 4K at some point (unless you can own or rent several Z100s), 1080p will still last for at least 5 years firmly in this realm. 4K live as a bandwidth thug can’t be carried out easily, and no one can even receive it online because of the bandwidth. Noise and DR still better than Z100 hence means better quality especially for broadcasting; Interchangeable lens (yet adds so much budget in the future, should I expect it?) makes more flexibility for later, but yet not feasible for 4K.
So really, which one should I choose? I have last a few points that might be concerns:
1. 1080/60p capability of PMW-300 after XAVC firmware update already included in Z100 out of the factory. Will 60p be included later?
2. Budget concerns of lenses for PMW-300 later. This could be a big money hog. Is standard 14x enough, or can I find cheap deals on eBay?
3. Post-processing time of 4K videos could be extremely long due to larger file size and render time.
4. Is Genlock port still necessary with ATEM switchers everywhere?
5. Will there be a PXW-Z500 or even Z700 later? Will it totally trump PMW-300?

You will note from several of my posts that there is no comparison in noise between the older sensors ( in your Z5U and my NX5U ) and the new back illuminated sensors. The NX30U or the CX700 I have at max gain ( shown in data code as 28db if I recall ) has less noise than the NX5U at 12db. The sensor in the FDR-AX1 or PXW-Z100 is not the same sensor but of the same family used in the Sony consumer line and I expect the same noise performance. Much better than the old 3 chip 1/3" sensors in our cameras. My take on the FDR-AX1 is an update on the NX5U with 4K as a bonus. Higher data rate for 1920x1080, 60P and the 4K allows cropping in post. The PXW-Z100 without the LongGOP firmware will be a card eater and for me useless for long programs. 720P does not appear to be in spec, at least for the FDR-AX1.

Looking at the PMW300 you will be in a better position for chip size and acceptance for broadcast if that is your goal I expect.

Not sure how XAVCS will edit but I can edit 3 tracks of XAVC in multicam on my i7 2600K , 16G RAM, WIN 7 using Edius Pro7 at full frame rate and native files, preview at 1920x1080. Going to 4 tracks will cause a little stutter so usable. Single track is no problem at all.

Ron Evans

Wait, this AX1/Z100 sensor,...."IF" it truly is a Cybershot-type 18+mp sensor, can anyone confirm if it's a native 4x3 aspect or a 16x9?

I don't think Sony would put a 4x3 sensor and crop it to 16x9. (hopefully) If so, that shows Sony REALLY wanted to keep this camera in a true "entry level" 4k market. Something that would easily be outclassed on the day when the "Z200" was finally released. ("Z200 = 1/2 inch, THREE sensor with PMW 200 Fujinon lens)

I was a bit excited about this Z100 but if I'm going to drop $600-7000 on a new camera, it's going to have to be one that I feel will have a long shelf life. (like the EX1 had)

From the early specs that we have, this camera has a AWESOME codec but it's sensor is too small and has an unnecessarily high pixel count. (10-12mp in a 16x9 aspect would have been fine...not 18+mp)

Will wait for NAB 2013!

CT

Completely agree with this line of thinking. Will wait for a mass produced prism to be high enough in quality to resolve 4K and a native 4096x2160 1/2'' or 2/3'' sensor(s) before going all in with 4K. I'd still want to see a 100% manual lens with servo zoom and iris that can be toggled.

My EX1R is closing in on 2 years of use, and it's still going strong as a 1080p30 powerhouse. And if I need 50Mbps or higher? I use my Nanoflash.

I would also be OK with an "FS200" as well. Actually a 4K super 35 to replace my FS100 might be even better!

I would even accept a low cost ($5000-$6000) "FS200" 4k camera even if it was locked down to 8bit 4:2:0 XAVC.

I think this new Z100 will be like the "PMW100" of today in Sony's 4k lineup 12 months from now.

(PMW100 meaning;... low end sensor with high end codec)

CT

There was totally that chance with the FS700R to offer XAVC-S on SDHC UHS-II cards, but XQD is the only card format XAVC is being focused on. The FS700R was offered too early. Had it been delayed half a year, I would have no doubt it would have XAVC-S.

I think the PXW-Z100 is more capable than either the PMW 100 or the PMW 160 just shooting 1920x1080 and forgetting about 4K. Just view 4K as a bonus with the present firmware. With the upgrade to shoot LongGOP I find it difficult to see why anyone would buy the PMW100 or the PMW160. Remember that all are really 1/3" sensors. The PXW-Z100 will also shoot 1920x1080 60P 10bit 4:2:2 at 220Mbps too and is lower cost than the PMW 160 !!. If it actually came to market with the promised firmware upgrade it would be a very flexible camera for a large segment of the market including me as a serious hobbyist.

Ron Evans

I just find it hard to get over the sensor density. That many pixels in a APS-C sensor makes more sense, (like the EA50) but a small Cybershot/Xperia sensor is what I'm currently having trouble getting over.

I just find it hard to get over the sensor density. That many pixels in a APS-C sensor makes more sense, (like the EA50) but a small Cybershot/Xperia sensor is what I'm currently having trouble getting over.

We will find out in a month or so. I am sure it is the same basic sensor that is in my HX30VB. This camera produces some lovely 1920x1080 60P video in reasonable light, acceptable even in a dimly light restaurant and this with a really small 20x zoom lens with the algorithm set for stills and video compromise. Clearly the low light performance is not going to challenge a large sensor camera of the same technology. But to my knowledge there isn't a large sensor with the same technology as this size is about the range were back illumination cuts off in the present market anyway. Since we now have 4K on the FS700R I am just waiting for the 4K upgrade to the EA50 and the VG30 to complete the set !!! Then next year dip down into the NX30U range and normal Handycams for the consumer with maybe more compression for lower data rates!!!

Ron Evans

I wonder, could Sony have put the 1/2.3" chip in a PMW-200 body? The lens is designed for a 1/2" sensor. Could the 1/2.3" chip work with that lens?
Difficult, because then you're dealing with the full number of pixels on the chip, (is it 16 or 18 megapixels?)

DeBayering all those at full 60fps means a lot more processing than deBayering the central 3840x2160, and then the resultant will require downconversion. Starting off with 3840x2160 means a much simpler deBayer and no downconversion at the end. Theoretically, what you say would make a lot of sense - but expect such to be a lot more power hungry and expensive than what they've produced. I also suspect the PMW200 is more expensive than what they're using as well.

It's not difficult to find things about the Z100 which could be better - but I think it's pretty good for the money.

So looks like in this case it's better to keep up with PMW-300 for me and forget about 4K now. Though it would be shiny and maybe cheaper to get 4K onto Youtube, the improvisation if 4K in all the perspective does not quite match the industrial and broadcasting reality.

And I have also done some math calculations. 1/2.33" = 0.42", assuming it's 4:3 and crop it to 16:9 it's about 0.3939", which is slightly larger than 1/3", but not so much.

If it is the same sensor as in my HX30VB the spec for that at 4x3 4896 x 3672 and the 16x9 crop is 4896 x 2752, about 13Mpixels from which 8300k effective pixels are interpolated. So the width is the same and the center of the height is cropped to get the 16x9. Close to 1/3 " as used in the NX5U/AX2000 that share the lens likely with a different LP filter. About 4 times the pixels of a similar sized HD sensor but it is back illuminated in this case. Still not going to match a PMW300 in low light though and there will be a firmware upgrade next I think for the PMW300 to have XAVC codec. I don't think the PXw is a competitior for the PMW200/300 but the PMW 100 and 160 will be questionable if not used in a group with other PMW cameras for the similar codec.

Ron Evans

......the 16x9 crop is 4896 x 2752, about 13Mpixels from which 8300k effective pixels are interpolated. So the width is the same and the center of the height is cropped to get the 16x9.
I think it's smaller - the spec on the Sony news page specifically talks of "With 8 million effective pixels, ......" - not 13 Mpixels (though I think they're rounding down from about 8.3 million).

Using the centre 8.3 million (the centre 3840x2160) gives them a far easier engineering job than using 13 million and some form of downscale. Probably better quality than using the 13 million and a downscale unless you've got some pretty powerful processing, and that's unlikely in a camera at this price. I think I've also read it confirmed that is what is happening from somebody who has worked it out from crop factors etc?

Yes just did some calculations and you are probably correct to crop to the 1/3" size the lens needs. The diagonal is more than 1/3 " for the crop off the square chip .

I was also wondering what the live output would be from the HDMI of the FDR-AX1 if the front ends are the same. Could it too be 10bit 4:2:2 ?

Ron Evans

I would strongly suspect that Sony would cripple the HDMI on the AX1. It's important for them to create some distance between the AX1 and the Z100 so I strongly suspect that it's 8 bit 4:2:0. (maybe 8 bit 4:2:2 if we are very lucky)

Although, I suppose it doesn't make a significant difference being that the video comes from this tiny single Bayer sensor. Heck, I suspect that even XAVC Long GOP 150Mbp/s, 8bit 4:2:0 already captures 99.99% of all this little sensor has to offer. Putting a 10bit 4:2:2 600 Mbp/s intraframe codec behind this tiny sensor is overkill. It's like building a high tech Formula 1 race car but giving it a 1.6 liter Toyota Corolla engine.

Anyway, I was excited about this AX1/Z100 a week ago but that emotion is almost completely gone now.

My first 4K camera will be Sony's new super 35 "FS200" with XAVC-S Long GOP onboard. That's when I jump in the 4K pool. ;-)

I would give $100 right now to see Sony's three year 4k camera R&D plans. Whatever it is, I suspect that in 18 months, the Z100 will be considered the "bottom-end" of their 4K product fleet.

NAB 2014! I'm there!

I would strongly suspect that Sony would cripple the HDMI on the AX1. It's important for them create some distance between the AX1 and the Z100 so I strongly suspect that it's 8 bit 4:2:0. (maybe 8 bit 4:2:2 if we are very lucky)

Although, I suppose it doesn't make a significant difference being that the video comes from this tiny single Bayer sensor. Heck, I suspect that even XAVC Long GOP 150Mbp/s, 8bit 4:2:0 already captures 99.99% of all this little sensor has to offer. Putting a 10bit 4:2:2 600 Mbp/s intraframe codec behind a sensor like this is overkill. It's like building a high tech Formula 1 race car but giving it a 1.6 liter Toyota Corolla engine.

Anyway, I was excited about this AX1/Z100 a week ago but that emotion is almost completely gone now.

My first 4K camera will be Sony's new super 35 "FS200" with XAVC-S Long GOP onboard. That's when I jump in the 4K pool. ;-)

I would give $100 right now to see Sony's three year 4k camera R&D plans. Whatever it is, I suspect that in 18 months, the Z100 will be considered the "bottom-end" of their 4K product fleet.

NAB 2014! I'm there!

One more question: in the future version of 4K cameras, like Z200 or further, for sure it would have interchangeable lenses. It is a nice benefit yet a questionable thing. The current Fujinon lenses are designed for 1080p,can it be fit for a 4K resolution? Like the one on PMW-300 may not be fit onto PXW-Z300 later due to the quality and purpose, etc. Another question is, is there any way to put Canon DSLR L lenses onto PMW-300 and how would be the quality of that?

My first 4K camera will be Sony's new super 35 "FS200" with XAVC-S Long GOP onboard. That's when I jump in the 4K pool. ;-)!

I would have wanted that to be the FS700R, which would have recorded XAVC-S to SDXC UHS-II cards if there was more R&D time dedicated to it. You've got to remember, the FS200 may not have ND filters when and if that comes out.

I expect the next XAVCS announcements to be a version of the EA50 or the VG30( or both since they are really the same though the extra space in the EA50 may be needed for the fan). Consumer /prosumer small sensor and larger sensor with XAVCS with PXW-Z100 and FS700R for the pros with XAVC.

Ron Evans

FS700R's already been announced. there's no XAVC support. The only codec I would see Sony putting on the next upgrade to the FS700 is XAVC-S. If standard XAVC is put on, that starts to cannibalize the F5 market. Plus, XAVC requires the UDF filesystem, something SD cards and Memory Sticks don't support.

The 700R came out too fast. With faster card technologies other than XQD like UHS-II and adding USB 3 to the FMUs, there is ample opportunity to add onboard 4K recording, yet they released it to early to add these technologies. Remember that it is a single slot camera, and the least physical change required is usually the best route, so UHS-II SD cards sound about right.