I am planning on getting a FD-AX1 and was testing some XAVCS files in Vegas 12. I plan on cropping and panning around the 3840x2160 image in a 1902x1080 project so was testing the playback and render speeds with my present PC. It is an i7 2600K, 16G RAM, Win7 64 bit and with GTX560 GPU card. Vegas 12 build is current as is the NVidia driver. Render speed to Canopus HQX codec is slow at about 5.3 times realtime with the GPU and with hardware acceleration off it is faster at about 3.9 times realtime. Render to AVCHD is faster at 4.7 times and hardware off is 3 times. With GPU on CPU is showwing about 45% and with GPU off CPU is showing 80%.

A simple scale to 1920x1080 takes about 3 times so not really different from the crop and pan for AVCHD output.

I would really like to find out what I have to do to my PC to make the render faster. Changing my processor to the latest Haswell will only improve about 15% at most I think so it may well involve a little more.

Ron Evans

Have you matched the Vegas project settings to the XAVC?

Here's what I read on the Sony Site for XAVC:

"Support
Vegas™ Pro 12 is the world's first HD, 2K and 4K XAVC™ native editor. The latest version features built-in support for XAVC files, with the same drag and drop, no transcode simplicity that Vegas Pro users have enjoyed with other popular formats. No expensive add-ons or plug-ins are required. For optimal performance with 2K and 4K XAVC content, use the new smart proxy HD workflow for full frame rate playback on a wide variety of hardware configurations, from compact laptops to advanced multi core workstations."

Note the 3 items:

1] Transcode Simplicity

2] For optimal playback use smart proxy.....

3] Laptop and Advanced core stations

Ok, I interpret this as you may need to look at that there is Transcode going on PLUS experiment with their new Smart Proxy and consider experiment on on more Core workstations.

So to recap: Transcoding is a given; Smart Proxy is offered, we've gotta think "why"?; the number of cores is again becoming crucial. And finally, GPU acceleration does become capable of heavy lifting when they are GPU optimum-enabled FXs.

I hope my clumsy interpretations are accurate. But more than that, hopefully I've offered some thoughts you might consider thinking or researching further.

Cheers

Grazie

I have to say, that is one nice bit of machinery.
Cant wait for the reviews.
I just cant see how you could have a fluid editing experience with the native files.
Maybe a nested project with a proxy on top to be muted before render?

FDR-AX1 is XAVCS not XAVC. It uses the Long GOP version of XAVC so I was expecting to have more problems. XAVC editing in Vegas 12 or Edius Pro 7 are not a problem as it is an i-frame encode so PC does not have to create frames from LongGOP stream and if the hard drive throughput is OK for the higher date rate there should be no problem. I can multicam 3 streams of XAVC in Edius Pro7.

I specifically want to use a 1920x1080 project because I want to crop the image to 1920x1080 and pan around so that I can emulate a multicam shoot with one camera. I did this with HDV when it first was introduced to produce SD output and it worked great so want to do the same with 3840x2160.

Rendering and scaling to output format is the issue for the PC so I just want to find the best way to do this. A more powerful CPU or GPU are the options. Installing a 3770K in my motherboard is the lowest cost alternative but that may only give me about 15% improvement. Not sure what GPU I would need to even get better than the CPU alone since my first tests show the CPU alone to be faster. Maybe the GPU in this case is not used or optimized.

Latest build of Vegas 12 will edit both XAVC and XAVCS.

Ron Evans

built-in support for XAVC files, with the same drag and drop, no transcode simplicity that..."

Note the 3 items:
1] Transcode Simplicity
I interpret this as you may need to look at that there is Transcode going on
So to recap: Transcoding is a given

It says "NO transcode simplicity" - in other words, no transcoding is needed, 'cos Vegas just handles it natively as-is. Depending on your CPU of course. The only reason for the proxy on playback is if your CPU can't handle it. It won't make any difference to rendering though.

Dave

Ron, I wonder if a dual processor workstation would do the trick.

Ron, I wonder if a dual processor workstation would do the trick.

Yes I think it will but I am just trying to assess the benefit for the cost as I am only really interested in the render times as the editing is OK. Unless it is 4 or 5 times quicker it may not be worth the extra cost. A Supermicro workstation will be a few thousand dollars and I may just leave it render over night !!! If by going to a 3770K in my motherboard and a new video card I could improve a reasonable amount that may be the most economical solution for me.

Ron Evans

I'd wait for the native 8 core LGA2011s to start editing XAVC-S. That along with a GTX TITAN (or newer) could do the trick.

Having looked at several sources now the answer seems to be multiple fast cores. Many people report no real effect of the GPU which is what I have found with my admittedly slower GTX560. Current cost for a 8 core Xeon is from about $1200 for a slow one to over $2200 for the fast one. I think I will leave it render over night !!! My present though is to upgrade my 2600K to a 3770K only a little faster but with improvements to PCI and Quicksync when I upgrade my motherboard bios to use the 3770K. Editing in Vegas or Edius seems usable its just the rendering/scaling to 1920x1080 that is taking the time.

Ron Evans

I have done a few tests that you all may be interested in. For those that have obtained the XAVCS files from the VideoAcadamy I used the first file the C0008 which is 36 sec long.

First I set up a 1920x1080 50i project in Vegas 12, placed this 3840x2160 file on the timeline. I used the crop/motion to set up a 1920x1080 crop and just set up a pan from left to right over the length of the clip. This played back fine with 960x540 preview at full frame rate of 50. I then rendered a Bluray preset file which took 2 min and 52 sec and then a Canopus HQX file which also took 2 min 57 sec.

Then I repeated the exercise in Edius PRO 7 with the same clip same project setting etc. Used the Layouter to do the crop and pan. Render from Edius Pro 7 took 55sec for the Canopus HQX file and without hardware acceleration the Bluray took 4 mins and 42 sec. With Quicksync hardware assistance the Bluray preset encode took 55 sec.

The user interface for doing this cropping is a lot easier in Vegas but clearly the performance is much better in Edius. For editing both Edius and Vegas playback just fine for this single track crop/pan that I want to do.

I think I have come to the conclusion that upgrading my motherboard bios and CPU to a 3770K to get about a 15% performance improvement and better Quicksync will be the way I will go. I will use Edius most of the time as I now do, and Vegas when the crop/pan is more difficult to see where to go.

Ron Evans

There are two more possibilities:

switch to premiere pro + a quadro card with the mercury playback engine The quadro cards are outperforming dual xeon workstations, from the test scores I have seen on line. The mercury playback engine, is exclusive to the quadro cards.

ref: http://www.servethehome.com/Workstation-detail/nvidia-quadro-k4000-workstation-graphics-card-review/

or,

do like what I do on my X9dai e5-2687 WS (single cpu), with a k4000 quadro card:

(Vegas 11) GPU turn on for editing and playback. GPU turned off for rendering. Render project to xdcam 35Mbps HQ profile that matches the project settings, (which in turn matches the majority of the footage - so that vegas processing is minimized); and render from the source drive to a scratch drive. Then use handbrake to resize and de-interlace the project for web and computer delivery, rendering from the scratch drive back to the source drive. Vegas will not make use of the computing power that is available, no matter the codec used for export. In fact, I can start and edit another vegas project while vegas is rendering in the background, on my system. Handbrake will use all 8 cores and use all of the computing power available - and is blazingly fast. The results are far faster and of better quality this way and is free of system crashes. I used to export from vegas using the dnxhd codec, but I found that it was problematic and way too slow in vegas. So I switched to xdcam Hq with no loss in quality that I can see.

R

P.S. STH is my favorite website for getting advice on system builds.

For information the FDR-AX1 only shoots progressive either 24, 25, 30, 50 or 60 fps so need to deinterlace. To be correct, 23.98 and of course 59.94 . Since I use both Edius and Vegas I use the Edius HQX 10bit codec to transfer between them or to send to TMPGenc for resizing and encoding for DVD.

I have ADOBE CS6 Production Suite but never use Premiere. Edius is a lot faster than the others especially for multicam which I do all the time its weakness is audio which I do in Vegas and Sound Forge.

I did upgrade to the 3770 and see the small improvement I expected of about 10%.

Just waiting for my camera now. Its on backorder.

Ron Evans

this is a most interesting thread - am also looking at the pxw z100 - seems to be the same as the ax1?

Basically they are the same but there are significant difference especially for the first releases. FDR-AX1 uses the XAVCS LongGOP codec is 8bit 4:2:0 QFHD 3840x2016. The PXW-Z100 uses the XAVC i frame only codec 10bit 4:2:2 is both QFHD and true 4K. Consequently the data rates are very different. Max data rate for the FDR-AX1 is 150Mbps but the PXW-Z100 is 600Mbps so for record times a 64G card will run for 50 mins on the FDR-AX1 and about 10 mins on the PXW-Z100 !!! Next year the PXW-Z100 is said to get a firmware upgrade to have longGOP at both 10bit and 8 bit which will make it more usable but as a camera for long form projects now it is not viable in my mind.

PXW-Z100 has other interfaces too that are nice. WiFI dongle for control with phone or tablet , HD-SDI and timecode interface and I think more menu controls than the FDR-AX1. That would make it similar to the differences between the AX2000 and the NX5U. Next year with the firmware update it will be a nice camera.

Ron Evans

Slightly off topic. This thread has been a good read for me since I am considering buying a new camera soon and the Sony FDR-AX1 is on my radar. I am also considering the Sony PMW-150 (pal). In terms of editing on the Vegas timeline, how does the AX1's codec compare to the MXF files? Are the MXF files easier to work with on the timeline? I might have to do some editing off-site with a laptop and I'm looking for the smoothest workflow possible.

Apart from the ability to crop and pan with the AX1, is there any other reason to go with this cam over the PMW 150?

..

Apart from the ability to crop and pan with the AX1, is there any other reason to go with this cam over the PMW 150?

Crop and pan is my only reason. What do you want to do with your new camera ?

Ron Evans

Crop and pan is my only reason. What do you want to do with your new camera ?

Ron Evans

Hi Ron. The camera is primarily for studio work (Interviews, green screen work, etc) with the option of doing some run and gun stuff. My main concern is ease of edit and getting each job out as soon as possible. Am I to expect teething problems with the codec of a new camera like the AX1? I can live without the crop and pan. From experience I tend not to jump on new technology too quickly because of teething problems.

Doesn't look like you need FDR-AX1. What camera do you use now ?

Ron Evans

Well I have just ordered one.

Seems like just the cam I have been waiting for to replace my Canon XHA1. I'm a stills photog and as is becoming the norm nowadays, often have to shoot 'b' roll. Often shooting aerials of rigs and offshore platforms so this looks great, 60/50P for a smoother aerial shot, Pal or NTSC switch for AU or US clients. Relatively high data rate for the downscaled 1080P at 50 Mbps. XQD cards that look the goods at high transfer rates and prices dropping (32 gig @ less then $100 at B&H) and other makers coming on board. Smallish form factor, inbuildt NDs. Reasonable lens quality and wide angle. Flexible audio recording. Sony layout. Was considering the NEX-EA50 but put off by the lack of ND's and the feeling that the AX-1 will be a more robust unit.

AND 4K!!

I have not got it (the camera) as yet so I am sure there will be some problems and issues, especially trans-coding the files.
I understand the small sensor issue and the 4:2:0 colour space and log gop files, however, am just starting a four + year corporate project and have the feeling that by project end the 4K will be the norm :)

robert, please keep us informed and if possible give us a 'review' of the camera when you get it. i know there's a great many of us z5'ers thinking this might just be the next step....

I have had mine a few days from Crutchfield. The original 4k files look really nice but when I render to a bluray file it does not look so great, as there is a lot of aliasing. I use a Sony EX1R, and a canon XA20 and can render very nice blurays from those cameras.

I use Sony Vegas 12 for editing and I tried using the same settings to render to bluray as I did with those cameras for the Sony AX1.

I typically set the Vegas project settings to upper field first and then interpolate fields before rendering for best bluray quality. When I do this with the AX1, I am not pleased. I have dialed down the sharpness from factory 0 to minus 3 and it helped slightly withth aliasing but not much.

The camera is very nice and produces great images, I just cannot get the blu ray files to be of nice quality,
Any recommendations on Sony Vegas settings? I usually render to Sony AVC blu ray but have tried mpeg2 as well with the avc file looking noticeably better.

James

Try setting the fields to none, or progressive, whatever the option is in Vegas. You should be shooting progressive footage. No fields.

Thank you, I have tried that as well. The canon xa20 also shoots progressive but after I edit, I have to select field order to "upper field first" and deinterlace to "interpolate fields" to render the best blurays. Leaving it at progressive and deinterlace to "none" produces lesser quality.

For the AX1, I have tried both progressive, upper field first, lower field first etc.. and cannot get equal quality of even the xa20 bluray files. At this point I am just experimenting. The original AX1 files are pristine.

James

How are you scaling down from 4K to HD?

The problem is that you can't easily apply any form of interpolation to an interlaced source as in any given field, every other line is missing so the interpolation doesn't work. Even if you do try to interpolate as there is motion between every other line the interpolation still fails or is less than satisfactory. You really need to be shooting progressive.

For the very best results I recommend shooting at 60p this will eliminate the field issues during down conversion and each of the 60 frames will be down converted into one of the 60 fields required. Then you need to ensure that the downconversion includes an anti-aliasing process such as bilinear interpolation otherwise you will have jagged edges and aliasing. If you don't have any control over the interpolation try adding a 2 or 3 pixel blur to the 4K footage prior to down converting. It sounds counter intuitive to blur the picture before down conversion but it's actually very effective.

The other final consideration is that the cameras sharpening circuits are tailored for 4K so they have little effect at HD. You mat need to add a small amount of sharpening to the down converted HD to compensate for this.

see this: Getting SD from HD and the problems of oversampling. | XDCAM-USER.COM (http://www.xdcam-user.com/2009/11/getting-sd-from-hd-and-the-problems-of-oversampling/)
and this: Getting good SD from an HD camera. | XDCAM-USER.COM (http://www.xdcam-user.com/2011/03/getting-good-sd-from-an-hd-camera/)

Thank you all for your advice. I did in fact try to add a little sharpening even before I read your post with no improvement.. I am shooting in 60p and there is still an excessive amount of aliasing when rendering to bluray. I am rendering to sony avc bluray preset with original file settings at progressive as I am shooting at 60p. Since there was too much aliasing, I have just been experimenting with other settings with no luck.

When rendering to a non-bluray file such as a progressive mp4 file for the internet, the results are perfect.
I really like the camera but I primarily purchased it to produce amazing blurays but am having no success. I may keep trying a few more days before sending it back to Crutchfield.

Alister, thank you for providing the informative links, I am going to try to use the flicker filter. I know I have that option in Sony DVD Architect.

Thanks,
James

double post

Just a thought, have you tried rendering to an intermediate file, like ProRes HQ or whatever, and making your Bluray from that?

I have not tried that yet. I probably will not attempt that, I video airplane shows and if I have to render a 2 hour project once and do it again to convert to blu ray, then I prefer to just stick to HD cameras for the moment.

It is a nice camera and the problem may lie with the conversion of the two resolutions so I do not blame the camera.

Overall a nice camera, the only two issues I have is difficulty to convert to acceptable quality blu ray and that fact that the the camera does not hold fixed aperture across its 20X lens.

The results have been the same editing in Adobe Premiere Pro.(bad aliasing), a few more days of trying and I will reluctantly send it back as the original files are the best images I've seen from a camera at this price range. (in good light).

James

Clearly scaling is the issue and have not found Vegas scaling to be that great. I have just got my FDR-AX1 this afternoon so have not had time to play with it too much. Will record some clips tomorrow and see how it performs in Vegas and Edius. My expectation is Edius downscaling will be better.

Ron Evans

Ron, good to hear. Looking forward to your results.

James

Just some quick comments on one afternoon of shooting with the FDR-AX1.

It is billed as a consumer camera but doesn't have a remote control !! First Sony I have got that doesn't include one. Including the NX5U

Does not have Bravia sync so my TV does not respond to its presence . Seems to stay in standby when playing clips over the HDMI to the TV.

Firmware is Version 1.01 I think there will be lots more as neither SD slot or one USB do anything at the moment.

Fan noise is evident in quite room.

I also see moire when there are minor movement on lines that are close.This with playback to a 1920x1080 TV so not sure if this is due to the internal scaling. Will see with the same clip when I scale in edit.


Things I Like:

The picture is sharp and very clean.

Seems to be as sensitive or more so than my NX5U and with less noise. Need to check this more but that is the first impression.

Miss having realtime for battery life and for a consumer camera things like spotlight control etc. No timecode just a counter like most consumer cameras. Will really be interested to find differences to the PXW-Z100 and what the firmware updates will real have next year.

Will try and post some clips when I have time.

Ron Evans

When you set camera output to 1920 x 1080i in order to watch on an HDTV then the video looks great. But when rendering to BluRay via Sony Vegas, ther is too much aliasing to create an acceptable blu ray.

James

I just downloaded and used the trial version of Edius 7. I had never used this software before and generated a bluray file that looked excellent with very minimal aliasing compared to the Sony Vegas and Adobe renders.

If you plan on using this camera for creating quality blurays, then you must be prepared to possibly learn how to use other NLE's as well as experimenting.

James

Edius is my main editing program for a number of reasons. I use Vegas for audio though because of the ability to squeeze and stretch audio for sync and easy interface with Sound Forge and Spectral Layers. Video is Edius. In project settings you can specify which scaling algorithm is used. By default it will be fast and sharpbut there are options including several Laczos variants.

Ron Evans

Sony sent some of these camera to the Napa Valley Film Fest. I'd be interested to see the results.

Sony at the Napa Valley Film Festival | Sony (http://blog.sony.com/2013/11/sony-at-the-napa-valley-film-festival/comment-page-1/#comment-31009)

Ron are you saying there is no remote to a panhandle as in lanc or the av method from the cx era or the current multifunction mico usb?

Yes the Lanc control is just in the same place as the NX5U and AX2000 next to the button 7 normally assigned to expanded focus. Works fine. However unlike the NX5U it does not have a nice ramp to start or stop. Not sure if that was on the AX2000 or was one of the things that was different between the two models. maybe the PXW-Z100 will have a ramp to smoothly start and stop the zoom. Does not have smooth switch gain changes either and I think that was something that was different between the AX2000 and the NX5U too.
Will be interesting to see exactly the spec differences between the FDR-AX1 and the PXW-Z100 other than the obvious codec differences.
Ron Evans

Hi Ron, just curious about your final impressions of the cam. Will you be keeping yours? Satisfied?


James

Yes I will keep. It handle much like the NX5U. I still have to do more testing for my use but I intended to use only as acquisition and crop out a 1920x1080 image and my testing of that works just fine so it is a matter of finding out how to get the most out of the camera. It is maybe a stop slower than the NX5U but has a lot less noise so I think that is a wash. Focusing will be very critical and I would have liked the expanded focus to be more like 4 :1 not the 2:1 that is the same as the NX5U. Auto focus seems a little better than the NX5U but in viewing video I can see it hunt a little so just as with the NX5U I will not use.

I am collecting a list of things that I would prefer to be different. So far:

LCD indications.
I would prefer battery to indicate time remaining not icons
Prefer to have parameters with like the NX5U with A next to them for automatic etc. Though at least all parameters are displayed all the time.
Would like spotlight setting I feel billed as a consumer camera this should be included.
Microphone is active when clips thumbnail display is active and since there is no remote one needs to set TV volume down before setting the camera to play a clip, then volume up to listen. A little crude. Otherwise there is feedback to the TV speakers.

Neither SD card slot is working. The host USB is not working and the data code button is also inactive for this firmware version ( version 1.01 on my unit). I sort of feel the real release will be after the next firmware update !!!!

PlayMemories changes I would like:

Unlike AVCHD PlayMemories does not change the name of the file ( at least I haven't figured out how yet) so all files retain their naming from the card. After formatting they of course all start at C0001. PlayMemories does of course put in directories by date and there are a lot of parameters logged too though not camera parameters ( I expect this is because data code is not active in this firmware version !!!!)


I will be insterested to see the menu differences to the PXW-Z100 as I expect them to have the differences that exist between the AX2000 and the NX5U. Things like smooth switching of gain and a ramp for zoom start and stop. Iris limit as well as gain limit etc. Knee controls in the paint etc. Maybe these will also appear for the FDR-AX1 firmware update !!!

I am not able to view image on a 4K TV but to my Sony 240Hz TV they are lovely. So the internal downscale is not bad.

Ron Evans

It is maybe a stop slower than the NX5U but has a lot less noise so I think that is a wash.

The NX5U is not the quietest camera out there, but this surprises me. Maybe I was too quick in writing the AX1 off.

I don't suppose it would be possible for you to shoot a few seconds of an indoor lighted scene (good enough light to read by) that has some shadow areas with both cameras and upload the original files somewhere?

If required, I could send you ftp upload details to a folder on my web site, which I could make available for others.

I will try and find something this weekend that is suitable.

Ron Evans

Thanks. Do you want me to send you ftp details?

Well finally received my AX-1. This is my first Sony and I am coming from a Canon XH-a1 and 5DMk11 &111s. I am primarily a stills photographer so not at all any sort of expert on video camera operation.

On getting the Ax-1 out of the box, I must say I was very impressed. The build quality seems to be very good. It does have a few open vents for the fan operation, so will have to be careful with condensation when coming out of cold offices/hotel rooms etc. The lens operation is nice and smooth, a better action I think then the Canon XH-A1. The overall size is similar to the XH-A1, it is a little shorter when the lens hood is off, but also a little wider. The lens hood works very well, but if you remove it to travel there is no lens cap included. Additionally there is no shoulder strap.

For testing I shot 4K @ 50P. Getting it into Vegas is easy using a Sony XQD USB3 card reader and the Vegas 'Device Explorer' function, 19 min of video, about 18 gig of files, took about 7 minutes to capture to local drive. I then dropped all 18 gigs onto Vegas Pro 12 time-line and let it conform to the media. It will not play back much faster then two or three frames per second, so I can't see myself editing in its native 4K without a proxy. As a test I rendered the whole 18 gigs out to a Sony Vegas native mxf file at 1080 25P, this resulted in about a 7 gig file from the original 18gig. This 1080 25P file will then easily play and edit in Vegas or play in VLC media player.

The resulting down scaled image was far better then I expected and much better then the native image from the Canon XH-A1, which I always found soft and suffering from chromatic aberration. This render was with no applied sharpness for the downscale. I have attached a screen grab referenced below.

In general the camera has a good deal of control available, particularly in relation to audio control. The picture set-up is not as' tweekable' as the Canon XH-A1, however there is a good level of control with a variety of gammas and hue, saturation, contrast controls.

Physically the lay-out is very good and I found it easy to pick-up, however the 'hot shoe' is not really available to some add ons, as it will get in the way of the flip up LCD. I think the QXD cards are a winner, with low pricing already at B&H etc. The supplied manual is very light on for detail and I can't really see how Sony considers the camera as primarily as a consumer product. The only real consumer aspect of the package is the addition of "PlayMemories home edition", not that I have installed it!

As a first time Sony Cam user, could some one help me with the zebra function of the AX-1? I am only used to one setting with the Canon and this has the option for two at once. Zebra1 at 50 to 107%, Zebra1 Aperture Level at 1 to 20%, and Zebra2 Level at 52 to 109% (that probably makes three) ?? What does this mean, different levels within the scene I guess?

I think we may need a new Sony FDR sub-forum:)

Cheers,
Rob


Well I have just ordered one.

Seems like just the cam I have been waiting for to replace my Canon XHA1. I'm a stills photog and as is becoming the norm nowadays, often have to shoot 'b' roll. Often shooting aerials of rigs and offshore platforms so this looks great, 60/50P for a smoother aerial shot, Pal or NTSC switch for AU or US clients. Relatively high data rate for the downscaled 1080P at 50 Mbps. XQD cards that look the goods at high transfer rates and prices dropping (32 gig @ less then $100 at B&H) and other makers coming on board. Smallish form factor, inbuildt NDs. Reasonable lens quality and wide angle. Flexible audio recording. Sony layout. Was considering the NEX-EA50 but put off by the lack of ND's and the feeling that the AX-1 will be a more robust unit.

AND 4K!!

I have not got it (the camera) as yet so I am sure there will be some problems and issues, especially trans-coding the files.
I understand the small sensor issue and the 4:2:0 colour space and log gop files, however, am just starting a four + year corporate project and have the feeling that by project end the 4K will be the norm :)

I always use the Sony software to transfer to PC for all my cameras ( FDR-AX1, NX5U, NX30U, CX700, XR500 ) The PlayMemories is a little disappointing compared to the software for the others as it does not rename the files by date and time like they do for AVCHD but just places the files in directories by date taken so file names are not unique, bummer. Calendar view works the same though. It also does not join files that span cards either not good for me as my projects are always larger than a single 64G card. The separate files seem to butt together OK though even though there are some indication that they may not sync together correctly according to PXW-Z100 information though that may refer to XAVC files rather than XAVC-S files.

I have the same playback experience with Vegas 12 but Edius Pro 7 will playback at close to realtime. Vegas plays back OK too if preview is set to draft auto. Image is good enough on a PC monitor to edit with and can always be switched to best full for color correction etc.

FDR-AX1 is between 1 and 2 stops slower than the NX5U or the other Sony's but image is clean and downscale from Edius using Lanczos3 is nice. I miss a few things from the NX5U. There is the paint function for parameter changing but poor compared to the 6 Picture Profiles of the NX5U that are switchable and have more parameters. Data code button does not work yet so cannot go back and find settings for a clip. Battery indication is silly icons rather than time which I do not understand having a Infolithium battery set up for this function !!! Maybe the next firmware update !! It is what I expected though and look forward to the firmware upgrades next year that I feel will really be the product.

Ron Evans

yes install playmemories home. It is far more useful than the silly name implies