Chris Jothi
October 17th, 2005, 04:44 PM
Hey all,
Long time since I posted here. This is basically a meandering little post, but something I just wanna get off my chest!
Basically, back in Spring this year I bought the Z1 (UK version) to complete a film for the final year of my degree.
I absolutely loved the camera, however when I came to film a wedding the poor low light capabilities revealed the camera's major weakness. Low light performance. Could I care less about progressive images? Not now. Not really a demand in the UK, and unless you go to really long lengths video will always look like video to me. The great thing about these cameras are their 16:9 chips. The problem is there should NEVER be a step taken backwards. These should be superior in every shape and form to their predecessors, but being dull where the VX2000/PD150/170s are bright is baffling to me.
Any how, I ended up selling the Z1. It had served its purpose for me, and as I saw a huge gaping hole in my summer for filming I figured I might as well get rid of it whilst it still holds its value (especially with that Panny cam putting doubt in so many potential buyers).
Now I'm working for a company who use the PD170, among others, but also have the FX1. Having owned and thoroughly acquainted myself with the Z1 I knew the best pictures would be produced with the FX1. My doubt however was with the sound. Well having been filming all day today with a Beacktek attached to it I am glad to say I cannot honestly notice a single difference in quality. Yes, the Z1 has it all built in (and has some useful features the FX1 does not) but for me the primaries are as follows:
Lens, build quality, sound, ergonomics. With these four areas the cameras are inseparable. Same picture quality, same great controls (still love the LCD screen, and its position, still love the vastly improved focus ring over the PD170, and LOVE the shot transition, which thankfully is retained with the FX1). I was also happy to find the picture profiles allowing me the control I needed to shift the WB to make the picture a tad warmer. Definitely not a consumer feature!
As for the sound, with a stereo jack into the FX1, manually adjusting each XLR input with the adaptor, I can't see much difference. In fact, I would argue the Beachtek box has better positioned gain knobs, which are less finicky than the Z1's.
My main gripe is what seems to be a lower audio monitoring level with the FX1, and the lack of peaking lines (which is ridiculous as the button, with its printed label is still on the back!). I reckon the FX1 has the same circuitry inside as the Z1, it will just take someone with balls to tamper with it to activate the hidden Z1 features.
Bottom line: The 16:9 SD images (I know, I know, should have shot in HDV and downconverted, but can't with this particular film) are rich in colour and detail.
Worthless low light performance imo (and honestly, having used the PD170 for night shots over the weekend that just past, I am telling you the difference is huge) but at the end of the day you use what is right for the application. Today the FX1 fit the application, surpassed my expectations, and will delight the end client; guaranteed.
Tomorrow am off to Manchester and taking the FX1 with me. I can't wait to look through the viewfinder and compose some more great images with this camera. I might even shoot some HDV, 25CF stuff for my own personal curiosity and see what it looks like back at work.
Chris
Long time since I posted here. This is basically a meandering little post, but something I just wanna get off my chest!
Basically, back in Spring this year I bought the Z1 (UK version) to complete a film for the final year of my degree.
I absolutely loved the camera, however when I came to film a wedding the poor low light capabilities revealed the camera's major weakness. Low light performance. Could I care less about progressive images? Not now. Not really a demand in the UK, and unless you go to really long lengths video will always look like video to me. The great thing about these cameras are their 16:9 chips. The problem is there should NEVER be a step taken backwards. These should be superior in every shape and form to their predecessors, but being dull where the VX2000/PD150/170s are bright is baffling to me.
Any how, I ended up selling the Z1. It had served its purpose for me, and as I saw a huge gaping hole in my summer for filming I figured I might as well get rid of it whilst it still holds its value (especially with that Panny cam putting doubt in so many potential buyers).
Now I'm working for a company who use the PD170, among others, but also have the FX1. Having owned and thoroughly acquainted myself with the Z1 I knew the best pictures would be produced with the FX1. My doubt however was with the sound. Well having been filming all day today with a Beacktek attached to it I am glad to say I cannot honestly notice a single difference in quality. Yes, the Z1 has it all built in (and has some useful features the FX1 does not) but for me the primaries are as follows:
Lens, build quality, sound, ergonomics. With these four areas the cameras are inseparable. Same picture quality, same great controls (still love the LCD screen, and its position, still love the vastly improved focus ring over the PD170, and LOVE the shot transition, which thankfully is retained with the FX1). I was also happy to find the picture profiles allowing me the control I needed to shift the WB to make the picture a tad warmer. Definitely not a consumer feature!
As for the sound, with a stereo jack into the FX1, manually adjusting each XLR input with the adaptor, I can't see much difference. In fact, I would argue the Beachtek box has better positioned gain knobs, which are less finicky than the Z1's.
My main gripe is what seems to be a lower audio monitoring level with the FX1, and the lack of peaking lines (which is ridiculous as the button, with its printed label is still on the back!). I reckon the FX1 has the same circuitry inside as the Z1, it will just take someone with balls to tamper with it to activate the hidden Z1 features.
Bottom line: The 16:9 SD images (I know, I know, should have shot in HDV and downconverted, but can't with this particular film) are rich in colour and detail.
Worthless low light performance imo (and honestly, having used the PD170 for night shots over the weekend that just past, I am telling you the difference is huge) but at the end of the day you use what is right for the application. Today the FX1 fit the application, surpassed my expectations, and will delight the end client; guaranteed.
Tomorrow am off to Manchester and taking the FX1 with me. I can't wait to look through the viewfinder and compose some more great images with this camera. I might even shoot some HDV, 25CF stuff for my own personal curiosity and see what it looks like back at work.
Chris