Well guys some of you might remember the thread a few days ago discussing if it would be better to wait for new models or to buy a Z1/FX1 at that time.
Some said that it would take ages for some to release a new model and other believed that they would respond to Canon's new models. The thread even had to me moderated as it got a bit "out of focus"...
Anyway, they've just announced the new versions:
http://nct.digitalriver.com/fulfill/0135.009/download/2006-aa254850045f2fc06653f96467dd63a5-3
Seems that it was good to wait, then!

I think you posted the wrong link but yep, it was good to wait. There's a forum for the FX7/V1 cameras here:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/forumdisplay.php?f=140

Well guys some of you might remember the thread a few days ago discussing if it would be better to wait for new models or to buy a Z1/FX1 at that time.
Some said that it would take ages for some to release a new modelSeems that it was good to wait, then!

I have on numerous occassions pointed out that Sony have no plans for A REPLACEMENT for the Z1 at the moment.
That is still true.
The new cameras that you are referring to are NEW cameras in their own "slot". Neither of them is a "REPLACEMENT" for the Z1.

Sony releases consumer models quite often. Sometimes they are to fill a gap, sometimes they are just to test the market.
But on the Pro side they have a very definite workflow - and that does not include "replacing" existing models on a daily basis (slight exaggeration....smile)
Pro cameras have a production line that is reckoned on turning out cameras for AT LEAST 4 years at a time.

There is a big difference in "replacing" camera models and introducing new models.

Douglas.

Do you really think the new fx7 camera is not intended to replace the FX1?
Why wouldn't i t be? 3 CMOS sounds like a natural "evolution"...

I went to have a look on your website gaijin-eyes.com but unfortunately couldn't open any of the movie files as they are only available in (argh) .wmv format. I don't know about (argh again!) windows but WMP for Mac really sucks. Besides the bad video quality it's just impossible to control playback.
Hope you consider providing Quicktime files in the future as I'm sure your videos are really good and many mac users would love to see them.
Cheers.
PP

Douglas.

Do you really think the new fx7 camera is not intended to replace the FX1?
PP

Hello Pedro,
Did I mention the FX1 in my post above?
Nope...I mentioned the Z1.

But with all the Z's, X's, H's, V's etc. flying around these days.....it is easy to misread camera model abbreviations.

regards,
Douglas

Douglas.
I went to have a look on your website gaijin-eyes.com but unfortunately couldn't open any of the movie files as they are only available in (argh) .wmv format. I don't know about (argh again!) windows but WMP for Mac really sucks. Besides the bad video quality it's just impossible to control playback.
Hope you consider providing Quicktime files in the future as I'm sure your videos are really good and many mac users would love to see them.
Cheers.
PP

There's a good plug-in for QT so you can play .wmv's on the Mac, can't remember what it's called (on my other machine) but you can get it at the Apple website.

FYI, bad video quality doesn't mean Windows Media is bad, it means that video is bad; you can actually get some surprisingly nice web video compression in windows media.

My preferred method is Flash (.flv) however.

There's a good plug-in for QT so you can play .wmv's on the Mac, can't remember what it's called (on my other machine) but you can get it at the Apple website.

FYI, bad video quality doesn't mean Windows Media is bad, it means that video is bad; you can actually get some surprisingly nice web video compression in windows media.

My preferred method is Flash (.flv) however.

Thanks for the feedback, Benjamin.
QT, Media Player, Flash etc. They all have their pluses and minuses. Most people find one that works for them and then stick to it. But that is not always the best way - as the software companies are always leapfrogging each other.......

Here is a link to the MAC version of MediaPlayer. It will co-exist with QT...

If you want to watch .wmv files on Mac and do not already have the
Windows Media player for Mac, you can download it for free at

English:

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/player/download/download.aspx

Japanese:
http://www.microsoft.com/japan/windows/windowsmedia/download/default.aspx

Douglas.

I went to have a look on your website gaijin-eyes.com but unfortunately couldn't open any of the movie files as they are only available in (argh) .wmv format. I don't know about (argh again!) windows but WMP for Mac really sucks. Besides the bad video quality it's just impossible to control playback.
Hope you consider providing Quicktime files in the future as I'm sure your videos are really good and many mac users would love to see them.
Cheers.
PP

Sorry I just posted a link to the WMP for MAC download. I hadn't noticed you had already tried it.
I have also encoded some QT files and even Flash movies, but at the moment I find that I am getting the best results with WMP.
I do intend having a QT alternative available later........ but as you know "later" can usually mean in 6 months or more.............. smile

Hi Douglas. My past results with encoding to QT on PC were pretty dire, but recently I downloaded the Avid QT codec set for windows. Much much better. You can get them at the link below (the zip file at the bottom of the page).

Richard


http://www.avid.com/onlineSupport/supportcontent.asp?contentID=3555

Thanks for the link, Richard.

I will give it a try at a later date.

FX1 is, apparently, going to be allowed to die, Z1 continues on.
This info is from the Sony guys at IBC show. It may well still be available for some time, perhaps well into 2007 (a guess) due to unsold stock. My firm guess is production of FX1 actually ceased sometime ago.

FX7 and V1 are the new HDV machines as we know.
So it's reasonable to say that Sony are viewing the FX7 as the replacement model for the FX1 but NOT the Z1. V1 and Z1 will run alongside each other. V1 is essentially an HDV 'equivalent' of the excellent PD170.

FX7's price is broadly similar to FX1, neatly filling a gap there between the A1 and the Z1. (A1 and Z1 are from the pro division of Sony, FX1 and FX7 from the consumer division etc).

"FX7 and V1 are the new HDV machines as we know.
So it's reasonable to say that Sony are viewing the FX7 as the replacement model for the FX1 but NOT the Z1. V1 and Z1 will run alongside each other. V1 is essentially an HDV 'equivalent' of the excellent PD170."

Except, apparently, the great lowlight performance has been left behind. Which was the main selling point of the PD170 for many customers.

Flip4Mac Plays WMV in Quicktime On MAC

Here's link
http://www.flip4mac.com/wmv_download.htm
Version 2.1 works on both PPC and Intel Macs and gives you full frame by frame control over the WMV.

There's a good plug-in for QT so you can play .wmv's on the Mac, can't remember what it's called (on my other machine) but you can get it at the Apple website.

FYI, bad video quality doesn't mean Windows Media is bad, it means that video is bad; you can actually get some surprisingly nice web video compression in windows media.

My preferred method is Flash (.flv) however.

Except, apparently, the great lowlight performance has been left behind. Which was the main selling point of the PD170 for many customers.Totally agree the PD170 & Vx2100 are in a class of their own on lowlight. I think it's doubtful whether we'll ever see an HDV camcorder (at reasonable money) from any manufacturer with lowlight performance like the PD170/VX2100. Bit of a shame but HDV is different.

I agree for sure it would have been nice to see lowlight closer to PD170, but the specs only tell part of the story, so i think really we'll just have to wait for the full reviews to see how it manages.

This new camera only has 1/4" chips. I don't see how it could be considered a replacement for the FX1. Unless...it's cheaper to manufacture, which it probably is. Newer doesn't always mean better--it often only means more profitable for the manufacturer.

This new camera only has 1/4" chips. I don't see how it could be considered a replacement for the FX1. Unless...it's cheaper to manufacture, which it probably is. Newer doesn't always mean better--it often only means more profitable for the manufacturer.

Not necessarily true. It can work both ways. Sony had a fixed lens still -- the 828 with whatever prefix that goes with it. I bought one about a year and half ago- had 8 megapixel, decent fixed lens. Today, for the same price or less they are shipping a ten megapixel SLR with interchangeable lens capability. Clearly an improvement. The market has changed and evolved, and you are getting more for you money because of the competition out there. (In case of stills, Nikon, Olympus, Canon, etc..)

A1 and Z1 are the only normal Pro HDV "affordable" cams from Sony. There is a $16K brick I know nothing about and if you want to spend more the HD XDCAMS which I only wish I could afford. I have a tracking number for my A1 from B&H so I'm a happy camper.

A1 and Z1 are the only normal Pro HDV "affordable" cams from Sony. There is a $16K brick I know nothing about and if you want to spend more the HD XDCAMS which I only wish I could afford. I have a tracking number for my A1 from B&H so I'm a happy camper.

Mind you I haven't actually used an A1, but from the specs, its seems to me that FX1 has more professional functions than the A1- lacking only the XLR imputs which is easily and adequately remedied with an XLR adapter.

Well I think the A1 has some of the features which distinguish the Z1 from the FX1, such as black stretch, All Scan display mode and DVCAM recording.

Yeah the A1 in terms of 'features' is closer to the Z1 than the HC1, but as someone who has used the whole lineup (HC3-Z1U) the FX1 and Z!U blow the others OUT OF THE WATER in low-light...in bright sunlight its difficult to tell the difference between an A1 and a Z1 without a really nice big HD monitor. I shot a three-cam concert with my FX1, an HC1 and HC3...it was almost (I mean this as a rough comparison) like comparing a GS150 to a DVX100 i terms of clarity in low-light.

So as we always say...it depends on what you're using it for!
If you're going to be shooting primarily under ideal, bright lighting...A1 is an amazing camera and very portable and inconspicuous. For weddings, concerts, and anything else in low lighting, I'd highly recommend a FX1/Z1 over the A1, even if it means you have to get a beachtek to get XLR's (like i do...I'll be getting a Z1 in a couple months hopefully)

I will definately not be getting the FX7, and I doubt I'd get the V1... if I don't get the Z1 in a couple months, I'll be selling my FX1 and getting two XH-A1's (provided they give me enough capabilities in low lighting)

Good points Noah. But don't expect the HC1/A1 to match the FX1/Z1 in low light. Sony rate the former as 7 lux cams, the latter as 3 lux cams, so there's a good few stops between them. I hope Canon's A1 will be closer to the Z1. We shall see.

A note to Chris Barcellos. You're right, still cameras get cheaper, better smaller, lighter as every day goes past, and this applies to proper DSLRs as well as compacts. But this has certainly not happened in the MiniDV world. The VX2000 sold for the same amount as the FX1 5 years later, and they're broadly very similar in capability and performance.

OK the FX1 is an HDV model, but at the moment (while HD DVD and BluRay fight it out) it's the VX2200.

tom.

Totally agree the PD170 & Vx2100 are in a class of their own on lowlight. I think it's doubtful whether we'll ever see an HDV camcorder (at reasonable money) from any manufacturer with lowlight performance like the PD170/VX2100. Bit of a shame but HDV is different.


When video processing speeds can handle the demosaic processing, we should be seeing single chip 2/3" or larger sensors that should blow away the VX2000 in lowlight performance. A Nikon D2H DSLR can do eight frames / second (fps) on a larger sensor with 4 million photosites. With that technology, an HD camcorder should be up to 16 fps. Someday ...