Sony HDR FX-1000 better than A-1?

[Bill Grant]

Rick,
I updated to ver c today. In doing so, I downloaded some of Barry Green's MTS files from DVX user. They import right into the timeline, and play fine. AVCHD works. This might be my weapon of choice when it hits... Maybe...
Bill

[Rick Steele]

Hey! I've been looking for that footage but that thread is longer than my last IRS tax audit.

Where the heck are they?

[Jeff Harper]

I believe the FX1000 will blow the AH1 out of the water due to the use of the same type of cmos sensors used in the XDCAM cams. As b&H said,

"Aside from the XH-A1's XLR inputs, the FX1000 provides far more bang for the buck, its new specs giving it a substantial edge over arguably any sub-$4,000 camcorder out there.

"But even more significant for HD shooters, many of whom still miss the great low-light capabilities of standard-def workhorses like the VX2100 and PD170, is the FX1000's ability to accurately capture images down to 1.5 lux. This is twice the ability of the FX1, Z1U or Panasonic's HVX200 (all at 3 lux), and compares even more favorably to the FX7, VIU, and Canon's XH-A1 and GL2—rated at 4 lux."

I view the FX1000 as the updated version of the VX2100. The FX1 never came close to filling that role, but seemed to me to be a transitional piece of hardware.

[Mark Fry]

Originally Posted by Jeff Harper

"But even more significant for HD shooters, many of whom still miss the great low-light capabilities of standard-def workhorses like the VX2100 and PD170, is the FX1000's ability to accurately capture images down to 1.5 lux. This is twice the ability of the FX1, Z1U or Panasonic's HVX200 (all at 3 lux), and compares even more favorably to the FX7, VIU, and Canon's XH-A1 and GL2—rated at 4 lux."

I find that the XH-A1 is not quite a sensitive as the XM1, so I'm suspcious of the B&H comparisson.

According to their web-site, Sony's 1.5 lux claim for the Z5/FX1000 applies with slower shutter speed and higher gain than you'd normally use when shooting. Were the other cameras also measured with the same settings? How well does the Z7 do, compared to the other cams mentioned here? There's no reason to suppose that the Z5/FX1000 will be much different.

I'm not saying that the new Sony will not be better than the XH-A1 in low light. However, I don't expect it to be in the same class as the VX2100/PD170, which is what B&H seem to imply.

[Kevin Shaw]

Originally Posted by Mark Fry

How well does the Z7 do, compared to the other cams mentioned here? There's no reason to suppose that the Z5/FX1000 will be much different.

The Z7U is popular with wedding videographers who had previously avoided HD due to low-light performance concerns, and found that camera to be sufficient for their needs. Assuming the FX1000 is equally sensitive, which it should be using the same sensor, it will likely be popular with those looking for an affordable low-light HD camera.

It's true that lux ratings are somewhat arbitrary because they may involve extreme camera settings, but in this case the 1.5 lux figure appears to be a fair assessment of what the Z7U (and hence FX1000) can handle to produce a usable image.

[Rick Steele]

Originally Posted by Mark Fry

According to their web-site, Sony's 1.5 lux claim for the Z5/FX1000 applies with slower shutter speed and higher gain than you'd normally use when shooting.

Where are you reading the "higher" gain stipulation? It says:

at 1/30 fixed shutter speed with auto iris and auto gain.

HDR-FX1000 | HDR-FX1000 High Definition MiniDV (HDV) Handycam® Camcorder | Sony | SonyStyle USA

I know lux ratings are jaded so please cite your source if different from mine as I'd like to know.

[Jeff Harper]

Originally Posted by Mark Fry

According to their web-site, Sony's 1.5 lux claim for the Z5/FX1000 applies with slower shutter speed and higher gain than you'd normally use when shooting.

Mark, I have looked at the specs on sony's website and it says min illumination: 1.5 lux. I don't see the qualification you mention.

Can you please point me to it?

Thanks

[Jeff Harper]

I found it, Mark. It says "(at 1/30 fixed shutter speed with auto iris and auto gain)".

[Hubert Duijzer]

I saw a brochure of the XHA1 recently.
It is rated at 0.4 lux (1/3 shutter and +36db gain....)
I think the Z5 is a little better, but they are also cheating a little.

[Chris Hurd]

Please try to avoid quoting lux ratings on this site... the term is so incredibly meaningless these days because there's really no standardization for determining it. For example, "0.4 lux at 1/3rd shutter and +36db gain." In all honesty, who expects to shoot at a shutter speed of 1/3rd sec. and +36db gain, and get anything resembling clean, usable video? It's nonsense. The lux measurement may be accurate (it has to be or they couldn't print it) but what they're not telling you is how utterly unusable such a noisy image would be.

Lux ratings are worse than useless; they're downright misleading -- and that goes for most all the major camera manufacturers, unfortunately.

[Hubert Duijzer]

My point exactly. That was what i was trying to say with cheating. Sometimes i have trouble with finding the right words, because it isn't my native langue.

[Dave Blackhurst]

Originally Posted by Rick Steele

Yeah, I saw that in the Vegas improvement list Bill.

I am really trying to find a reason to go the HMC-150 route myself. I never thought I would have a chance to go both HD and tapeless at the same time. (I'm usually way behind in cams).

I'm going to wait and see what the Vegas 8.0c crowd finds about editing this crap without having to transcode it first.

FWIW, I downloaded the clips another member posted from the HMC150, dropped into Vegas Pro 8c and looked quite good, fairly smooth playback, I'd expect editing to be decent if you have a basic quad core machine... doable if you're on a 2 core box, but render times would be long. The HMC150 has been on my "watch list" as well, although I'm typically a Sony shooter... but Sony isn't going tapeless in the "prosumer" lines, and since they got me hooked on tapeless with the SR/CX cameras, it just aint' fair, I'll strongly watch the competition!

[Rick Steele]

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

Please try to avoid quoting lux ratings on this site... the term is so incredibly meaningless these days because there's really no standardization for determining it.

I think most of us know this Chris. But when somebody further inflates the inaccuracy of lux ratings by citing something like "increased gain" to achieve it, I'd like to know the source - as it contradicts what Sony is saying. (Unless "Auto" gain means +12dB these days).

But if they're "fibbing" about this, then they (Sony) need to be called down on it. :)

[Joel Peregrine]

Hi Chris,

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

Please try to avoid quoting lux ratings on this site... the term is so incredibly meaningless these days

There must be a manufacturer who can take the lead and go back to the method of quoting sensitivity in terms of f-stop and lux rating, i.e. "F8 at 2000 lux". Or maybe independent testing can determine these ratings for the current batch of prosumer and low-end pro cameras?

[Michael Kraus]

Originally Posted by Roger Lee

Hello All,

Anybody see where the advantage of the FX-1000 lies? ...other than it's the same price...for what appears to be less camera?

Take care all.

Rog Lee

It may also be worth mentioning that the fx1000 has 1080p capabilities.