Sony CX12 is born at DVinfo.net

Hans Ledel · June 19th, 2008, 06:11 AM

Here "she" is

http://www.akihabaranews.com/en/news...s.php?id=16253

Joseph Kassana · July 9th, 2008, 02:02 AM

Nice consumer cam, the marketing babble aside, it's no better than the HV20.

Craig Irving · July 9th, 2008, 07:36 AM

I don't really understand why they write "HDV support (1440x1080i) in 5/7/9Mbps"

Seems like it will stir up an awful lot of confusion. At least it's not in the press release, seems to just be poor article summary.

Bill Koehler · July 9th, 2008, 08:38 AM

http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/...52921665466947

Can't say I'm tempted. To go by the spec's...
1. No mic input
2. Smaller screen than the SR11/SR12
3. No viewfinder
4. They finally completely eliminated LANC

I'd call all that a high price to pay for tapeless recording.
The HDR-HC9 is looking better to me each and every day.

Want to have a world beating product Sony?

Add back the viewfinder. You already have the parts in stock.
Upgrade to the same screen as the SR11/SR12. You already have the parts in stock.
Add in a mic input. Why is keeping that so hard?
Add back in a proper LANC terminal. Or are you going the same way as Canon on this?

Arghhh!

Dave Blackhurst · July 9th, 2008, 02:48 PM

The CX12 takes over the slot the CX7 occupied in the line, which is similar to the models other manufacturers offer... thus some of the "features", which aren't for everyone.

1. You can access mic inputs via the AiShoe - using Sony mics of course. IF they reissued the old adapter, you could use others too - who knows if that accessory will resurface...

2. small screen goes with the form factor... I too wish for a larger screen though.

3. again, simply no room to put one on... not if they maintain the small size.

4. Dollars to doughnuts the LANC interface is there on the "D" jack. I think they show the SPK HCD ports pack as an accessory, meaning it will use that same interface, just like SR11/12 and CX7.

The CX7 has it's own odd little niche... that all the other manuacturers seem to be pushing as well. I didn't think much of the design, until I got one in hand. Then the "pocket cam" concept started to make sense.

I think the frustration comes from the fact that the SR11 is not much bigger or heavier, yet has all the features, we could just do without the hard drive... Not sure why that configuration hasn't popped up (Panasonic appears to be releasing something in that vein...)

The CX12 hits a specific spot, and it may not be for everyone, but it's an interesting update to the CX7.

Bill Koehler · July 9th, 2008, 08:35 PM

Yes, I've taken the Valium and calmed down now.

Yes Dave, you're right.
1. On mics - I have my Rode Stereo Video Mic. I'm not buying something less.
2. Small screen - For HD Video, I personally believe 3.5" should be the minimum. But I can be and frequently am wrong. But I'll take as good as I can get (3.2"?).
3. No view finder = you are nearly blind in bright sunlight. If the price is making it bigger, so be it.
4. Yeah, I'm sure you're right about the LANC. I still have my Manfrotto 523PRO. We've talked about this one before.

I am just frustrated because:
1. The Orientals are masters of miniaturization. No doubt about it.
No matter how small they get it though, my hands are not shrinking. Size X-Large.
And another thing that has been discussed is how below a certain size or weight the lack of inertia translates into ever shakier video.

2. I'm a hobbyist, not a pro, and have no delusions otherwise. But I have to admit to heading in the other direction. More manual control, not less, and contemplating controlling a camera through menus rates a 'you have got to be kidding'. On the other hand, people are obviously accepting it and buying it, so what do I know?

3. Another issue is accommodating add-ons (Audio, LANC), and then changing the interfaces. I don't know about anyone else, but it seems unreasonable to expect people to re-purchase their add-ons every time they buy another cam.

Mike Burgess · July 10th, 2008, 06:46 AM

Bill, I am in agreement with you. I also would like to have a little larger size to these camcorders. While my hands are not overly large, they are big enough to seemingly overwhelm these smaller and smaller cams. And you are correct in your thoughts concerning smaller cams make for shakier handling. Mass means steadier video. Also, lets face it, with alittle more surface area on a slightly larger cam, there would be more room for exterior manual controls instead of having them hidden under layers of on screen menus displayed on the LCD.
I personally would like to see something in the size between the old FX7 and the current SR11/12. I don't need to have to be able to put it in my pocket, nor have to hide it in such a way as to not draw attention to itself so that I can get some covert footage of people. Rediculously small is not an attractive feature for me.
There is a comfort factor for me in having a solid, feature-filled, well built camcorder in my hands with enough mass to make handling easier for me to get the quality shots I desire. And without breaking my bank.

Mike

Bill Koehler · July 10th, 2008, 09:51 AM

Thanks Mike. It's nice to know I'm not losing my mind.

Dave Blackhurst · July 10th, 2008, 12:16 PM

You have to keep in mind these minicams are consumer oriented, although they certainly can put out professional quality results in the right hands.

I'm going to disagree a bit about the mass, as I've had better luck with small cameras once I've learned to stabilize them, and the lower weight makes for less fatigue, which helps with stability. Mass CAN work against you, as you then have to control the inertia of that mass - sure, if a cam is heavy enough, the inertia becomes a stabilizing factor (and fatigue becomes a big issue), but I'd rather have a CX7 handheld for many situations than something heavier...

All that aside, the CX type cam has it's place, but I too have pretty much the same "dream" - a cam in between the SR11 and the FX7, solid state recording (skip the HDD please), manual control with REAL buttons, a bigger lens for better light gathering, and a price low enough to make it a "possible"... The EX1 and Z7 are great, but I can't justify that 5K+ budget.

My FX7 is fine, backed up by SR11 and CX7 for multicam, and all at a budget less than ONE of the high end offerings... I guess all the manufacturers have decided to abandon the "middle ground" and leave either consumer "big box" sales or "pro line"...

Mike Burgess · July 11th, 2008, 05:56 AM

Hi Dave.

Yes it is a shame that they have abandoned that middle ground. Apparently there wasn't enough profit there, although I just can't believe that. So in the meantime, I just keep hoping for an affordable FX7 replacement.

Mike

Christopher Ruffell · July 11th, 2008, 06:21 PM

Sans mic input :(

Dave Blackhurst · July 11th, 2008, 06:44 PM

There ARE mic inputs, just not the old traditional minijack... gotta hack 'em or get the olde Sony adapter for the shoe...

Bill Koehler · July 15th, 2008, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Burgess

Hi Dave.

Yes it is a shame that they have abandoned that middle ground. Apparently there wasn't enough profit there, although I just can't believe that. So in the meantime, I just keep hoping for an affordable FX7 replacement.

Mike

I am willing to bet the mid-market segment volumes were small.
The consumers want it cheap.
The pros are willing to pay for their features.

So the market segments.
I understand it. I'm just not happy about it.
Saving up my shekels....

Andrew Wheatley · July 25th, 2008, 08:14 PM

This type of camera is exactly what we need. Why? Well it has to be recognised that hobbyists and professionals are not the target market.

Thus, who is? Well families for happy snaps, stick a camera in the pocket and go. This is great because there are no complex controls etc.

Why is this good for us? Well it increases HD saturation across the market, allows Sony and other companies to justify increasing research expenditure. Also as the quality gets better image wise on these little cameras the pro cameras get updated as well to remain 'pro'. Not everyone needs manual control or wants a big camera.

I own an FX1 and a Z7. I use both of these professionally but when I go out with mates and want to grab some video they are both too big and too complex. I have an old TRV27 for kicking around on holidays but am seriously considering one of these new little cameras be it the CX12, SR12 or even HC9 (yes I like tape for the quality benefits). Even the TG1 could fit the bill as something that still gives me pretty sweet HD quality but in a size that I can stick the camera in my pocket and pull it out and hit record without having to worry about checking, white balance, audio feeds, iris, focus, shutter speed, frame rate, gain etc. Sure the footage won't be as good but the purpose is not for recording the next major film it is for recording memories.

Bill Koehler · September 10th, 2008, 11:12 PM

Well...I didn't think adding in the features I mentioned would grow the CX12 to anything like the size of a FX1 or Z7.

No matter. I broke down and put my money where my mouth was/is.
I bought a Sony HDR-HC9.

I spent yesterday doing some simple testing and getting familiar with it.
I expect to shoot an event this Sunday with it.

June 19th, 2008, 06:11 AM	#1
Hans Ledel Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Stockholm Sweden Posts: 184	Sony CX12 is born Here "she" is http://www.akihabaranews.com/en/news...s.php?id=16253 __________________ Remember, that English is my second language.

July 9th, 2008, 08:38 AM	#4
Bill Koehler Major Player Join Date: May 2007 Location: Alpharetta, Georgia, USA Posts: 760	From the manufacturer's website http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/...52921665466947 Can't say I'm tempted. To go by the spec's... 1. No mic input 2. Smaller screen than the SR11/SR12 3. No viewfinder 4. They finally completely eliminated LANC I'd call all that a high price to pay for tapeless recording. The HDR-HC9 is looking better to me each and every day. Want to have a world beating product Sony? Add back the viewfinder. You already have the parts in stock. Upgrade to the same screen as the SR11/SR12. You already have the parts in stock. Add in a mic input. Why is keeping that so hard? Add back in a proper LANC terminal. Or are you going the same way as Canon on this? Arghhh!

July 9th, 2008, 08:35 PM	#6
Bill Koehler Major Player Join Date: May 2007 Location: Alpharetta, Georgia, USA Posts: 760	Yes, I've taken the Valium and calmed down now. Yes Dave, you're right. 1. On mics - I have my Rode Stereo Video Mic. I'm not buying something less. 2. Small screen - For HD Video, I personally believe 3.5" should be the minimum. But I can be and frequently am wrong. But I'll take as good as I can get (3.2"?). 3. No view finder = you are nearly blind in bright sunlight. If the price is making it bigger, so be it. 4. Yeah, I'm sure you're right about the LANC. I still have my Manfrotto 523PRO. We've talked about this one before. I am just frustrated because: 1. The Orientals are masters of miniaturization. No doubt about it. No matter how small they get it though, my hands are not shrinking. Size X-Large. And another thing that has been discussed is how below a certain size or weight the lack of inertia translates into ever shakier video. 2. I'm a hobbyist, not a pro, and have no delusions otherwise. But I have to admit to heading in the other direction. More manual control, not less, and contemplating controlling a camera through menus rates a 'you have got to be kidding'. On the other hand, people are obviously accepting it and buying it, so what do I know? 3. Another issue is accommodating add-ons (Audio, LANC), and then changing the interfaces. I don't know about anyone else, but it seems unreasonable to expect people to re-purchase their add-ons every time they buy another cam. Last edited by Bill Koehler; July 10th, 2008 at 09:52 AM.

July 9th, 2008, 02:02 AM	#2
Joseph Kassana Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: London Posts: 92	Nice consumer cam, the marketing babble aside, it's no better than the HV20.

July 9th, 2008, 07:36 AM	#3
Craig Irving Major Player Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Toronto Posts: 539	I don't really understand why they write "HDV support (1440x1080i) in 5/7/9Mbps" Seems like it will stir up an awful lot of confusion. At least it's not in the press release, seems to just be poor article summary.

July 9th, 2008, 02:48 PM	#5
Dave Blackhurst Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Apple Valley CA Posts: 4,874	The CX12 takes over the slot the CX7 occupied in the line, which is similar to the models other manufacturers offer... thus some of the "features", which aren't for everyone. 1. You can access mic inputs via the AiShoe - using Sony mics of course. IF they reissued the old adapter, you could use others too - who knows if that accessory will resurface... 2. small screen goes with the form factor... I too wish for a larger screen though. 3. again, simply no room to put one on... not if they maintain the small size. 4. Dollars to doughnuts the LANC interface is there on the "D" jack. I think they show the SPK HCD ports pack as an accessory, meaning it will use that same interface, just like SR11/12 and CX7. The CX7 has it's own odd little niche... that all the other manuacturers seem to be pushing as well. I didn't think much of the design, until I got one in hand. Then the "pocket cam" concept started to make sense. I think the frustration comes from the fact that the SR11 is not much bigger or heavier, yet has all the features, we could just do without the hard drive... Not sure why that configuration hasn't popped up (Panasonic appears to be releasing something in that vein...) The CX12 hits a specific spot, and it may not be for everyone, but it's an interesting update to the CX7.

July 10th, 2008, 06:46 AM	#7
Mike Burgess Major Player Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Traverse City, Michigan Posts: 416	Bill, I am in agreement with you. I also would like to have a little larger size to these camcorders. While my hands are not overly large, they are big enough to seemingly overwhelm these smaller and smaller cams. And you are correct in your thoughts concerning smaller cams make for shakier handling. Mass means steadier video. Also, lets face it, with alittle more surface area on a slightly larger cam, there would be more room for exterior manual controls instead of having them hidden under layers of on screen menus displayed on the LCD. I personally would like to see something in the size between the old FX7 and the current SR11/12. I don't need to have to be able to put it in my pocket, nor have to hide it in such a way as to not draw attention to itself so that I can get some covert footage of people. Rediculously small is not an attractive feature for me. There is a comfort factor for me in having a solid, feature-filled, well built camcorder in my hands with enough mass to make handling easier for me to get the quality shots I desire. And without breaking my bank. Mike

July 10th, 2008, 09:51 AM	#8
Bill Koehler Major Player Join Date: May 2007 Location: Alpharetta, Georgia, USA Posts: 760	Thanks Mike. It's nice to know I'm not losing my mind.

July 10th, 2008, 12:16 PM	#9
Dave Blackhurst Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Apple Valley CA Posts: 4,874	You have to keep in mind these minicams are consumer oriented, although they certainly can put out professional quality results in the right hands. I'm going to disagree a bit about the mass, as I've had better luck with small cameras once I've learned to stabilize them, and the lower weight makes for less fatigue, which helps with stability. Mass CAN work against you, as you then have to control the inertia of that mass - sure, if a cam is heavy enough, the inertia becomes a stabilizing factor (and fatigue becomes a big issue), but I'd rather have a CX7 handheld for many situations than something heavier... All that aside, the CX type cam has it's place, but I too have pretty much the same "dream" - a cam in between the SR11 and the FX7, solid state recording (skip the HDD please), manual control with REAL buttons, a bigger lens for better light gathering, and a price low enough to make it a "possible"... The EX1 and Z7 are great, but I can't justify that 5K+ budget. My FX7 is fine, backed up by SR11 and CX7 for multicam, and all at a budget less than ONE of the high end offerings... I guess all the manufacturers have decided to abandon the "middle ground" and leave either consumer "big box" sales or "pro line"...

July 11th, 2008, 05:56 AM	#10
Mike Burgess Major Player Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Traverse City, Michigan Posts: 416	Hi Dave. Yes it is a shame that they have abandoned that middle ground. Apparently there wasn't enough profit there, although I just can't believe that. So in the meantime, I just keep hoping for an affordable FX7 replacement. Mike

July 11th, 2008, 06:21 PM	#11
Christopher Ruffell Major Player Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Victoria, BC Posts: 202	Sans mic input :(

July 11th, 2008, 06:44 PM	#12
Dave Blackhurst Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Apple Valley CA Posts: 4,874	There ARE mic inputs, just not the old traditional minijack... gotta hack 'em or get the olde Sony adapter for the shoe...

July 25th, 2008, 08:14 PM	#14
Andrew Wheatley Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 26	This type of camera is exactly what we need. Why? Well it has to be recognised that hobbyists and professionals are not the target market. Thus, who is? Well families for happy snaps, stick a camera in the pocket and go. This is great because there are no complex controls etc. Why is this good for us? Well it increases HD saturation across the market, allows Sony and other companies to justify increasing research expenditure. Also as the quality gets better image wise on these little cameras the pro cameras get updated as well to remain 'pro'. Not everyone needs manual control or wants a big camera. I own an FX1 and a Z7. I use both of these professionally but when I go out with mates and want to grab some video they are both too big and too complex. I have an old TRV27 for kicking around on holidays but am seriously considering one of these new little cameras be it the CX12, SR12 or even HC9 (yes I like tape for the quality benefits). Even the TG1 could fit the bill as something that still gives me pretty sweet HD quality but in a size that I can stick the camera in my pocket and pull it out and hit record without having to worry about checking, white balance, audio feeds, iris, focus, shutter speed, frame rate, gain etc. Sure the footage won't be as good but the purpose is not for recording the next major film it is for recording memories.

September 10th, 2008, 11:12 PM	#15
Bill Koehler Major Player Join Date: May 2007 Location: Alpharetta, Georgia, USA Posts: 760	Well...I didn't think adding in the features I mentioned would grow the CX12 to anything like the size of a FX1 or Z7. No matter. I broke down and put my money where my mouth was/is. I bought a Sony HDR-HC9. I spent yesterday doing some simple testing and getting familiar with it. I expect to shoot an event this Sunday with it.