Sony FDR-AX100

[Glen Vandermolen]

I was under the impression the PMW300 could not do 1080/50-60P, even with the XAVC ungrade. I don't remember why that is.

But there are other 1080/50-60P cameras out there: the F5/55, the Z100, the new Panasonic PX270, the PX5000 and possibly the HPX600, with the AVC/Ultra upgrade. And of course, RED and Alexas.

10-bit 1080/50-60/P, 4:2:2. seems to be a rarity, at least for now. Notice the cheapest camera that can do this starts at $5,500.

It seems there are a lot of people in this forum that want 1080/50-60P, but honestly, I've never had a client request this format, not even from my little FS100. And I shoot mainly for broadcast networks and cables channels. They're very happy with 24P, 30P or 60i. Yup, 60i is still a big format out there.

edit - I forgot about the PMW400. I think it can do 50-60P with the XAVC upgrade. Or not.

[Ken Ross]

Kate, I'd bet the bank that 4K will have no relationship in terms of success to 3D. I knew from the very beginning 3D would not succeed for the simple reason people were not going to wear glasses to watch TV in any great numbers. Add to that, many were prone to headaches while watching 3D. Sure, people bought 3DTVs, but not because most wanted 3D, but because it was bundled with the TV they wanted anyway for other reasons. No, this was a fail from day one.

I see 4K very differently (no pun intended;)). As long as the screen size is large enough or seating distances close enough, the 4x increase in resolution is easy to see...and no glasses required, passive or active, to see the difference!

As is usually the case with a transition like this, content is the bottleneck. But this will change, even though it looks like that change will take longer to occur than our SD to HD transition. People will accept 4K downloading and streaming as the best way to get content early on. But it will happen, the industry is too committed to it not to. Just look at the precipitous drop in 4K display prices in just a few months.

[Michael Warren]

Originally Posted by Glen Vandermolen

It seems there are a lot of people in this forum that want 1080/50-60P, but honestly, I've never had a client request this format, not even from my little FS100. And I shoot mainly for broadcast networks and cables channels. They're very happy with 24P, 30P or 60i. Yup, 60i is still a big format out there.

I can only speak for myself, but I only want 50/60p as an acquisition format. As a delivery format, 25p doesn't bother me.

Same with 4K. I'd like to acquire in 4K and deliver in 1080p. I don't know anyone who apart from enthusiasts who want any higher resolution than that.

[Ken Ross]

Dave, 30p is also my biggest concern, but for my own personal use I'm really thinking it will be fine.

The impact of the frame doubler (or quadrupler, depending on your TV display) can really work wonders for 30p video. The same frame rate increase process that causes that dreaded SOE (soap opera effect) with film, works beautifully with 30p video as it smooths out the 30p stutter. Sure, most of us don't want our film to look like video, but there are few ill-effects from making our 30p video look like 60p or even 120p video. It will still look like video.

For those looking for a filmic look, sure, using frame rate doubters in your display is not the way to go. But then again I really doubt that most AX100 owners will be looking for a filmic look. Personally I love the look of video, always have. I love film too, but there's a place for both.

I think the AX100 will be a blast and, like Dave said, look at this 'cheap' 4K entry not for what it lacks but rather for what it has.

[Glen Vandermolen]

Ken, I agree with this. 4K and 3D are two different animals. 4K is the natural progression of HD: more resolution, better color. It makes sense to go in this direction.

To those who doubt 4K will catch on, do you really think we're going to stay with 1920x1080 resolution for the next 20-30 years? Is 1920x1080 the highest resolution we're ever going to get for home entertainment?

I see the real problem is delivering all that 4K info through the existing cable and satellite architecture, but that's being worked on now. Isn't that what H.265 and Google's new 4K bandwidth supposed to cure? At least for a start in that direction.

Once that issue is resolved, and with the dropping in price of 4K TVs, I expect 4K to take off. If you've seen a 4K monitor next to a regular HD monitor, you'll see that the difference is dramatic. 4K gives that Wow factor the same way that HD did compared to SD.
Yeah, I know, there are lots of people who still don't see the difference between SD and HD (like my parents), but I think most consumers will gravitate to 4K over time.

[Glen Vandermolen]

Originally Posted by Michael Warren

I can only speak for myself, but I only want 50/60p as an acquisition format. As a delivery format, 25p doesn't bother me.

Same with 4K. I'd like to acquire in 4K and deliver in 1080p. I don't know anyone who apart from enthusiasts who want any higher resolution than that.

Michael, do you think the AX100 will be a good enough tool for you to shoot 4K, then deliver 1080p to your clients? I sure hope so, I'd love to shoot 4k.

[Michael Warren]

Originally Posted by Glen Vandermolen

Michael, do you think the AX100 will be a good enough tool for you to shoot 4K, then deliver 1080p to your clients? I sure hope so, I'd love to shoot 4k.

I only shoot for fun now days, but to me it's horses for courses. Plenty of professionals deliver content shot on AVCHD. From what I've seen, it looks like the AX100 will do better than most AVCHD cameras, whn used within it capabilities.

For long form broadcast on a big station, I'd say no.

[Joe Ogiba]

Originally Posted by Kate Spiegel

I am not barking. I find 4k = 3D. We all saw where that ended up.

Both 4K and glasses free 3D will be big in a few years. Some people just like to stay in their comfort zone and that is why there is still 100 million Windows XP users out there.

[Andy Wilkinson]

I joked about a 4K video capable phone early on in this thread. Well, it seems Sony might be close to actually launching such a phone already! Never a truer word spoken in jest - and all that!

Leaked software suggests Sony's next flagship phone will record 4K video

[Buba Kastorski]

Originally Posted by Andy Wilkinson

Well, it seems Sony might be close to actually launching such a phone already! Never a truer word spoken in jest - and all that!

well, Samsung been selling one since September last year

[Ken Ross]

How funny would it be if that Sony phone comes with 4K @60p. The article does reference 'high frame rate'. :)

[Ron Evans]

I saw no contradictions to my understanding in the presentation. To me XAVC-S was always 8bit, 4:2:0. XAVC was 10 bit with the option for 4:2:2 and 4:4:4 intra frame. This was discussed with the differences between the FDR-AX1 and the PXW-Z100. At that time the main firmware upgrades, due this summer discussed for these cameras was AVCHD 2.0 for both and the LongGOP version of XAVC for the PXW-Z100. At the time it was not clear to me whether this was the XAVC-S of the FDR-AX1 or a variant of XAVC. Now it appears it is XAVC LongGOP I think so may be still 10bit 4:2:2. making the PXW-Z100 a much better choice than the FDR-AX1.

Ron Evans

[Ron Little]

Samsung Note 3 shoots 4k video and 1080 60p.

[Mark Fry]

Originally Posted by David Heath

Expressed in another way, it's possible to use higher compression ratios as resolutions increase with no increase in the visibility of artifacting....

Only on the same size screen (or the same viewing angle). However, just as the jump from 480 to 720 or 1080 prompted us all to go and get bigger screens, won't the next increase to 4k only really be worth having on bigger "4k-ready" screens? And on those screens, you'll want similar compression ratios to those currently used for 1080 - won't you?

Originally Posted by Ken Ross

I see 4K very differently (no pun intended;)). As long as the screen size is large enough or seating distances close enough, the 4x increase in resolution is easy to see...

In which case, it will probably catch on, though not to the same extent as HD. Just as DVD is good enough for many people (because it's so much better than VHS!), my guess is that HD screens will be good enough for most people for a long time, and they'll only upgrade their screens when the old one packs up or they move to a bigger home.

Originally Posted by Michael Warren

I can only speak for myself, but I only want 50/60p as an acquisition format. As a delivery format, 25p doesn't bother me.

Same with 4K. I'd like to acquire in 4K and deliver in 1080p. I don't know anyone who apart from enthusiasts who want any higher resolution than that.

Don't you lose a whole lot down-converting from 50/60p to 25p? Doesn't it take forever to re-render? Doesn't any fast motion come out jerky? Delivering and playing back 50p is still an unresolved problem, it seems, which is partly why I've not yet made the move away from 50i...

(I'm very much an "enthusiast" - I'll sell a few discs a year, but really I make them for myself and my friends. I want standards and equipment that will last 5 years minimum, and which I can always play back, even in 50 years time!)

[Ken Ross]

Originally Posted by Ron Little

Samsung Note 3 shoots 4k video and 1080 60p.

Yes, but 4K@ 30p.