Sony FDR-AX100

[Ron Evans]

Originally Posted by Jack Zhang

The PXW-Z100 is ALMOST there. The cell phone camera sensor is what's preventing it from having very good picture quality. I'm certain 1'' lenses that can be adapted for the prosumer form factor can be made, or combine Boinz X with a 2/3'' native widescreen sensor, similar to the HPX600.

My FDR-AX1 is not that bad. In good light its lovely. As to the sensor one has to understand that Sony have a lot of sensors around this size used in still cameras like my HX30V, Actioncams like the AS10/15/30/100 and Sony do not always get their numbers on specs correct !!! I think its the cellphone has used one of these rather the the camcorders using a cellphone sensor !!! Agreed that the sensor size is the issue for low light performance at 4K and will look forward to seeing the difference. 60P is a must for me though so will wait to see what else Sony brings out. In the meantime I can work on integrating 4K into my edits.

Ron Evans

[Dave Blackhurst]

As another RX10 owner who is happy with what it can do, the AX100 is a logical upgrade to one (or more) of the 7xx series handy cams. IF I can get acceptable crop and scan, in theory one AX100 might well replace 2-3 cameras.

The RX10 seems to render color and detail quite nicely as I'm learning to get the most from it. I'd expect the same from the AX100, what with the same pedigree on the sensor/processor.

Will the AX100 be the "perfect" camera for every use? As is typically true... no... there is no such device, AFAIK... thus I have a "few" cameras in my collection! Will the AX100 perhaps replace several other cameras, as the RX10 has for me? Aside from my reservations about the 30p, it should at the LEAST be a nicer camera for 1080/60p than pretty much any other cam I've got currently. That'll do... I'm sure I can find a couple cameras I won't "need" that can be retired...

Would I "like" a high bitrate option for "better" footage? Maybe... ask me after I wake up after passing out after realizing how much the media will cost...

2-3 years from now, when perhaps there is a "consumer" priced, commonly available media to record 4:4:4 at 1 bazillion bits/sec or whatever the ideal "perfect" recording format is... everyone will be "happy"... or maybe not...


This is the "bleeding edge" of technology, it's fine to push the envelope, but realize sometimes wings fall off and you have to bail out! OK, it's probably NOT that drastic... you just have to adjust expectations and work with what the technology CAN do while wishing it could do more - in a few years, all your wishes will likely come true, and you can find something ELSE to complain about/wish for.


Speaking for myself, I was "wishing" for the RX10... I still wish it had 4K (based on the AX100, it SHOULD have!), but it'll do "as-is"... the RX100M2 fit's another niche of the "wish list", and complements the RX10... I can see the AX100 fitting into another niche nicely. Put 'em together, those 3 cameras (toss in an extra 100M2 for additional angle), and I'm shooting 1080/60p multicam, with decent sensors and capabilities, and the entire set will fit in a small bag! I'm not going to complain about that... unless the resulting video is pretty darn offensively awful! I've not been put off by anything I've shot with the RX's (aside from "operator inexperience induced error"), so I think an AX100 will be on the "wish list", warts and all!

I'm fairly sure that I won't look back in 20 years and feel like somehow the things I captured are somehow fatally, fundamentally flawed because of some weakness in the technology (any more than footage shot with the old HC1 is scrap!). I'd rather have reasonably good tools to shoot with, and enjoy them for what they are!

[Ken Ross]

Dave, I could not have expressed it better. My thoughts exactly. :)

[Wacharapong Chiowanich]

Originally Posted by Dave Blackhurst

I'm fairly sure that I won't look back in 20 years and feel like somehow the things I captured are somehow fatally, fundamentally flawed because of some weakness in the technology (any more than footage shot with the old HC1 is scrap!). I'd rather have reasonably good tools to shoot with, and enjoy them for what they are!

Right on, Dave! Looking at my HC1 footage shot almost 10 years ago and compared that to what I usually get from the current crop of HD cameras, there's no denying it doesn't look as good. Did I ever wish it had been 14-bit RAW 4:4:4 and shot with a Zeiss Master Prime?, Umm.... maybe but the thing I'm more sure about is it wouldn't have been acceptable had I had to worry silly about finding some specific equipment that was either unavailable or unaffordable so much so that the chance of capturing the worthy moments were gone because I happened to have nothing technically "worthy" enough to capture them.

Maybe that's because my clients and my preference are much more focused on the content rather than technical perfection. Yours may be different.

[Cliff Totten]

I'm still scratching my head about this AX100. If the reports are true and this camera does not have some of the typical "Handycam" crippling of Iris, Gain and shutter speeds....it just seems to be an unusually bold move on Sony's part for this class of camera. Sony didn't even allow the NXCAM NX30 or NX3D to have full manual exposure control. Many Handycams and NX30 aren't even allowed to display gain amounts on the screen when shooting. (only shown on playback)

With no AX100 user manual available yet, I'm wondering what Sony crippling "surprises" are built into the firmware. We know the 60Mbp/s codec is a limitation that helps Sony's higher models fight the AX100. The 30p limitation is another protection. No XLR audio and those goofy triangle shaped audio meters is another limitation tool too.

Is that it? I can only expect that the "Pro" NXCAM sister to this Handycam will have the answer to these AX100 cripples. I'm debating in my head if it will have 60p 100 Mbp/s on XQD or if it stays with SDXC at 30p 60Mbp/s. Giving the pro version 100Mbp/s might be too scary or risky for Sony to add at this price point. This 1 inch sensor with is dangerous enough to the AX1 sales.

I'm dying to see the AX100 user manual.

CT

P.S. I wonder if Sony will throw in the "VG20-style" 1/25 shutter speed in 24p. (yeah,..when shooting at 24p, you cant select a true 1/24 shutter speed,....only 1/25....sounds crazy but they do use that trick too!)

[Paul Rickford]

Cliff, I think we have finally arrived with a fully functioning Handycam as Sony sees the AX100 as the 'RX' of Handycams, just like the Cybershot market that has been destroyed by the iphone generation, the 'home movie' market for the Handycam has dried up even more so.

Sony have had great success with the RX hi end cameras and are now trying the same here.

The AX100 is probably a one in a generation camcorder, the market for 4k is in its infancy, they know they can only sell through to 'enthusiasts' and 'weekend pros' for the moment so the AX100 has to be the best HD 'enthusiasts' cam going as well, with full manual control and everything thrown in, not just 4K to make us buy all over again.

Sony will be already be working on what comes next, 4K for the mass market, with no viewfinder smaller chips and size, auto everything and a choice of 5 colours!, look at how bad the HC3 was that replaced the much loved HC1 a year later!, chances are apart from maybe a mk2 refinement this is as good as it gets for the enthusiasts for now, sorry just cant bring myself to say 'prosumer'!

[Ron Evans]

Back in the days of Hi8 Sony's higher end consumer cameras like the CCD-V801 had full controls with buttons just like the AX100. They stopped doing that with the introduction of DV. Maybe they now will start going back to how it was before !!! I had a VX3 and a couple of CCD-V801 for multicam back then. Price points were similar !!!

If you want full artisitic control ( and the ability to really mess it up !!) then it is essential to have the manual controls. However , as in my case for the smaller cams, they go unattended so good auto controls are more important with the ability to bias response. Set limits on parameters and AE shift response times etc. In this mode one is letting the designers set the parameters to keep the lens/sensor in its sweet spot. My wife uses my NX30U for closeups in this mode, AE shift usually -1 and she uses spot focus for focusing. AE shift on the dial so she can adjust if she sees the zebras appear too much etc.

I still feel 60P is important as there is no interlace for smooth motion and this may be the differentiator. It is a very nice AVCHD camera with slow frame rate and low data rate UHD. For those who like 24P stuff this would be great.

Ron Evans

[Buba Kastorski]

Originally Posted by Paul Rickford

Sony will be already be working on what comes next, 4K for the mass market, with no viewfinder smaller chips and size, auto everything and a choice of 5 colours!, look at how bad the HC3 was that replaced the much loved HC1 a year later!

exactly my thoughts,

[Pavel Sedlak]

It is really interesting - consumer AX100 has 1" chip with 13.2mm x 8.8mm (20mil pixels, 14mil ef.) and FDR-AX1 has only 1/2" chip (19mil pixels, 8.3mil ef.).

AX100 has XAVC recording with 50Mbps (8bit, 420, long GOP) on SDXC Memory Card(Class 10), FDR-AX1 has the same type of recording with more expensive cards XQD (XAVC-S with 100Mbps or more, 420 and 8bit?).

Consumer AX100 has EVF (OLED) with 2mil pixels, I don't know the EVF type of AX1.

[Michael Warren]

Originally Posted by Pavel Sedlak

FDR-AX1 has only 1/2" chip (19mil pixels, 8.3mil ef.).

The AX1 and Z100 might use a 1/2" chip (actually, slightly smaller than that (1/2.3")), but it's only using 1/3" area of it. So it's truly a 1/3" camera.

[Pavel Sedlak]

Michael Warren - for me is more important the physical size of one pixel. The consumer AX100 has much bigger chip with the same count of pixel as professional AX1 (with price 4500 USD), 20mil vs. 19mil.

It is important for high-contrast scenes and lowlight. Ef. pixel count is important for 422 vs 420 chroma subsampling.

[Michael Warren]

Originally Posted by Pavel Sedlak

20mil vs. 19mil.

Do you have links to the pixel sizes? The quality difference between the AX1 and AX100 suggests much more than a 1mil difference in pixel size.

[Pavel Sedlak]

Chips size is in the specification, all pixel count on the same place - look for Imaging Sensor.
(Don't change "all pixel count" and "one pixel physical size", it is not the same because its depend on chip size).

4K/60p Handycam Camcorder - FDRAX1 Review - Sony US

4K Camcorder with 1" sensor - FDRAX100/B Review - Sony US

Effective pixel count (14mil) for AX100 is in the review - http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/16/te...camcorder.html, for AX is eff. count in specification.

[Michael Warren]

Sorry, I thought you were talking abut the size of the pixels, not the count.

[Ron Evans]

Originally Posted by Pavel Sedlak

It is really interesting - consumer AX100 has 1" chip with 13.2mm x 8.8mm (20mil pixels, 14mil ef.) and FDR-AX1 has only 1/2" chip (19mil pixels, 8.3mil ef.).

AX100 has XAVC recording with 50Mbps (8bit, 420, long GOP) on SDXC Memory Card(Class 10), FDR-AX1 has the same type of recording with more expensive cards XQD (XAVC-S with 100Mbps or more, 420 and 8bit?).

Consumer AX100 has EVF (OLED) with 2mil pixels, I don't know the EVF type of AX1.

Both FDR-AX1 and FDR-AX100 use XAVC-S which is 4:2:0 8 bit. AX1 records at 60P, 150Mbps it will also record 30P at 100Mbps twice the data rate of the AX100. This to me is the biggest difference and likely the reason for the more expensive higher performance memory. We will have to wait on test for real performance differences I think. One would think that the AX100 would be better in low light from the sensor size and I expect this to be the case but there are almost twice as many effective pixels and the lens is F2.8 compared to the AX1 lens of F1.6 both ramp to about the same F3.4 I think. There are other operational difference too. Dual memory slots as well as a SD card slot that will be active in the next firmware update that I think will record AVCHD simultaneously with UHD. So with adequate light operationally the FDR-AX1 has a lot more capability.

Ron Evans