Sony FDR-AX100

[Peter Siamidis]

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

Started with FCP X. I imported clip as .mp4 copy and generated FHD proxy. According to Apple, when the export is done -- the original .mp4 would be used. Export still had artifacts!

Next step, import .mp4 clip converted to ProRes 422 UHD and ProRes Proxy FHD. Surely, during export FCP X would chose the ProRes 422 UHD. Export still had artifacts!

Are you sure your proxy step isn't introducing artifacts or other video issues? I've never had to work with proxy files, not once in the past 10 years since my nle's have always worked at full speed with the raw files right from the camera so I don't know what damage proxy files do or don't do to the video footage. Maybe that would explain why we aren't seeing what you see. Can you just skip the proxy files? There's no need to do that nowadays since most every computer can play back the raw files at full speed anyways for years now and you'll save time and a ton of disc space that way as well. Maybe it will also solve your video issues in the process. Because clearly we're seeing two different results from the same camera, which to me seems to indicate a failing in the proxy files process.

[Steve Mullen]

As I explained in my post, the proxy files were fine but were FHD. During export, because they were chosen without my realizing it, they were upscaled from ProRes Proxy FHD to UHD. No wonder they looked so bad before they went to YouTube.

I've updated my post and all is well. Now I can see what correctly edited and 4K streamed files look like. But, better to catch the error and fix it now.

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Dave Blackhurst

Hmm, I seem to see that EXACT part quoted... but anyway... maybe you really are seeing things that aren't there, and not seeing things that are? I hate it when that happens <wink>!

And your explanation on that 720p clip wasn't informative enough to "read"... but again, whatever. Maybe I missed the part about "dual record function", but I'm not even sure what you refer to or how it's applicable... I "infer" that your point is that YOU are seeing artifacts under the set of conditions particular to your setup, that's fine, and maybe you are "on to" something, but it's not consistent with what others are finding and seeing.

You are correct -- I never said Dual Record function. It only says, "Sony AX100's 1280x720p proxy from camera." But, that wasn't very clear if you don't have the camera.

But, please go back and read my long post on how I found the source of the artifacts and now know how to avoid them. Still don't know if I found a FCP X bug when working with UHD or if I just didn't read the manual. :)

Sorry, about saying attack. I have always respected you too. Contrary to what folks believe, I really want the AX100 to work because I have a major trip ahead.

Still need to see if RS bothers me, if the stutters that sometimes occur are a problem, and how bad motion judder from 24p/30p are. Low-light in my living room seems fantastic, but must shoot to see the noise present.

Lastly, I want to see if FilmConvert can change color to match motion picture stock and add grain. As Slashcam said, the super sharpness works against a cinema look. But, maybe a blur filter?

And, if folks are open to it, I can link to a movie shot by the Digital Bolex that is so much better than the DSLR stuff we've all seen. It looks like 35mm film -- not the soft crap I think we all hate. Motion judder is very nice. I'd love to have the OPTION to have a more arty look.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

Thus, the FDR-X100 limited in XAVC S 4K recording the data stream to about 60 Mbit /s Since this is not yet to be a h.265/HEVC-Codec, this is about a AVCHD FullHD power with 15Mbit /s comparable. For some, moving some details short. << THIS MAY BE CRITICAL >>

No, No, No, No, and it can't be said too many times!!

It is completely wrong to scale bitrate figures like this.

60Mbs for 4k does *NOT* equate to 15Mbs for HD, you can't do a simple comparison like that. It's a general rule that if you increase the pixel count by a given factor, then to get equivalent quality, you need to scale up the bitrate by a lesser factor. Quadrupling the number the pixels does not need four times the datarate for equivalence.

It's also worth remembering that when AVC-HD is spoken about at "24Mbs" - that figure represents a MAX figure - not average. I think I've heard (??) that the 60Mbs figure spoken of is AVERAGE (NOT max) which further complicates comparison.

(Anybody with the camera can easily check the latter. Film an exact time of shot (say 5 minutes) at HD AVC-HD 24Mbs, then 4k 60Mbs, and compare file sizes. If what I've suggested above is correct, then I'd expect the 4k file to be around 3x the size - not 2.5x as a simple 24:60 comparison would suggest. I'd be keen to get a definite answer to that.)

At the end of the day, the question is "is the 60Mbs mode good enough?"

My own feeling is that it's probably roughly comparable to what the top rate of AVC-HD manages in normal HD. If that's good enough for you in HD, then this 60Mbs mode is probably good enough for you in 4k. It's unlikely to get any "broadcast quality" seal of approval - but neither did AVC-HD. Do you see pots half full or half empty?

Let's all remember what we're talking about here. It's not a top notch, full pro camera, and it's unreasonable to expect it to come with a codec worthy of such. There are good reasons for that - not just manufacturers stunting product - they may have good reasons to keep bitrate down to lower the number of consumer complaints who try to use it with too low spec memory, then blame the camera.

[Ken Ross]

Originally Posted by Noa Put

On the rx10 there was also a review on a site run by a German guy who claimed that eventhough the camera produced nice images he had to delete several shots because they where not usable to him as a result of the codec breaking apart. You will always have people that shoot high detail fast moving scenes, then freeze frame it, blow it up 400% in photoshop, stick their faces against the screen, look for artifacts and then say the camera sucks.

Yup. We've got two of them right here, one of which posts on multiple forums showing us those 400% blow ups. The fact is I know of no camera, at any price, that can stand that kind of scrutiny. But if you're trying to single one camera out, what better 'ammunition'.

Silliness, all of it. I mean really, who the hell watches footage like this???

[Max Palmer]

Originally Posted by Cliff Totten

Here is a quick and dirty UN SCIENTIFIC test of dynamic range between the AX100, FS100 and EX1r.

I set the bright lit area to the right at just barely 100 IRE on each camera and let the rest of the shadows below it fall as it may. (when you place it into your NLE, your scopes will place the top peak highlight at about 95 IRE or so.)

These are all un graded screen caps. However, please note that there are 2 FS 100 frame captures. One used no profile and the other used the Able Cine flat profile. The FS100 is an 8 bit sensor read out and written to an 8 bit codec so I don't think the flat profile will really add any "true" dynamic range. (FS100 lens is a Sigma 18-35 f1.8 Nikon mount with no F-Stop value)

Grade them any way you want and compare. There is a significant difference in the 3 cameras.

This test was done in a very dimly lit storage room. So it's a really brutal low light test.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...20Shootout.zip

CT

Cliff- was this screen cap from the AX100 shot in-camera as a 1080p clip, or was it a 4k clip downresed to 1080p?

[Ken Ross]

Originally Posted by Dave Blackhurst

Bring it on, I'm still lookin' fer that "open box return DEAL"!

So can I turn <on> the "sarcasm font"...

The AX100 is obviously a terribly flawed, inadequate camera with horrible artifacting and rolling shutter that cannot possibly be used to take pretty scenes and filmic works of art! The manual is the most boring horrible uninformative drek I've read since the Affordable Care Act... and the buttons are just all wrong! The audacity of Sony to release such a horrid product onto the market should result in all Sony execs being hunted down, tarred and feathered! Go buy anything else lest your eyeballs bleed from the tragedy that lies within...

Sarcasm font <off>


Now to go find my "open box deal"...

LOL, thanks, I needed that.

Dave, it seems so many of us are in a trance, unable to see the horrendous artifacts and are simply 'blinded' by all that scrumptious detail. When I went over to Apple a week or so ago, the same phenomena occurred. I had a 'crowd' of about 5 or 6 people gawking at my footage, asking questions about what camera shot it, where is it available and so on. I guess they too were drawn into this trance.

[Ken Ross]

Originally Posted by David Heath

No, No, No, No, and it can't be said too many times!!

It is completely wrong to scale bitrate figures like this.

60Mbs for 4k does *NOT* equate to 15Mbs for HD, you can't do a simple comparison like that. It's a general rule that if you increase the pixel count by a given factor, then to get equivalent quality, you need to scale up the bitrate by a lesser factor. Quadrupling the number the pixels does not need four times the datarate for equivalence.

It's also worth remembering that when AVC-HD is spoken about at "24Mbs" - that figure represents a MAX figure - not average. I think I've heard (??) that the 60Mbs figure spoken of is AVERAGE (NOT max) which further complicates comparison.

Excellent point and yes, the bitrate is a variable one. I've seen over 70Mbps during complex scenes.

Originally Posted by David Heath

(Anybody with the camera can easily check the latter. Film an exact time of shot (say 5 minutes) at HD At the end of the day, the question is "is the 60Mbs mode good enough?"

My own feeling is that it's probably roughly comparable to what the top rate of AVC-HD manages in normal HD. If that's good enough for you in HD, then this 60Mbs mode is probably good enough for you in 4k. It's unlikely to get any "broadcast quality" seal of approval - but neither did AVC-HD. Do you see pots half full or half empty?

And the important point here is to know the tool you are working with. If you know that rapid pans will either make the codec falter or manifest evidence of RS, then you avoid rapid pans. I typically do that with any kind of shooting, so for me it's no biggie.

But the point is if you abide by these rules, knowing the limitations, your footage can look like it was shot at 100 Mpbs or more. Further, your footage can look sharper and more detailed than even those cameras that actually DO shoot 100Mbps or more. :)

[Cliff Totten]

Originally Posted by Max Palmer

Cliff- was this screen cap from the AX100 shot in-camera as a 1080p clip, or was it a 4k clip downresed to 1080p?

FS100 = 1080 28Mbps 60p
EX1r = EXCAM EX 35 Mbp/s 29.97p
AX100 = 4K 30p 60 Mbp/s

All were frame captured in a 1920x1080 project.

Some things I have noticed about grading the AX100. We all know how "tough" the FS100 codec is. You can stretch it and bend it pretty far considering it's 8bit. Even in the blacks. The FS100 alocates a good deal of bits into the shadows and you can play with them a good deal.

The AX100? Well?...not so much. Raising the blacks or bending the mid tones to raise the mid-level shadows WILL reveal compression artifacts. Don't get me wrong,...what Sony has done with 60Mbp/s is amazing. If you don't need to grade it, it holds up to motion pretty well. I have tried to break it and have pushed it pretty hard in dark room tests. It's good. It's solid enough to hold up to "normal" abuse. However, I'm certain that it's 100 Mbp/s sister "upgrade" will be much tougher. Adding 40 more VBR megabits will definitely make the blacks bulletproof. (as you all know, the blacks and shadows on any codec will be the first to "stress out" with complex detail under low but rate.)

Overall, I'm very VERY impressed with the camera. However, it's going back to Best Buy tomorrow. The rumors about the new Sony 4K A7s with FULL FRAME 12 Megapixel sensor are far too tempting! I'm taking my $2000 back from the AX100 and getting ready to pre order this Sony A7S 4K.

I only have 3 days left to return it. Best Buy only gives 15 days for returns and I'll be in Vegas at NAB on Monday. Bye bye AX100...it's be a fun and educational 2 weeks with you :(

Everyone needs to watch the Sony live NAB web stream on Sunday. Keep your AX100 receipts! This new A7S full frame 4k monster looks like the perfect GH4 killer.

CT

[Dave Blackhurst]

I've seen lots of "broadcast" that wasn't "quality"... cell phone footage is broadcast-able if the content is "important" enough... Go-Pro seems mighty popular as well...

The AX100 is a leg up on much of that!


I caught the A7S "announcement" as well, but considering the investment in FF E mount lenses (I'm presuming this will be a Full Frame camera, not APS-C), I think the AX100 looks "good enough", and as much as I've shot with my RX's for the last year for almost everything video (and of course stills), I still have uses for a "real" video camera... though I can wait until I find a "deal" on an AX! Maybe I won't have to wait too long for those "open box deals" <wink>!

Keep in mind that while the E mount has lots of options for adapters, the selection of FF lenses is a bit more limited... Somehow I'm also VERY skeptical of that "12Mpixel" sensor - that would be VERY "un-Sony" when everything else is 20Mp +, but I'll be watching...


Then again, I'm watching for the RX10M2 and the A77II... I think by this time next year anything other than the cheapest consumer devices will be touting "4K" of some flavor or another! I still wish 4K and higher bitrates were enabled in the RX10, though it would probably mean the AX100 wouldn't be that interesting!

[Cliff Totten]

I'm very impressed with the AX100. Hell,...I'd LOVE to keep it. I had every intention of doing that until today.

I too am wondering how a 12MP full frame sensor will function with FF lenses and APSC cropped lenses.

I cant wait to hear what Sony's plans are for this. I'll be at NAB on Monday so I can't wait to see it.

If worse comes to worse, I can always re buy the AX100 if I'm not impressed with anything else at NAB.

I would CERTAINLY have no problems buying the AX100 again. I feel comfortable with it...but an A7s full frame 4K camera? If it has 100Mbp/s XAVCs with an clean 4K HDMI out? Woah,..I cant turn that down, even if the body was $2,500!

I just hope you can shoot in true 4K with my APSC lenses.

CT

[Peter Siamidis]

Originally Posted by Cliff Totten

The rumors about the new Sony 4K A7s with FULL FRAME 12 Megapixel sensor are far too tempting!

My issue with full frame for video is that for some of my filming needs it will blur too much, for some projects I need a very deep dof so the AX100 is perfect for that. Also if the auto focus isn't perfect then things can look really bad with a full frame sensor when used for video. However for my other projects that are full manual focus with extremely shallow dof I've been using the VG900, so that A7s could replace the VG900 there. Although personally I hate camera form factor for video, so I'm hoping they have a replacement VG900 that uses the A7s's sensor, then I'll buy that. Result will be that the AX100 replaced my NX30, and the A7s (video camera version) will replace my VG900. Then my transition to 4k will be complete :)

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by David Heath

No, No, No, No, and it can't be said too many times!!

Hey David, don't yell at me. Send an email to Slashcam. :)

It does seem like Sony may have chosen 60Mbps because on a 64GB card it nicely gives 2 hours -- just like VHS. Also, Sony has set FHD at 50Mbps. So 90Mbps would have been a "better" data-rate for UHD. Even if only for marketing purposes.

[Ken Ross]

Originally Posted by Cliff Totten

Overall, I'm very VERY impressed with the camera. However, it's going back to Best Buy tomorrow. The rumors about the new Sony 4K A7s with FULL FRAME 12 Megapixel sensor are far too tempting! I'm taking my $2000 back from the AX100 and getting ready to pre order this Sony A7S 4K.

I only have 3 days left to return it. Best Buy only gives 15 days for returns and I'll be in Vegas at NAB on Monday. Bye bye AX100...it's be a fun and educational 2 weeks with you :(

Everyone needs to watch the Sony live NAB web stream on Sunday. Keep your AX100 receipts! This new A7S full frame 4k monster looks like the perfect GH4 killer.

CT

Don't race back to BB quite yet Cliff. According to late breaking reports, you're going to get the same XAVC-S codec along with the same 60Mbps bitrate with the A7S in 4K. Sony hasn't changed a thing. They've just put it in the full frame body of the A7. Of course IMO that's a good thing. ;)

The other thing regarding the 100Mbps video of the GH4. I have yet to see one sample GH4 video that has matched the sharpness & resolution of the XA100. Not one. There was one video on YouTube that really had me laughing. It was perhaps 70% of the resolution of the AX100 and the comments below from prospective GH4 buyers were "OMG, the detail!!!". But I guarantee you if you showed those same folks the far more detailed XA100 footage, the response would be "Ah, too videoish".

Some just can't deal with so much detail and sharpness. I say 'bring it on!'. :)

[Cliff Totten]

Ken Ross - "According to late breaking reports, you're going to get the same XAVC-S codec along with the same 60Mbps bitrate with the A7S in 4K. Sony hasn't changed a thing."

Don't tell me that. If that's true, it's a HUGE let down.

Where did you read that?

Damn,.....Sony had Panny down on the ground but couldn't go for the final 100Mbp/s kill shot. If this is true, than the GH4 is a bit injured but still lives OK.

What about Sony's HDMI? Is it still locked? (like the AX100's)

CT