Sony FDR-AX100

[Peter Siamidis]

Originally Posted by Noa Put

Whats the length of the footage that takes 18 hours to render? That seems really long, I currently can render an hour of 1080p 50p avchd 28mbs footage to any 1080p h264 format in about 20-25 minutes, what would the render times be ratiowise on a ax100, would it take twice as long?

A typical shoot of mine produces about 75 minutes of final content usually made up of 12 individual clips. The clips all have watermark and color corrector applied, and for my websites I need 4 versions of every clip so it renders out around 300 minutes of footage. I have a Vegas Pro script that will automatically render out a low quality h264 mobile version that can work on most cell phone networks (about 700kbps), two 1280x720 good quality versions one in WMV and the other in h264 MP4 (about 8mbps), and an uber quality h264 4k MP4 version (about 30mbps). My render box is also my pc gaming box, a stock Haswell 4770k quad core with twin 670 gpu's. Vegas Pro uses the 670 on video decode and to apply the color corrector, but the encode part is pure cpu only. I use the Main Concept encoder that comes with Vegas Pro. I used to use the Sony AVC encoder that comes with Vegas Pro which was faster but it seems broken for 4k, so I've switched back to Main Concept. I guess the reason for it being slow is two fold, first because it's dealing with 60mbps of data instead of 28mbps previously so there is more data to churn through. Secondly I guess it would be because it has to churn through it four times more often since it has 4x the final pixels to render out. I asked about gpu encoding support on the official Vegas Pro forum as I remember that NVidia 5xx gpu's are supported to 1080p encodes. However the people there tried 4k gpu encodes with some AX100 files that I made available to them and they told me the results were broken with NVidia gpu's, and while gpu encode worked with some Amd gpu's they said the results were visibly worse than cpu encode. So cpu encode it is. Anyways I'll just get an 8 core Haswell-E when they come out later this year, that should let my shoots be all encoded by the time I wake up.

Originally Posted by Noa Put

Also the a7s is 1080p and you need a additional recorder to record in 4k which does make it a expensive combination, not having 50/60p in 4k is something I have thought about as well, 25p would work for most shots but I would prefer 50p for all I shoot, 25p doesn't slow down well at all. I guess next year we will start to see the first 50p 4k camera's appear?

Yeah the a7s with 4k add on does get up there in price and also becomes less comfortable to handle compared to the AX100, not sure what to do there yet. I also lament the loss of 60 fps :( But 4k looks too good to go back now so I'll deal with 30 fps. I view the AX100 as a one year camera, a stop gap solution that I'll probably replace next year once a 60 fps model is available.

Originally Posted by Ken Ross

Pete, when I'm looking for the widest coverage possible, I always switch to Standard OIS. It's sometimes easy to forget you've got Active engaged and that does reduce your maximum wide angle coverage.

I'll have to test that out and see if standard ois works well enough to use for run 'n gun type stuff.

[Rob Cantwell]

i looked at this with some interest when it was announced, also looked at the CX 900 that's €1,699.00 on the Irish Sony site and they have the AX-100 for €2,249.01. Thats a bit spendy eh?

Its a nice enough system ok, dont like the lens cap even though it's the same as all my stills cameras!
The only thing i could see it being an advantage for me at present would be the ability to crop into the image, then my Canon 5D MkIII should be able to crop even deeper still.

So for me at the moment - I'm out.

Will revisit again in a while and see how things are coming along.

[Noa Put]

the CX 900 that's €1,699.00 on the Irish Sony site and they have the AX-100 for €2,249.01

You are better off ordering in the Netherlands or Belgium, here it's 1498 and 1998 euro which includes 21% tax.

[Aaron Holmes]

I've been playing with the AX100 over the weekend. 4k is brilliantly sharp, as expected. 1080p is woefully soft. *scratches head* It doesn't make any sense to me why it's so soft straight out of the camera. Fortunately, a drop of "Sharpen" in Premiere and the 1080p snaps to life, looking about as good on my 1080p monitor as the downscaled 4k -- a relief, because as much as I wanted to fiddle with 4k, I had hoped to do a fair bit of 1080p shooting also!

Unfortunately, at least as far as I can tell, there is no in-camera sharpening like there seems to be in the RX10. Pity. Why?! (Pleeeaasssee?!)

The conspiracy theorist in me is imagining Sony engineers being told to soften the 1080p image so that the 4k looks better. But no, they'd never stoop to something like that...

[Dave Blackhurst]

What mode do you have the camera in for 1080? I haven't shot RX10/AX100 side by side, but the XAVC S 1080/60p looked fairly good. Obviously not as sharp as the 4K, but not really "woefully soft", I think the 4K resets out expectations... the RX10 still looks great to me, but I do see it's a "little" soft, until you really get in close, and realize... yes, it's not as sharp as the 4K out of the same sensor/processor combo...

It's not a conspiracy, IMO it's two separate "development teams" that would benefit from some "cross-pollination" of ideas (like how about the VF switching the LCD off with the eye sensor like any EVF still camera?). The DNA of the AX100 is clearly "Handycam" in ancestry, while the RX10 has Alpha/Cybershot bloodlines. The result is some real serious head scratchers like a "MULTI" jack that operates differently between the two cams, the lack of XAVC S and 4K in the RX10, when clearly it COULD have it, and probably a few other "quirks".

IMO a bit of "unification" as to controls/features would actually be beneficial, as the AX100/RX10/RX100 create a powerful "team" for image capture, even with the annoying differences!

[Adriano Moroni]

Originally Posted by Marc Salvatore

DM-Accessories MIS-SHOE Review
Here are my thoughts on this device:

Marc,
are you using the MIS-SHOE without problems? I cannot use any heavy accessory on MIS-SHOE: there is the risk it could fall to the ground. I have already broken a lamp. The MIS-SHOE doesn't settle strongly on AX100 shoe. In fact after installing it on the shoe, if I shake the MIS-SHOE, it comes off.
Thanks for your suggestions.

[Rob Cantwell]

Originally Posted by Noa Put

You are better off ordering in the Netherlands or Belgium, here it's 1498 and 1998 euro which includes 21% tax.

I'm wondering how they do any business here at all, with their prices!!

Last cam I bought was a PAL version from B&H, even with customs and shipping it was still cheaper than anything I could source in the EU.
Of course theres always a risk purchasing outside your own country if you have to return a defective product.

Anyway not buying anything at present, but will see how the 4K market develops.

[Ken Ross]

Originally Posted by Peter Siamidis

I'll have to test that out and see if standard ois works well enough to use for run 'n gun type stuff.

Pete, worst case scenario is that you use Standard OIS when you want the widest shot possible and then switch to Active IS when you want maximum stabilization for longer shots.

[Ken Ross]

Originally Posted by Rob Cantwell

i looked at this with some interest when it was announced, also looked at the CX 900 that's €1,699.00 on the Irish Sony site and they have the AX-100 for €2,249.01. Thats a bit spendy eh?

Its a nice enough system ok, dont like the lens cap even though it's the same as all my stills cameras!
The only thing i could see it being an advantage for me at present would be the ability to crop into the image, then my Canon 5D MkIII should be able to crop even deeper still.

So for me at the moment - I'm out.

Will revisit again in a while and see how things are coming along.

Rob, an argument can be made that both the AX100 & CX900 will produce cleaner, more artifact-free footage than the Canon.

[Ken Ross]

Originally Posted by Aaron Holmes

I've been playing with the AX100 over the weekend. 4k is brilliantly sharp, as expected. 1080p is woefully soft. *scratches head* It doesn't make any sense to me why it's so soft straight out of the camera. Fortunately, a drop of "Sharpen" in Premiere and the 1080p snaps to life, looking about as good on my 1080p monitor as the downscaled 4k -- a relief, because as much as I wanted to fiddle with 4k, I had hoped to do a fair bit of 1080p shooting also!

Unfortunately, at least as far as I can tell, there is no in-camera sharpening like there seems to be in the RX10. Pity. Why?! (Pleeeaasssee?!)

The conspiracy theorist in me is imagining Sony engineers being told to soften the 1080p image so that the 4k looks better. But no, they'd never stoop to something like that...

Aaron, my advice would be to shoot everything in 4K regardless of how sharp or soft the actual HD mode is. Shoot in 4K and simply downscale to HD when you need it. This way everything you've shot is permanently archived in 4K. The day may come when you look back at some of your footage and wished you had shot it in 4K.

I really can see little advantage for shooting in HD with the AX100.

[Aaron Holmes]

Originally Posted by Ken Ross

Aaron, my advice would be to shoot everything in 4K regardless of how sharp or soft the actual HD mode is. Shoot in 4K and simply downscale to HD when you need it. This way everything you've shot is permanently archived in 4K. The day may come when you look back at some of your footage and wished you had shot it in 4K.

I really can see little advantage for shooting in HD with the AX100.

The only advantage is 60fps -- which, it turns out, is most of what I expect to be shooting. :) The primary aim of the camera was to replace my (relatively) ancient CX12 as B-cam while allowing experimentation with 4k. Although I enjoy the opportunities I get to plan and execute real shoots, the reality is that I mostly do grab-n-go handheld shooting of family events and whatnot, and I'm not a huge fan of the 30/24fps aesthetic in those situations.

[Rob Cantwell]

Originally Posted by Ken Ross

Rob, an argument can be made that both the AX100 & CX900 will produce cleaner, more artifact-free footage than the Canon.

Good point, I'd like to see a real life side by side to see how they compare.

[Keith Rollinson]

Originally Posted by Adriano Moroni

Marc,
are you using the MIS-SHOE without problems? I cannot use any heavy accessory on MIS-SHOE: there is the risk it could fall to the ground. I have already broken a lamp. The MIS-SHOE doesn't settle strongly on AX100 shoe. In fact after installing it on the shoe, if I shake the MIS-SHOE, it comes off.
Thanks for your suggestions.

I am using the MIS-SHOE w/ a RODE Stereo Pro Mic - it is rock solid, no slop at all in the shoe. 100% confidence.

Perhaps you have a defective one, or one that is not securely mounted or fastened. How "heavy" an accessory are you mounting?

[Adriano Moroni]

Originally Posted by Keith Rollinson

I am using the MIS-SHOE w/ a RODE Stereo Pro Mic - it is rock solid, no slop at all in the shoe. 100% confidence.

Perhaps you have a defective one, or one that is not securely mounted or fastened. How "heavy" an accessory are you mounting?

I think my light is too much heavy. My light is like it: 312as Bi-color Changing Dimmable LED Video Light Panel with Magnetic Filter Plate - Laptop Computer Chargers And Adapters - Amazon.com

[Dave Blackhurst]

Originally Posted by Aaron Holmes

The only advantage is 60fps -- which, it turns out, is most of what I expect to be shooting. :) The primary aim of the camera was to replace my (relatively) ancient CX12 as B-cam while allowing experimentation with 4k. Although I enjoy the opportunities I get to plan and execute real shoots, the reality is that I mostly do grab-n-go handheld shooting of family events and whatnot, and I'm not a huge fan of the 30/24fps aesthetic in those situations.

@Aaron -

I'm sure the "worst" HD from the AX100 will be far superior to the old CX12... just p vs. i will make a big difference! Make sure you're using the XAVCS 50Mbps 60p, it looks to me like it improves over the 28Mbps AVCHD. I'll have to do some tests against the RX10, but I think they'll match up OK.

I'm also in the "not a fan of 30p aesthetic" club, but I'm trying to experiment with shutter speeds (manual control rather than letting the cam run auto) to see if some of that can be tamed, I think it is a critical part of the equation, based on a bit of playing with the 30p mode. I'd really rather shoot in 4K whenever possible, but I'm still "experimenting" and learning...