Sony FDR-AX100

Anthony Lelli · July 2nd, 2014, 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Noa Put

That's the key when you shoot feature films where you either pan slowly or follow a subject to take the attention away from the background but I don't know of any multiplayer sport, like soccer, where they take closeups from one player and follow him constantly around. I don't know if you ever have shot soccergames, I did and 25p is useless, you get that strobing stuttering kind of effect that is very distracting, something that is no issue if you shoot 50i or 50p. I don't know if you watch the current worldseries soccer games in Brazil, those are very smooth images which can't be achieved in 25p and I"m sure they use high framerate camera's to show very slomo replays as those are very smooth as well, just try to slow down 25p by 50%, that looks like a slideshow, that's the only thing I don't like about shooting in 4K now and that's that it does not have 50P as a option. You can always shoot at 1080p 50p which will be better then 4K at 25p with the ax100 for fast moving sports, something I would do if I had to cover such an event.

oh I see. No , Im shooting the official coverage of the game from the above, main camera and 1 camera only. I never close-up on a single player but I keep always 1/3rd of the field to show the play. The close-ups are done with more dedicated cameras, usually on the field. I'm doing it for years , sometimes even 4 games a week
4K is not THAT bad panning, not even at 30p. Sure it takes more care but again I'm willing to do anything to produce 4K. ANYTHING

Noa Put · July 2nd, 2014, 09:46 AM

That's the point I"m trying to make, "4K" does not have anything to do with getting a stuttery motion when doing a fast pan, the framerate does. You get better results shooting at 1080p 50p then 4K at 25p in such a case, the stutter will only appear sharper in 4K :).

Anthony Lelli · July 2nd, 2014, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Noa Put

That's the point I"m trying to make, "4K" does not have anything to do with getting a stuttery motion when doing a fast pan, the framerate does. You get better results shooting at 1080p 50p then 4K at 25p in such a case.

not really. anything that moves in the viefinder and the shutter speed gets the spotlight as the main actor. then the bitrate and then the framerate. So in the order shutter , bitrate because it's digital out of a cmos sensor, and last the framerate for moving targets.
panning adds more stuff to the plate , but if you don't get it right with the shutter speed first and a decent bitrate recording then everything will move in your frame.

Noa Put · July 2nd, 2014, 10:05 AM

You are forgetting rolling shutter where I have seen some pretty bad examples from the ax100 so that will be fun following fast moving subjects, but at least it's in 4K, so no problem right? :)

Anthony Lelli · July 2nd, 2014, 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Noa Put

You are forgetting rolling shutter where I have seen some pretty bad examples from the ax100 so that will be fun following fast moving subjects, but at least it's in 4K, so no problem right? :)

yes the rolling shutter gets more visible with the AX100 in 4K but if you add regular "movements" due to a slow shutter speed then you'll get the best of the two worlds in one shot.

that said what the AX100 can do in 4K is way past my best hopes. It's something close to amazing. Will make my footage of that game stand out and beat the competition LOL

about the AX100 I saw some posts talking about how bad is 1080p ? and where THAT comes from? compared to the XA20 the 1080p of the AX100 could pass for 4K in comparison if it wasn't that the camera surpasses every single camera that I know of in the real 4K. But 1080 is great, way better than XA20 (no match, hands down)

Dave Blackhurst · July 2nd, 2014, 01:11 PM

I don't have "huge" experience with the AX100 (who does, right?!), but let me try to "sort" a few things out.

I was concerned with skew/RS, as there have been some seriously skewed videos posted.... we all know it's a CMOS issue, BUT here's what I noticed using the VF - skew was more noticeable as shutter speeds were higher, 30p is "worse" than 1080/60p, which is actually about the same as my PJ7xx series when apples to apples are compared. SO that's part of the shooting equation... Take a little time looking through the VF while fiddling with settings and waving the camera about, you'll find the RS/skew is HIGHLY variable, and manageable.

Now the "stills" photogs were mentioned, along with a FAST 1/500 "minimum" shutter speed - the reason for that is that the STILLS guy is trying to "freeze" a perfectly sharp image, preferably with a nicely shallow fuzzy background - a "capture" of the moment as it were... You know, drops of sweat and grimmaces and all... frozen!

My first tests of the AX100 let the camera run "auto", and in bright summer sun, the shutter was also "fast", the results being 30 sharp images per second, and NOTICEABLE "stutter" in the VF and sometimes onscreen on playback - the "shimmer" and "stutter" some complain about seems to stem from this super sharp series of what are effectively STILLS due to high shutter speed! This can allow you to "frame grab" effectively, and of course looks "super sharp", but you run into temporal motion "artifacting" which can range from minor to horrific - if you turn up "sharpness" on the display, the pulsing can be nauseating!

SO, here's the flip side as "video dudes" - our goal is to capture MOTION naturally (see where this is going yet?) - after realizing that the super sharp stills caused fast motion to look "funny", I started fiddling with shutter speed (thank goodness this is a pretty well designed "manual" camera!). The slower that shutter speed, the more "motion blur" will enter in the exposure period of EACH frame as whatever is moving will move THROUGH the frame and NOT be "frozen". Pausing video shot at slower shutters confirms that now there is a degree of motion blur, not "30 sharp stills".

THAT said, I haven't experimented enough to know what the "magic" shutter speed is, 30 seems a little TOO low (except in low light, where you NEED the added sensitivity from the shutter being open longer), but 60-125 seems to look pretty "natural" on playback (no stutter, minimal "shimmer" in high detail). The motion blur also seems to make the skew less objectionable, bonus points!

Ken posted pretty much the system I ended up with - set the shutter manually to what "feels" right, and lock it in - set the wheel to "exposure" so you can override the camera if needed to boost or cut exposure, use the ND's as desired/needed to balance Iris/iso/gain. Use a negative AE shift if exposure is too "hot", as is typically needed on Sony cameras. I shot this method at an amusement park, and the footage was still stunning, with nice natural "motion blur" when there was fast action. I would have preferred a tripod/monopod to help keep the camera stable, but was travelling light.

Hope that will help with the initial learning curve! And yes, even the first auto tests were QUITE good, temporal artifacts and all! This camera will spoil you VERY quickly, and yes you will desire to shoot EVERYTHING in 4K - try not to forget that you will likely DELIVER in 1080, remember that you can "frame wide" and pan/crop in post (added work, but an option). If slow mo is desired, remember the camera has other "modes", with attendant resolution loss, but... they are available.

Enjoy!!

Inevitably I'm sure you'll all be dealing with how to process and display 4K, so I should mention that I saw the Seiki 39" 4K TV on ebay for $360/offer, shipped... apparently new, no less! It's not "great", but with tweaking, I'm happy enough with it, it changes things to be able to actually SEE stills and video from these cameras (RX10 stills took on a whole other quality!). You of course need computer/graphics capable of 4K, but I'm using on motherboard Intel graphics, seems adequate! It's ALL 30p of course...

Haven't tried uploading, and I think Chris is enjoying the 4th! But I won't forget to upload the adapter pics when the opportunity arises.

Dave Blackhurst · July 2nd, 2014, 01:36 PM

It's not that the 1080/60p/50Mbps XAVCS is "bad", it's actually noticeably better than 1080/60p/28Mbps AVCHD, it would have been a perfect "incremental improvement" by itself (thus the RX100M3, GRRRR, no 4K!)

It's just that "how you going to keep 'em down on the farm, after they've seen 4k?" (couldn't resist!). The "looking through a window" effect just makes everything else seem "soft"!

Ultimately, the average viewer on a typical screen maybe wouldn't see a big difference, but for a content producer, we have to look at this "stuff", and it's pretty obvious what you get with the 4K... all naysayers aside.

Yeah, we have the question of "how to deliver end product", there aren't that many "cheap" 4K TV's and monitors, but as Peter pointed out, there are more and more super high resolution SMALL displays, and they look really good.

Anthony Lelli · July 2nd, 2014, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Blackhurst

I don't have "huge" experience with the AX100 (who does, right?!), but let me try to "sort" a few things out.

I was concerned with skew/RS, as there have been some seriously skewed videos posted.... we all know it's a CMOS issue, BUT here's what I noticed using the VF - skew was more noticeable as shutter speeds were higher, 30p is "worse" than 1080/60p, which is actually about the same as my PJ7xx series when apples to apples are compared. SO that's part of the shooting equation... Take a little time looking through the VF while fiddling with settings and waving the camera about, you'll find the RS/skew is HIGHLY variable, and manageable.

Now the "stills" photogs were mentioned, along with a FAST 1/500 "minimum" shutter speed - the reason for that is that the STILLS guy is trying to "freeze" a perfectly sharp image, preferably with a nicely shallow fuzzy background - a "capture" of the moment as it were... You know, drops of sweat and grimmaces and all... frozen!

My first tests of the AX100 let the camera run "auto", and in bright summer sun, the shutter was also "fast", the results being 30 sharp images per second, and NOTICEABLE "stutter" in the VF and sometimes onscreen on playback - the "shimmer" and "stutter" some complain about seems to stem from this super sharp series of what are effectively STILLS due to high shutter speed! This can allow you to "frame grab" effectively, and of course looks "super sharp", but you run into temporal motion "artifacting" which can range from minor to horrific - if you turn up "sharpness" on the display, the pulsing can be nauseating!

SO, here's the flip side as "video dudes" - our goal is to capture MOTION naturally (see where this is going yet?) - after realizing that the super sharp stills caused fast motion to look "funny", I started fiddling with shutter speed (thank goodness this is a pretty well designed "manual" camera!). The slower that shutter speed, the more "motion blur" will enter in the exposure period of EACH frame as whatever is moving will move THROUGH the frame and NOT be "frozen". Pausing video shot at slower shutters confirms that now there is a degree of motion blur, not "30 sharp stills".

THAT said, I haven't experimented enough to know what the "magic" shutter speed is, 30 seems a little TOO low (except in low light, where you NEED the added sensitivity from the shutter being open longer), but 60-125 seems to look pretty "natural" on playback (no stutter, minimal "shimmer" in high detail). The motion blur also seems to make the skew less objectionable, bonus points!

Ken posted pretty much the system I ended up with - set the shutter manually to what "feels" right, and lock it in - set the wheel to "exposure" so you can override the camera if needed to boost or cut exposure, use the ND's as desired/needed to balance Iris/iso/gain. Use a negative AE shift if exposure is too "hot", as is typically needed on Sony cameras. I shot this method at an amusement park, and the footage was still stunning, with nice natural "motion blur" when there was fast action. I would have preferred a tripod/monopod to help keep the camera stable, but was travelling light.

Hope that will help with the initial learning curve! And yes, even the first auto tests were QUITE good, temporal artifacts and all! This camera will spoil you VERY quickly, and yes you will desire to shoot EVERYTHING in 4K - try not to forget that you will likely DELIVER in 1080, remember that you can "frame wide" and pan/crop in post (added work, but an option). If slow mo is desired, remember the camera has other "modes", with attendant resolution loss, but... they are available.

Enjoy!!

Inevitably I'm sure you'll all be dealing with how to process and display 4K, so I should mention that I saw the Seiki 39" 4K TV on ebay for $360/offer, shipped... apparently new, no less! It's not "great", but with tweaking, I'm happy enough with it, it changes things to be able to actually SEE stills and video from these cameras (RX10 stills took on a whole other quality!). You of course need computer/graphics capable of 4K, but I'm using on motherboard Intel graphics, seems adequate! It's ALL 30p of course...

Haven't tried uploading, and I think Chris is enjoying the 4th! But I won't forget to upload the adapter pics when the opportunity arises.

perfect, Dave
thanks

I have a lot of experience about that with the XA20 and ea50 but let's don't talk about the ea50 now)
with the XA20 and shutter speed of 1/250 I get perfect footage of the soccer game. Really good. But dark because I'm shooting at night.
Now the idiotic Canon designers put 1/250 and jusp to 1/100 . nothing in between. So at 1/100 I get some decent footage but with motion and shutter.
Aso on the XA20 I get WAY better in MP4 because it records @35mbps
big difference compared to the same XA20 @28mbps
Still talking about panning of course
SO there is no doubt that the shutter speed is the first thing to care, then the bitrate while (sorry to contraddict Noa) the framerate seems to value very little (in terms of panning)

Yes, I'll shoot 30p 4K , no doubts about it. I'll try to don't pan too much I promise LOL

Bruce Dempsey · July 2nd, 2014, 01:59 PM

do you stream these games live Anthony?
Maybe we could watch

Dave Blackhurst · July 2nd, 2014, 02:15 PM

Higher frame rates do "add value" to the equation, at least in respect to smoother temporal motion. BUT, as a practical matter, when dealing with 4K... the AX100 is 30p, the Intel graphics chip is 30p, and the Seiki TV is 30p... not like I have ANY choice for higher framerates there on my "budget"...

2-3 years on, we will likely have 4K/240p/1 MillionMbps or whatever (or at least 4K/60p anyhow), but for now, it's "learn the limitations, shoot within them, enjoy 4K!"... I'll take it, since I am using "old" cards to record on with no prob, my "budget" computer and monitor/TV work, and it all looks good without breaking the piggy bank too badly!

The higher bitrate XAVCS is always there for a fallback if you run into problems with a specific shoot, I'm almost tempted to pick up a cheap CX900 for that reason, but if the AX100's come down... I know I myself am very disinclined to buy any "new" camera that doesn't have 4K, and the current ones with 1080/60p AVCHD really don't look THAT bad... except when compared to the AX100 4K! I suppose it's relative!

Anthony Lelli · July 2nd, 2014, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Blackhurst

Higher frame rates do "add value" to the equation, at least in respect to smoother temporal motion. BUT, as a practical matter, when dealing with 4K... the AX100 is 30p, the Intel graphics chip is 30p, and the Seiki TV is 30p... not like I have ANY choice for higher framerates there on my "budget"...

2-3 years on, we will likely have 4K/240p/1 MillionMbps or whatever (or at least 4K/60p anyhow), but for now, it's "learn the limitations, shoot within them, enjoy 4K!"... I'll take it, since I am using "old" cards to record on with no prob, my "budget" computer and monitor/TV work, and it all looks good without breaking the piggy bank too badly!

The higher bitrate XAVCS is always there for a fallback if you run into problems with a specific shoot, I'm almost tempted to pick up a cheap CX900 for that reason, but if the AX100's come down... I know I myself am very disinclined to buy any "new" camera that doesn't have 4K, and the current ones with 1080/60p AVCHD really don't look THAT bad... except when compared to the AX100 4K! I suppose it's relative!

oh yeah. I'm thinking of the 4K transition like it was with the HD compared to the VHS (I mean SD) . Im sure that by then the same guys who had a look at HD said exactly what we're saying now about the 4K
now. Back then everybody was saying "I don't need no stupid HD, there are no TV sets for that, I'm fine with my XL1!". Yeah right, look at them now LOL

Peter Siamidis · July 2nd, 2014, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anthony Lelli

oh yeah. I'm thinking of the 4K transition like it was with the HD compared to the VHS (I mean SD) . Im sure that by then the same guys who had a look at HD said exactly what we're saying now about the 4K
now. Back then everybody was saying "I don't need no stupid HD, there are no TV sets for that, I'm fine with my XL1!". Yeah right, look at them now LOL

Absolutely, I went through this very thing myself. 9 years ago when I started my websites I decide to film in full 1920x1080 hd from the start and people thought I was nuts at the time. Now their SD content looks horrible, whereas I have 9 years worth of 1920x1080 content that still looks pretty good. It was totally worth it, and I feel the same about 4k now, it's a no brainer to me and I'll never go back to 1080p.

On a separate note, I had a question about something I notice when I film in the garage area of my film house which has florescent lights. I notice what can best be described as "stripes" on the display and in the final recordings. They are faint, but they are there and I presume they are due to some weird frequency issue with the florescent lights. Is there any way to correct this, like are there special film safe florescent lights that can be used? They are the typical in ceiling long tube florescent lights which is cool because I can film 360 degrees without worrying about filming my own lighting gear, but I hope that stripe issue has a solution.

Anthony Lelli · July 2nd, 2014, 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Siamidis

Absolutely, I went through this very thing myself. 9 years ago when I started my websites I decide to film in full 1920x1080 hd from the start and people thought I was nuts at the time. Now their SD content looks horrible, whereas I have 9 years worth of 1920x1080 content that still looks pretty good. It was totally worth it, and I feel the same about 4k now, it's a no brainer to me and I'll never go back to 1080p.

On a separate note, I had a question about something I notice when I film in the garage area of my film house which has florescent lights. I notice what can best be described as "stripes" on the display and in the final recordings. They are faint, but they are there and I presume they are due to some weird frequency issue with the florescent lights. Is there any way to correct this, like are there special film safe florescent lights that can be used? They are the typical in ceiling long tube florescent lights which is cool because I can film 360 degrees without worrying about filming my own lighting gear, but I hope that stripe issue has a solution.

Peter
Im sorry but Ive got the camera yesterday, I'll let dave or others with more experience answer that

Dave,
ran more tests with evening lights and the 4K panning will be a challenge. I'll shoot 4 anyway , at least the first half.
But the reason why I'm telling you this is because it doesn't match, the whole thing doesn't match. let's say that again I compared the 1080 of both the XA20 and AX100 and the sony did better, also panning. Now the limitation of the 4K panning starts smelling funny to me. Was it intentional? It is exaggerated , doesn't look "normal" to me.

well, you know how much I "love" the marketing at sony's, so maybe Im being a little "defensive" here, but come on... it doesn't look right.

anyway I'll keep the XA100 and after the first game I'll take a closer look at the AX1 (no face detection and that would be a problem for me because I do lots of interviews and I'm not going back to manual!). But I want to see if 2.5K more magically cured the panning thingy.

Wacharapong Chiowanich · July 3rd, 2014, 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Siamidis

............but I hope that stripe issue has a solution.

Not sure about the version of the AX100 you're using but on my PAL, AX100E, version I remember having the range of usable shutters for shooting 4K like 1/25, 1/30, 1/50, 1/60, 1/80, 1/100......and faster but hardly usable especially in slow frame rate 4K due to the judder and flicker problems. I suppose your normal shutter is 1/60 for your camera's 30fps frame rate then you can try varying the shutter slower or faster in either direction and see if the striping goes away. Of course you have to also vary the iris or gain to compensate for that or even the speed of your camera movement if the required shutter is a little too extreme. If that still doesn't help I'm afraid you have to avoid that scene or at least change the light. The refreshment cycle would probably not be in sync with your camera's frame rates.

One thing I absolutely agree with Anthony about shooting 4K with this camera is getting good image is very unforgiving. You can't just get by with a lousy or even less than precise shooting technique. I haven't shot a single handheld cilp that would be considered stable enough similar to countless 1080p shots I could normally get from any of my small form factor Sony HD handycams. Good god the AF and zooming are very good. Though the AF may be a bit slow but it's always precise, hardly hunts and the focus transition is smooth. The zoom speed may not be fast enough for some people but the zooming action is smooth with no wiggles or wobbles.

It will take some practice to get it right for this new 4K thing. I foresee either a tripod, monopod or steadicam will be an essential accessory to this camera.

Dave Blackhurst · July 3rd, 2014, 03:47 AM

@Peter -
I've seen that "ghost" band that creeps down the screen with my garage flos, and with what I think were some nasty old mercury halide lights in a gym.... you notice it when you have a large "solid" color area, and will see a slightly darker band slowly creep down across the screen...

I suspect playing with shutter speed may help, I'm sure it's a function of the 60 cycle A/C and perhaps cheap ballasts, but it might be worth asking in the lighting section? LED or incandescent fills are what I'd suggest, and avoiding large expanses of single color!

@Anthony -
Remember that in 1080, they probably toss at least "some" of the data, but with 4K, they have to keep more...there's a certain amount of unavoidable lag in the sensor reads, and it gets worse with 4K, based on how the camera performs, my guess is that is what is happening - The "Bionz X" is a newer faster processor, but may still be a little short on horesepower - I definitely get the feeling that the engineers were pushing the limits a bit in this camera... it's not an evil scheme, just physics being a fickle mistress!

A possible partial solution is to frame wider than you otherwise might, hopefully minimizing background movement (where skew is most noticeable) by panning a bit less. Pan/crop in post... In theory this should also reduce the number crunching required (less changes in the frame to account for). Not "ideal", but one way to use the added resolution to our advantage, instead of our frustration!

In time, one can assume that electronic designs and processors will improve to better deal with this sort of thing. This is not the first time I've seen "physics" issues of this sort, that can only be overcome with faster number crunching, better circuitry design, and new algorithms...

I found using the viewfinder helped a LOT with handheld stability, my technique went south fast with the LCD, and I too would concur that proper support is far more critical with 4K... digging out old rigs, picked up a new monopod I'd been looking at for a long time, and planning to take SOMETHING for additional support if at all possible! The results justify the extra gear.

July 2nd, 2014, 09:46 AM	#1472
Noa Put Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Posts: 9,510	Re: Sony FDR-AX100 That's the point I"m trying to make, "4K" does not have anything to do with getting a stuttery motion when doing a fast pan, the framerate does. You get better results shooting at 1080p 50p then 4K at 25p in such a case, the stutter will only appear sharper in 4K :).

July 2nd, 2014, 10:05 AM	#1474
Noa Put Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Posts: 9,510	Re: Sony FDR-AX100 You are forgetting rolling shutter where I have seen some pretty bad examples from the ax100 so that will be fun following fast moving subjects, but at least it's in 4K, so no problem right? :)

July 2nd, 2014, 01:11 PM	#1476
Dave Blackhurst Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Apple Valley CA Posts: 4,874	Re: Sony FDR-AX100 I don't have "huge" experience with the AX100 (who does, right?!), but let me try to "sort" a few things out. I was concerned with skew/RS, as there have been some seriously skewed videos posted.... we all know it's a CMOS issue, BUT here's what I noticed using the VF - skew was more noticeable as shutter speeds were higher, 30p is "worse" than 1080/60p, which is actually about the same as my PJ7xx series when apples to apples are compared. SO that's part of the shooting equation... Take a little time looking through the VF while fiddling with settings and waving the camera about, you'll find the RS/skew is HIGHLY variable, and manageable. Now the "stills" photogs were mentioned, along with a FAST 1/500 "minimum" shutter speed - the reason for that is that the STILLS guy is trying to "freeze" a perfectly sharp image, preferably with a nicely shallow fuzzy background - a "capture" of the moment as it were... You know, drops of sweat and grimmaces and all... frozen! My first tests of the AX100 let the camera run "auto", and in bright summer sun, the shutter was also "fast", the results being 30 sharp images per second, and NOTICEABLE "stutter" in the VF and sometimes onscreen on playback - the "shimmer" and "stutter" some complain about seems to stem from this super sharp series of what are effectively STILLS due to high shutter speed! This can allow you to "frame grab" effectively, and of course looks "super sharp", but you run into temporal motion "artifacting" which can range from minor to horrific - if you turn up "sharpness" on the display, the pulsing can be nauseating! SO, here's the flip side as "video dudes" - our goal is to capture MOTION naturally (see where this is going yet?) - after realizing that the super sharp stills caused fast motion to look "funny", I started fiddling with shutter speed (thank goodness this is a pretty well designed "manual" camera!). The slower that shutter speed, the more "motion blur" will enter in the exposure period of EACH frame as whatever is moving will move THROUGH the frame and NOT be "frozen". Pausing video shot at slower shutters confirms that now there is a degree of motion blur, not "30 sharp stills". THAT said, I haven't experimented enough to know what the "magic" shutter speed is, 30 seems a little TOO low (except in low light, where you NEED the added sensitivity from the shutter being open longer), but 60-125 seems to look pretty "natural" on playback (no stutter, minimal "shimmer" in high detail). The motion blur also seems to make the skew less objectionable, bonus points! Ken posted pretty much the system I ended up with - set the shutter manually to what "feels" right, and lock it in - set the wheel to "exposure" so you can override the camera if needed to boost or cut exposure, use the ND's as desired/needed to balance Iris/iso/gain. Use a negative AE shift if exposure is too "hot", as is typically needed on Sony cameras. I shot this method at an amusement park, and the footage was still stunning, with nice natural "motion blur" when there was fast action. I would have preferred a tripod/monopod to help keep the camera stable, but was travelling light. Hope that will help with the initial learning curve! And yes, even the first auto tests were QUITE good, temporal artifacts and all! This camera will spoil you VERY quickly, and yes you will desire to shoot EVERYTHING in 4K - try not to forget that you will likely DELIVER in 1080, remember that you can "frame wide" and pan/crop in post (added work, but an option). If slow mo is desired, remember the camera has other "modes", with attendant resolution loss, but... they are available. Enjoy!! Inevitably I'm sure you'll all be dealing with how to process and display 4K, so I should mention that I saw the Seiki 39" 4K TV on ebay for $360/offer, shipped... apparently new, no less! It's not "great", but with tweaking, I'm happy enough with it, it changes things to be able to actually SEE stills and video from these cameras (RX10 stills took on a whole other quality!). You of course need computer/graphics capable of 4K, but I'm using on motherboard Intel graphics, seems adequate! It's ALL 30p of course... Haven't tried uploading, and I think Chris is enjoying the 4th! But I won't forget to upload the adapter pics when the opportunity arises.

July 2nd, 2014, 01:36 PM	#1477
Dave Blackhurst Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Apple Valley CA Posts: 4,874	Re: Sony FDR-AX100 It's not that the 1080/60p/50Mbps XAVCS is "bad", it's actually noticeably better than 1080/60p/28Mbps AVCHD, it would have been a perfect "incremental improvement" by itself (thus the RX100M3, GRRRR, no 4K!) It's just that "how you going to keep 'em down on the farm, after they've seen 4k?" (couldn't resist!). The "looking through a window" effect just makes everything else seem "soft"! Ultimately, the average viewer on a typical screen maybe wouldn't see a big difference, but for a content producer, we have to look at this "stuff", and it's pretty obvious what you get with the 4K... all naysayers aside. Yeah, we have the question of "how to deliver end product", there aren't that many "cheap" 4K TV's and monitors, but as Peter pointed out, there are more and more super high resolution SMALL displays, and they look really good.

July 2nd, 2014, 01:59 PM	#1479
Bruce Dempsey Major Player Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Atlantic Coast Canada Posts: 599	Re: Sony FDR-AX100 do you stream these games live Anthony? Maybe we could watch

July 2nd, 2014, 02:15 PM	#1480
Dave Blackhurst Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Apple Valley CA Posts: 4,874	Re: Sony FDR-AX100 Higher frame rates do "add value" to the equation, at least in respect to smoother temporal motion. BUT, as a practical matter, when dealing with 4K... the AX100 is 30p, the Intel graphics chip is 30p, and the Seiki TV is 30p... not like I have ANY choice for higher framerates there on my "budget"... 2-3 years on, we will likely have 4K/240p/1 MillionMbps or whatever (or at least 4K/60p anyhow), but for now, it's "learn the limitations, shoot within them, enjoy 4K!"... I'll take it, since I am using "old" cards to record on with no prob, my "budget" computer and monitor/TV work, and it all looks good without breaking the piggy bank too badly! The higher bitrate XAVCS is always there for a fallback if you run into problems with a specific shoot, I'm almost tempted to pick up a cheap CX900 for that reason, but if the AX100's come down... I know I myself am very disinclined to buy any "new" camera that doesn't have 4K, and the current ones with 1080/60p AVCHD really don't look THAT bad... except when compared to the AX100 4K! I suppose it's relative!

July 3rd, 2014, 03:47 AM	#1485
Dave Blackhurst Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Apple Valley CA Posts: 4,874	Re: Sony FDR-AX100 @Peter - I've seen that "ghost" band that creeps down the screen with my garage flos, and with what I think were some nasty old mercury halide lights in a gym.... you notice it when you have a large "solid" color area, and will see a slightly darker band slowly creep down across the screen... I suspect playing with shutter speed may help, I'm sure it's a function of the 60 cycle A/C and perhaps cheap ballasts, but it might be worth asking in the lighting section? LED or incandescent fills are what I'd suggest, and avoiding large expanses of single color! @Anthony - Remember that in 1080, they probably toss at least "some" of the data, but with 4K, they have to keep more...there's a certain amount of unavoidable lag in the sensor reads, and it gets worse with 4K, based on how the camera performs, my guess is that is what is happening - The "Bionz X" is a newer faster processor, but may still be a little short on horesepower - I definitely get the feeling that the engineers were pushing the limits a bit in this camera... it's not an evil scheme, just physics being a fickle mistress! A possible partial solution is to frame wider than you otherwise might, hopefully minimizing background movement (where skew is most noticeable) by panning a bit less. Pan/crop in post... In theory this should also reduce the number crunching required (less changes in the frame to account for). Not "ideal", but one way to use the added resolution to our advantage, instead of our frustration! In time, one can assume that electronic designs and processors will improve to better deal with this sort of thing. This is not the first time I've seen "physics" issues of this sort, that can only be overcome with faster number crunching, better circuitry design, and new algorithms... I found using the viewfinder helped a LOT with handheld stability, my technique went south fast with the LCD, and I too would concur that proper support is far more critical with 4K... digging out old rigs, picked up a new monopod I'd been looking at for a long time, and planning to take SOMETHING for additional support if at all possible! The results justify the extra gear.