Sony PXW-X70 announced: Pro XDCAM version of AX100

[Anthony Lelli]

Originally Posted by Jack Zhang

I'm adding that 4K 60p requirement was pitching for "wildlife programming." Reality TV programming may have different requirements.

But considering this cam might only be getting XAVC-L 4K, it is essentially the same at the moment as XAVC-S picture wise (8bit 4:2:0) but the added audio channels and 24bit audio would be a nice addition.

Sony doesn't seem like they will make XAVC-L 4K with 10bit 4:2:2, which is mandated by broadcast.

hmm so it is the XAVC L the problem then, even the FS7 can't be used for editing with that format. At least the FS7 shoots XAVC L and XAVC I , and the "I" works for editing.
so to recap:
XAVC S works with everything
XAVC I works with everything
XAVC L works only with catalyst (and edius) but not directly from the camera file.

[David Dixon]

Originally Posted by Anthony Lelli

hmm so it is the XAVC L the problem then, even the FS7 can't be used for editing with that format. At least the FS7 shoots XAVC L and XAVC I , and the "I" works for editing.
so to recap:
XAVC S works with everything
XAVC I works with everything
XAVC L works only with catalyst (and edius) but not directly from the camera file.

That's essentially correct, except that I understand that Premiere Pro's latest version will also import XAVC L. And Catalyst Browse will transcode the XAVC L clips to ProRes so that anything can use it. And now as mentioned in my earlier post we have EditReady that will also transcode the clips to ProRes.

Sony did recently release a plugin for Avid, and is supposedly now working on the plugin for FCPX.

[Josh Bass]

went and tried the cam out and shot some footage at Microsearch (Houston) today. havent looked at footage yet...i wont say I put the camera through its paces or anything, but one thing I did notice that kind of bugged me is that the focus ring takes a very long time to turn from one extreme to the other, unlike the more physical focus rings on cams like the EX1. going through the menus I couldnt find an way to adjust the sensitivity on it, so maybe is what it is. that could make run n gun shoots trying to capture broll as things are happening tough if trying to focus manually, so maybe the saying face detection is the only way was not as off as we thought.

[Paul Anderegg]

The manual ruing can focus from macro to infinity in about 1mm of rotation at WIDE ANGLE. Once you start zooming in, it gets worse, much worse. At full telephoto, it is 1 1/2 full rotations to do the same, just tested it out now. As the grip on the ring only really allows around 1/4 of a turn per "finger manipulation", that works out to roughly 6 distinct grip and cranks of the ring to focus worst case scenario.

I shoot news with this puppy, and I have gotten into the habit of quickly zooming OUT, racking to infinity, then doing my thing. At night, the camera cannot seem to find infinity again once it settles on something very close, but racking it out to infinity helps as the clearer the image the easier the auto focus. And I too use the face detection thing to let the camera find focus, but I always quickly disengage it after the box appears so it won't drift on me!

Paul

[Josh Bass]

clever. do you think the compromises like that are worth it for the cost savings over the next higher up cam in that line?

[Paul Anderegg]

What would be the next higher up camera in line?

I am SERIOUSLY considering buying a Sony A7s for LIVE TV news broadcasts..........can you imagine how cool that would be to see in the dark and broadcast it live on air! If it came with an HD-SDI output, I would purchase it right away.

Paul

[Anthony Lelli]

Originally Posted by Paul Anderegg

If it came with an HD-SDI output, I would purchase it right away.

Paul

you mean SD-SDI, right?

[Anthony Lelli]

Originally Posted by David Dixon

That's essentially correct, except that I understand that Premiere Pro's latest version will also import XAVC L. And Catalyst Browse will transcode the XAVC L clips to ProRes so that anything can use it. And now as mentioned in my earlier post we have EditReady that will also transcode the clips to ProRes.

Sony did recently release a plugin for Avid, and is supposedly now working on the plugin for FCPX.

yes but still must be converted, and I have the feeling that all the converters do some sort of "interpretation", and that brings me to the next question: are we sure that's "real" xavc coming out? In other words if I want to convert something (anything) I can make it 100MBps if I want to, but that doesn't mean that the footage is now 100mbps, doesn't it?
let alone the 4:2:2 and the 10bit thing

I think that until will work on its own and face the world standing proud against the "ordinary and inferior" avchd then I suspect that it may be just a marketing thing.

for sure we shouldn't work THAT hard to try to make it work.. LOL

[Josh Bass]

I would consider the 180, the pmw 200 or the 300 to be part of the same general line of cams (even if not strictly true).

has anyone messed with the screen touch autofocus on this cam? generally Im against all that but again thinking of ENG situations where youre trying to change shots quickly and the 15 or so seconds it might take to focus manually wont cut it.

[Tom Grushka]

Originally Posted by Anthony Lelli

XAVC L works only with catalyst (and edius) but not directly from the camera file.

Not exactly ... the camera files work directly in Premiere Pro with no transcoding.

[Tom Grushka]

Originally Posted by Josh Bass

... the focus ring takes a very long time to turn from one extreme to the other ...

+1 on a firmware fix for this.

[Josh Bass]

Can they do that? that would be great. or an adjustable sensitivity/"gear ratio" setting. otherwise seems well thought out. havent seen footage yet.

[Tom Grushka]

Originally Posted by Anthony Lelli

I don't think that's funny, and given the situation it makes some sense, actually.
XAVC gives "highest picture resolution and frame rate" (from Sony , in writing) so you shouldn't work that hard trying to catch the difference with the "regular" AVCHD , no?
it should be obvious, no?
or not?

Sorry, I was being facetious. It is serious, and I hope someone has the technical ability to perform some good tests. I don't have the equipment. There are some side-by-side comparisons on the AX100 of XAVC vs AVCHD, just Google videos for:

"ax100 xavc vs avchd"

Originally Posted by Anthony Lelli

well, XAVC files from the PXW-X70 actually don't work with vegas. AT ALL. what's "confusing" about that?

Thought I acknowledged that. It's Sony's own software. Makes no sense.

[Josh Bass]

Looked at footage. . .looks generally nice. My impression is that it's not as sharp as the EX1 (which is almost painfully so). It's not fuzzy, rather, the in focus footage has a softer, less harsh quality to edges etc. I daresay maybe it's more "cinematic" or. . .sigh. . ."filmlike". Sharp but not "enhanced" the way I'm used to with EX footage. If the EX is like you're standing there in real life looking at the the subject from an inch away so you can see every detail, the X70 is like everything has a very subtle diffusion filter over it.

Now, I stupidly did not take note of settings/picture profiles/etc., so no way to know what anyone who'd been in the store for the last 10 hours before I got to the cam had done to it. Perhaps this was default sharpness and you can add more to make it more EX-like, perhaps someone took it DOWN, but it looks like some of the other footage I've seen posted.

One other note is that I put it in 24p (the FX mode, I believe. . .whichever is the top one in the menu. . .I assumed that was the better quality). Simply playing back the clips in VLC from the "private" file right off a hard drive, 24p looks pretty juddery. Don't know if that's 'cause I'm playing back original quality footage in a way that was never meant to be done.

[Anthony Lelli]

Originally Posted by Tom Grushka

Not exactly ... the camera files work directly in Premiere Pro with no transcoding.

really?
and the next question (like many are asking actually, lately) will be this one:
is that a real XAVC 10bit 4:2:2 @50mbps once is processed by a third party software?
'cause there is no (really) difference with the "inferior" avchd , and again even the catalyst software does a "translation and transcoding after the fact which is not what I wanted and it doesn't produce any better than the avchd as well)

lemme put it this way: this XAVC that the X70 produces seems to be misunderstood by the very own Sony software , the same software treating other cameras' XAVC well.

and the same is happening with the fs7 , and again only with the XAVC L

something doesn't "smell" right and I wouldn't trust other software translating the XAVC L correctly by the way.
we (all) bought the camera believing in the 4K of tomorrow, and the 50mbps (10bit 4:2:2) of today. it looks like it's a 28mbps camera in avchd so far. which is different than the brochures