fx7 anyone at DVinfo.net

Ruben Senderey · January 7th, 2007, 10:13 AM

Hi
Anybody Work With This Cam Yet At Any Events?

Vaughan Wood · January 17th, 2007, 01:01 AM

Yes,

I 've been doing some wedding shooting with it in the last month or so, and just finished putting the first wedding through the computer.

Coming from the VX 2000, I must say I am finding the camera to really struggle at receptions, and am seriously considering "retiring" it from weddings already.

Last week I did a reception in a marquee, and even at dusk when the inside was quite well lit, the picture was much darker than I was expecting.

I'll probably wait for the new LED camera light to try with it, but it struggles on event work, (weddings and stage shows), when you can't control the lighting.

For a well lit stage show, it did a good job, but again, both myself and another operator have had trouble getting an even slow zoom out of it, and the tape door tends to creak and groan when operating the zoom.

Disappointing really!

Cheers Vaughan

Ruben Senderey · January 17th, 2007, 12:33 PM

thanks i rent the fx7 i felt and saw the same thing " bad low light camera"
how about the v1 is it the same?
thanks

Marshall Levy · January 17th, 2007, 02:55 PM

With your issues with the FX7 in low light, were you filming in auto? If so, your image probably stunk. Use manual everything, boost the gain, open the iris....etc....and the image will be just fine. I use Z1U's and V1U's, and while they're certainly no PD170 w/ one lux, a lot has to do with the operator in some respect.

Comparison - PD170 is 1 lux, Z1U - 3 lux, V1U - 4 lux -- but the way in which this was achieved is unknown in terms of f-stop, gain, and so forth.

Also, a 720x480 image is only so big when compared with a 1080 or 1440, etc. image - the image sensor requires much more light which is standard for the techonology at this point in time.

If you don't want your FX7's let me know.

Ruben Senderey · January 17th, 2007, 03:27 PM

Well i did use it only in manual ,believe me in close up shoot was unreal but when i need it in wide angle shot it was miserable, this cam needs help
hope next generation( FX10 get better lux)

Steve Mullen · January 17th, 2007, 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruben Senderey

Well i did use it only in manual ,believe me in close up shoot was unreal but when i need it in wide angle shot it was miserable, this cam needs help
hope next generation( FX10 get better lux)

Now that our local news is HD, I clearly notice that night video from the HD cameras has more noise. It's the nature of HD. But, weddings were shot long before 1 lux camcorders! They were shot with 25lux and 50lux cameras. So obviously, they can be shot with a 4lux camera.

I'm at a loss at why folks want to move to HD yet insist on working like they did with ONE (VX2100) model of SD camcorder. Just go back to how you worked with a VX1000! It too was a 4lux camcorder. Are you telling me no one shot weddings with a VX1000?

Daniel Boswell · January 18th, 2007, 01:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruben Senderey

thanks i rent the fx7 i felt and saw the same thing " bad low light camera"
how about the v1 is it the same?
thanks

Yes, V1 is not good in low light either. Terribly noisy. My Fx is much better.

Marshall Levy · January 18th, 2007, 02:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

Now that our local news is HD, I clearly notice that night video from the HD cameras has more noise. It's the nature of HD. But, weddings were shot long before 1 lux camcorders! They were shot with 25lux and 50lux cameras. So obviously, they can be shot with a 4lux camera.

I'm at a loss at why folks want to move to HD yet insist on working like they did with ONE (VX2100) model of SD camcorder. Just go back to how you worked with a VX1000! It too was a 4lux camcorder. Are you telling me no one shot weddings with a VX1000?

I completely agree. Not to imply anyone on these forums, but there is so much whining about these cameras not performing as good as the PD/VX cameras - simply put, they're not the same cameras and there are plenty of reasons why they are the way they are, at least at the present time. I certainly do wish that the Z1/V1 could perform like the PD's but as I tell everyone, if you learn how to use the camera, work off of existing light, use your own light, and tweak the footage in post, particularly when filming in HDV, the image will look just fine. Maybe it's just me, who knows, but I haven't had any problems and I've been using the Z1U's for about 15 months or so with great success.

Chris Hurd · January 18th, 2007, 11:26 AM

Probably the single biggest misunderstanding most people seem to have when moving from standard definition to HD acquisition is the trade-off of low-light performance that they're forced to make. It's not an issue of any particular brand or model of camera.

The higher resolution of HD means there are more pixels on the image sensor, amd image sensors on low-cost HD camcorders are pretty small. More pixels on the sensor means they're smaller pixels. Smaller pixels on small sensors equals poor performance in low light. Simple physics.

Small-sensor High Definition needs light. Or artificial gain... take your pick.

Daniel Boswell · January 18th, 2007, 11:31 AM

Yep, makes sense.

The thing that was disappointing going from FX to V1 is the noise. The FXs..even at 18db are relatively grain free. Anything over 12 db on the V1 is pretty bad.

Ruben Senderey · January 18th, 2007, 03:23 PM

I agre with all of you the HD cams need more light ,
in my bizz the low light issue is very big most of my party's are in the low light condition, and my clients don't want light stands in the room...
so iam Wining since i want to advance with the new tecknology , but i can't....
(pd-170 to the rescue)
Disappointing really!

Ken Ross · January 18th, 2007, 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruben Senderey

Well i did use it only in manual ,believe me in close up shoot was unreal but when i need it in wide angle shot it was miserable, this cam needs help
hope next generation( FX10 get better lux)

Not sure why a close up would be better in low light than a wide shot.

Ken Ross · January 18th, 2007, 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel Boswell

Yep, makes sense.

The thing that was disappointing going from FX to V1 is the noise. The FXs..even at 18db are relatively grain free. Anything over 12 db on the V1 is pretty bad.

By the same token the FX7/V1 are much sharper in low light and retain their colors much better. You give some and take some.

Marshall Levy · January 18th, 2007, 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ken Ross

Not sure why a close up would be better in low light than a wide shot.

Yeah, I wondered the same thing. As you zoom in, particularly with these cameras, the focal length is so small that the image naturally becomes darker. Unless he was referring to close-ups implying the subject being right in front of the lens, the quote should be reversed :)

Robert Ducon · January 18th, 2007, 09:34 PM

Ken, do you mean the FX7/V1 when compared to the FX1/Z1 that while there is more noise, it's sharper, yes?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ken Ross

By the same token the FX7/V1 are much sharper in low light and retain their colors much better. You give some and take some.

January 7th, 2007, 10:13 AM	#1
Ruben Senderey Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: LAUDERHILL FLORIDA Posts: 47	fx7 anyone Hi Anybody Work With This Cam Yet At Any Events?

January 17th, 2007, 12:33 PM	#3
Ruben Senderey Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: LAUDERHILL FLORIDA Posts: 47	fx7 thanks i rent the fx7 i felt and saw the same thing " bad low light camera" how about the v1 is it the same? thanks

January 17th, 2007, 03:27 PM	#5
Ruben Senderey Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: LAUDERHILL FLORIDA Posts: 47	fx7 Well i did use it only in manual ,believe me in close up shoot was unreal but when i need it in wide angle shot it was miserable, this cam needs help hope next generation( FX10 get better lux)

January 18th, 2007, 11:26 AM	#9
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	Probably the single biggest misunderstanding most people seem to have when moving from standard definition to HD acquisition is the trade-off of low-light performance that they're forced to make. It's not an issue of any particular brand or model of camera. The higher resolution of HD means there are more pixels on the image sensor, amd image sensors on low-cost HD camcorders are pretty small. More pixels on the sensor means they're smaller pixels. Smaller pixels on small sensors equals poor performance in low light. Simple physics. Small-sensor High Definition needs light. Or artificial gain... take your pick. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

January 18th, 2007, 11:31 AM	#10
Daniel Boswell Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: Temecula, CA Posts: 189	Yep, makes sense. The thing that was disappointing going from FX to V1 is the noise. The FXs..even at 18db are relatively grain free. Anything over 12 db on the V1 is pretty bad. __________________ DBoZ

January 17th, 2007, 01:01 AM	#2
Vaughan Wood Major Player Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Melbourne Australia Posts: 278	Yes, I 've been doing some wedding shooting with it in the last month or so, and just finished putting the first wedding through the computer. Coming from the VX 2000, I must say I am finding the camera to really struggle at receptions, and am seriously considering "retiring" it from weddings already. Last week I did a reception in a marquee, and even at dusk when the inside was quite well lit, the picture was much darker than I was expecting. I'll probably wait for the new LED camera light to try with it, but it struggles on event work, (weddings and stage shows), when you can't control the lighting. For a well lit stage show, it did a good job, but again, both myself and another operator have had trouble getting an even slow zoom out of it, and the tape door tends to creak and groan when operating the zoom. Disappointing really! Cheers Vaughan

January 17th, 2007, 02:55 PM	#4
Marshall Levy Major Player Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Maryland Posts: 304	With your issues with the FX7 in low light, were you filming in auto? If so, your image probably stunk. Use manual everything, boost the gain, open the iris....etc....and the image will be just fine. I use Z1U's and V1U's, and while they're certainly no PD170 w/ one lux, a lot has to do with the operator in some respect. Comparison - PD170 is 1 lux, Z1U - 3 lux, V1U - 4 lux -- but the way in which this was achieved is unknown in terms of f-stop, gain, and so forth. Also, a 720x480 image is only so big when compared with a 1080 or 1440, etc. image - the image sensor requires much more light which is standard for the techonology at this point in time. If you don't want your FX7's let me know.

January 18th, 2007, 03:23 PM	#11
Ruben Senderey Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: LAUDERHILL FLORIDA Posts: 47	Fx7 I agre with all of you the HD cams need more light , in my bizz the low light issue is very big most of my party's are in the low light condition, and my clients don't want light stands in the room... so iam Wining since i want to advance with the new tecknology , but i can't.... (pd-170 to the rescue) Disappointing really!