Sony Z1 and FX1 various questions 2004 - 2005

[Ronald Lee]

So does anyone know what are the models that will be released, the price difference between then and what are the actual functional differences?

[Chris Hurd]

I'm working on another chart to cover this. Should have it ready over the weekend.

[Tom Hardwick]

A lot of stuff that appears to be logical (HD will require 'better' converter lenses than SD) doesn't become the truth simply because it's been written down. 'Show me, and I shall see' is not even a valid argument as many magicians have proved.

Zoom-through converters are made for those people where convienience rates more highly that picture quality, and there's no
getting away from that. There are good solid arguments for leaving a w/a converter on the Sony PD/VX at all times, and Panasonic (with their DVX100A) have recognised this and responded to the market forces. Sony have admitted their choice of focal lengths was wrong on the VX/PD and the new FX1 follows the Panasonic lead.

Take the case of a single element wide-angle converter. They're made by countless manufacturers - Red Eye, Century, Raynox, Kenko, Schneider and so on. In its simplest form this is just a negative element (the reverse of a {positive} close-up lens). This bends the light that's about to enter the front element of the camcorder's zoom lens. This is all it does, and apart from making the lens surfaces uneven or having the two concave surfaces
miss-centred from one face to the other, there's little that can be changed to make the element perform better for hi-def applications.

The multi-element zoom-through variety come into the same category. But build tolerances and inspection weigh heavily in
the argument, yet the lens is doing exactly the same job as the single element converter. If they produce soft images on SD (as my Cavision 0.5x did) then this would simply be more obvious on HD pictures. Sharp, beautifully made optics like the Century 0.65x I tested should do just as well on HD footage. It's just bending the light before the zoom gets hold of it. The more you bend it, the greater the opportunity to distort (blur) it.

The camcorders fixed zoom lens does all the work and you can hold up anything in front of it. Double-glazed and tinted bus
windows, underwater housings, electrically heated car windscreens, multiple, stacked filters and misty mornings.

tom.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

HD doesn't need better lenses due to its increased resolution or anything like that. However, what you get (with any camera system) by using higher quality glass is just that -- higher quality glass.

Cheaper glass can lead to color fringing, haze, image distortion, etc.. Going from SD to HD resolution with the same quality of glass is essentially going to give the same results between the two formats. If you have a mediocre lens that gives purple fringes on highlights in SD, you will have them in HD as well.

To some extent, HD may show the flaws in your glass a bit more than SD will simply due to the increased detail available to the format, but it can work the other way too. The increased resolution of HD can create more variation within the details captured through a lens so it could help to smooth out undesired lense effects or tone them down a bit. I guess the differences between DV and HD are about like film vs. DV, but not necessarily as extreme -- as HD still only provides about 1/4 of the detail available with a quality 35mm film system and HD still relies on much of the same tech as DV. New superHD or digital film cameras that shoot at resolutions higher than HD close that gap, but that's a different matter.

What it all comes down to is higher quality lenses are available for higher quality camera systems. Sony chose a certain grade of lens for the FX1/Z1 as it fit within the price and quality parameters for this level of camera.

When you start looking at add-on converter lenses like the wide angle and teleconverters - zoom-through or not, you're adding another set of variables into this equation. As you said, some may produce a soft image and others a sharper image. I doubt the effect of the soft image would be magnified in HD, but the same general softness would occur.

[J. Lamar King]

When will the Z1 be in or near Dallas so I can see it with my own eyes? Can't make a judgment until then.

[Chris Hurd]

ECI will have it but of course not until Feb. when it's released.

Your best bet until then is a trade show... DV Expo (L.A.) or CES (Las Vegas).

[Darren Kelly]

Does anyone know if the new deck accepts full size DVCAM tapes as well as mini DV. I'm asking because if it does I have no reason to keep my DSR40, and that would easily fund the purchase of the new HDV deck.

Comments, suggestions...

DBK

[Chris Hurd]

It accepts the Mini cassettes only.

[Mike Moncrief]

Hi,

I recently started reading some info on this camera..And maybe these questions are redundant.. So forgive me if so..

Can the camera use the Cine Mode (or Psuedo 24p or whatever it is) in the normal DV mode ?? Can it shoot 16:9 in normal DV mode ??
And lastly is there any sample footage online to look at ?? If so link please..

Thanks to all..

Mike M.

[Heath McKnight]

Please do a search, as this is a topic we've covered extensively.

Hope this helps,

heath

[John Gaspain]

So far the best price ive found is for

$3,399.00 from http://www.us1camera.com

or

$3,499.00 from B&H photo

any better deals?

[Heath McKnight]

Try someone from our official sponsors.

They provide excellent service and support and you will help
this community by buying from them as well. Chris has hand
picked our sponsors, they are the best in the business.

Thank you!

heath

[Heath McKnight]

Forbes (12/13/04)'s article, "Def High" by Stephen Manes. They talk all about it, say the Z1 is a "$4900" pro camera, the FX1 is 1440x1080 vs. 1920x1080 (like most 1080i HD cameras) and "cheats" by this:

"...each of the camera's three sensors offers only about 1.1 million pixels, not the 1.5 million in the final image, Sony extrapolates the difference by shifting one of the sensors out of alignment from the others and computing the results."

Of course, the author then says, "But if this is cheat, it's an exquisite one." And details how great the camera is with colors, image, etc. He also says there's a shoulder mount one can buy.

heath

[Barry Green]

I've got all sorts of charts shot on the FX1: macbeth, EIA, CamAlign, and high-def res charts. On an HDTV the FX1 looks like it resolves about 800-900 lines of horizontal resolution, which is a lot.

Keep in mind that the FX1 *excels* at still shots. Motion is a different thing, but when shooting stills the FX1 is at its best. And charts look pretty good on it. I'll try to get something together and posted over the course of this week.

[Darren Kelly]

Guys,

Thanks for the interest in the DVD, but unfortunately, we will not be getting it out on a timely basis.

I'm embarrassed about it, and decided the right thing to do was to come clean and simply refund your money.

If you paid with paypal, you will have received a full refund. If you sent me a money order (1 person) you will receive it back.

We are working on the JumpStart Guide to the FX1 and the JumpStart Guide to the XL2, which will be released in January. I hope you will consider one of those titles.

I'll post more info when I'm closer to shipping and all the DV Info Community will get preferential pricing.

Cheers

DBK