Wow... Rolling shutter

Robert Petersen · December 27th, 2008, 02:00 PM

When I open the test site, it gives me the option to expand the number of camcorders compared per page and also has a link in the top section that converts it to English. I suspect that the early tests for the XH-A1 and other camcorders may have been flawed, accounting for the brighter images. Obviously gain or something else was different. Everything more recent seems to be consistent.

Ken Ross · December 27th, 2008, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Petersen

When I open the test site, it gives me the option to expand the number of camcorders compared per page and also has a link in the top section that converts it to English. I suspect that the early tests for the XH-A1 and other camcorders may have been flawed, accounting for the brighter images. Obviously gain or something else was different. Everything more recent seems to be consistent.

Bob, the difference between the A1 and A1S was so dramatically different, it sure made me scratch my head. I'd just bet the A1S was 'out-of-the-box' in its settings and the A1 had someone's picture profile active.

Then there was the issue when I compared the FX1 to the FX1000, the FX1 looked better in the low light tests! Can't be. So after doing more of these comparisons I've begun to question the accuracy of their test results. It's too bad since the ability to compare any 2 cams is great.

John Gayman · December 28th, 2008, 10:28 PM

Has anyone used a CMOS-based camera like the FX1000 for fast-moving action like ice hockey or figure skating? I'm currently using a VX2100 and record a lot of figure skating shows and while I pan with the skater as they zoom around on the ice the backgrounds sometimes experience very rapid pans.

I'm very curious if the rolling shutter effect will be an issue for me? I'm also interested in whether the auto focus is up to par for keeping skaters in sharp focus against the bright white walls of your typical skating rink.

I'd sure hate to plop down the cash for a FX1000 only to find out it doesn't make the grade when I get it to the rink.

Jeff Harper · December 29th, 2008, 01:57 AM

I have the FX1000 but haven't used it for fast moving shots. However my first thought when reading your post is if you do not need HD or 16:9, don't bother and spend the money. The auto-focus on the FX1000 is not nearly as quick as the 2100.

For what you are doing the 2100 is great. I just sold mine and while I'm coming to like my FX1000 just fine, I will miss my 2100 for a long time.

The Panasonic (is it the HD-150?) equivalent to the FX1000 has CCDs and XLRs, I think and if you could deal with the AVCHD might be a better choice. Just something to kick around.

Tom Hardwick · December 29th, 2008, 02:57 AM

Good points Jeff, but if John stays with Sony he'll have carry-over batteries, chargers, lamps - that sort of thing. And presumably John's moving on because of the VX's poor 16:9 performance.

I moved from the VX2k to the Z1 and find the Z1's auto-focus far better than the VX's, mainly because it has this wonderful focus assist feature (not expanded focus, mind). I bet the FX1000 doesn't have this, but the Z5 sure does.

Hey, this is my 3000th post I notice.

tom.

Stelios Christofides · December 29th, 2008, 04:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Hardwick

Hey, this is my 3000th post I notice.

tom.

3000 posts! Wow! well done Tom.

By the way what is the difference from a " Trustee" and an "Inner Circle" guy?

Stelios

Ken Ross · December 29th, 2008, 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Hardwick

I moved from the VX2k to the Z1 and find the Z1's auto-focus far better than the VX's, mainly because it has this wonderful focus assist feature (not expanded focus, mind). I bet the FX1000 doesn't have this, but the Z5 sure does.

Congrats on your 3,000th Tom! I believe the FX1000 has expanded focus, peaking and the ability to over-ride the autofocus momentarily. Not sure if that's what you were referring to on the Z1.

Ken Ross · December 29th, 2008, 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stelios Christofides

By the way what is the difference from a " Trustee" and an "Inner Circle" guy?

Stelios

I think the "Inner Circle" guys get paid more! :)

Tom Hardwick · December 29th, 2008, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ken Ross

the FX1000 has expanded focus, peaking and the ability to over-ride the autofocus momentarily. Not sure if that's what you were referring to on the Z1.

Yes, the 'override' feature is called focus assist on the Z1. I'm surprised to hear it's on the FX1000 as it's not on the FX1 but it is oh such a useful feature.

Adam Gold · December 29th, 2008, 12:10 PM

This feature (AF ASSIST) is on both the FX1000 and the FX7, but not the FX1.

K.C. Luke · January 2nd, 2009, 01:31 AM

Some 1 post the trailer. I view it and saw this above !

Ken Ross · January 2nd, 2009, 07:40 AM

Not to minimize this, but even without the rolling shutter effect in this pix, your exposure would have been ruined anyway had you used a CCD equipped camera at that same instant.

Of course when we freeze the instant in time, it won't look pretty either way (CCD or CMOS). Again, I just don't think customers are going to notice it during normal motion. That's just MO.

John Gayman · January 2nd, 2009, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Hardwick

Good points Jeff, but if John stays with Sony he'll have carry-over batteries, chargers, lamps - that sort of thing. And presumably John's moving on because of the VX's poor 16:9 performance.
tom.

Exactly. I would like to start shooting 16:9 and start getting my feet wet with editing HD and authoring Blu-ray. Also, I'm on my third Sony camera and still using the same batteries, chargers and Vari-zoom remote control. I'm one of those guys that just happens to like Sony video gear, I have Sony video cameras, DVD players, HDTV, etc.

- John

Martin Duffy · January 2nd, 2009, 01:55 PM

I'm also interested in whether the auto focus is up to par for keeping skaters in sharp focus against the bright white walls of your typical skating rink.

John I have only used the FX1000 twice so far and believe the auto focus does "hunt" a little. Defintly not as quick as the VX2000 or TRV900 but having said that I was filming a dance show and concentrating on other things in what was a very loud and full on enviroment.

I didn't notice that often the auto focus to be a problem and so I think once framed up a subject would stay in focus fine.

This camera is beautiful on the tripod and seems to really allow you to do nice pans. It to me seems more ergonomic than the Z1 so for tracking fast motion I would think it will be a winner for you. The Z1 to me always felt a bit "clunky".

As for rolling shutter I haven't had a problem with this and in fact looking back at the dance show which had millions of lights going off the pictures were fine.

I also filmed cricket recently and didn't notice any problems with fast panning.

I still need to source a good audio XLR box. I checked out the "Juice box" but it seems a few too many buttons on it for me and the Line/XLR button sit underneath the unit which seems not logical at all. Looking for something smaller that is hiss free.

Ken Ross · January 2nd, 2009, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Harper

The auto-focus on the FX1000 is not nearly as quick as the 2100.

Jeff, how bad is the autofocus on the 1000? Does it tend to hunt?

December 27th, 2008, 02:00 PM	#31
Robert Petersen Regular Crew Join Date: May 2006 Location: Girard, Ohio Posts: 103	German test site When I open the test site, it gives me the option to expand the number of camcorders compared per page and also has a link in the top section that converts it to English. I suspect that the early tests for the XH-A1 and other camcorders may have been flawed, accounting for the brighter images. Obviously gain or something else was different. Everything more recent seems to be consistent.

January 2nd, 2009, 01:31 AM	#41
K.C. Luke Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Singapore Posts: 173	Some 1 post the trailer. I view it and saw this above ! __________________ Edit on Adobe Creative Suite Production Premium CS5 Mac 64BIT

January 2nd, 2009, 01:55 PM	#44
Martin Duffy Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 156	Auto focus I'm also interested in whether the auto focus is up to par for keeping skaters in sharp focus against the bright white walls of your typical skating rink. John I have only used the FX1000 twice so far and believe the auto focus does "hunt" a little. Defintly not as quick as the VX2000 or TRV900 but having said that I was filming a dance show and concentrating on other things in what was a very loud and full on enviroment. I didn't notice that often the auto focus to be a problem and so I think once framed up a subject would stay in focus fine. This camera is beautiful on the tripod and seems to really allow you to do nice pans. It to me seems more ergonomic than the Z1 so for tracking fast motion I would think it will be a winner for you. The Z1 to me always felt a bit "clunky". As for rolling shutter I haven't had a problem with this and in fact looking back at the dance show which had millions of lights going off the pictures were fine. I also filmed cricket recently and didn't notice any problems with fast panning. I still need to source a good audio XLR box. I checked out the "Juice box" but it seems a few too many buttons on it for me and the Line/XLR button sit underneath the unit which seems not logical at all. Looking for something smaller that is hiss free.

December 28th, 2008, 10:28 PM	#33
John Gayman Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Harrisburg, PA Posts: 46	Has anyone used a CMOS-based camera like the FX1000 for fast-moving action like ice hockey or figure skating? I'm currently using a VX2100 and record a lot of figure skating shows and while I pan with the skater as they zoom around on the ice the backgrounds sometimes experience very rapid pans. I'm very curious if the rolling shutter effect will be an issue for me? I'm also interested in whether the auto focus is up to par for keeping skaters in sharp focus against the bright white walls of your typical skating rink. I'd sure hate to plop down the cash for a FX1000 only to find out it doesn't make the grade when I get it to the rink.

December 29th, 2008, 01:57 AM	#34
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	I have the FX1000 but haven't used it for fast moving shots. However my first thought when reading your post is if you do not need HD or 16:9, don't bother and spend the money. The auto-focus on the FX1000 is not nearly as quick as the 2100. For what you are doing the 2100 is great. I just sold mine and while I'm coming to like my FX1000 just fine, I will miss my 2100 for a long time. The Panasonic (is it the HD-150?) equivalent to the FX1000 has CCDs and XLRs, I think and if you could deal with the AVCHD might be a better choice. Just something to kick around.

December 29th, 2008, 02:57 AM	#35
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	Good points Jeff, but if John stays with Sony he'll have carry-over batteries, chargers, lamps - that sort of thing. And presumably John's moving on because of the VX's poor 16:9 performance. I moved from the VX2k to the Z1 and find the Z1's auto-focus far better than the VX's, mainly because it has this wonderful focus assist feature (not expanded focus, mind). I bet the FX1000 doesn't have this, but the Z5 sure does. Hey, this is my 3000th post I notice. tom.

December 29th, 2008, 12:10 PM	#40
Adam Gold Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Woodinville, WA USA Posts: 3,467	This feature (AF ASSIST) is on both the FX1000 and the FX7, but not the FX1.

January 2nd, 2009, 07:40 AM	#42
Ken Ross Trustee Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: New York Posts: 1,945	Not to minimize this, but even without the rolling shutter effect in this pix, your exposure would have been ruined anyway had you used a CCD equipped camera at that same instant. Of course when we freeze the instant in time, it won't look pretty either way (CCD or CMOS). Again, I just don't think customers are going to notice it during normal motion. That's just MO.