HVR Z5 exceptional ignore the rolling shutter malarky

[Robin Burrows]

Hi Everyone. I have not posted oh here before but have just received my HVR Z5E and woudl like to comment on what a great camera it is.

Firstly, rolling shutter? Load of rubbish. Its all perfectly acceptable. Cameras are like tools. You have several and you dont use a hamer to put in screws you pick the right tool for the job....

Having played with my HVR Z5 for a week Its well built, sturdy, the image quality is superb and rolling shutter is almost non existant. After talking to Sony I also learned a lot... I am an electro mechanical engineer by trade and do analysis on a lot of kit including cameras. I asked some good questions and got good answers which made my mind up.

The Z7 and Z5 differ from older CMOS camera as the sensor is faster and although progressive but reading one line at a time using the rolling shutter the newer sensors by being faster and using parallel processing read many lines at a time so your only likely to notice issues in blocks of the screen. This means that skew over individual lines all the way up the screen is far less noticeable unless you slow down the video and really look.

Id say the menu button is too small and recessed too much and is fiddly. In general the buttons are a bit too small but its nicely laid out and all the assigns are great if you do want to move buttons.

The zoom rocker is great as is the programmable speed selection on the linear switches.

Th erings glide so smoothly you wouldnt want real controls. Although it turns infinitely the object is to be able to smoothly adjust the settings without thinking about it. It acheives this without you even trying.
Unless they are servo assisted mechanical clunky lenses need to cost a fortune for the same silky response. and I just dont have this money.

The viewfinder and display are stunningly good quality and make such a difference.
I like the quick button operated lens cover ad button release for the shade.

The balance is much much better to the Z1 even if the weight is the same. Althogh its a plastic ABS frame with metal reinforcement is weight has not reduced from the all metal frame due to the extra glass on the lens to give it the stunningly good 20x G lens.
It has floors but what doesnt for the price.

The mic mount is good but will not let you attach a sennheisser k6-me66 with rycote softie as its shown in view but adaptors will be available to replace the bracket as with the Z1.

The new firmware upgrades due to a delayed release are spot on. The autofocus, macro, zoom speed etc have all been radically improved from the Z7s mechanical lens which is slow and cumbersome.
The tape mechanism is smooth, quiet and works well but get the MRC1K and a whole new world opens up. You can do CF card or tape separately or both at the same time with HD or SD.
The new audio controls under covers are really well thought out.
It balances towards the lens still but not to be expected with all that glass. Its perfect with a larger battery or MRC1K on the back.

I have a gripe that the charger although charging two batteries fast will also power the camera with an adaptor. I like this but why oh why cant it charge batteries and run the camera? If my batteries are flat I cant use the camera without a third to run it from whilst charging the other one or two.

Its not much to ask for an AC adaptor and a battery charger is it?

Other than this looking at its operation in 1.5 to 2 lux its much better towards two but the quality is stunning. A resolution chart its sharp and as good as I have seen for a HDV camera and the signal to noise ratio is really very good.

Im very impressed with this camera and hope to use it underwater as well once housings become available.

Dont listen to comments about rolling shutter. The older cameras had slower sensors and processed less lines at once, the signal to noise ration was worse, control not so good and unless you are in an unbalanced twin blade helicopter, a racing car or a speed boat travelling at 70 knots I doubt most people will ever come accross the skew issue. unless they slow down the picture. Most things passing the frame will not be straight so you will not even notice it.
Camera flashes are also not really a problem.

If you do a lot of this and it is a problem your using a screwdriver to hammer in a nail go buy a better camera or a cheaper one if it does the job...

Well done Sony for a superb product. I wont miss the Z1.

Robin

[Colin McDonald]

Welcome Robin. I've been trying to keep a note of all the active Brits on dVinfo, and you've been just tangoed.

[Robin Burrows]

Please to be here.

I occasionally see people posting questions or rubbish about issues with cameras or technology and keep meaning to put them right but never have. Im now proud to say Ive taken a few steps...


Ive talked to the product manager for sony quite a bit and done quite a few tests now and Im loving the new cameras.

All cameras have problems you cant get away from it but bottom line Sony are listening working on things and its a great time to get into the new technology. Especially with a VAT reduction.

Thankyou for the welcoming notes.
Robin

[Marco Dias]

"Camera flashes are also not really a problem."

What about strobe lights from the mobile disco?

I film quite a few weddings, where the DJ uses strobe lights on the dance floor.

Do you think there will be a "Rolling shutter' issue with strobe lights?

[Ken Ross]

Robin, this is GREAT to hear! I had just about eliminated the FX1000/Z5 from consideration, but this sounds very hopeful. The low light capability and enhanced features of the new Sonys are very tempting!

Thanks much for the info.

[Tom Roper]

Hi Ken,

I use both the Canon XH-A1 (older series) and the Sony EX1 with the cmos sensor.

I used the Canon for a wedding with a 10 watt light, and that worked well. But if you are out of range of the light, the XH-A1 is objectionably grainy. I had the Z1 as well. Other opinions to the contrary, I feel it gets objectionably soft in low light. The EX1 is the first HD cam I've owned that retains the "wow" factor in low light. It's really good. I haven't tried the Z5 or FX1000, but if the reported low light improvement over the other 1/3 inch cam sensors is real, that could be a deciding factor, but I would not be too rash, the Canon image is extremely clean and transparent for HDV, very HD. The autofocus is also faster and more dependable on my XH-A1. (It has that little optical sensor to the side of the main lens, don't know how it works but it does.)

So that probably doesn't help you much, but I would add just one more comment. Rolling shutter artifacts are not rubbish. Can you manage life with them in your images, or mitigate them in your situation?

To comment on one question you posed, "will a slower shutter speed help?" The answer is no. The scan time of the sensor is fixed, and independent of the shutter. The duration of a thyristor flash is shorter than the cmos sensor scan time. If the light from the flash dominates the image, the image will have the banded artifact.

Skew or wobble is real as well, but less of a problem, and can be mitigated. For handheld, you have to pan and shake hard enough that no one would watch your footage even if there were no cmos skewing going on. Skew or wobble can actually be worse on a tripod, because it enforces symetry to the framing, therefore wobble or skew within that symetry becomes visible. It's still fairly rare and not so objectionable. The easy way to make it happen is to set the camera on a tripod on rigid ground like a paved sidewalk. Lock everything down tight, then induce a few vibrations by lightly wrapping your knuckles against the handle a few times while watching the LCD image. That's called the "jello effect." It's real too, but not usually a problem in normal situations.

My personal two cents for a price-is-no-object-guy like you would be to just get the EX1 or EX3 anyway, you'll have no doubt about your images being ready for the BBC or DiscoveryHD network broadcast, when that circus animal rampages or the ground opens up under a magnitude 7.0 earthquake on Long Island...(hope not... ;)

[Robin Burrows]

What I said above was a highlight of technical responses from a research engineer testing kit properly.
Everything is a tool and you need to buy the right tool for the media. Dont use a hammer to put in screws!

In responce to the previous post about discos. I would use a Z1 or the like for discos. Limit the gain to reduce noise and the lighting will give the the effect and illumination you need. The camer will not have big enough dynamic range to expose the background illumination well with no light and not be blatted out when the lights come on. Low light is only good if you are filming in available light not falsely illuminated scenes.
Rolling shutters are acceptable for disco use but you will get artifacts and effects. Its unavoidable. However with a global shutter a bright light will blank the whole frame where as with a clustered line rolling shutter it will only affect a selection of lines or a portion of the screen.
Dont worry about skew or wobble its there but unless your filming aircraft propellors or highspeed trains with 90 degree edges and flat fronts oh and playing in slow motion you wont notice it.

As I mentioned with regards to the reply previous to this Rolling shutter is not a problem. Its rubbish thrown around after the original cheep cameras performed bad with CMOS rolling shutters processing one line at a time slowly not clusters of lines or many faster.
To be able to get issues from skew and wobble you have to make your target move faster than is viewable. On Film we get motion blur at that speed and yes you also get skew! No one moaned about old classics having skew did they?
The Z5 and 7 will not be quite as good as the EX in low light due to 1/3 inch cmos sensors instead of 1/2 but this isnt that bad. In DVCAM SD the Z5 and 7 shodul be better due to the reduced pixel light density. It depends on if its down converted properly!

Its what you do with it and how you recognise its highlights not how good it is. Film makers recognise your tallent and awareness off issues. Your ability to get around them not your flashy new cam.

The EX1 is indeed good but dont forget its the fore runner of the technology it will improve. The issues you have are that it ill not downconvert so for UK news using DVCAM SD its pointless.
HDV is only a premiere service. You cant force everyone to use HD over SD!
Also the EX1 is 35MB.s the BBC will not accept HD from this camera as anything but SD for 225% use in a HD film because it is below the acceptable 50MB/s threshold.
They want 50 or 100MB/s 1/2 inch chips and minimal compression and a 4:2:2 colour space only achievable on this camera with the HD SDI out and a lot of money software time and effort. I was basing this on a non Hollywood budget.

The EX1 is also heavy and unmanageable handheld for long periods.
Take your pick they are all good but in 4 years you may find an EX2 with 4:2:2 1/2 in ch chips and 50MB/s in order to keep up. They wont do it now as this will prevent sales of high end kit and memory is too expensive for 50MMB/s captures. Also the firmware is available for this for other XDCAMs but if the EX1 and 3 do it why by a shoulder XDCAM!
Sony have their market figured out and put themselves JUST ahead of the game to keep up without showing their hand or releasing too much too soon!

Remember CCD cameras have problems too! CCD bleeding etc but we learnt how to use it, where and when.

Ask questions, buy what you want and think skill and ingenuity not kit! You can think too much and then nothing is good enough for you!

[Ken Ross]

Thanks Tom...I think! :)

Yeah, this is not an easy decision. I'll be headed to B&H over the next week to try the cams out myself (with tape in hand). You know me with my A/Bs!

It does seem the new FX1000/Z5 are for real in the low light department, but like you I dislike the softening that occurs on so many HD cams when the lights get dim. My little HG21 retains its sharpness even in low light...somewhat noisy yes, but sharp. When I had my FX1 I saw that same softening as well and it very evident in the Sony SR12 I just sold.

I'm guessing from your post that the A1 also softens under these conditions? You mention that the EX is the first HD cam you've had that retains the sharpness. Although I know the EX is at the pinnacle of HD for our 'reach', I have a problem with going tapeless for work. Although I like tapeless for my 'fun cam', I don't really do any editing with my own stuff. If I did, I'd find the time I save in uploading would be given back in the transfer to a more computer-friendly codec in my NLE.

I still find tape so much easier to edit with and with my NLE of choice, Edius, it's a workflow that I still enjoy. So I don't see an EX in my immediate future. Further complicating this is the fact that virtually all of my work is still SD (corporate stuff) and the only reason I'm considering the FX1000/Z5/A1S is the fact that it's so easy to shoot both formats with them, and if necessary I can shoot in HDV. For coporate work the impact of flash & rolling shutter is pretty much nil.

I've been encouraged with some of the FX1000 clips I've seen, and the Sony would be a somewhat better fit from the standpoint of already having Sony equipment. I would not rule out the A1/A1S as a result, but it would be a consideration.

BTW, the other nicety about the FX1000/Z5 that doesn't seem to be discussed and is actually important to me, is the high rez viewfinder. Using reading glasses I'm not a fan of LCDs. They have their place in some settings, but for the most part I really need & use the viewfinder. The new viewfinder on the Sonys is one of the highest resolution VFs we've seen in this price class for sure.

[Tom Roper]

Ken,

You've given careful consideration, and make good points. I'll respond in reverse order.
The viewfinder (which I prefer as well), is not as good on my EX1 as my XH-A1, so if the FX1000/Z5 is now better in this regard, it's better than my EX1 as well. Someone may well call me out on that, because I'm not comparing or even aware of what the numbers are for the panel resolution per the spec sheet. It just seems like the XH-A1 is a little better on contrast and color. For resolution, no one would be doing critical focusing with either one, (which makes a small point in favor of the Canon's better autofocus BTW.) Of course the Sony LCD is much better than the XH-A1, or again at least I would expect it to be.

As for your preference for tape, again I agree with you. I predicted that HDV would be replaced by AVCHD in consumer cams, only to reappear in pro cams. And it sure looks to me like that's what happened. And why not? HDV is very viable.

It's easy to look at Blu-ray, the customers demand AVC or VC1. Mpeg-2 is passe. And it's true at that stage. But it's different for cams that have to encode in hardware, realtime. Mpeg-2 is less compressed, and yields better quality at the recording stage. Uncompressed would be even better, but who has the storage for that? Less compressed at the recording stage is the way to go. The appropriate time for AVC is when finalizing to disk, where a 2 or 3 pass encode is not constrained for time.

My tape based workflow for HDV is still faster than my tapeless for XDCAM even without the capture time savings. So no arguments against HDV from me.

As for the familiarity from already having Sony equipment, what I have to say about that is that I HATE SONY! To tell you why, consider that I start with a Sony cam, record to Sony solid state media, edit with Sony Vegas on a Sony laptop, burn to disk with Sony DVD Architect on Sony Blu-ray media, playback the media on a Sony PS3, and watch it on a 32" Sony 1080p Bravia XBR I just added on my desktop. Why do we hurt the ones we love? It's in our HDNA I guess...

Does the XH-A1 soften under low light? Not as much as it gets coarse and grainy. It does have a couple of noise reduction circuits you can enable. NR1 mitigates the noise but causes minor ghost-like trails, and NR2 has no trails but does soften the image. Both NR circuits have some adjustability, choosing one or the other lets you target a static situation or a moving one. Yes, the EX1 is in another league at twilight. Maybe now the FX1000/Z5 is as well?

I've seen people report you should not use the EX1 for weddings because of the rolling shutter. If the client complained, then it would be a problem. But that is situational, whereas coarse and grainy is event long. I wouldn't recommend the XH-A1 for weddings without a light.

Robin is right about the EX1 being heavy. The XH-A1 is not light but does feel like it after the EX1.

Whichever way you go, it will be interesting to read your comments. I would conclude by noting that Sony colors out of the box are more vivid and pleasing. The XH-A1 default profile is very bland, but fully tweakable.

The Canon setup is comparable to their DSLRs, I have the 5D (old series). It's easy and intuitive. The Sony is not quite as logical, but still easy to figure out.

Again, I haven't seen or used the FX1000/Z5. It will have to be really good to beat the XH-A1 in the image quality department. I will not be surprised. I also would not be surprised if there is another Canon HD camcorder in my future. But right now, the tide seems to be riding on the waves of Sony.

[Ken Ross]

Thanks again Tom, some great points as usual. We certainly seem to agree more than disagree. The targets are always moving and keeping pace is never easy or cheap in this field. The still guys have it a lot easier! They don't change their equipment nearly as often as we do. Funny how we don't create problems for them, but they do for us (rolling shutters ;)).

Regarding the 'bland settings' of the out-of-box Canon, I'm always surprised that Canon didn't do a somewhat more 'aggresive' job with their default settings. I've heard so many speak of the picture being a bit flat out of the box. Sure it's something that's easily tweakable (or maybe not quite 'so easy'), but you'd think there would be less of that initial concern if the default settings were a bit more vivid. I think many would rather back off on the throttle than have to hit the accelerator.

I think Sony's approach here makes more sense. I have to confess I was surprised at how much tweaking could be done with the new FX. Prior models always passed the hat to the Z series for those that wanted that level of adjustments. It's somewhat counterintuitive to the way Sony traditionally does things, but surely a welcome change!

BTW, Sony is now using somewhat in excess of 1.5 megapixels in a .45" viewfinder! That's a very high density. I'm not sure how that compares with the EX series, but I know the Canon uses a fraction of that resolution (269,000 pixels) in the A1/G1 viewfinders. As you say though, I'd bet the A1S's autofocus is superior to the Sony. I've found the Canon IAF to be the best in the business. This is not to say that I haven't had some Sony cams that did a pretty good job, but the Canon is just so quick and so accurate. As long as the system doesn't hunt and is reasonably quick, then it shouldn't be a 'deal break'.

I'll certainly post what I find and let you know how I progress.

[Robin Burrows]

Your comments are all valid but People seem to be put off by small issues as apposed to be putting themselves in the frame of mind of what are the advantages and how can I use it to make good films!

Nobody would sell anything that was useless!

Canon make superb kit but the signal to noise ration is not a patch on Sony. The image stabilization however is amazing.

I predict Canon are the odd ones out and where as Sony and Pany have released for the next 3-4 years Canon will come out with something good in 1-2 years. We are awaiting an XH--A1 replacement. I just hope they get to grips with the S/Nr and include a bigger higher resolution screen thats not on a little flimsy bracket.

As you both mentioned and at the top of the post what I discussed was the amazing resolution and quality of the new screen and viewfinder on the Z5. Its almost like there is a hole through the plastic and its not an LCD! It is an OLED screen though which has won many awards.
With the progressive nature of the cam and the new lens it is good.
Ive used the Z5 on boats, a light aircraft, a car and a train and have had no footage which is unusable. I also like the new natural touch lens rings.
Make your own minds up but I really like it.
Second choice would be a canon XHA1 or a Sony Z1 If panny do a full res HD HVX Id maybe move to that only if they stopped their cameras looking and feeling like cheep plastic but heavy bricks. For underwater this is useless.
Robin

[Tom Roper]

The OLED would be a huge improvement over anything out there, in viewfinders.

I would not recommend a Z1 as a second choice. It was a great cam in its day (I owned one), but is now outclassed image wise.

[Robin Burrows]

It is outdated true but my comment was a reference to what I would use if I had shutter issues.and needed a CCD based cam.
Canon XH-A1 or Sony Z1.

In terms of it being a good camera, we still film on 8mm and 16mm and thats outdated!

The BBC only a year or so ago bought hundreds of Z1s for ENG roles as a stop gap.

Its a good camera and I doubt there is any point upgrading to anything new from that unless you really rake it in... Professionals with lots of work may be different but for semi pros amateurs or pros with lots of cams its not a huge update for the money.

I wont jump up and down till I see what canon do followed by what Sony do with the new XDCAM firmware in development.
It gives good 4:2:2 high bandwidth recording and would make the EX1 unbeatable but that's not Sony's aim at the moment. Its already pretty good.

Im still not sure about the use of long gop variable bit rate compression on the EX1. Its got some explaining to do and testing to endure before it earns full trust and with a lot of people waiting for the full color space and higher constant rate compression I feel we will be stuck until the market bows to the new cameras in 2011/2012.
Its getting to the point where everyone is converging on a same goal same technology output.
Sony have spent a lot of time on the long gop XDCAM algorithm though and wont budge easily.

To have camera with similar storage, functions, features and capabilities would be wonderful and would mean you could choose what you wanted to do a job not so much of what would actually do the job.

Im happy with PDX10s, Z5 and 7 and an EX for now but Im using the EX as a toy while its loaned to me until Im happy if I want one or not.

For now I think the Z5 is a good camera with vices like any, which, you all need to try it out and decide if you think they are acceptable or not in your situation.

I cant advise one or another as Id feel guilty if you bought it and didnt like it but I can say Im more than happy with it and advise if your interested go check it out. The same goes for this or the FX1000. Most people in the business would not compromise for no XLR adaptors. The XHA1 is good value for this whilst still being a superb camera but the FX1000s main difference to the Z5 is the audio block which immediately makes it a proffessional camera. IT works well, It has good easily accessed and protected switches all the features of the Z1 and PD170 plus negative gain settings in the menu. The Z5 actually comes with an ok/very reasonable short gun mike too which unlike PDX10 and others is metal, nicely screened, has more gain and lower noise. Its phantom powered and comes with a windshield. The Z1 did not come with anything!

[Tom Roper]

Originally Posted by Robin Burrows

I wont jump up and down till I see what canon do followed by what Sony do with the new XDCAM firmware in development.
It gives good 4:2:2 high bandwidth recording and would make the EX1 unbeatable but that's not Sony's aim at the moment. Its already pretty good.

Im still not sure about the use of long gop variable bit rate compression on the EX1. Its got some explaining to do and testing to endure before it earns full trust and with a lot of people waiting for the full color space and higher constant rate compression I feel we will be stuck until the market bows to the new cameras in 2011/2012.
Its getting to the point where everyone is converging on a same goal same technology output.

Sony have spent a lot of time on the long gop XDCAM algorithm though and wont budge easily.

I'm sure you are aware the EX1 outputs native 4:2:2 already, just not to the solid state memory card. That's why all the excitement with the Nanoflash, capturing 4:2:2, higher bitrates, pre-compression.

The existing HQ mode, 1920 x 1080, 35mbps VBR, 15 GOP mpeg-2 is a close relative of HDV.

[Ken Ross]

Just a side comment regarding the flash/rolling shutter issue. I watched several wedding and Bar Mitzvah videos on Vimeo that were shot with the FX1000. I also sat my wife down in front of the monitor and asked her if there was anything bothering her about some of the videos.

Interestingly her objection was more to do with some of the editing techniques than the impact of the rolling shutter. The worst clip was, of course, the slow motion clip during a barrage of flashes. It wasn't until I pointed the issue out, paused the video in places (something that would not happen during the normal viewing of a production) and replayed the spots several times, that she understood what was happening. Even then, when again played at normal speed, her reaction was 'so what?'.

My point here goes to the fact that we, as videographers, are much more likely to notice this issue than others watching the production. I can honestly say that most of the flashes produced nothing more than an effect that most would totally dismiss as nothing more than the inevitable impact of a flash during the videotaping. The slow motion piece was another story. But let's face it, even when shot with a CCD-equipped cam, flashes during videotaping are not entirely 'artistic'.

Now, on the other hand, a friend of mine shot a birthday party with an SR12, during which there was considerable flash activity. He emailed that video to me and THAT was bad! Not only was the effect prolonged, but the exposure shift actually rolled up the screen and truly cried out "rolling shutter". It leads me to believe that the rolling shutter issue may be worse with single chip CMOS than 3-CMOS cams.