Sony NEX-VG10 AVCHD E-Mount Lens Camcorder

Kristian Roque · July 16th, 2010, 05:24 PM

Thanks Robert. You are totally correct, we really don't know much about this camera other than the specs Sony has posted on their site. But like you said HDV is a thing of yesterday now. And why spend $3199 on a camera when $2000 seems more attractive. Knowing that there WILL be a big brother to this model (hoping for progressive) just makes me more excited. Also a simple Beechtek always handles the situation with XLR inputs. Maybe I will join you in placing a preorder for this model :-)

Robert Young · July 16th, 2010, 05:45 PM

Kristian
All is not lost re 30p. Apparently the NEX VG actually records progressive frames and then divides them into interlaced fields. So, even in the interlaced wrapper it should look like 30p and be free of interlace artifacts.
There is discussion as to how you could reassemble the fields into true 30p in post if needed.
It's kind of ironic that in the early days we had pseudo 30p/24p, this time around we have pseudo 60i.

Brian Woods · July 16th, 2010, 09:12 PM

Hmmm... not so sure about this one. I'm not impressed with NEX-5 video, and this has the same sensor and image processor... at $2k? Really?? For what, a headphone jack and horizontal grip? oh, Sony... *sigh*

I haven't seen anything in the demo footage that I can't get at least as good, if not better, with a hacked GH1 for half the price. And with the GH1, I'd get 60p & 24p & raw stills.

Graham Hickling · July 17th, 2010, 12:48 AM

>> If it's actually PsFs in either 60i or 50i wrap

Y'know, maybe it is - I may have to retract my earlier posts. It would be a first for a sub $2000 Sony vidocam to be "pseudo 60i", but this sensor is a new ballgame and having a slower readout for it does make some sense.

If so, yes, it will be trivial to extract 25P or 30P from the wrapper.

Robert Young · July 17th, 2010, 02:04 AM

Also, if it's true, the shoe is finally on the other foot- us guys who like the motion rendering of 60i will be whining about being stuck with 30p motion- hands wringing..."why, oh why couldn't they give us TRUE 60i".
I can hear it already :)
Getting back to the "deinterlacing" issue. Among all the algorithms for deinterlacing we have on board, isn't there the facility to do simple, non interpretetive deinterlace- where it just puts the two fields together in a frame without altering the data? Seems like that would do the trick to reconstitute the original 30p as it was shot, if in fact it actually was shot that way.

Kristian Roque · July 17th, 2010, 02:54 AM

Thanks again Robert. Quick question how much recording time do you think a 32 GB Memory Stick Pro-HG will handle on this camera?

Ron Evans · July 17th, 2010, 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Young

Also, if it's true, the shoe is finally on the other foot- us guys who like the motion rendering of 60i will be whining about being stuck with 30p motion- hands wringing..."why, oh why couldn't they give us TRUE 60i".
I can hear it already :)
.

Yes I agree Robert. Of no interest to me almost the exact opposite of what I want for stage stuff. I want large depth of field, smooth motion and low light performance. It appears to have none of these features!!!

Ron Evans

Dave Burckhard · July 17th, 2010, 11:44 AM

While so many are looking at this camera for what it isn't, I am impressed for what it is. Like all of you, I would not throw away my pro cam and replace it with this little guy. But I see this camera as a way to get certain shots that my 1/3" sensor pro cam can't. I see the new Sony as a way to capture b-roll quickly, even on the run, in a small, highly capable and relatively affordable price.

My business and workflow demand a fast pace with short dwell time at locations. Businesses want video but they don't want video to be an all-day or even hours long production. With a crew of as few as two, One can be shooting the main video while a camera operator / PA / grip / whatever is out shooting quick snips with a small camera. Or my PA can be unpacking or packing gear while I'm grabbing shots in the lobby, outside, the office space, etc. At most, I'm using a light and small tripod. And a small camera that has some creative abilities of an APS-C sized sensor and relatively long lens. (Indeed, the combo exactly matches that of my Nikon SLR and zoom lens. I already "see" in that focal length range.) Also, pros are already seeing that AVCHD is no longer a consumer file format. I'm comfortable with the limitations of AVCHD and those limitations are not in image quality but in processing requirements that push my computer to its limits. Finally, a b-roll camera will not be the one responsible for recording sound so one that can just record vocal notes, for me, is sufficient. However, I've also recorded sound with other AVCHD consumer cams with 1/4 inch TRS sockets using pro audio gear and I would challenge anyone to tell me that it didn't pass through an XLR socket on a camera.

While many are bemoaning the "shortcomings" of this neat little cam, I'm betting pros will see its virtues and, as important, buy and use it.

Dave

Jay West · July 17th, 2010, 12:00 PM

Ron wrote: "Yes I agree Robert. Of no interest to me almost the exact opposite of what I want for stage stuff. I want large depth of field, smooth motion and low light performance. It appears to have none of these features!!!"

Well, maybe, maybe not.

I say this as the one who started the questions about the low-light capabilities and asked if it was lens design or what? I think we just do not yet know enough about this product and its accessories.

The specs given us for the stock lens have all the downsides that Ron listed. But it seems that there are two other lenses made specifically for this unit. Would one of those lenses work better for multi-cam event and stage productions? How about the lenses you can use with adapters?

For example, a number of different lenses are listed at the end of credits at the end of that "Beautiful Bali" video. The shots of the dancer in the temple indicate considerable low light capability with whatever lens was used for that shot. However, it also seemed to me to have a shallow, "filmic" depth of field, too. The whole piece was done in that style.

Is that because the video makers chose that style or because that's how this camera works with everything? If the latter, then this camera is absolutely out of the question for me, too. Maybe Sony made this thing to be THE camera for the indie film makers and the other folks who really like the film look and film-type shooting styles?

Maybe. Maybe not.

I think Sony put out just enough info to get us talking. We certainly are doing that.

Jay West · July 17th, 2010, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kristian Roque

Thanks again Robert. Quick question how much recording time do you think a 32 GB Memory Stick Pro-HG will handle on this camera?

Same as other Sony AVCHD cams like the NX5/AX2000 and CX5xx which shoot 24Mbps AVCHD, about 2½ hours.

Kristian Roque · July 17th, 2010, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jay West

Same as other Sony AVCHD cams like the NX5/AX2000 and CX5xx which shoot 24Mbps AVCHD, about 2½ hours.

with a 32 GB card? wow, I was hoping at least 4 hours at the speed of 24Mbps.

As far as low light capabilities. I am hearing this camera does great in low light? Man, serious, I am stuck here. I really would like to wait for this and pre order it. But not having it in my hands and not being able to play with it is hard. I shoot social events (weddings, corporate etc) and low light is essential to my shooting at times. So between this and the Sony FX1000, I am hard in choosing.

Kristian Roque · July 17th, 2010, 01:21 PM

Am I reading this right? The Sony VG10 shoots at a minimum of 11 lux? and FX1000 at 1.5 lux? What the?

Jay West · July 17th, 2010, 01:57 PM

Yeah, that is the specification we've been talking about. Note that it is the specification for a particular zoom lens and that particular lens apparently only goes to f/3.5.

Maybe there is or will be lens that will go down to f/1.6. But maybe it will have only shallow depth of field. Maybe it won't. It is still too early to tell.

As for recording times, you can get close to 4 hours with 17Mbps "FH" AVCHD. I just checked my NX5 manual. It says the FX 24 Mbps capacity on a 32 gig card will be 170 minutes (not quite 3 hours) while FH (17Mbps) capacity will be 235 minutes (so not quite 4 hours).

If you get an MRC unit with your FX1000, you'll get the 170 minute recording time for HDV.

Robert Young · July 17th, 2010, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kristian Roque

Am I reading this right? The Sony VG10 shoots at a minimum of 11 lux? and FX1000 at 1.5 lux? What the?

I would be very cautious about drawing conclusions from the lux ratings of any of these cameras.
You need to see what the actual low light images look like.
Depending on the camera, the image can look a lot better, or worse than the rating implies.
For example: a low light shot that gives a "bright" but noisy image is useless, an image that is a little darker, but has no noise, silky blacks with detail in the shadows, is an acceptable image that can be worked with. The raw "lux" ratings do not address these qualitative issues.
The little Sony CX550 is rated @ 11lux and yet produces outstanding low light images. Here are some sample shots:
Sony 550 Night Shots
Keep in mind that these images are Flash for web- in the BR version on HDTV the image quality is quite stunning

Dave Blackhurst · July 17th, 2010, 02:18 PM

You get about an hour on an 8G MS (56 minutes is coming to mind), if you're recording at 17mbps - that drops down to about 40 minutes at the higher bitrate, so multipy that by 4 for a 32G stick/card (remember Sony takes SDHC now!), and you come out just a bit over 2 1/2 hours...

In some ways this camera is a bit strange when you consider the CX550, with 64G built in memory AND the card slot, excellent low light, and pretty smooth motion with 60i... I definitely share Ron's take for events, and wonder about it for wedding use. I do think the "lux ratings" are likely about useless because of the interchangeable lens - what we really need to find out is how the sensor performs and if it's clean and handles gain well, only hands on will tell that story.

OTOH, I'm looking at this more as though it is a DLSR that is optimized for video - got to go search for NEX5 footage and stills and see if it's passing muster (since the lens, sensor and basic menu structure are supposedly "borrowed"). The shallow DoF and the ability to use Alpha lenses (manually focused) still opens some interesting possibilities as a "dual use" camera - my primary concern is where the compromises are if any (already noticed the still side lost RAW... jpeg only).

This definitely isn't your run of the mill "handycam", seems more like the inverse of the 5D2 - instead of a still cam that does video, it's a video cam that does stills...

July 16th, 2010, 05:45 PM	#92
Robert Young Trustee Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Coronado Island Posts: 1,472	Kristian All is not lost re 30p. Apparently the NEX VG actually records progressive frames and then divides them into interlaced fields. So, even in the interlaced wrapper it should look like 30p and be free of interlace artifacts. There is discussion as to how you could reassemble the fields into true 30p in post if needed. It's kind of ironic that in the early days we had pseudo 30p/24p, this time around we have pseudo 60i. __________________ Bob

July 17th, 2010, 02:04 AM	#95
Robert Young Trustee Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Coronado Island Posts: 1,472	Also, if it's true, the shoe is finally on the other foot- us guys who like the motion rendering of 60i will be whining about being stuck with 30p motion- hands wringing..."why, oh why couldn't they give us TRUE 60i". I can hear it already :) Getting back to the "deinterlacing" issue. Among all the algorithms for deinterlacing we have on board, isn't there the facility to do simple, non interpretetive deinterlace- where it just puts the two fields together in a frame without altering the data? Seems like that would do the trick to reconstitute the original 30p as it was shot, if in fact it actually was shot that way. __________________ Bob

July 16th, 2010, 05:24 PM	#91
Kristian Roque Regular Crew Join Date: May 2010 Location: Spring Valley CA Posts: 55	Thanks Robert. You are totally correct, we really don't know much about this camera other than the specs Sony has posted on their site. But like you said HDV is a thing of yesterday now. And why spend $3199 on a camera when $2000 seems more attractive. Knowing that there WILL be a big brother to this model (hoping for progressive) just makes me more excited. Also a simple Beechtek always handles the situation with XLR inputs. Maybe I will join you in placing a preorder for this model :-)

July 16th, 2010, 09:12 PM	#93
Brian Woods Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 44	Hmmm... not so sure about this one. I'm not impressed with NEX-5 video, and this has the same sensor and image processor... at $2k? Really?? For what, a headphone jack and horizontal grip? oh, Sony... sigh I haven't seen anything in the demo footage that I can't get at least as good, if not better, with a hacked GH1 for half the price. And with the GH1, I'd get 60p & 24p & raw stills.

July 17th, 2010, 12:48 AM	#94
Graham Hickling Trustee Join Date: May 2004 Location: Knoxville, Tennessee Posts: 1,669	>> If it's actually PsFs in either 60i or 50i wrap Y'know, maybe it is - I may have to retract my earlier posts. It would be a first for a sub $2000 Sony vidocam to be "pseudo 60i", but this sensor is a new ballgame and having a slower readout for it does make some sense. If so, yes, it will be trivial to extract 25P or 30P from the wrapper.

July 17th, 2010, 02:54 AM	#96
Kristian Roque Regular Crew Join Date: May 2010 Location: Spring Valley CA Posts: 55	Thanks again Robert. Quick question how much recording time do you think a 32 GB Memory Stick Pro-HG will handle on this camera?

July 17th, 2010, 11:44 AM	#98
Dave Burckhard Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 73	While so many are looking at this camera for what it isn't, I am impressed for what it is. Like all of you, I would not throw away my pro cam and replace it with this little guy. But I see this camera as a way to get certain shots that my 1/3" sensor pro cam can't. I see the new Sony as a way to capture b-roll quickly, even on the run, in a small, highly capable and relatively affordable price. My business and workflow demand a fast pace with short dwell time at locations. Businesses want video but they don't want video to be an all-day or even hours long production. With a crew of as few as two, One can be shooting the main video while a camera operator / PA / grip / whatever is out shooting quick snips with a small camera. Or my PA can be unpacking or packing gear while I'm grabbing shots in the lobby, outside, the office space, etc. At most, I'm using a light and small tripod. And a small camera that has some creative abilities of an APS-C sized sensor and relatively long lens. (Indeed, the combo exactly matches that of my Nikon SLR and zoom lens. I already "see" in that focal length range.) Also, pros are already seeing that AVCHD is no longer a consumer file format. I'm comfortable with the limitations of AVCHD and those limitations are not in image quality but in processing requirements that push my computer to its limits. Finally, a b-roll camera will not be the one responsible for recording sound so one that can just record vocal notes, for me, is sufficient. However, I've also recorded sound with other AVCHD consumer cams with 1/4 inch TRS sockets using pro audio gear and I would challenge anyone to tell me that it didn't pass through an XLR socket on a camera. While many are bemoaning the "shortcomings" of this neat little cam, I'm betting pros will see its virtues and, as important, buy and use it. Dave

July 17th, 2010, 12:00 PM	#99
Jay West Major Player Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Red Lodge, Montana Posts: 889	Ron wrote: "Yes I agree Robert. Of no interest to me almost the exact opposite of what I want for stage stuff. I want large depth of field, smooth motion and low light performance. It appears to have none of these features!!!" Well, maybe, maybe not. I say this as the one who started the questions about the low-light capabilities and asked if it was lens design or what? I think we just do not yet know enough about this product and its accessories. The specs given us for the stock lens have all the downsides that Ron listed. But it seems that there are two other lenses made specifically for this unit. Would one of those lenses work better for multi-cam event and stage productions? How about the lenses you can use with adapters? For example, a number of different lenses are listed at the end of credits at the end of that "Beautiful Bali" video. The shots of the dancer in the temple indicate considerable low light capability with whatever lens was used for that shot. However, it also seemed to me to have a shallow, "filmic" depth of field, too. The whole piece was done in that style. Is that because the video makers chose that style or because that's how this camera works with everything? If the latter, then this camera is absolutely out of the question for me, too. Maybe Sony made this thing to be THE camera for the indie film makers and the other folks who really like the film look and film-type shooting styles? Maybe. Maybe not. I think Sony put out just enough info to get us talking. We certainly are doing that.

July 17th, 2010, 01:21 PM	#102
Kristian Roque Regular Crew Join Date: May 2010 Location: Spring Valley CA Posts: 55	Am I reading this right? The Sony VG10 shoots at a minimum of 11 lux? and FX1000 at 1.5 lux? What the?

July 17th, 2010, 01:57 PM	#103
Jay West Major Player Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Red Lodge, Montana Posts: 889	Yeah, that is the specification we've been talking about. Note that it is the specification for a particular zoom lens and that particular lens apparently only goes to f/3.5. Maybe there is or will be lens that will go down to f/1.6. But maybe it will have only shallow depth of field. Maybe it won't. It is still too early to tell. As for recording times, you can get close to 4 hours with 17Mbps "FH" AVCHD. I just checked my NX5 manual. It says the FX 24 Mbps capacity on a 32 gig card will be 170 minutes (not quite 3 hours) while FH (17Mbps) capacity will be 235 minutes (so not quite 4 hours). If you get an MRC unit with your FX1000, you'll get the 170 minute recording time for HDV.

July 17th, 2010, 02:18 PM	#105
Dave Blackhurst Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Apple Valley CA Posts: 4,874	You get about an hour on an 8G MS (56 minutes is coming to mind), if you're recording at 17mbps - that drops down to about 40 minutes at the higher bitrate, so multipy that by 4 for a 32G stick/card (remember Sony takes SDHC now!), and you come out just a bit over 2 1/2 hours... In some ways this camera is a bit strange when you consider the CX550, with 64G built in memory AND the card slot, excellent low light, and pretty smooth motion with 60i... I definitely share Ron's take for events, and wonder about it for wedding use. I do think the "lux ratings" are likely about useless because of the interchangeable lens - what we really need to find out is how the sensor performs and if it's clean and handles gain well, only hands on will tell that story. OTOH, I'm looking at this more as though it is a DLSR that is optimized for video - got to go search for NEX5 footage and stills and see if it's passing muster (since the lens, sensor and basic menu structure are supposedly "borrowed"). The shallow DoF and the ability to use Alpha lenses (manually focused) still opens some interesting possibilities as a "dual use" camera - my primary concern is where the compromises are if any (already noticed the still side lost RAW... jpeg only). This definitely isn't your run of the mill "handycam", seems more like the inverse of the 5D2 - instead of a still cam that does video, it's a video cam that does stills...