Sony AX2000 and Fx7: shots in full light: what is better?

[Bruce Dempsey]

far more Permanent? ...nah the word permanent doesn't work here at all, these are but fleeting glimpses into the lives of those around us and will hardly outlast us. Some of it (the truly treasured bits) will surely last a little longer as it will be viewed and copied to varying media but for the most part when its done its gone.
I film young person's activities (sports, graduations) and I'm hoping my offspring will have be able to fill orders when these kids grow up and and google their names to discover that movies of themselves as kids doing neat stuff exist and are availabe to buy.
I need my archives to last til then
Magnetic tape holds up until an EMP same as HDD
Optical storage such as dvds and Blu-ray hold up til who knows
New stuff will come along soon making compression as novel as a working 286

[Ron Evans]

The advantage of DLT or any of the other data backup tape options is a lot more redundancy than video tape of any kind. IF like me you like to have more than one backup then the Backup software can manage a duplicate as well. The tape is a lot cheaper than video tape.One DLT tape of $25 is the equivalent to about 35 DV/HDV tapes and the cheapest I ever got those was about $3 each so over $100. To add to that the DLT tape occupies about the same space as about 4 DV tapes. Transfer to DLT or restore goes as fast as the hard drives will run in my case about 65MBs. Will back up an hour of AVCHD in minutes. The deck in Canada was about $1000, that is less than any of my cameras.

So more reliable than video tape,cheaper, faster backup and restore and takes up less space. Actually I am thinking over time to transfer all my video tapes to DLT as I have had quite a few with drop outs etc that will only get worse over time.

I keep disc images of DVD's of finished projects on hard drive so that I can make a quick DVD if asked. All source files with my Edius project files etc are on DLT and can be restored to further edit a project in the future if I wished as well as the DVD images and Bluray files.

Ron Evans

[Adriano Moroni]

Originally Posted by Aaron Holmes

I have owned both a Z5 and NX5, so will register a vote for the AX2000 (being similar to the NX5)

Hi Aaron, I'm happy read your post. I will use Sony AX2000 for my travels. I'm enough expert filmaker but lacking in technology and I'd like to ask two questions:
1) in wide angle is it possible to use AX2000 without tripod? How is it hard to use AX2000 without tripod? Usually I use my camera without it with decent success.
2) will it be significant to buy a wide agle lens?

I'm thinking to buy a Sony AX2000 or an EX1 but my worry is that EX1 is not handy as AX2000.

thanks for your reply.

[Aaron Holmes]

Originally Posted by Adriano Moroni

1) in wide angle is it possible to use AX2000 without tripod? How is it hard to use AX2000 without tripod? Usually I use my camera without it with decent success.
2) will it be significant to buy a wide agle lens?

I shoot handheld all the time with the NX5. It's not light, but it's well balanced. It's a two-handed job, though! :) As for the wide angle, I think that really depends on what you're shooting. I owned the Sony wide angle kit for the Z5 and sold it because I found that the camera was wide enough for me without it (for the hobby shooting I do, anyway). Also, the Sony wide angle is very heavy. I would probably not try to shoot handheld that way. Others might, but my wrist couldn't take that kind of punishment for long.

Originally Posted by Adriano Moroni

I'm thinking to buy a Sony AX2000 or an EX1 but my worry is that EX1 is not handy as AX2000.

Really depends on how you define "handy," I suppose. :)

Best,
Aaron

[Tom Hardwick]

Originally Posted by Adriano Moroni

I'm thinking to buy a Sony AX2000 or an EX1 but my worry is that EX1 is not handy as AX2000.

There's probably a comparison list on this site somewhere that puts the AX2k alongside the NX5 and shows you the extra dongles you get for your NX5 buck. And if the word EX1 arrives in the same sentence as the AX2k, then I'm pretty sure the NX5 should replace the AX.

The EX1 is rather good in hand-held situations because of it's adjustable hand-grip, but the NX5 has the lens reach - going wider and more tele. This might be useful for your travels, but if you're like me you won't live without a decent wide-angle. The 29.5mm is 'ok', but not dramatically wide by any means.

Hand holding? The NX5 has the added benefit of Active Steadyshot on top of Sony's Steadyshot, so hand-holding is a breeze. But if you've even thought about the EX1 I'd say go with it. As a photographic tool it outperforms all those mentioned here.

tom.

[Adriano Moroni]

Tom ... and if you were me what would you buy? ;)
EX1: more image performance but less wide angle.
HXR-NX5E: less image performance but more wide angle.

Another question: what are their running cost about batteries and memory flash?
I will need 4-5 batteries and 2-3 memory flash for my documentaries.

May be EX1 becomes less expensive for it because it has more Supplied Accessories?

Thanks, Adriano

My ethnic documentaries: http://xoomer.virgilio.it/alvmos/

[Tom Hardwick]

Have you any Sony kit at the moment Adriano? I went from the Z1 to the NX5 because of the carry-over batteries, Lanc controller and wide-angle converter that I already owned. If you're starting from zero, then the EX1R is a much better camera (even though it has less zoom) because of its bigger chips, full stop.

The power consumption of the two cameras will be pretty similar and they'll both run SDHC cards so there's little to choose in the running costs, but the up-front costs are plain - the EX costs another 30% or so on top of the NX5.

What's your intended market? Will your clients pay more for films you make with the EX rather than the NX?

tom.

[Ron Evans]

I agree with Tom. If you have nothing to carry over such as batteries etc and can afford the EX1 then that would be the choice for your projects. It is a more expensive camera with more expensive accessories but much better image quality that is accepted for higher level markets than AVCHD. It will need an adapter to use SDHC cards or you can also buy a hard drive unit for it too.

Ron Evans

[Adriano Moroni]

Originally Posted by Tom Hardwick

Have you any Sony kit at the moment Adriano? I went from the Z1 to the NX5 because of the carry-over batteries ....

Me too, now I'm using Sony FX7. I have some batteries so that I can use them for NX5 or AX2000.

Originally Posted by Tom Hardwick

The power consumption of the two cameras will be pretty similar and they'll both run SDHC cards so there's little to choose in the running costs, but the up-front costs are plain - the EX costs another 30% or so on top of the NX5.

I'm considering to buy a NX5 or even an used EX1 so that I will not pay out extra cash. Are you that EX1 can use SDHC cards as an AX2000 or NX5? If it is so, I should not spend much more money but the choice is very difficult.

Originally Posted by Tom Hardwick

What's your intended market? Will your clients pay more for films you make with the EX rather than the NX?

I don't have any customer, it is my hobby and I pay every cost of my travels. But it soon could become my job. I'm a solitary and impassioned traveler, as my travels will become more and more expansive, I'm thinking to sell them even if it is very very hard because I don't know anybody. ;)
Thanks for your availability.

[Adriano Moroni]

Originally Posted by Ron Evans

It is a more expensive camera with more expensive accessories but much better image quality that is accepted for higher level markets than AVCHD.

Ron, it seems that AVCHD is the new and wonderful codec, do you not think that MPEG2 codec of EX1 is mature, may it is be too much mature and soon AVCHD will replace MPEG2?

[Ron Evans]

There are lots of discussions around that say that the 24mbps AVCHD is as good or better than the 35mbps EX. The difference is that there isn't available the camera quality of the EX1 with AVCHD recording.

Having looked on your site I feel that your work justifies an EX1 and also get a CX550 to take too if you can afford. None of the more professional cameras have the stabilization of the CX550 which is amazing and could be used as a "B" camera with EX1. The AX2000/NX5U does not compete with either of these for low light or video noise level. I often shoot with EX3, NX5U and my XR500 and the NX5U has the most video noise with surprisingly the XR500 having the least noise!!

I moved from an FX1 to the NX5U and it is a big improvement over the FX1.

Ron Evans

[Adriano Moroni]

Originally Posted by Ron Evans

I moved from an FX1 to the NX5U and it is a big improvement over the FX1.

Thanks for your pleasant reply.
Ron,
if I shot with XR500 in full day light, the XR500 has the same image quality of NX5U?
From an FX1 to the NX5U you get more chromatism too in addition to better definition of image?
thanks

[Tom Hardwick]

Originally Posted by Ron Evans

I moved from an FX1 to the NX5U and it is a big improvement over the FX1.
Ron Evans

I should think so too, Ron! One is 6 years younger than the other and on top of that the NX costs almost exactly 2¼ times the FX1 price.

Adriano - the 550 uses internal, automatic ND filtration. With the NX you can choose when and how much ND to add, to change the look of the picture by using different apertures. So 'the same image quality' doesn't mean much unless you're using full-auto operation.

tom.

[Ron Evans]

Tom .
When I bought the FX1 it was about the same price I paid for the NX5U. Listing at about $5000 Canadian. So for me they are replacement cameras though some still like the CCD's over the CMOS and as such FX1/Z1 are still available in NA and hold their price well. IF you can find a new one it will cost more than a NX5U. Even used they are close to half the price of a new NX5U as you mentioned. I have kept my FX1 as I have a lot of HDV tapes that one day I will capture and put on to DLT backup tape so that I am not dependent on video tape or cameras in the future.

Of interest is that the NX5U in automatic is not a match for the XR500. The value for me in the NX5U is the ability to use the manual controls. In a family environment in auto the XR500 beats it hands down. Better auto focus with face recognition and scene detection etc , smaller , lighter and better stabilizer.

The combination I am happy with. I am waiting to see if Sony brings out an upgrade to the CX550 since they produce a new model each year and one is due I think.

Ron Evans

[Ron Evans]

Originally Posted by Adriano Moroni

Thanks for your pleasant reply.
Ron,
if I shot with XR500 in full day light, the XR500 has the same image quality of NX5U?
From an FX1 to the NX5U you get more chromatism too in addition to better definition of image?
thanks

The main difference between the FX1 and NX5U are in resolution and better colour. The added benefits are no tape to worry about and for me doing theatre that is important as I do not have to worry about tape changing before a program has finished. With the FMU128 flash memory I could record for about 14 hours!!!! We shoot the theatre with EX3 ( using hard drive attachment), NX5U with FMU128 flash module, XR500 and SR11. All use the large batteries so could go for about 5 hours.

NX5U is a better match for the EX3 and XR500 than the FX1 in all respects.

The XR500 is a consumer camera so must be viewed in this light. I have it unattended on a tripod for theatre, spot focus and with AE shift at -4. This does a very good job of managing stage lighting other than the most extreme contrast.

For family stuff I still tend to have AE shift at about -2 as the Sony's tend to overexpose too much for me. Face recognition is excellent in a family situation as it will correctly set focus, depth of field , white balance, I believe better than all but very fast experts who try to do this manually.

If you need to be artistic then you can do that with the NX5U but for fast responses the smaller cams in my mind will do a better job as their automatic functions are more elaborate.

Ron Evans