tom's FX1 review at DVinfo.net

Tom Hardwick · February 18th, 2005, 03:35 PM

As lots of us think the FX1 will replace the VX2k1, may I take up some bandwidth here to tell you my review of the FX1 is now on line?

http://www.dvuser.co.uk/Reviews/Camc...%20review.html

You're probably all sick of reading FX1 reviews, but there's a deliberate mistake in mine. And if you find more than one, I'm singing loudly with my fingers in my ears.

tom.

Shawn Mielke · February 18th, 2005, 05:00 PM

Thanks for the review, Tom. What are your thoughts/feelings on the 24 and 30 frame modes? Have you spent as much time with the DVX100A as you did the FX1? I'm considering getting a 24p camera with excellent audio later this year, and can still only think of one that's on the market. :-]

Tom Hardwick · February 20th, 2005, 04:59 PM

I've never been a big fan of the progressive and some-such modes - probably because I spent years with film and I rather like the 'real' look if 50i video.

Haven't spent much time with the DVX100A either I'm sorry to say, though I've much admired it. I always say that when you're in the GL2 and upwards ball park (VX / PD / DVX / XL etc) then all the cameras will bring home absolutely superb footage if you know what you're doing. If you get an FX1 or Z1, the camera s will bring home even better footage with the same level of care.

tom.

Ignacio Rodriguez · February 21st, 2005, 10:08 AM

Great article. There is an illustration that says Leica instead of Carl Zeiss. Scary!

Tom Hardwick · February 21st, 2005, 10:42 AM

Well spotted Ignacio!! But there's yet another mistake I've found... How many times did I proof read it?

Dave Ambrose · February 21st, 2005, 12:42 PM

What do I win ?

I’m sure the BBC will be buying skip loads of them....

Tom Hardwick · February 21st, 2005, 05:00 PM

Ah-ha! It's already in the past tense. The BBC have already bought skip-loads of them.

Laurence Kingston · February 21st, 2005, 11:22 PM

Is this it:

"The image of the HDR-FX1 – even allowing for the advanced chip design and beautiful lens – could appear very slightly soft on an SD set, but only when compared with the incredible sharpness of the VX2100."

I hope not. I would very much like to believe that the HDR-FX1 looks soft compared to the "incredible sharpness" of my current VX2000 ;-)

Tom Hardwick · February 22nd, 2005, 01:51 AM

Sleep easy Laurence, your 2100's lens is no different from the 2000's lens.

Sherlock Holmes clue: The other mistake is also in the text surrounding the picture. I must've been getting pretty tired when I did those in Photoshop.

tom.

Jim Vesty · February 22nd, 2005, 02:28 AM

Don't know much on the specs/features of this camera so I can't comment if any of those are mistakes. But, is it that analog was spelled wrong, (analogue).

Jim

Tom Hardwick · February 22nd, 2005, 03:32 AM

Whoooh, it *you* guys who spell wrong!
:-)

Over here in PAL land it's colour and analogue and stabilise, thank you very much.

Jeff Toogood · February 22nd, 2005, 08:03 AM

Flip out 3.5" top screen folds to hide tape transport?
Tape transport?
Ummm... no ;)

John Jay · February 22nd, 2005, 09:03 AM

Tom

How much did the Aspheron set you back?

also how is the CA at the edges of the frame?

I've always wanted a Zeiss Aspheron but way too expensive , maybe a Bolex is a bit cheaper...

Tom Hardwick · February 23rd, 2005, 03:21 PM

I thought I knew all the wide-angles John, but I've never heard of a Zeiss Aspheron. The Swiss firm of Kern makes them for Bolex, and Bolex call it the Aspheron. Basically it's a pretty big, 0,5x, single aspherical element, beautifully coated and has an 85mm attachment thread.

I bought mine second-hand for 125 GBP, but if you're rich they can be had new for close to 1000 GBP. That's a loot of loot.

The chromatic aberation is most certainly there and single elements are renowned for exhibiting this fault. If you look at the multi-element 0.65x Century you'll see it's better in this regard, but in my view the lack of barrel distortion when using the Aspheron is much more important, and I'll accept slight CA at the very edges of the image to keep straight lines straight.

tom.

John Jay · February 23rd, 2005, 03:45 PM

125 !!!

you got a bargain , I'm jealous

yeah I suppose top of the tree is the Zeiss (rentable @ 40 per diem), but there are others like the Kinoptic and the double aspheron (which is as rare as rocking horse poo)

getting a bargain on these to buy is like queing in the Jan sales!

February 18th, 2005, 03:35 PM	#1
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	tom's FX1 review As lots of us think the FX1 will replace the VX2k1, may I take up some bandwidth here to tell you my review of the FX1 is now on line? http://www.dvuser.co.uk/Reviews/Camc...%20review.html You're probably all sick of reading FX1 reviews, but there's a deliberate mistake in mine. And if you find more than one, I'm singing loudly with my fingers in my ears. tom.

February 18th, 2005, 05:00 PM	#2
Shawn Mielke Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Santa Rosa, California Posts: 745	Thanks for the review, Tom. What are your thoughts/feelings on the 24 and 30 frame modes? Have you spent as much time with the DVX100A as you did the FX1? I'm considering getting a 24p camera with excellent audio later this year, and can still only think of one that's on the market. :-] __________________ Breakthrough In Grey Room

February 21st, 2005, 10:08 AM	#4
Ignacio Rodriguez Contributor Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Santiago, Chile Posts: 932	Great article. There is an illustration that says Leica instead of Carl Zeiss. Scary! __________________ Ignacio Rodríguez in the third world. @micronauta on Twitter. Main hardware: brain, eyes, hands.

February 22nd, 2005, 08:03 AM	#12
Jeff Toogood Major Player Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: St.Thomas, Ontario, CANADA Posts: 428	Flip out 3.5" top screen folds to hide tape transport? Tape transport? Ummm... no ;) __________________ Toogood Studios

February 22nd, 2005, 09:03 AM	#13
John Jay Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: US & THEM Posts: 827	Tom How much did the Aspheron set you back? also how is the CA at the edges of the frame? I've always wanted a Zeiss Aspheron but way too expensive , maybe a Bolex is a bit cheaper... __________________ John Jay Beware *PLUGGER-BYTES*

February 20th, 2005, 04:59 PM	#3
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	I've never been a big fan of the progressive and some-such modes - probably because I spent years with film and I rather like the 'real' look if 50i video. Haven't spent much time with the DVX100A either I'm sorry to say, though I've much admired it. I always say that when you're in the GL2 and upwards ball park (VX / PD / DVX / XL etc) then all the cameras will bring home absolutely superb footage if you know what you're doing. If you get an FX1 or Z1, the camera s will bring home even better footage with the same level of care. tom.

February 21st, 2005, 10:42 AM	#5
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	Well spotted Ignacio!! But there's yet another mistake I've found... How many times did I proof read it?

February 21st, 2005, 12:42 PM	#6
Dave Ambrose Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: New York Posts: 28	What do I win ? I’m sure the BBC will be buying skip loads of them....

February 21st, 2005, 05:00 PM	#7
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	Ah-ha! It's already in the past tense. The BBC have already bought skip-loads of them.

February 21st, 2005, 11:22 PM	#8
Laurence Kingston Major Player Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Clermont, FL. Posts: 941	Is this it: "The image of the HDR-FX1 – even allowing for the advanced chip design and beautiful lens – could appear very slightly soft on an SD set, but only when compared with the incredible sharpness of the VX2100." I hope not. I would very much like to believe that the HDR-FX1 looks soft compared to the "incredible sharpness" of my current VX2000 ;-)

February 22nd, 2005, 01:51 AM	#9
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	Sleep easy Laurence, your 2100's lens is no different from the 2000's lens. Sherlock Holmes clue: The other mistake is also in the text surrounding the picture. I must've been getting pretty tired when I did those in Photoshop. tom.

February 22nd, 2005, 02:28 AM	#10
Jim Vesty New Boot Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 10	Don't know much on the specs/features of this camera so I can't comment if any of those are mistakes. But, is it that analog was spelled wrong, (analogue). Jim

February 22nd, 2005, 03:32 AM	#11
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	Whoooh, it you guys who spell wrong! :-) Over here in PAL land it's colour and analogue and stabilise, thank you very much.

February 23rd, 2005, 03:21 PM	#14
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	I thought I knew all the wide-angles John, but I've never heard of a Zeiss Aspheron. The Swiss firm of Kern makes them for Bolex, and Bolex call it the Aspheron. Basically it's a pretty big, 0,5x, single aspherical element, beautifully coated and has an 85mm attachment thread. I bought mine second-hand for 125 GBP, but if you're rich they can be had new for close to 1000 GBP. That's a loot of loot. The chromatic aberation is most certainly there and single elements are renowned for exhibiting this fault. If you look at the multi-element 0.65x Century you'll see it's better in this regard, but in my view the lack of barrel distortion when using the Aspheron is much more important, and I'll accept slight CA at the very edges of the image to keep straight lines straight. tom.

February 23rd, 2005, 03:45 PM	#15
John Jay Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: US & THEM Posts: 827	125 !!! you got a bargain , I'm jealous yeah I suppose top of the tree is the Zeiss (rentable @ 40 per diem), but there are others like the Kinoptic and the double aspheron (which is as rare as rocking horse poo) getting a bargain on these to buy is like queing in the Jan sales! __________________ John Jay Beware *PLUGGER-BYTES*