4K camera choices and Vegas

VidMus wrote on 6/13/2015, 5:37 PM

After giving this some thoughts, I have decided to hold-off on 4k. I will be waiting for cameras with a much better dynamic range. And if the much better dynamic range cameras are 4k or more then that will be a bonus. Also, smarter cameras!

My CX-900 will need to last a while.

set wrote on 6/13/2015, 6:51 PM

Sony just announced several new hybrid camera, all with internal 4K capability: A7R II, RX10 II and RX100 IV, shipping soon.

Or, you can also consider Sony PXW-X70. 4K capability is available with separate purchase, so I can 'upgrade' this camera later after 4K has become common.

Set

astar wrote on 6/13/2015, 11:18 PM

PXW-Z100
- True 4K 4096x2160 Recording
- XAVC 4:2:2 10-bit Intra Frame Codec
- 60P recording
- high bitrate abilities

HyperMedia wrote on 6/14/2015, 1:11 PM

Sony A7R II FullFrame camera. This is the future, of course you have to start buying lens.

Wolfgang S. wrote on 6/15/2015, 4:08 AM

Z100:
- terrible small sensor
- poor lowlight-behaviour

astar wrote on 6/15/2015, 10:48 PM

z100 = low cost, entry level 4k with quality codec. Sure there better cameras that have large image sensors, accept super speeds, and require an AC.

- terrible small sensor = greater depth of field or greater chance of being in focus while moving the camera. Pretty sure that is reason behind small image sensor. Think reality TV or documentary.

- poor lowlight-behaviour - if this is a problem, you may need to light your scene better. Ext Night work is generally lit with lights. Light your shadows helps to reduce noise the same way is did back in the film days.

Wolfgang S. wrote on 6/16/2015, 12:12 AM

That is no low cost solution but one that is outdated. Even the AX100 is lot better. For professional featues lik a xlr section even the X70 is better. Or the upcoming DVX200 of Panasonic.

astar wrote on 6/16/2015, 1:08 PM

I think we are talking apples and oranges. The cameras you recommend are good devices for their range. $6,000 is pretty much entry level to me, anything below that is consumer grade video. I prefer to not have the camera master shot in a LGOP codec, but each to his own.

The PXWFS7 someone recommended looks like a sweet rig, but the cost of those devices can be misleading when you apply the glass, and all the accessories you need to rig them out.

Best camera for Vegas is really dependent on your needs, shooting style, budget, storage budget, workflow, and final display requirements.

OldSmoke wrote on 6/16/2015, 1:15 PM

I am with Wolfgang on this one. The Z100 sensor is just not good enough to be in that camera. If they make the same camera with the 1" sensor from the AX100 then we can talk. Sony is currently missing a lower range 4K pro camera with a good sensor like the upcoming Panasonic DVX200.

larry-peter wrote on 6/16/2015, 2:01 PM

Yes, the DVX200 may be what prods me into 4K, but has anyone found which codec/bitrate the cam will use? The early brochure says mp4/mov on SD cards without additional qualifications, which makes me worry. The 12-stop Vlog gamma is more attractive to me than the 4K is, but will we need an external 4K recorder to really use it?

astar wrote on 6/16/2015, 3:59 PM

The DVX200 is Panasonic, the road map for AVC-Ultra is already known, and the recording formats seem to align with the roadmap. That fact the DVX200 is limited to 24p at 4096x2160 is sort of a tip of the hand. I would find it hard to believe Panasonic would record to Prores or DNxHR, and not use their own codec to keep licensing costs down. My guess is AVC-ultra lgop, with intra recording on the models higher than the DVX200.

MattAdamson wrote on 6/20/2015, 3:12 PM

Thanks All for your thoughts so far.

It does seem like the DVX200 will be the best choice in the mid term given its larger sensor.

However I really do need a new camera in the next 4 weeks before my summer vacation. I currently have nothing other than Go Pro 4 / 3 cameras. With that in mind I'm wondering which camera reaches the best price / performance point right now e.g. HC-X1000E. It really does need 60fps and even poor low light isn't essential given most of my home videos are outside / sunny days ( yes we do have them in the UK sometimes ! )

OldSmoke wrote on 6/20/2015, 4:38 PM

I love my AX100 but it's only 30p at 4K. The 1080 60p footage still beats many prosumer cameras. The 1" sensor and Zeiss lens are a great combination.

VidMus wrote on 6/20/2015, 8:36 PM

"The 1080 60p footage still beats many prosumer cameras."

The same with my CX-900.

Was the sub-par 4k really worth the extra $500?

I am glad I saved the extra $500 for other needed things.

I will wait a while for 4k.

megabit wrote on 6/21/2015, 2:54 AM

I'm in a specific situation as due to my deteriorating neck spine condition, I'm unable to handle all my HD rig (gathered over the last several years around 2 Sony cameras: EX1 and FS100), so I'm trying to sell all this stuff and only continue the editing part of my "second trade". But of course I'd like to have a small and handy camera (just without all those add-ons that would make it heavy and difficult to handle) - and needless to say, it should be as much future proof as possible, so 4K is what I'm currently looking for...

Frankly, I'm on the fence between 2 types of available 4k camcorders:

- the large sensor ones (AX100, X70, JVC HM200...)
- the smaller sensor but fully featured ones (like the A1/Z1, or the Panasonic x1000).

If I consider the second group at all is for 2 reasons: for a partially disabled operator, assuring perfect focus in 4K is not a trivial task, and a smaller sensor would certainly make it easier; also the Panasonic x1000 is really feature-packed while costing less than the X70 after 4k upgrade (at least in Poland). On the other hand, the smallish 1/2.3" sensor cannot be as good in low light as the 1" sensor the former group offers; not to mention some of the x1000 native files I downloaded are very, very soft (distant foliage or grass being as muddy as in SD) sometimes!

So I would probably settle with the X70 after all, but - for some unknown reason - it's the X70 Long-GOP 4k files that play the worst on my current system out of all the above mentioned cameras (in Vegas Pro latest build)... Any idea why, or at least can anyone confirm this observation?

Opinions welcome;

Piotr

PS. What I will never understand is why an AVC clip in Quicktime container (from the JVC HM200) plays more smoothly in VP than Sony's own XAVC from the X70! (same for AVC in MP4 from Panasonic x1000 - so far, the smoothest playback of 4k on my Vegas system).

Wolfgang S. wrote on 6/21/2015, 4:20 AM

Right, the DVX200 will be in the range of $5000. Even a GH4 is in a similar range, if one takes into account all the additional equipment one will need (for XLR a Beachtec, a good rig and cage, the objectives, ND filter). Both systems will have v-log - for the DVX200 that was announced for sure, and for the GH4 that seems to be still open.

Vegas will have both with v-log an issue (not included in the log files available), and Vegas will have an issue with the internal H.264 files (will be the same in the DVX200, and will require the script that brings in line the length of video and audio).

I have the Shogun here too - and can state that Vegas is not compatible with these UHD-ProRes files in reallity. Vegas still crashes with more then 20-25 ProRes files, AND it is not capable to decode ProRes as 10bit.

So XAVC systems would be more appropriate with Vegas - in that price range.

OldSmoke wrote on 6/21/2015, 8:42 AM

Was the sub-par 4k really worth the extra $500?

I consider the Z100 and AX1 as sub par, the AX100 beats both. Sure, 60p would be nice but as of now, all my 4K work doesn't include sport events so 30p is sufficient; I just had to learn to make the best of it. Was it worth it, any time especially with 100Mbps upgrade.

jwcarney wrote on 6/21/2015, 9:20 AM

I'm waiting to see if reviews of the new RX10 II are good after it's released to the public. The real world reviews of the Pana FX1000 have been mixed.

megabit wrote on 6/21/2015, 11:02 AM

I think you meant "Pana x1000", not fx1000?

Here is a grab from a native 4k file; it looks out of focus, but it's not - it's that soft! Can anyone explain it?

http://www.moldcad.idsl.pl/images/x1000.png
http://www.moldcad.idsl.pl/images/x1000-2.png

OK, there is some motion blur due to the panning - but believe me the panning is slow, certainly not explaining the softness of the picture. In a single clip, there are moments like this - plenty of them - and some real 4k "wow" scenes, as well. But what is causing the softness?!!

Well, I have my theory: the red foliage is the softest of all, could it be some bug with 4:2:0 chroma subsampling? Green foliage looks much better.

Or the camera had some back focus problem, and could focus at infinity? But then - in the many YT/Vimeo clips - the muddy picture appears here and there, as well...

Piotr

FPP wrote on 6/21/2015, 2:23 PM

The results I've been getting from my first CX900 has definitely inspired a professional attitude from me.
I just recently purchased a second one, and now with the three CX330 in my toolbox, my multicam projects are getting closer to marketable products.
I am a low budget video producer with an emphasis on high quality audio to boot.
I think when the cost of your gear is the common denominator, you sometimes lose sight of the hard work of being creative and making the best of what you can budget for.
A $10.000 camera would be "Overkill" for my operation, so I build from the ground up.
There are so many moving parts in video productions.. Each "part" has to be just as important as the other.

entilza72 wrote on 6/23/2015, 7:55 PM

+1 for the Sony FDR AX100. It's very stable with Vegas 13. I'm doing my first VP13 project right now, and its also the first one with this camera. No crashes, no nested Vegs, no corrupted frames. Good times so far, touch wood.

The jelly shutter in 4K mode is as bad as the EOS 5D Mk II was in its day, but is perfectly acceptable for doing anything that doesn't involve whip pans or rapidly moving vehicles and the 100mbps data rate is no Raw, but is decent none the less. It's great in 1080p @ 50mbps, overcranking to 50/60fps.

100fps/120fps mode only works at 720p. It's fantastic, but suffers from compression artefacts if you look really closely - featureless walls will "pop" with an updated frame every 2 seconds. I've only noticed it once though.

The full manual controls and resulting image is well beyond its price point, and is why I bought one. I use one with a follow focus and rails - my major complaint about it is that the lens marks drift significantly each turn, making mark points on the follow focus useless. My other major gripe is the focus/zoom ring turns too slowly - it needs a "burst" setting.