HDR-FX1 or HVR-Z1U best miniDV cam?

busterkeaton wrote on 11/16/2004, 12:58 PM

Hi,

Spot did send me a couple of images. Don't ask me to post them because I won't, because of copyright issues. Suffice to say, it looks like Yoda gets into one heck of a battle with Emperor Palpatine.

Just kidding.

The HD to DV image has a greater color range.
The DV image looks like it's a touch overexposed. Spot says they were both white balanced off the same card. The angles are slightly different, which may account for a slightly different exposure.

The subject is wearing a patterned shirt and in the PD150 shot the background of the shirt looks black or dark navy, but in the FX1 shot you can tell it is actually a hunter green. The pattern contains yellows and whites and it all looks like white on the PD150 shot, but in the FX1 shot, the range of colors appear. The colors just look better in the HDV to DV image. The subject is holding a common object and in the HDV image the wood of the this object is warmer and richer in color. The skin tones look better in the HDV image. They are a bit washed out in the DV image.

In general in looks like shooting HDV and downcoverting to DV lets capture a greater tonal range. The DV shot is pushing the low end towards black and the highlights towards white. The PD150 image looks like someone standing in white spotlight while the FX1 image doesn't give that effect. When a shadow falls on the subject's shirt, it is black in the PD150 image, while you can make out details and a bit of color in the FX1 image

Laurence wrote on 11/16/2004, 1:04 PM

Another thing I get kind of excited about is capturing good quality stills from the HDV footage! Stills I captured and enhanced from the footage I downloaded look terrific. Getting good quality art work this way for packaging and promotional material would be pretty easy.

tnw2933 wrote on 11/16/2004, 1:57 PM

Mark,

I have had a Sony HDR-FX1 for over a week now so I speak from hands-on experience. Yes, you can shoot in HDV format, and then set the menu on the HDR-FX1 to output the HDV material in the DV format which can be captured and editied in Vegas. Of course, with Cineform's HDConnect you can also capture the HDV footage and edit that in Vegas. I have done both and both worked very well. Cineform's avi's do take up a lot of disk space, however and require at least a 2.8 Ghz processor to playback well.

I have also shot with my FX1 in DV mode, and it looks terrific on my 76 in. screeen with my Runco 980 Ultra displaying the 16:9 image. It's not as good as HDV, but it's darn good for DV.

Tom

mark2929 wrote on 11/16/2004, 2:39 PM

Thanks Tom

I think my mind was set before I asked the Question I want the Sony Camera Just wanted to Know more about what it can do !

Thanks for the Info !

psg wrote on 11/16/2004, 5:11 PM

My early experience with the FX1:

The HDV material I have recorded; primarily indoors, low light including some material at a bowling alley with crummy fluorescent lights (and not many of them) looks absolutely fantastic when I play it pack on my Sony 60" RP LCD TV. I'm impressed by the low light performance of this camera. Can't wait to have a way to distribute HDV material.

Downconverting the HDV footage to DV in the camera using Vegas+DVD Arch to create a DVD looks good, but I did notice some motion artifacts which surprised me since those scenes did not have a lot of movement. But I'm still experimenting.

Next step is to take DV footage that I shot in the same bowling alley, to see how it looks.

John_Cline wrote on 11/16/2004, 6:38 PM

Regarding the motion artifacts; HDV footage is "upper field first," so make certain that Vegas has selected this correctly when you import the clip.

John

mhbstevens wrote on 11/16/2004, 10:46 PM

Will someone explain Spot's comment that the FX1 does not have rack focusing as the Z1. My comparison chart does not mention this, and I don't know what is meant by rack focusing.

ALSO Spot says: "The only thing about it (?) that stands head and shoulders above other DVcams is the DOF, but that alone isn't worth the extra $$. "

Is this refering to the XL2? A shallow DOF is important to me as in my 35mm still work I have used it a lot and am comfortable with it. What DOF characturistics does the FX1 have? Lets say a medium shot, waist up focused on eyes and you are at full apature, how far back from subject does focus start to go soft?

Cheers, Mike S

Spot|DSE wrote on 11/17/2004, 8:54 AM

The FX1 and the Z1 have the same DOF, so far as I know. I've never had them both in my hands at the same time.
Rack focus is fairly important to you if you like DOF as part of your production. Rack allows you to go from foreground to background focus. Think of it as 'moveable selective focus." This is something that only more expensive cams have had in the past. Z1 has a programmable button for this. Come to think of it, the FX1 has 3 programmable buttons too, but I'm not certain focus is one of the programmable features. Someone who has an FX1 can verify this or not. The XL2 has a good DOF IF you have the broadcast lens.

Regarding the depth in the shot you describe, I can't comment as I didn't measure. On the other hand, at Gov't Expo, we shot flowers at a medium zoom, open aperture, and you couldn't identify the fabric in a couch that was 10 inches behind the flowers. I mean, you could see the fabric, but you couldn't tell the kind of weave it was, and it was a big, open weave. At the time, I wasn't interested in measurements, I was interested in tearing the rest of the cam apart.

tnw2933 wrote on 11/17/2004, 9:02 AM

Spot,

The HDR-FX1 has two memory locations buttons (marked A and B) which allow one to store the complete settings for two different scenes (including WB, focus, zoom setting, etc.) and by filming the first scene and then pushing the appropriate memory button when transitoning to the second scene one can easily move between two widely disparate scenes. Furthermore, the FX1 allows the transition time and type of transition (i.e. ease in and ease out, linear, etc.) to be set as well. Thus a rack focus is definitely achievable with the FX1 with a little practice. I have done it myself and it works very nicely indeed. I think this is one of the best features on the HDR-FX1.

Tom

Spot|DSE wrote on 11/17/2004, 9:50 AM

I wondered, since the FX has 3 programmable modes. the Z1 has 14 vs the 3 of the FX1, but that may be overkill for some. (unless of course, the cam is shared by a bunch of shooters)
I wish Sony would let us have an FX 1 for a while, but it's a different division of Sony than the Z1 is. (consumer vs pro)

busterkeaton wrote on 11/17/2004, 10:33 AM

Spot said I didn't have to be so cryptic in my description of the clips he sent me.

The images are of a man onstage wearing a Hawaiian shirt and playing an acoustic guitar. He is standing in bright stage lights.
In the PD150 shots, the wood of the guitar tends toward yellow. The red flowers on his shirt tend towards pink. The white and yellow flowers look about the same. The dark background fabric tends towards black. So the highs and the lows seem to be emphasized. His skintone is reddish with a lot white hightlights. Overall the shot is a bit overexosed in the bright stage lights. In the Vegas Waveform monitor, the values are consistently above 90 when set to composite.
In the downsampled FX1 shots the wood of the guitar is more orange, consistent with what I think of a new acoustic guitar looking like. The colors of the Hawaiian shirt are easier to determine. The pattern includes light green leaves and red, yellow and white flowers. You can make out of these different colors. The green leaves on the PD150 shot look kind of greyish. The tonal range of the photo is wider and the colors are more saturated. The skin tone looks natural and the only white areas are a tiny shiny spot on his forehead.In the Vegas Waveform monitor, the values are grouped near 80 when set to composite. You can see the wider spacing of the values as well.

mhbstevens wrote on 11/17/2004, 11:02 AM

This is just as one should expect. When you have more information to begin with you can be selective about what you discard. It seem the FX1/Z1 has been well programed to keep the most definitive colour information. The more I hear the more I can't wait to touch it. I'm only going to be able to get the F1 and my only concern is that stupid 1/4" stereo plug and no Phantum power. I suppose there is a breakout box/XLR adapter/battery sort of thing out there somewhere?

farss wrote on 11/17/2004, 11:45 AM

Which leads me to a request for the Z1UA! It'd be nice to be able to save all those settings to memory stick. The DVX 100 has the same limitation for us in the hire business. I know probably less than 1% of potential purchasers would need this facility and it'd add a bit to the cost the camera so I don't expect it'll happen on cameras at this price point any time soon.
The focussing system though is very nice, from my brief play with the FX1 having the readout of actual distance to focus is truly great. Didn't get enough time to see how that holds up with the WA adaptor on the camera. One thing no one else seems to have mentioned is the lens on the camera, it's a pretty fine effort, it'll focus down to JUST in front of the sunshade, I mean only a few inches.
One thing that I think those using the camera for HD will have to come to grips with is how critical focus is, that's not an issue unique to this camera, it's a general issue with HD on a big screen.
Come to think of it I'm kind of wondering if Sony shouldn't have left autofocus off the pro version altogether, would have probably made for a better manual focussing system and simplified fitting of follow focus gear.
Bob.

farss wrote on 11/17/2004, 11:48 AM

Heaps of balanced adaptors have been available for years, Beachtek seem to be pretty good. The unit mounts securely to the camera and gives you phantom power for the mic(s). Just watch the minipin plug, if it's your own gear you should be fine.
Bob.

Spot|DSE wrote on 11/17/2004, 11:49 AM

I LOVE the Beachtek DX8. Sweet box, phantom, 2 channel, etc.

busterkeaton wrote on 11/17/2004, 1:04 PM

I would guess that there are professionals like documentary makers who will use autofocus for situations where they have no control over what they are filming. Filming something like a street protest would be unpredictable and the ability to swing from one shot to another would be useful.

farss wrote on 11/17/2004, 1:08 PM

We've got the revious model with only phantom power on one mic channel. Must say we've had a lot of trouble with it, really simple thing that they need to address, the cable clamp for the lead to the minipin plug squashes the cable so much one of the wires snaps.
I've repaired this thing several times, even tried filling out the plastic clamp but then there's not enough tension to clamp the cable and the careless users can pull the cable clean out of the box!
This isn't the only unit with that kind of problem and if it's your own kit probably you'll take more care but it's still worth noting.
Between that problem and minipin plugs coming out of cameras I'm pretty down on the whole idea of audio adaptors, at least with say the PD170 you can run external audio into one channel and leave the other for the on camera mic, that way when (yeah not if) things go haywire with your external feed you've always got the track from the on camera mic to fall back on.
Can I also add that these external adaptors aren't that cheap either, so by the time you factor in the cost of the box, the risks involved and the extra bits to take care of the extra cost for a 'pro' versus 'consummer' camera isn't that great. And of course if your using phantom power out of the Beachtek etc then you've got another battery to worry about going flat.
Bob.

farss wrote on 11/17/2004, 2:46 PM

To the best of my knowledge no pro camera has autofocus. From my contact with pro camerapersons the first thing they do when you hand them a camera is switch of autofocus and auto iris, that's assuming the camera has it.
That's why mostly pros complain about color EVFs etc.
Then again that's all these guys do, stare through a viewfinder all day, they can find focus quicker than any autofocus system so to them autofocus is too slow, same goes mostly for exposure, they just live by zebras, and they can hold a camera like it's on a tripod.
Their devotion to their craft is pretty amazing, probably explains why so many fall down manholes, get shot, blown up, run over or fall over cliffs.
Bob.

Laurence wrote on 11/17/2004, 7:50 PM

On my VX-2000, I've been using the adapter made for the the old PD-100. I found it really cheap on eBay and thought it might work. It did. The only problem was that it sits on top of the camera backwards with the Sony logo facing you and the switches facing out. Anyway, one channel of XLR audio with phantom power and a switchable pad on a VX-2000 has been pretty darned cool these last couple of years! Maybe something like the XLR box from the PD10 might work on the FX-1080. I think that Sony has changed their hotshoe format, and they tend to an excessively high price for this type of thing, but it may still be an option at some point.

mhbstevens wrote on 11/18/2004, 12:53 AM

Mr. fars:

I have already "emotionaly" upgraded from the PD-170 to the FX1. Please don't encourage me to jump to the Z1 as my wife still seems to think she need money for food.

Grazie wrote on 11/18/2004, 1:18 AM

Teh! Typical! Food before Art! ? ! ! . .. g ;)