OT: Got impartial professional camcorder review?

Rich Parry wrote on 7/8/2014, 12:37 AM

I’m having difficulty deciding on the Sony FDR-AX100 at $2000, the Sony HDR-CX900 at $1500, and the Canon HF G30 at $1400. Cost is not the issue.

I suspect all will meet my needs of shooting wildlife, landscapes, and nature outdoors in National Parks with occasional family video at the beach. I don’t need 4K or Night Vision but not adverse to having it as an unused feature. Who knows, maybe I need it and don't know it.

I have found dozens of reviews on the web from many sources, B&H Reviews, Amazon Reviews, CNET reviews, YouTube reviews and for the most part, the people with a particular camera like what they have.

I am looking for an professional impartial review of camcorders similar to what DPReview does for still image cameras or what Consumer Reports does for washing machines.
http://www.dpreview.com/

When looking at a product I know nothing about, I don’t know what questions to ask. I don’t own a camcorder and have no basis for comparison. I'm a DSLR video guy ready to purchase a dedicated video camera.

Something as simple as what the hot/cold shoe supports may be of interest or knowing the brightness of the OLED viewfinder or the size of the buttons. I find reading what a camcorder professional likes and doesn't like useful. “OldSmoke” on this forum likes the AX-100 and gives good reasons. I’d still like to see a full review from a source that routinely rates camcorders and doesn't just say how wonderful the camera is.

Got any suggestion for full reviews from an impartial professional review source?

Thanks in advance,
Rich

Comments

deusx wrote on 7/8/2014, 1:22 AM

You don't need any reviews. Considering those prices you mention just get one GH4 and you have excellent stills, video, 4K all in one camera.

GH4 really has no competition under $5000.

On the internetz everybody is an impartial professional, right?

OldSmoke wrote on 7/8/2014, 7:27 AM

Parry.

Have you read my review on B&H? That are the only issues I have with the camera. The G30 was good and had plenty of features but the 1" sensor in the AX100 is just so much better. Sure, GH4 and A7s are great cameras but how much would a 18x zoom lens cost for one of those and how big will it be? And how about audio? Not that the build in mic on the AX100 is "awesome" but it sure does a better job then anything the GH4 has. By the time you have it all "rigged" up, the GH4 is no longer something I would like to carry along on my trips.
The AX100 is very much an underrated camera and in my opinion DSLRs are way overrated.
As for AX100 vs CX900. I initially thought that 4K will be something to experiment with but I fell in love with it. The 4K footage has so much more room in post, even at 4:2:0 you can do so much more grading work that looks stunning when converted to 1080.
You can find a bit more about my AX100 and what use it with at the bottom of this thread http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?Forum=4&MessageID=899296

ushere wrote on 7/8/2014, 7:54 AM

+ 1 oldsmoke

and the op was after a video camera, not a dslr.

deusx wrote on 7/8/2014, 9:58 AM

GH4 is a video camera. It's not a DSLR, it's just shaped like one. Shoots great stills and there's 4K as a bonus.

Hey I'm the one who said that "DSLR" video basically looks as good as HV20, not really better, but if I were buying a new camera GH4 would still make the most sense because if I'm going to pay $2000 why not have a camera that excels at both, video and stills. Ability to swap lenses and 4K is a bonus too.

I'm sure that AX100 shoots video that's just as good as GH4, but I doubt it's true for stills and you are stuck with one lens.

Anyway he's not going to find impartial reviews. Even the DP review he mentions is bull$hit. They are owned by Amazon and they just want to sell you stuff. It's impossible to tell who's paid by whom. Internet is just one big bull$hit churning machine.

The only way to know is to go to a store, get your hands on these cameras, and try them out.

OldSmoke wrote on 7/8/2014, 10:09 AM

deux

Trust me, at 20MP it does shoot amazing stills too. One lens has it's pros and cons as does the ability to change lenses but a Carl Zeiss lens is certainly not a bad thing to have. You keep on revering to the $2000 but I doubt you get a GH4 + lens + mic package at that value that is as good as the AX100. I see the AX100 the other way around, you get a 4K camera that finally shoots great stills too. And no, the GH4 is not a video camera. I am almost certain it would overheat when recording a 1hr event in 4K.

BruceUSA wrote on 7/8/2014, 11:09 AM

Gh4 is no question is a top contender in video quality. But $2000 alone won't get you all the goodies. A 12-35 f/2.8 lens run about $1400 alone. AX100 is hard to beat for it 4k video is impressive. Depends on your shooting style. If you like the option of being able to change lenses> GH4 is a good choice. Othervise go AX100 4K video camcorder.

Laurence wrote on 7/8/2014, 11:37 AM

Another vote for the GH4 here. If you don't need 4k, GH3s are going pretty cheap. I don't really understand how one could consider anything else. As far as changing lenses goes, I have been using a 45mm 1.8 Olympus prime on interviews and beauty b-roll shots. It would be really hard for me to go back to a single lens camera. It would be giving up that look that is just so important to my work now.

OldSmoke wrote on 7/8/2014, 11:39 AM

Laurence
So how much did you spend on your whole setup?

wwjd wrote on 7/8/2014, 12:53 PM

I'm in at about $2700: GH4, 12-35mm 2,8 lens ($850), 2 extra batteries and 2 32GB cards, ready to go. (the BM4K was $3000, with nothing else)

The AX100 seems great but would orphan all my lenses, which I now use on the GH4 for the way I shoot. AX100 also very proprietary with memory cards and hot shoe. Also lacks 96fps slo mo, and full 4096 Cinema 4K, which is all I shoot in.

Not knocking AX100, it's epic, didn't fit MY needs though.

I'm sure next year, 4K video cameras will have twice the features and swappable lens, etc for about $750

OldSmoke wrote on 7/8/2014, 2:40 PM

The AX100 uses standard SD cards, SDXC in fact and all you need is fast ones able to handle 60MB data stream, nothing proprietary here. It also does 120fps slow mo but only at 1280x720. Cinema 4K only makes sense to me once I have a TV that can support it, 4K at 60fps, that would be nice. What I am looking for now is a wide angle converter for it to get those epic wide landscape shots.

Rich Parry wrote on 7/9/2014, 12:38 AM

Oldsmoke,

You got me "off the fence". I just ordered the AX100 from B&H. I got the external battery charger also. That should get me started. I think this camera is more than I need for now, but I can grow into it.

Regarding the GH4 option that was suggested, I already own one of the very best DSLRs with more than $10K in professional lenses. One of the main reasons for the AX100 is to get away from carrying 30 lbs of glass with me. I'm going to wilderness areas of Alaska and weight restrictions are similar to weight restrictions when going to the moon. Just joking, but you get the idea.

I ordered the camera Next Day Air, so it won't be long before I have it in my hands.

Thanks,
Rich in San Diego

OldSmoke wrote on 7/9/2014, 7:36 AM

Parry
I am sure you will like it and you can always send it back and get something else, that is what I like about B&H. You may want to get two more items, one is the Multi Interface Shoe to cold shoe adapter and the Sony shotgun mic. Especially in the wilderness you want to capture the sound coming from the direction the lens is pointing too. The Sony shotgun I use is perfect for the AX100 and has great sound too.

Laurence wrote on 7/9/2014, 8:58 AM

I got the GH3 when they were new and going for the list price of $1200. The same thing with the lenses. They are much cheaper now. Here is my basic camera kit and the current B&B prices:

GH3: $1097.99
12-35mm f2.8 lens: $999.99
14-140 lens: $629.99
Olympus 45mm f1.8: $399.00

I also use a Panasonic 20 mm f1.7 but if I was on a budget, that is my least used lens: $ 399.99

The 12-35 is my general purpose indoor lens. The 14-140 has a polarizer on permanently and goes on the camera as soon as I step outside. The 45mm is used on interview and headshots, and the 20 mm is used for wider body portraits (mostly on stills since f2.8 is as shallow a depth of field as I'm comfortable with on wide video shots).

Yes I could cover almost everything with the 12-35 bit it would look nowhere near as pretty on the interviews and Beaty shots. Outdoors I like the reach of the longer lens and prefer smaller apertures anyway. Switching lenses is just as fast as screwing on the polarizer.

Laurence wrote on 7/9/2014, 9:06 AM

If I was buying now it would obviously be a GH4 instead of a GH3, but at the HD resolutions I work with, there is little reason to upgrade. A used GH3 would be a good deal however. Also, if you are happy with HD resolutions and no weatherproofing, a Panasonic G6 is worth considering at $749.99 including an entry level lens:

[Link= http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/968554-REG/panasonic_dmc_g6kk_lumix_dmc_g6_mirrorless_micro.html]

I bought this for my daughter (at a somewhat lower Christmas special price) as a Christmas/birthday present and it is a fantastic camera. Pretty much indistinguishable from the GH3 or GH4 at HD resolutions.

OldSmoke wrote on 7/9/2014, 9:33 AM

Laurence
I think you missed the OP's point. He has a very high end DSLR setup but doesn't want to carry all the equipment around. The AX100 has a fantastic lens and in 4K is on par with the GH4 but with all the benefits of being a video camera.

Laurence wrote on 7/9/2014, 11:00 AM

Yeah, I just read the original post again and I am off base...look, a squirrel ...what was the subject again... ;-)

OldSmoke wrote on 7/10/2014, 11:58 AM

Parry

Did you get your AX100? Any first impressions?

Laurence wrote on 7/10/2014, 7:56 PM

The footage from that camera that I'm seeing on YouTube looks fantastic.

OldSmoke wrote on 7/10/2014, 11:52 PM

Laurence

Here are some samples straight from the camera if you like to play around with it.
http://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0Bz4okF1D_ux5V1FnQUxnVGpEZkE&usp=sharing

deusx wrote on 7/11/2014, 1:32 AM

>>>I think you missed the OP's point. He has a very high end DSLR setup but doesn't want to carry all the equipment around. The AX100 has a fantastic lens and in 4K is on par with the GH4 but with all the benefits of being a video camera.<<<<

He has a Canon 5D and that is very low end as far as video goes. You can get a $500 Panasonic camera that shoots better video than that.

GH4 with a lens is not exactly a lot to carry around. I don't see AX100 as being much smaller or more convenient. He should go to a store and try them out, see which one feels better and get that. Video quality from both will be the same thing so it's more about which one feels better and whether he needs more lens options GH4 gives him.

Serena Steuart wrote on 7/11/2014, 2:43 AM

Canon 5D? Can't see where that is stated. Anyway he has bought the AX100.

The GH4 has good reviews, certainly, but not universal. For example: >" I quite like the GH4's features, but found the noise level of the
small 3.7um photosites to be higher than I'm comfortable with. Even at low ISOs there's busy-ness in the shadows, which displeases me. Shooting 4K for HD helps (and knocking it down to h.264 afterwards tends to hide any remaining noise quite nicely)."

But as with any bit of gear, if it pleases you then other views are irrelevant.

ushere wrote on 7/11/2014, 8:57 AM

i sometimes get the feeling the repetitious praise of GHx cameras is more a self-reinforcement of a purchase rather than an objective view of the practicality of such cameras for commercial video production...

of course everyone is entitled to their opinion ;-)

OldSmoke wrote on 7/11/2014, 12:27 PM

of course everyone is entitled to their opinion ;-)

And I share yours.

John_Cline wrote on 7/11/2014, 1:56 PM

OldSmoke, that's some good looking AX100 footage, unfortunately, 30P just isn't enough temporal resolution for my purposes, I guess I'll have to spring for the FDR-AX1 at a minimum. $4,500 isn't too bad.