Your Take On Sony HDR-FX7 Technology

A

andybiz_2005

Well-known member
Quote : "The higher-end HDR-FX7 camcorder uses Sony's 3 ClearVid CMOS Sensor technology which hasthree independent sensors to handle RGB color element, to improve color reproduction".

Question : What exactly is the ClearVid CMOS sensor? Doesn't CCDs produce better images generally in videocamcorders?

Quote : "The new AVCHD format is based on the high-quality high-compression MPEG-4 AVC/D.264 video codec, which is similar to the one used on Blu-ray discs".

Question : What so big a deal about MPEG-4, since it gets compressed heavily? Isn't MPEG-2 a better quality format for better quality images & .avi format even better?

Is the FX7 a valid upgrade from the FX1? Thanks in advance.

Andrew
 
Interesting quote since I've heard most Blue Rays are actually using MPEG 2 compression which is why they don't look as good as HD DVDs. Anyway, MPEG-4 AVD is supposedly a better and less compressed codec than MPEG2.

As far as valid upgrade, a lot more people need to get their hands on the camera before we can tell and it really depends on a lot. If all you want is 60i event, wedding, and docutmentary stuff, you may want to stick with your FX1 which is said to be almost a full stop faster and be sharper in 60i (according one report). The hope is that the FX7 is going to be a similar product to the FX1 but with a much more competative progressive mode for narrative films.
 
andybiz_2005 said:
Question : What exactly is the ClearVid CMOS sensor? Doesn't CCDs produce better images generally in videocamcorders?
Click to expand...
Traditionally, yes. But CMOS is coming on strong, which is why organizations like RED are choosing CMOS. It remains to be seen what we think of ClearVid CMOS; the FX7 is probably the first camcorder to use it and it's not released yet.

Question : What so big a deal about MPEG-4, since it gets compressed heavily? Isn't MPEG-2 a better quality format for better quality images & .avi format even better?
Click to expand...
Oh heck no. MPEG-2 is old and tired. MPEG-4 is not the right thing to call AVC though. MPEG-4 is a family of codecs and AVC is just one of many codecs in the MPEG-4 family. AVC is also known as MPEG-4 Level 10 or H.264. And it's two to 2.5 times as efficient as MPEG-2.

Is the FX7 a valid upgrade from the FX1? Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...
It's not out yet, so we don't know.
 
DavidBeier said:
Interesting quote since I've heard most Blue Rays are actually using MPEG 2 compression which is why they don't look as good as HD DVDs. Anyway, MPEG-4 AVD is supposedly a better and less compressed codec than MPEG2.

As far as valid upgrade, a lot more people need to get their hands on the camera before we can tell and it really depends on a lot. If all you want is 60i event, wedding, and docutmentary stuff, you may want to stick with your FX1 which is said to be almost a full stop faster and be sharper in 60i (according one report). The hope is that the FX7 is going to be a similar product to the FX1 but with a much more competative progressive mode for narrative films.
Click to expand...

From what I read the FX7 doesn't have a progressive mode. Not even a fake one (CF25/24).
But to be honest, after watching some clips from the A1 in interlaced mode I was so damn impressed that I got really curious to see what the FX7 can do.
 
Yeah, I'm with rawfa. pretty sure the FX7 doesn't even have a progressive mode. Looks like just 60i on that one. Now the pro version is a different story. That could be a good upgrade over the FX-1 and Z1U.

Only time will tell.
 
Thank you guys for such insightful & interesting comments on the FX7. Hope that this camera will be accepted by videographers. Only time & real tests will tell if it's a "worthy" camera. If I'm not wrong, the FX7 uses a CMOS sensor that is 1/4" right?
 
Your not wrong the fx7/v1 sensors are 1.4" but sony claims that because their cmos their ccd equivalent would be 1/3". Whether or not that's true we have yet to see.
 
Is it right or practically feasible of Sony to compare CCDs & CMOS in such a way since they're different? That their 1/4" CMOS is equivalent to 1/3" CCD? Whatever they claim, it can only be confirmed by practical tests.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top