Official Sony NEX-VG10 Thread

hpmoon said:
My gosh. I expected to come here finding field-smart professionals, but all the Sony hate here sounds like the usual routine on tech forums where people basically shoot down anything that doesn't match what they own (perhaps because the memory of what they bought is too recently burned into their brains, and their wallets).

(...)
Click to expand...

I agree. All this hate is quite annoying and, to say the least in a word, unprofessional. What can the haters write about one of the most recent Sony's sales success (EX1/3) or Sony pushing the 3D sales as same as HD before, in FIFA World Cup editions? Crap?! :laugh: ;-)
 
Aside from the fact that, as I already mentioned, you can easily convert from 60p to any of those formats...

edit: Going from 60p to 30p looks a hell of a lot better than going from 60i to 30p, at least in my experience. Dropping every other frame looks a hell of a lot better than interpolating frames or filling in the blanks.
 
dcloud said:
24p is here to stay. get over it.
Click to expand...

No.

I'm especially fond of this comment:
robertrogoz said:
I think 60p is far more useful then 24p. 99.9% of the projects will have web and/or DVD distribution, so 60p makes more sense then 24. Anyway- I think 24p looks jittery with any motion. I don't undestand why people are so stuck on this 24p rate anyway. News in the 50's and 60's were shot on 16mm and I don't see anyone demanding shooting news in 24p on 16mm. times change - get on with it.
Click to expand...
 
hpmoon said:
My gosh. I expected to come here finding field-smart professionals, but all the Sony hate here sounds like the usual routine on tech forums where people basically shoot down anything that doesn't match what they own (perhaps because the memory of what they bought is too recently burned into their brains, and their wallets). ...
Click to expand...

Hi HPMoon: You seem to be confusing criticism with hate. You also seem unaware or reluctant to appreciate that many of the folks posting here are pros with years of hard-earned experience. But mostly you seem intent on defending Sony's latest inanimate object against mostly-accurate criticism. You have an interesting hobby.

... 1. This whole 24p lust needs to die for good. Anyone shooting more than soccer matches will be laying down these tracks into a NLE application like Premiere Pro or, if you're low-tech, Final Cut Pro. The 60i stream will interpolate perfectly to 24p if you really think you need that. As an aside, though, do you really think that the best celluloid has to offer is jittery motion? How about grain, detail, saturation, fidelity? Let's decide we've arrived in the 21st Century, OK? ...
Click to expand...

In addition to it's lack of 24p capability, this new Sony cam doesn't do 30p or 60p either. Only last-century 60i (or 50i PAL).

No, 60i does not "interpolate perfectly" to 24p. If it were easily, cleanly or cost-effectively possible there'd be no need for 24p-capable cameras. And the 1/60th or 1/50th shutter typically used when shooting 60i would be non-standard and the resulting motion blur would look "wrong" when the video is converted to 24p (where a ~1/48th sec. shutter is most-often used).

"Low tech FCP": Now you're the one who's hating?

... 2. The time has also arrived to stop defending those Canon 5DmkII and 7D SLRs as movie-making machines. They're awful (and it doesn't matter that you own one). And, higher bitrates on those toys do not equate to superior quality overall, because the codec is the poison. And yes, you will not find those rolling-shutter "jello" issues using AVCHD, not at 17 Mbps and especially not now at 24 Mbps. ...
Click to expand...

Perhaps you've somehow missed what motion picture professionals worldwide have achieved with video-capable DSLRs for the past 2 years or so? Despite DSLRs' imperfections (and, no cam is perfect, they are all a collection of compromises), pros have been creating huge quantities of beautiful work with them. You may wish to take another look because most of your statements seem grossly inaccurate.

Further, not only does this new Sony cam seem to have merely one advantage over DSLRs (a headphone jack), it also has most if not all of their disadvantages (skew, partial frame exposure, alias/moire, no XLRs, etc.), plus a big disadvantage of its own (interlace only), _and_ it costs more than 3 popular models already on the market. Again: This new Sony cam's design seems squarely aimed at well-heeled gadget-happy consumers who only want to make home movies with occasional narrow DOF. It should have little or no appeal to video production & "indie" cinema shooters who've thought it through.

... 3. This camcorder is moderately revolutionary for independent filmmakers. RED are dead to me, who should go back to making overpriced Oakley sunglasses. You won't see their Scarlet for months more, after their billionth delay, and I guarantee you that the price will get jacked up a third time. And Panasonic's camcorder (which I admit may edge out this model) will cost as much as buying three (that's "3x") of these. I'd hate to be Panasonic today, assuming they lacked espionage. ...
Click to expand...

Sony's new <$2K camcorder has nothing in common with anything which might be considered a "revolutionary" product. It's _only_ advance relative to "similar" products in its general price range is the inclusion of a headphone jack for monitoring audio while recording. Its Achilles heel is its limitation of shooting interlaced video only. Given it's higher price compared to "similar" (large sensor, interchangeable lens) cams such as the T2i, GH1 & 7D, IMHO it's a poor value.

... 4. Did I mention we all need to get over the 24p fetish? ...
Click to expand...

Yes, more than once. Why?

... 5. For an obligatory imposition of creative conscience now, a reminder: Everyone needs to just get out there and shoot, do it well, and find interesting subjects rather than weddings and ballgames and birthday parties and corporate training videos. Interesting subjects take you much farther than the nominal distinctions between one camcorder and the next. Even if you make it big at festivals, you'll be screening the damn stuff in DVD format anyway. ...
Click to expand...

Folks who've done a lot of video shooting understand the huge difference small details in specs can make. In 2010, things such as a lack of 24p, 30p and 60p are not "nominal". 1/60 (or 1/50) frame rates are typically only appropriate for certain kinds of scenes or productions. Not only is it silly for Sony offer a camera in this price range with this limitation in 2010, why would a pro choose to use it over cams which don't have the same limitation, especially when some of these cams cost considerably less?

... 6. Everyone is overlooking the importance of Sony's new microphone array, which also incorporates a new Dolby tradename called "Digital Stereo Creator." Heard of it? No one but Sony is implementing it in this manner. ...
Click to expand...

If I'm not mistaken, DSC is a common feature in AVCHD cams, including the GH1. This new Sony may or may not implement it in a new useful way, but on-camera microphones are generally too far away from the subject sound source to be useful for anything other than hearing the cam operator's handling of the cam or, if you're lucky, ambient sound -- which is often (but not always) useless in a pro shoot.

... 7. Literally the only insightful, productive comment in this whole thread is the caution about shallow depth of field. Strangely, Sony abandoned its best-in-the-industry touchscreen viewfinder interface for this model, which would have helped dramatically for pulling focus (i.e., you just tap the part of the frame you want focused, to the extent you use the side swing-out viewfinder). And two other small disappointments that would have kept this Sony compatible with other accessories: no remote control jack and no Active Interface Shoe (both are Sony proprietary technologies that work well). ...
Click to expand...

As a longtime pro shooter I will use the word hate here: I _hate_ (hate!) fingerprints all over my primary monitor/viewfinder. I also hate the inevitable visual bump that results when a real or virtual button is pressed on a lightweight cam. Touchscreen interfaces have their place, but IMHO they're rarely useful on a screen attached to a handycam, DSLR or any low-mass cam while it's recording.

... 8. Since appears to be the go-to bitching thread within the SLR forum, I've started a new one ("OFFICIAL") in the appropriate forum: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?p=2047468
Click to expand...

Hopefully it will be a fount of knowledge. Have a nice day.
 
Last edited:
CMcMahon said:
An issue that I've found with touchscreen focus (I have a HMC40, and I use that for most of my shots) is that, unless the camcorder is mounted on something, it's nearly impossible to tap the screen (regardless of whether or not you're zoomed in) without the camera shaking somewhat.
Click to expand...
Agreed; a REDMOTE with the Scarlet could have solved that if it weren't such a useless toy - it controls the Scarlet via Wi-Fi but it lacks the ability to actually show you what you're filming.

I do use a tripod for my touch-screen focusing, and that's where I find it useful. But even so, I have to tap it like a house of cards. Hopefully soon any LCD viewfinder out-of-the-box will be a removable panel de rigeur.
 
dbwolfe said:
hpmoon, really? a lot of your comments make no sense, final cut lo tech? 60i works perfectly? really? interlaced for acquisition sucks, period. fine if you don't like 24p, but it's 2010, all aquisition should be progressive, temporal resolution is up to the creator/desired look.

and "no jello in AVCHD at 17mbs and especially not at 24mbs"?! really? are you that thick? compression type has nothing to with skew. skew is dependent on frame rate and sensor refresh rate.

why am I even explaining this to you? I can't believe how erroneous some of your comments are.
Click to expand...


I agree, i usually only shoot 24p, so if your not fond of it, then you buy this crappy gimmick from sony, who I have never liked, and have never had luck with their products. Im floored by most of your post and how ignorant it is. WOW:shocked:
 
William_Robinette said:
I really really hope you just forgot to add the </sarcasm> tag to your post.

Because if not, well... wow.
Click to expand...
dbwolfe said:
hpmoon, really? a lot of your comments make no sense, final cut lo tech? 60i works perfectly? really?
Click to expand...

stip said:
@hpmoon: yeah, sorry, thanks for stopping by and sharing your insight
Click to expand...

This feels rather like an exclusive club where opinions have coagulated into a group hug of BNC-connected, last-century shoulder-mount veterans...
 
maranfilms said:
I agree, i usually only shoot 24p, so if your not fond of it, then you buy this crappy gimmick from sony, who I have never liked, and have never had luck with their products. Im floored by most of your post and how ignorant it is. WOW:shocked:
Click to expand...

Well one thing is for sure, we know who the target user group is for :)
 
hpmoon said:
1. This whole 24p lust needs to die for good. Anyone shooting more than soccer matches will be laying down these tracks into a NLE application like Premiere Pro or, if you're low-tech, Final Cut Pro. The 60i stream will interpolate perfectly to 24p if you really think you need that. As an aside, though, do you really think that the best celluloid has to offer is jittery motion? How about grain, detail, saturation, fidelity? Let's decide we've arrived in the 21st Century, OK?
Click to expand...

Actually 60i is the preferred format for sports and 24p is for drama; the soccer analogy is backwards...

60i doesn't interpolate perfectly to 24p, your comment is incorrect. You can't convert 60i to 24p without introducing motion artifacts, unless you de-interlace, which halves the effective resolution. You can use optical flow software, but it doesn't always work properly and takes forever.

If you really like the motion in 60i you must love these new TV's that can display a DVD at 220Hz or whatever. Personally, I hate it.
 
on the contrary hpmoon, a bunch of "BNC-connected, last-century shoulder-mount veterans..." would actually welcome a 60i camera with open arms.

we're not trying to bully anyone, just stopping the spread of gross mis-information in it's tracks. the "no jello vision in AVCHD" comment pretty much negates your relevance to the discussion anyway.

and steventimothy, 60p, not 60i is the preferred format for sports, that's why ESPN and ABC chose 720p over 1080i, b/c both networks show a lot of sports.

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tvlistings/espnhd/espnHDStory?id=1614556

end of transmission
 
Last edited:
Barry_Green said:
It's not a filmmaker camera, it's a hybrid video/still camera. For those wanting a Disneyworld camera that they can take stills, and also full-motion video, it's probably fairly ideal. And 60i would be no problem for those users at all, and may even be preferable.

It's approaching the hybrid from the video side instead of the stills side like everyone else has done. Interesting and may do quite well in the marketplace, we'll see.
Click to expand...
After reading all I have about this camera, I think Barry nailed it perfectly. (The highlight in the quote is mine for emphasis.)
 
steventimothy said:
You can't convert 60i to 24p without introducing motion artifacts, unless you de-interlace, which halves the effective resolution.
Click to expand...
The critical flaw in your argument is that - you must have forgotten - you are talking about halving the resolution of more the double the frames per second (i.e., 60) which interpolate to the equivalent of 30p. The squabbling about how that's imperfect is much ado about almost nothing. Get out there and make films, folks.
 
hpmoon said:
I can answer that. Generally you'll find that creative artists aren't funded by brides and grooms, corporate training videos and advertisements for local cable. Do you see where I'm going with this?
Click to expand...

I'm a creative artist who isn't funded by anything other than my own cash. For $2000 I'd take a 7D, 550D or a GH1 over this ANYDAY. I do A LOT of visual effects and 3D integration from Blender using After Effects. Interlaced content is VERY hard and time consuming to work with. I used to shoot using a camera that only did interlaced and when I got a camera that could shoot progressive, I've never looked back.

Until this camera is in the hands of you and others, no one knows how it will perform. Sure, we can make an educated guess based on other available products using the same architecture, but the lack of a progressive mode just makes it not as versatile and for many, like me, useless for *my* needs.
 
hpmoon said:
I can answer that. Generally you'll find that creative artists aren't funded by brides and grooms, corporate training videos and advertisements for local cable. Do you see where I'm going with this?
Click to expand...

What would you use it for mainly?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top