Ben_B
Veteran
However there are many people wandering around with their D40s and kit lens firing flash bulbs into fish tanks. Sigh.
Official Sony NEX-VG10 Thread
- Thread starter e-steve
- Start date
However there are many people wandering around with their D40s and kit lens firing flash bulbs into fish tanks. Sigh.
rogar-Kriz(DBG):deltoidjohn
Veteran
You say it is not a real substantial price break; why then is it an issue to pay the extra?
Sony have long had the dual model system and I would not be terribly surprised if we see a pro version of this new camera, with XLR's and 24p. I like thier separation of lines because it means you get to choose whether or not you need certain features.
Steve Castle
Well-known member
I'd say the E-mount, like the M43rds, is actually a benefit for real enthusiasts being that you can mount pretty much any lens via adapter due to the short FFD. In fact, the E-mount is more suitable for lenses being that you aren't dealing with a 2.0x crop factor like the m43.
However, the lack of 24P is just plain perplexing. Its obviously just software, and its a fairly common feature even in low-end camcorders.
If they only implemented these software features that really don't cost them anything, they could have seriously have hurt the AG100 in sales even before it was released. Let's consider that the AG100 is expected be $5k, it'll probably be a more better more focused device but this is a $2k camera with a 18-200mm lens (for comparison, a 7D with an 18-200mm kit is $2,300). Its reasonably priced.
And this camera has a lot going for it, its got the right form factor, its surprisingly small, its got an APS-C sensor, short FFD mount, and low-light for these NEX cameras have shown to be very good. It probably won't have uncompressed HDMI out like the AG100, but aliasing issues will exist with any dSLR sensor camera due to the necessity of line-skipping (maybe Panasonic will have a solution). Yet the thing that really hurts this are simple things that can be added via software.
shaocaholica
Well-known member
So? This point gets brought up over and over and it doesn't make sense. Just because its a broadcast standard doesn't make it any nicer of an acquisition format. Besides, broadcasters are fine using content shot at 24 and 30/60p. Ever watch primetime shows?
Also, what broadcaster is going to use a NEX camcorder? Are you implying Sony is marketing these to broadcasters?
What about Joe family man whos more likely to buy this thing? Is he really going to 'broadcast' his kids birthday party or soccer game at the local TV station?
Peter J. DeCrescenzo
Veteran
And Panasonic, Canon, etc. will have similar or better models for less cost soon, too. Same as it ever was.
The bottom line for me concerning this new Sony handycam is that it's one big step forward -- it has a headphone jack which can (probably) be used during recording; yea! -- and one huge step backward -- it only records 60i interlaced video. Ick!
Sorry, I got carried away with the bold, underlined, italic thing.
Move along, nothing to see here, unless you're a well-heeled consumer who wants only to make home movies for playback on your big-screen HDTV. For prosumer & pro users the T2i, GH1 & 7D (perhaps together with an external audio recorder) are much better values.
Last edited:
William_Robinette
Shallow Member
Too true.
I don't understand why this is relevant? Joe Schmo is going to play these back from a computer, blu-ray player, PS3, or the camera itself. Aside from the camera as an option all those avenues provide 1080p capability.
Peter J. DeCrescenzo
Veteran
Still photographers rightly see FF as a benefit, but for motion video, FF's typically extreme narrow DOF makes pulling focus a daunting challenge during a take. And a follow-focus rig only makes this job slightly easier, not easy. Big difference.
Also, compared to the most common 35mm motion picture format, the m4/3 crop factor is closer to 1.18, not 2.0x. See:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=2005971&postcount=105
If you're shooting motion video, the above points are important.
This new Sony handycam offers nothing to prosumer & pro motion video shooters that a T2i, GH1 or 7D can't do better & less expensively, except the Sony has a built-in headphone jack. Use an external audio recorder with a DSLR to address that issue, and don't shoot $%#@&* interlaced video unless your client pays you extra to do it. ;-)
The NEX-5 sensor shoots video that has close to no rolling-shutter "jello" issues, so I expect that this new NEX-10VG camera will be the same or better.
Say hello to stable no-Jello handheld action shots!
Peter J. DeCrescenzo
Veteran
Because, if you're looking to get a camcorder that does 60p, you can get a HMC150 for the same price (well, about $100 less on B&H) as the AX2000. Why spend $500 more to get the same capability?
And, that being said, let's say that you just want 24p. Here are your options:
AX2000 - $3500 - 24p over 60i
HMC150 - $3400 - 24p native
NX5U - $4000 - 24p native
So, once again, where's the incentive in buying either Sony camcorder? You either pay an extra $500 or you get to deal with pulldown.
Samuel H
Major Contributor
the only advantage I see on this new sony over a t2i is that it probably has good enough autofocus while recording
apart from that, it clearly looses because of:
* interlaced
* no 24 fps
* price
* probably, low bitrate
let's all hail the new king of cheap wedding videos
apart from that, it clearly looses because of:
* interlaced
* no 24 fps
* price
* probably, low bitrate
let's all hail the new king of cheap wedding videos
cowpunk52
Veteran
Actually, the NEX 5 has no less rolling shutter skew than any other CMOS sensor camcorder. Test one out and an equivalent focal length against a GH1 or 7D and you'll see. Expect this camcorder to be the same, with the same aliasing & moire issues.
This camera will most certainly not be a suitable replacement for a 7D or GH1 for anybody - it's clearly marketed as a strictly consumer product. As far as the autofocus goes, it probably won't be any different from the speed of the NEX series in video mode. And, I don't know about anybody else, but I really hate the form factor. With a zoom lens on this camera, balance will be severely front-heavy; and with no zoom rocker, it will be very difficult for one-handed shooting. If I have to have one hand on the lens during shooting, I'd rather have a DSLR form factor. Go ahead, put your hands up in front of you and try it yourself - imagine the weight on the far side of your palm. It's really not comfortable at all. Maybe it will be lighter than I imagine... just checked; it will be almost three pounds with lens and battery.
I don't know, will consumers want to buy rails and always use a tripod? I don't know, I'm really not impressed at all. This camera just doesn't make sense to me... but then again, Sony products rarely do; they seem to just throw as much crap against the wall as they can, and wait to see what sticks.
Last edited:
hpmoon
Carbonite Member
What's with all the hate?
What's with all the hate?
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).
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?
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.
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.
4. Did I mention we all need to get over the 24p fetish?
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.
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.
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).
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
What's with all the hate?
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).
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?
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.
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.
4. Did I mention we all need to get over the 24p fetish?
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.
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.
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).
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
robertrogoz
Carbonite Member
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.
shaocaholica
Well-known member
please explain how 60p makes more sense for web and DVD.
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.
60p can be easily converted to 30p (or 24p, even) for web, and 60i for DVDs. To do the former, you just drop every other frame (or drop some frames and interpolate others, in the case of 24p). For the latter, you take half the lines of one frame and half the lines of another, and put them in a 30fps, 60i stream.
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.
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.
Last edited:
robertrogoz
Carbonite Member
just google it in and you'll find the answers.