pxw x70 vs Ex1r

O

originalauthor

Member
To those that owned or used both cameras, which one has the "better" image? I have the Ex1r and I love the detail it has. I am wondering if you think does the pxw 70 has as much detail and filmic image as the Ex1r. I really like everything the pxw x70 offers package wise, just want to know what others think of its image vs the Ex1r. Thanks in advance.
 
I would bump this daily if it wouldn't offend anyone. The EX1r at the price they are now (used obviously) would be my go to ENG cam, the other one more appealing 'cause it's newer and will have 4K at some point, as well as cheaper media. But yes, very curious about this.
 
how do you feel about the limited (optical) zoom on x70? vs longer one on EX? you say lens is better on Ex but picture better on x70...how do you mean?

what about low light/gain/f4 lens on x70 vs more open lens on EX? thanks.
 
Not to sound condescending (if i do) but i never messed with auto on the EX1 to begin with. Let me ask you this, then...with only focus, zoom, or iris assignable to the ring one at a time, have you found run n'gun-style shoots more difficult than with the EX (being in manual and having to adjust many different things moment to moment depending on situation)? Is there a small dial or switch from which you can adjust iris?
 
youre saying theres an iris dial?

i would think for interviews you would just focus normally with peaking, no? thats how i would do it. even if its a man on street quickie interview i would say "hold the eff still while i focus on your eyes and then we'll start."
 
I've actually had trouble getting the face recognition to work, but your enthusiasm for it makes me want to delve into it more. I'm sure it's user error.

No XAVC??? That's all I shoot with it. At this point it still has to be transcoded to ProRes for use in FCPX, but that's pretty easy (and free) with Sony Catalyst Browse. So, not sure what you mean there.
 
thanks. i guess we're used to diffferent production methods...ive never shot an interview where i had to go back and forth like that between closeups to the point where focus was an issue (i would think standing equidistant from/between the people would solve that issue)

I havent been following the 50mb/s side of this discussion that closely...what is the issue exactly? that you have to use a tool to transcode to get that high bitrate? i am used to that from ex1/xdcam using xdcam transfer so whats the big deal? just part of the workflow.
 
I believe you have to use XDCAM transfer with EX1 footage to create prores to use in FCP7 (and earlier versions). That's how I always do it, and was taught to do it.


I guess we just have different shooting philosophies. C100 and DSLRs have shorter DOF than this cam and I (and other colleagues) will always manually focus when doing our interviews. If the cam has peaking it should not be an issue. Unless you're trying to do a walk and talk, people and cam not moving back and forth during the interview should not be an issue.
 
ah. ok. i do NOT do sports stuff so interview for me means sit down/corporate setting almost 100% of the time, maybe man on street at corporate event.

thats weird about the ex footage. why was i taught to transcode to prores before editing? there must be a reason. maybe yiu CAN open it in fcp and work with it but not WELL.
 
The X70 does shoot 50mbps 10-bit 4:2:2. Premiere Pro CC has zero issues with it - no transcoding needed. Catalyst Browse to preview clips. This is a pro, not consumer codec. Why not Vegas? Who knows, but I'll bet it's coming. Why not FCPX? Well, FCPX must have almost everything transcoded to ProRes to work. One might ask why these other developers don't get with the program and upgrade their 5-year-old codec support!

X70 XAVC footage looks great out of the camera with Paul Andregg's color profile tweaks. Edit directly with Premiere CC and enjoy your broadcast quality footage with minimal motion artifacts. :)
 
Josh Bass said:
ah. ok. i do NOT do sports stuff so interview for me means sit down/corporate setting almost 100% of the time, maybe man on street at corporate event.

thats weird about the ex footage. why was i taught to transcode to prores before editing? there must be a reason. maybe yiu CAN open it in fcp and work with it but not WELL.
Click to expand...

Well I dunno. I do a pretty good mix of corporate 'sit downs' and run and
gun interviews with the FS700 and I almost always use manual focus in conjunction
with peaking and 'punch in' to focus, even with my run and gun interviews.
Yup, even sports stuff. Not sure someone 'has' to use autofocus on
run and gun interviews, does their interview subject insist on moving
so much that they have to ride focus to follow him? I mean I get it
for a walk and talk but interviews are usually stationary(ish). I wonder
if auto iris is needed as well as there isn't time to adjust camera settings?
I get run and gun, I did TV news for a period of years. Learning to adjust
focus or iris manually in a quick fashion is a good skill to have though.
 
onemanband-videomaker said:
when this happened? how many years ago? (the TV interviews)? I do TV interviews now , and I use the new stuff with face recognition and tracking. moving between the interviewer and the talent during the interview had to be done in manual before, but now there is the X70 and JVC850 , current century stuff
if you don't know the technology I urge you to try one. and liberate yourself from that hand on the focus ring. Then you can concentrate on framing, composition... good stuff to make it better.

then there is the touch focus on screen of the GH2/4 that's also new stuff. It works well but I don't want to play with my fingers on that little monitor shooting a 2 people interview. so the joystick of the X70 is the best solution , right there on the grip, better than the touch-focus.

now I leave the MF to the focus pullers of the movie sets. As you can see I am "brutal" with the designers and the manufacturer when they do wrong: but in the case of the X70 I applaud Sony for making hands down the best AF tracking system to date. and get this: for a 1 person interview I can even do the third, with no problem, in AF , in studio or out ... imagine that LOL

about the skills : hmmm .. you control the iris shooting sports but only when you are in the press box up there. on the field you don't have time for that, you use the ND tops. excuse me if I doubt your experience now.
Click to expand...

Ummm, ok. I worked in broadcast TV news for about 8 years. About 7 years ago
I started my own business and have done video work for CNN, the US Census Bureau,
American Eagle Outfitters, The Amazing Race and plenty of other clients. So sorry, but
I could care less if you 'doubt my experience now'. I'll stick with the opinions of my
clients and they actually value my 'experience' enough to pay me good money to shoot
their projects. 'Liberating' new technology? I own a FS700, I know about
'technology' and 'face detection autofocus'. You know, the FS700.....it's (gasp)
even a higher end camera than the x70 believe it or not. And believe it or not, it
too has this mighty 'multiple face detection' autofocus. Don't have time to control iris?
How long does it take you to switch iris? Maybe it's the problem of the camera you are
using which makes you switch between focus, iris and zoom on one ring. More professional
cameras let you make adjustments much quicker. That's because each function is
isolated and independent of the others. One place to adjust iris. Another totally separate
ring to adjust focus. Actually works just fine. Or do you imagine that somehow, sports
shooters before this revolutionary development of 'face detection autofocus' were unable
to keep interview subjects in focus?
 
i have to side with alaska on this. i work with much better people higher up the food chain than myself frequently and absolutely do they learn to control their cameras 100% manually, switching between focus/iris/whatever at will, yes even on ENG/run n gun shoots, and yes, even with cams with autofocus and face detection. its a skill you practice until it becomes second nature and you dont think about it, like keyboard shortcuts in your NLE.
 
TomDenver: you have it reversed. FCP7 required most things to be transcoded to ProRes - FCPX will edit almost everything native. The new version of XAVC in the X70 (and a couple of other more expensive Sony cameras, I understand) cannot be directly imported to Vegas or FCPX yet. We're told a plugin or update to FCPX will enable that soon, and you have to assume the next Vegas update will fix that as well. The same situation existed a few years ago for the Canon XF series cameras. It took Canon about 6 months to update their plugin for FCPX. My understanding is that originally Avid would not import these but now Sony has updated that plugin.

1MB - So are you basing your comments that the X70 does not indeed shoot 10 bit 4:2:2 XAVC on the fact that you can't see any difference in the footage? I'm not debating here, just asking for clarification. I've always read that for certain shooting scenarios like for the Canon C100 the AVCHD looks about the same as when recorded to 10 bit 4:2:2 ProRes with a Ninja or something. That doesn't mean the Ninja is not recording what it says it does I don't think. If it's a pretty static subject the advantage of the better codec doesn't come into play. And if you're not doing much image manipulation in post the higher codec may also not become obvious.

I won't get to it soon, but it does sound like an interesting test to try the two modes and compare. But on the other hand, whatever the highest quality on the X70 is, it's definitely better than my Canon XF100 in almost every way, and only cost 2/3 the price.
 
I agree with all of the above. You can't necessarily "see" the improved codec in just any situation; there are certain times when it will manifest itself. Taking the C100 native vs Samurai/prores example, a client of mine has done it both ways and says you can't see much difference except in regards to noise in very dark areas (worse on AVCHD). From what I've heard (HERE!), codecs really strut their stuff when they can handle a ton of movement and fine detail simultaneously without pixellating. Also aggressive color correction. You're not necessarily gonna see skin tones looking better or more detail or finer color gradations or anything.
 
onemanband-videomaker said:
so why are you talking to me then? You have zero experience shooting sports
Click to expand...

O really? You sound awfully sure of yourself there. For your information,
I shoot high school and college basketball, hockey, high school football (American)
and USA Gymnastics. But, I can actually work a camera without going into mighty
'face detection' mode. See, if I am following game or meet action (fast moving
athletes) I can stop down to say F8 and have deep depth of field. But for 'after
action is over athlete interviews' I can open up and shoot shallow depth of field
because in an interview, the subjects stand in one place and don't run around.
Simple really. Or do you really think that people who cover professional sports for
ESPN are using 'face detection' for their work?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top