Sony 4K camera coming under $5,000 ?

Samuel H said:
If this thing is using the central 8.3 Mpix out of that 18.9 Mpix 1/2.3" sensor, that's not even a 1/3" sensor.
Click to expand...

You've got that wrong. 1/2.3" sensor is almost a 1/2" sensor. Significantly bigger than a 1/3" sensor. What they were trying to make is a 4K PMW-EX1 that will allow reframing and removing motion for ENG work.

Cameras such as the HF-S100, HF-S200, etc use a 1/2.3" chip with fast glass and produce a very nice HD image, but aren't great in low light.
 
Last edited:
Yes, I know. But this 1/2.3" sensor has 18.9 megapixels, and I think they're only using a central crop of 8.3 mpix, and discarding all the rest. So, they're using an area that's smaller than a 1/3" sensor.
Which matches the focal length conversion they themselves published: 7.68x crop factor.
 
Duke M. said:
You've got that wrong. 1/2.3" sensor is almost a 1/2" sensor. Significantly bigger than a 1/3" sensor.
Click to expand...
You're right in that a 1/2.3" is almost a 1/2" sensor, but actually Samuel didn't get it wrong, in fact he's exactly right. The overall sensor is close to 1/2", but that's irrelevant because they're ignoring most of the sensor and only using a windowed crop out of the central portion. And that windowed crop is about the same size (actually barely smaller than) a 1/3" sensor.

This is easily verifiable by using the crop factor calculations. In the B&H article they post the lens focal range as 4.1mm on the wide end, and Sony says that's equivalent to 29.5mm. That means that the actually-used imaging area of the chip is 1/3" in size.

Claiming the larger sensor size is incredibly misleading marketing.
What they were trying to make is a 4K PMW-EX1 that will allow reframing and removing motion for ENG work.
Click to expand...
And their incredibly misleading marketing appears to be working. But Duke, now that you know the truth and that it is not, in fact, a 4K EX1 (a three-chip 1/2" product) but is instead a single-chip 1/3" product, how do you feel about the way they've marketed it to you?

Doesn't make it a bad camera; we'll have to see how it performs. I don't see how a 1/3" 4K sensor is going to produce high quality, but then again I never would have thought we'd see good 1080p out of a 1/4" sensor, and the AC90/HMC40 deliver really sharp video, so maybe respectable 4K is possible off a 1/3" chip too. It would seem highly optimistic to expect high-quality 4K out of a single 1/3" sensor, but the proof will be in the footage when it's released.

I was just hoping Sony was past using blatant, instantly-disprovable deception in their marketing. Oh well, leopards and spots and all...
 
Barry_Green said:
I was just hoping Sony was past using blatant, instantly-disprovable deception in their marketing. Oh well, leopards and spots and all...
Click to expand...
Panasonic did the same thing with their X920, which they claimed had three 1/2.3" sensors even though its crop factor of 11.7 is for a much much smaller 1/4" sensor. The take away is that we should look at the crop factor and ignore the claimed sensor size.
 
I always thought the X920 thing had to be a typo, because I told anyone and everyone that it was impossible that a camera that size would have such sensors. Bogus info from any company is either irresponsible or misleading.

The lens focal length and the stated "field of view" equivalency do indeed reveal all.
 
One major design defect in both Sony 4K cams is that the LCD screen sits underneath the cold shoe, so if you have mounted anything there you have to remove it to open or close the LCD. Big PIA if you are trying to move between quick shots but in a crowd so need to protect equipment.
 
This is just like the FX1 which comes with an extension to clip into the cold shoe so that it doesn't get in the way. I used this on my FX1 all the time and never took it off. One of the unpacking videos shows the part.
 
Similar situation happened to the AC90 when Panasonic decided to use 1/4.7 as the chip sizes instead of 1/4.1 like they've been using which led a lot of people to believe the chips had to be a bit smaller than what's in the X900 even though the lens specifications were almost the same. That kind of confusion could have easily made some people not want to buy the AC90 if it wasn't for a lot of positive reports from users. Yes it obvioustly gotten worse with the release of the X920.

All companies really should make chip specs easier for people to understand. Sometimes the marketing of products can go too far.
 
Last edited:
All the major camera companies are offenders. For example, the Canon HF G30 claims a 1/2.84" sensor but has the 7.84 crop factor of a smaller sensor. The JVC GC-PX100 claims a 1/2.3" sensor but has the 8.8 crop factor of a much smaller sensor. Etc. I'm surprised there hasn't been a class action law suit on this issue.
 
Sony FDR-AX1 vs JVC GY-HMQ10

Sony FDR-AX1 vs JVC GY-HMQ10

Based on published specifications alone, I find the Sony FDR-AX1 disappointing. It's significantly larger and heavier than the JVC GY-HMQ10 (2.8KG vs 1.1KG) and only slightly less expensive. The lens is brighter but the active sensor area is smaller (7.7 CF vs 6.3 CF) so the benefit of the brighter lens is reduced. The Sony is equivalent to a 32mm f12.3 - 630mm f26.1 whereas the JVC is equivalent to a 42mm f17.6 - 424mm f28.4. Both offer QFHD at 60fps. The material improvements appear to be (1) the 20x zoom with a more useful wide angle on the Sony vs the 10x zoom on the JVC and (2) record to 1 XQD card vs 4 SDHC cards. Neither is going to be a low light champion. Both use a single sensor with a Bayer color filter without oversampling, which means they cannot provide the full 3840x2160 measured resolution. What am I missing?
 
philiplipetz said:
The AX1 has much better codec. Records to single high speed card, not four lower speed cards.
Click to expand...
The FDR-AX1 has essentially the same codec as the GY-HMQ10. The AX1 records 3840x2160 4:2:0 at 60 fps with H.264 codec at 150Mbps. The HMQ10 records 3840x2160 4:2:0 at 60 fps with H.264 at 144Mbps. The AX1 records 1080p60 4:2:0 at 50Mbps h.264 whereas the HMQ10 records 1080p60 4:2:0 at 35Mbps h.264. Like I said in my original post, the only apparent improvements are (1) 20x zoom vs 10x zoom and (2) record to 1 XQD card vs 4 SDHC cards.
 
I think JVC did a great job to get this to market but sorry I think that 4 SD cards was the most redundant idea ever. :huh:. Who thought of that idea. What happens if one of them gets corrupted - bye bye to the whole take or even shoot. Guess you could just lose the missing quadrant and somehow get HD out of it if you reframe right - it is 4k after all he he he. Four card readers or one after the other to ingest. What is the naming convention? How many folders will you need to keep track of files if you ingest sequentially? They have software to handle that but my word was it so shortsighted? What if you edit in Cineform? Is that an extra conversion step after stitching the files together? Adds an extra layer of complexity that was never needed - talk about jumping through hoops just to get down to an edit. Was it a speed issue? Why not use SxS cards or compact flash or some proprietary media to keep up the data rate if speed of media was a problem? My hacked GH2 can record at that bit rate to ONE card so why did they do it? If they had used a spare port for redundancy then fair enough. I mean it was a cutting edge tool with really dumb considerations. 4 HDMI ports? Four cables required. Perhaps they were in front of the tech curve and had to improvise but it may have been wiser to wait a little. Hopefully HDMI V 2 will see one cable and also the next version dropping to one card with another for redundancy. As of now - and I had my eye on it - but it just is a data wrangling nightmare potentially. Would be great on my Sgblade. I love the compactness of the cam though - if Sony made an equivalent camera I would be all over it - I think they do think of workflow a little better......just a little.
 
Last edited:
noirist said:
The FDR-AX1 has essentially the same codec as the GY-HMQ10. The AX1 records 3840x2160 4:2:0 at 60 fps with H.264 codec at 150Mbps. The HMQ10 records 3840x2160 4:2:0 at 60 fps with H.264 at 144Mbps. The AX1 records 1080p60 4:2:0 at 50Mbps h.264 whereas the HMQ10 records 1080p60 4:2:0 at 35Mbps h.264. Like I said in my original post, the only apparent improvements are (1) 20x zoom vs 10x zoom and (2) record to 1 XQD card vs 4 SDHC cards.
Click to expand...


The Sony is also listed about $500 less. So, it's cheaper, with a more reliable recording format and twice the zoom range. Plus, you won't need 4 HDMI cables to monitor a 4K image.
As much as the HMQ10 was ahead of its time, the solution they made to record 4K were never seen as practical, IMHO.
 
Crumbs. I've been working with the camera for the last week and a bit and reading through this, I'M confused.

Z1 is dead, long live the Z100. Great corporate/event camera, happens to do 4K which is nice, but also happens to do 4:2:2 at 10 bit, can rely on a downconvert of its 4K to superlative HD for chromakey, and has anyone twigged at its multicam facilities? Its AVCHD 'proxies'? Dudes, I am wearing my KoolAid hat, but aware that we're not seeing the bigger picture of this camera here.

Ouch, did you see what I did just then? Sorry.
 
vanvideo said:
The Sony is also listed about $500 less. So, it's cheaper, with a more reliable recording format and twice the zoom range. Plus, you won't need 4 HDMI cables to monitor a 4K image.
As much as the HMQ10 was ahead of its time, the solution they made to record 4K were never seen as practical, IMHO.
Click to expand...
Sony said they will have firmware upgrades for the 4K cameras and 4K UHDTVs .

http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-t...is-just-a-firmware-update-away/#ixzz2e2TgFKqY

HDMI 2.0 INDUSTRY STANDARDSony is prepared to support the HDMI 2.0 specification on its 4K Handycam camcorder with an easy firmware update to be available over the Internet. Just released by the HDMI Forum, the HDMI 2.0 industry standard offers an option to transmit 4K/60p signal using a single HDMI cable.
With this HDMI 2.0 update, FDR-AX1 will be able to output 4K 60p images not only to 4K BRAVIA TVs, but to other HDMI 2.0 compatible TVs and devices.
Click to expand...
http://blog.sony.com/press/sony-add...consumer-camcorder-to-its-handycam-portfolio/
 
I've been curious about when Sony was going to release a competitor to JVC's 4K camcorder (HMQ10). I expected history to repeat itself with Sony's new camera being a three chip upgrade to the one chip JVC model (just like 2004 during the dawn of prosumer HD camcorders). I guess that three chip solutions aren't really needed these days? The Bayer sensors do provide better color than the old generation one chip sensors. I've certainly got great color from my JVC 4K camcorder.

I suspect that Sony's sensor spec of 8.3 million pixels from a total of 18.9 million is a typo. A total of 8.9 is more plausible and would be similar to JVC's 4K 1/2.3" sensor. Sony doesn't mention high resolution stills or electronic stabilization so why would they need an extra 10 million pixels?

I've been using my JVC 4K camcorder since spring 2012. I've recorded great 4K video with it. I've probably recorded around 50 hours by now. The awkward four card solution was the best choice at the time as I probably would have had difficulty affording enough of the very fast cards that were available then. As it is configured, it only needs class 6 SDHC cards, although I use San Disk better class 10's.

Nobody mentioned the built-in neutral density filters on the Sony. That's quite a convenience that I miss on the JVC model.

Whether one intends to just record in 4K or deliver in 4K, both the JVC and Sony camcorders are great options. 4K displayed as HD provides a much sharper HD signal than any prosumer camcorder I've seen (even the three chip models). It seems that we just got used to our new HD standard and now it's starting to become obsolete!

It's a great time to be a videographer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top