Sony PMW-X70

I want to see some footage with the 24x zoom. Being a person who does most of my video outside, i don't want to get a camera now with anything less than 20x, and because I'm not doing much filming at all right now, i don't want to get another camera unless its 4k, in the hope it will last me well into the future.
 
fisherman1 said:
New video sample from Sony:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZylSbb4SHw
Click to expand...

Funny the way the structure on the glass at 1:25 becomes kind of a resolution and aliasing test chart - and the camera doesn't pass that test completely, IMO. There's a tiny bit of aliasing. To be fair it could be the YouTube compression, too. All in all this camera has a nice image, though. It would be very interesting to see if with the help of that excellent codec Filmconvert could generate an organic 16mm stock look.
 
Osslund said:
Overall a nice feel to that footage. Cool to have that quality in such a small camera with 10-bit 4:2:2!
Click to expand...
It's a beautiful bit of filmmaking, and (as much as you can tell via Youtube) then yes, good quality.

But I'm coming more and more to thinking that "real world" films don't really help very much for camera evaluation.

Partly it's that pretty well everything on the market nowadays is technically capable of vastly better than pro cameras from a couple of decades ago costing tens of thousands of pounds. There's virtually nothing on the market today that will give "bad" results.

But mostly (given the above) the "real world" films tend to get judged far more on camerawork, lighting, editing and yes, original subject! Does the linked film (excellent though I agree it is) owe that judging mostly to the camera it was shot on, to craft skills, or subject?

And what such films can't tell you is anything about the way any camera physically handles. Does it's design make it easy to use, or is it an ergonomic nightmare? The end result may be good - very good - but was it easy or difficult to achieve?

It's a well known scientific principle that in an investigation you have to try to isolate variables. So for technical quality, the only way to really evaluate is with charts - each designed to test one aspect of performance - and ONE at a time only. And in a way that the result can only be due to camera performance - not the craft skill of the operator, and where artifacts can only be due to the camera - not such as Youtube compression or rescaling.

No, charts aren't the prettiest of subjects, and don't make for good films. But they do give definitive benchmark results to compare hardware - not the people who've made the film.
 
I agree most cameras can look great in the right hands. I got a bit burned on the AF100. In the end footage I made with my AF100 turned out good but what a struggle to get there...

My 1 inch RX100 is a good still camera but video kind of suck. What I see on the X70 looks to be a very portable and easy to use camera. Not as easy as my F3 but so much easier to carry and with all features inside.
 
If it looks as good or better than an ex1/3 it wins for me, cause those cams make nice images. Aliasing is no good though, hopefully that was a youtube thing.
 
Actually the EX1/3 have better performance with three 1/2 inch sensors but they are also very old. I liked my EX3 and if the X70 betters it I'm good.

How good is that EVF? Usefull?
 
Neither Alis or the glass film really float my boat, As ali said he exposed a little right rather than protecting the highs and pulling up the mids in post, the glass vid shows, well the fire and the windows just clip to solid blocks of ugly Sony video colour.

Im still interested as up upgrade to my EX1 which is actually a bit of a lump and with the chip size is hard to get thin DOF.

.. and I say that as someone who will push most jobs towards the EX1 rather than use a DSLR or a 'cinema' camera - usually the subject does not deserve it!

S
 
Yes the X70 is so much smaller than the EX1 or for that matter the EX3. But I found the EVF on the EX3 to be excellent. I guess the one on the X70 will be small and I'll hesitate to use it should I get a X70.

There will be things not so good I guess with the X70. Highlight clipping and other things that comes with a traditional video camera. But on the upside footage so far looks clean and well resolved which is a good start. Hopefully 4k will look even better.

I had a look at the Z100 and despite the smaller sensor footage looks very smooth yet detailed. I would like to see the same on the X70 steering clear of a hyper sharp image and providing detail but without looking artificial. When the project doesn't call for shallow dof and just need to be high quality video footage the X70 looks like a keeper.
 
Problem is most EVF with SDI are rather bulky. Just the eye piece have to large. I actually enjoyed the view from the tube on the FS100 but the construction sucked. The smallest EVF I've tried was the original Zacuto EVF.
 
Would this camera be a good choice for multi camera live streaming since it has SDI or would the Black magic studio camera be a better choice (or any other camera in that price range).
 
The depth of field will not be noticeably shallower than 1/3" cams, because the lens opens only to f-2.8. The 1/3" cams often open to f-1.3, which would have the same depth of field as f-4 on this cam. And this cam at 2.8 will have about the same depth of field as DSLRs at f-5.6 or f-8.
 
Last edited:
combatentropy said:
The depth of field will not be noticeably shallower than 1/3" cams, because the lens opens only to f-2.8. The 1/3" cams often open to f-1.3, which would have the same depth of field as f-4 on this cam. And this cam at 2.8 will have about the same depth of field as DSLRs at f-5.6 or f-8.
Click to expand...

I think subject isolation will be much easier with the X70, especially taking Allister Chapman's comments into account. MOST 1/3" camcorders have a lens with 1.8 or 1.6, like the Panny 130A which has a 1.6 to 3.6. At 4.5 on the Sony, your subject will stand out much more than at 3.6 on the 130A.
 
I've had my eyes on this camera as well. The X70 is by far the best small format camcorder to come. At $2,300 with 10-bit 4:2:2 with SDI out is just absolutely the best news for documentary filmmakers. We get ND's, Zeiss Zoom, LANC, Phantom on the XLR, upgrade to 4K?! I'm willing to bet it's same sensor as the AX100 but with a better chipset. I'm even stretching to say that you get the same optical quality from both cameras aside from compression, and with 10bit on the X70 for about $500 bucks more it's well worth it. I can color grade pretty good and I'd be fine with the AX100, but for SDI out and a 4K future upgrade I think it's a steal. Plus I think the X70's form factor or ergonomic has better resale value as an official XDCAM. Also Panasonic just introduced their new 4K camcorder at $3,400 but there are no specs whatsoever with bit depth, so I'm going to assume that it's just 8-bit 4:2:0. It's a no brainer, go with an X70!!! What do you guys think?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top