Sony PMW-X70

"I got the trial of Vegas Pro 13 -- no joy. It just doesn't see the footage. That's a bit disappointing, given that the Vegas Pro product page says "... the latest version supports today's most popular camcorder formats including XAVC"

Ha! Really, Sony!!!!!?
 
Last edited:
AtticusLake said:
Yes.


These are the options that appear in the menu:


In 60i mode (i.e. NTSC), XAVC:

  • 1080/60p 50Mbps
  • 1080/60p 35Mbps
  • 1080/60i 50Mbps
  • 1080/60i 35Mbps
  • 1080/60i 25Mbps
  • 1080/30p 50Mbps
  • 1080/30p 35Mbps
  • 1080/24p 50Mbps
  • 1080/24p 35Mbps
  • 720/60p 50Mbps
In 60i mode (i.e. NTSC), AVCHD:

  • 1080/60p PS
  • 1080/60i FX
  • 1080/60i FH
  • 1080/30p FX
  • 1080/30p FH
  • 1080/24p FX
  • 1080/24p FH
  • 720/60p FX
  • 720/60p FH
  • 720/60p HQ
In 50i mode (i.e. PAL), XAVC:

  • 1080/50p 50Mbps
  • 1080/50p 35Mbps
  • 1080/50i 50Mbps
  • 1080/50i 35Mbps
  • 1080/50i 25Mbps
  • 1080/25p 50Mbps
  • 1080/25p 35Mbps
  • 720/50p 50Mbps
In 50i mode (i.e. PAL), AVCHD:

  • 1080/50p PS
  • 1080/50i FX
  • 1080/50i FH
  • 1080/25p FX
  • 1080/25p FH
  • 720/50p FX
  • 720/50p FH
  • 720/50p HQ
Click to expand...
Thank you for your reply. Sony U.S. has changed their spec sheet to indicate that it does record 60p in the 1920X1080 XAVC 50 mode as well. I am still a bit confused as to why they phrase it 1920X1080 60p "in the 60i" mode". What does that mean? Is it a 60i container, and is this different than for example, than how the Panasonic HC X1000 does 60p. I am trying to make a decision between the two cameras and am a fan of 60p. Thanks.
Kevin
 
Tinroof said:
I am still a bit confused as to why they phrase it 1920X1080 60p "in the 60i" mode".
Click to expand...

Ah, I see your confusion. The problem is that "the 60i mode" has absolutely nothing to do with 60i, or interlaced, in any way.

Basically the camera has the ability to record in 24, 25, 30, 50, or 60 FPS; but because of shocking stupidity, they have split these into what I would call "the PAL group" -- i.e. 25 and 50 -- and "the NTSC group" -- i.e. 24, 30 and 60. In fact PAL and NTSC don't really come into it, and don't ask me why 24 is considered an NTSC mode, but that's how Sony have done it.

To make it EVEN MORE stupid, to change from "the NTSC group" to "the PAL group" you have to reboot the camera and re-format the SD card. This is like saying that if you've been keeping Word documents on your computer, but now you want to make a spreadsheet, you need to wipe the hard drive.

To make it EVEN MORE INCREDIBLY stupid, Sony have decided to use the term "60i mode" to indicate when the camera is set up for "the NTSC group", and "50i mode" for when it is set for "the PAL group". Why do they put the "i" on there? Why choose 60 and 50, when it could as easily have been 30 and 25? Who knows. But I suspect more shocking stupidity.

In other words, to shoot at 24 OR 30 OR 60 FPS, the camera needs to be in what Sony call "60i mode". To shoot 25 or 50, it needs to be in what they call "50i mode". This is true even if you will never shoot interlaced in your life.

Hope this clears it up.
 
OK then. Thank you for that explanation. You are right, it makes no sense. I am happy that I can shoot 60p with it though. For me I think that the X70 makes more sense over the Panasonic XC1000, because I have no intention to shoot 4K anytime soon. It seems that the extra $1,000 or so for the Panasonic would be for the 4K ability. Much appreciated!
 
Tinroof said:
I am happy that I can shoot 60p with it though.
Click to expand...

You're very welcome. BTW I shot a very quick 60p test yesterday, no problem.

Honestly, I really like the camera; it's just that when you first get a thing like this, you can't help noticing the weird quirks. Like the mic clamp is much bigger than a standard 21mm mic shank, so my mic doesn't work in it. (Anyone got a solution for that??? Sony used to ship a shim strip with these clamps, but not this time.) And the way they organise frame rates is a mess. But overall it's great, feels solid, seems to work well (I haven't tested it much yet), the ND filters are great.

It's just a shame that Sony don't provide some way to work with the footage... but if you have a solution for that, great. My own command-line based method seems to be working now. In case anyone's interested, it's basically this:

ffmpeg -loglevel warning -y -i "Clip0002.MXF" -map 0:0 -filter_complex "[0:2] [0:1] amerge" -acodec aac -b:a 256k -strict -2 -vcodec copy "Clip0002.mp4"

Note that this switches the audio channels.
 
Tinroof said:
Don't know if you tried Catalyst Prepare...
Click to expand...

Thanks... yeah, I sort of looked at that, but... $200? For a utility that does... what, exactly? I usually just copy files to my hard drive and edit in Premiere, so I don't know what this would add, other than converting the format. So $200 seems a bit steep.

Anyhow, I just gave the free trial a try. In terms of transcoding, it looks similar to Catalyst Browse. There seems to be no way to re-wrap the XAVC files as mp4 -- i.e. without re-compressing -- which is what I need to edit in CS6. Instead, you can re-compress them into a variety of formats.

You can export as MP4, but you have to pick from one of the given presets. There seems to be no way to control quality. When I tried it, I got 4:2:0 at 16 Mbits/sec, so I might as well have just shot in AVCHD to begin with. In fact that would have been better.

Converting to XAVC Intra yields better results -- 4:2:2 10 bit, at 100 Mbits/sec. So if your NLE can read XAVC Intra (I think Vegas can?), that could be helpful. And, it does do multiple files at once.

Personally, I think I'll stick with spending $zero, and using FFMPEG to re-wrap in MP4 for Premiere CS6. This route certainly won't work for everyone, though.

For Vegas users, Catalyst Prepare might be useful, but $200 still seems a lot.

 
Osslund said:
If you managed to make something without mush please share.
Click to expand...

So far I've just been trying to make it work... for example I haven't played with PPs yet, e.g. to turn sharpening off. (Though out of the box, it doesn't seem too bad.)

I'm not completely clear what you mean by "mush". But FWIW, check these out:

https://vimeo.com/110805368
https://vimeo.com/110803125

Download the originals to see the real deal without streaming compression. The video is "as is" from the camera, just re-wrapped in an MP4 container.

There's some moire in the bricks shot, which is not a surprise, really -- that's a pretty harsh test for moire. But the bricks seem well-defined.
 
Osslund said:
By mush I've seen leafs and finer details been gone even in original camera files...
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think I know what you mean. I'm going to get out this afternoon (if it doesn't rain...) and shoot some leaves, that seems like a strong test.
 
More samples:

https://vimeo.com/110849962

Some quick impressions: the digital extender is really clear; it does introduce some noise, but that's not too noticeable. The rolling shutter is there, but it doesn't look very bad to me. The built-in sharpening seems less intrusive than some I've seen; you can see the halos it introduces, but I think you really need to be pixel-peeping. With sharpening off, the image is quite soft, but I guess you could sharpen it in post.

BTW sorry about the horrific jerky pans -- the tripod I was using is a total piece of junk.
 
you got at least one guy keeping up with this.

i read on "another forum" that you will be using gain like a mofo if you are anywhere but outdoors or inside with movie/video lights, and that the gain is not real clean past 6 or maybe 9 db. can you confirm/deny? sounds like in that case it wouldnt be a great cam for running around/b roll indoors at some hotel-based corporate event or other common scenarios if its that light-hungry.
 
Josh Bass said:
you got at least one guy keeping up with this.

i read on "another forum" that you will be using gain like a mofo if you are anywhere but outdoors or inside with movie/video lights, and that the gain is not real clean past 6 or maybe 9 db. can you confirm/deny? sounds like in that case it wouldnt be a great cam for running around/b roll indoors at some hotel-based corporate event or other common scenarios if its that light-hungry.
Click to expand...

It has been reported by a qualified user that the image is acceptable up to 18db.
 
Josh Bass said:
you got at least one guy keeping up with this.
Click to expand...

Cool, thanks! ;-)

Josh Bass said:
i read on "another forum" that you will be using gain like a mofo if you are anywhere but outdoors or inside with movie/video lights, and that the gain is not real clean past 6 or maybe 9 db. can you confirm/deny? sounds like in that case it wouldnt be a great cam for running around/b roll indoors at some hotel-based corporate event or other common scenarios if its that light-hungry.
Click to expand...

I don't know, I'll try to find an appropriate indoor environment to test in. But my (very informal) impression so far is it's not too bad... mostly to date I've been keeping the NDs up to 2 or 3 just to get it to expose outdoors. But I'll look into it.
 
zeke said:
things look a little underexposed. Is that intentional? thanks for posting.
Click to expand...

You're welcome! ;-)

Re exposure, it's basically what I said in the video comments -- get the whites in the waves high but not clipping, and that's about it. In most of the surf shots, that's basically all there is to it. I dare say I could tweak up the mids a little if I wanted. I guess it's partly subjective, and I don't have a calibrated monitor (yet); on mine, the surf shots look OK to my eye.

Note too that on the shots before the surfing, I played a little -- for example in the arch/lighthouse shot, I deliberately crushed the blacks, just 'cos I thought a more silhouette look would be cool.
 
Josh Bass said:
... sounds like in that case it wouldn't be a great cam for running around/b roll indoors at some hotel-based corporate event or other common scenarios if its that light-hungry.
Click to expand...

Well, it's not exactly corporate, unless your corporation has aircraft carriers... but this might be helpful:

https://vimeo.com/112005921

This is a selection of shots from below decks on USS Hornet (in Alameda, CA). It's very unevenly lit below, and I don't have a meter, so this doesn't tell you anything about the specific sensitivity of the camera; but it's pretty gloomy overall (there's no natural light, of course), and even in this dim light, the X70 performed well. I only rarely had to use the gain. Even then, 15db gain looks pretty clean; and the footage (XAVC) seems to stretch well in post. Even at 30db gain, OK it's noisy, but the picture is at least recognizable; and that corridor was black to the eye.

All the shots where the waveform is shown are exactly as-is from the camera. If it looks kind of gloomy, well, that's how it looks! Actually I'm really pleased with the image, which I think is exactly what it looks and feels like in real life.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top