Sony reveals 1st NXCAM camcorder: HXR-NX5U

[studio1972]

Well, I have ordered a NX5 from b&H , but have no information on expected delivery. From a features perspective the camera hits all the points I am looking for. But, I am having some second thoughts about the "rolling shutter " characteristics inherent to CMOS imagers. The video at this link http://www.trainingvideographers.com/tipsandtricks.html shows a comaprison between a Panasonic HMC150 (my second choice camera) and the tape based Z5. I am most concerned about the CMOS based camera representation of still camera flash, and secondarily the tilting verticals represented during pans. I intend to shoot weddings and nighttime sporting events (football) with the camera. Weddings will require dealing with flash, and sporting events will require fairly rapid pans. Have I chosen the wrong too l(NXCAM) for the tasks at hand? It seems like the perfect camera is a CCD based Z5, which does not exist yet. From a financial perspective my budget needs to be limited to around 4K us dollars. Any thoughts, and can I expect improved rolling shutter performance from the NXCAM over the previous generation Z5 camera? Thanks

Can't understand why you didn't go for the 150? No CMOS and cheaper to boot!

 

[ATL Media Group]

Hmm... From the article written by Adam Wilt:
"It’s roughly comparable to the HVR-Z5U in features and functionality, but offers full-raster solid-state recording with higher visual quality than its HDV tape-based stablemate. "

He does say that the resolution is "virtually identical" but that the NX offers full raster 1920X1080 24P which the Z5 just can not do.

He goes on to say:
"Sensitivity, Noise, and Dynamic Range:
I measured the NX5U at ISO 400, regardless of mode (interlaced or progressive). . The NX5U equals the EX1 in 1080p mode."

 

[dcloud]

sounds interesting
equals the ex1?

 

[ATL Media Group]

sounds interesting
equals the ex1?

That's what he said when talking about the dynamic range.

 

[Robert M Wright]

As far as I know, the NX5U and Z5 imaging blocks are essentially identical, aside from accommodating the difference in the encoders. HDV encoders are (by spec) limited to recording 1440x1080 images, but AVCHD compliant encoders can record 1920x1080 images. That doesn't really have anything to do with how many photosites are on the imaging chips.

 

[Barry_Green]

"It’s roughly comparable to the HVR-Z5U in features and functionality, but offers full-raster solid-state recording with higher visual quality than its HDV tape-based stablemate. "

Full raster RECORDING, not full raster chips. HDV is 1440x1080, AVCHD is 1920x1080.

They're the same 960x1080 chips, using diamond-pattern interpolation.

 

[ATL Media Group]

Full raster RECORDING, not full raster chips. HDV is 1440x1080, AVCHD is 1920x1080.

They're the same 960x1080 chips, using diamond-pattern interpolation.

Right... That's why I said specifically: "For me the benefit of higher rez, AVCHD file based recording." in an earlier post.

Ahh... hehe.. Looking back I see where the mistake was made.. I said "The NX5 captures a full 1920X1080 using all of the cmos sensors..." I intended to say it uses the AVCHD to record the full 1920X1080. The NX and Z5 both use all of the cmos sensors as they use the same block.
I shoulda been more specific like I did later in the first quote: "For the benefit of higher rez, AVCHD file based recording.."

 

[Lat32Media]

Can't understand why you didn't go for the 150? No CMOS and cheaper to boot!

Not that much cheaper. Once you figure in a decent battery for the HMC iso the 2600 ma stock + a shutgun mic as provided with the NX, then the diff is roughly $500. Next add in the cost pr. GB on a fast high quality SD vs. the current $250 ($500 mail-in) price tag for the sony 128GB flashdrive. Now we are effectively talking a few 100 bucks for which you get:

- Dual recording capability
- PCM linear sound
- Arguably better optics (almost same wide but 20 x)
- Better steady shot
- Way better LCD
- Higher res (not a big deal for me..but doesnt hurt)
- zoom, iris and focus rings where they belong
- GPS Mapping.....ok that may be under the gadget category for some.

Rolling shutter is all dependent on the speed of scan - 1st gen cmos certainly had slower scan, but I 've read that there is noticeable difference between the venerable 1/2 inch Z1 and the newer, but faster scanning z5 - what the NX brings nobody knows yet. But keep in mind that 35mm is rolling shutter as well (albeit mechanical). Did we ever hear any grief and bitterness on that account ?

 

[dcloud]

id correct that the 150 has a difference in wideness of the lens.

 

[studio1972]

Not that much cheaper. Once you figure in a decent battery for the HMC iso the 2600 ma stock + a shutgun mic as provided with the NX, then the diff is roughly $500. Next add in the cost pr. GB on a fast high quality SD vs. the current $250 ($500 mail-in) price tag for the sony 128GB flashdrive. Now we are effectively talking a few 100 bucks for which you get:

- Dual recording capability
- PCM linear sound
- Arguably better optics (almost same wide but 20 x)
- Better steady shot
- Way better LCD
- Higher res (not a big deal for me..but doesnt hurt)
- zoom, iris and focus rings where they belong
- GPS Mapping.....ok that may be under the gadget category for some.

Rolling shutter is all dependent on the speed of scan - 1st gen cmos certainly had slower scan, but I 've read that there is noticeable difference between the venerable 1/2 inch Z1 and the newer, but faster scanning z5 - what the NX brings nobody knows yet. But keep in mind that 35mm is rolling shutter as well (albeit mechanical). Did we ever hear any grief and bitterness on that account ?

Maybe the pricing is different in the US than in the UK, over here the NX5 + 128GB recorder = 1.5x the price of the HMC151. Not sure what you are saying about the cost of memory cards, but doesn't the NX5 take Sony memory sticks which are more expensive than SD cards. I have been using 5 x 16GB Patriot SDHC cards since I got my 151 nearly 18 months ago with no problems.

PCM audio - not had any problems with the HMC's audio myself.

Optics, maybe you need the long zoom for sports, so I take your point, but I like the wide zoom of the HMC for events.

Steady shot - take your word for it, it's not great on the HMC for sure.

LCD - can't argue with that, but having said that, it isn't that hard to focus the 151 in my experience, so I doubt that a better LCD would help me that much, although it is nicer to look at I suppose.

Res - Like you, I couldn't care less really

Control positions - I don't have a background with ENG type cameras so I'm not sure what is considered 'proper', but I haven't had any problems with the HMC's layout .

GPS - Nice, but I probably wouldn't sue it.

As for Film having a rolling shutter. I think Barry did a piece on this a while back, and effectively said that the rolling shutter associated with CMOS is totally different. In any case, there aren't many people using film for events and sports are there, so you should compare CMOS to CCD, not film, as surely a film camera was never an option you considered. I have a CMOS camera as well as my HMC and the footage looks shocking when a lot of flashes are going off at a wedding.

Not sure what you were saying about the z1, but I thought that was a CCD based camera, maybe you were thinking of the V1?

There are some advantages of the HMC you might not be aware of. It's a lot lighter than the Z5, and presumably the NX5 as well, which makes it easier to use on a glidecam etc. Also the look of the images in the Cine Gamma settings is really appealing and film like, not sure how the sony compares. Also SD cards are available everywhere which is very convenient.

For the money, it still seems like really good value to me, although it was actually cheaper when I got mine than it is now, I guess that's down to the economy though

 

[ATL Media Group]

Maybe the pricing is different in the US than in the UK, over here the NX5 + 128GB recorder = 1.5x the price of the HMC151. Not sure what you are saying about the cost of memory cards, but doesn't the NX5 take Sony memory sticks which are more expensive than SD cards. I have been using 5 x 16GB Patriot SDHC cards since I got my 151 nearly 18 months ago with no problems.

Actually both the NX5 and AX will accept either the sticks OR SDHC cards.

 

[Otis Grapsas]

Hmm... From the article written by Adam Wilt:
"It’s roughly comparable to the HVR-Z5U in features and functionality, but offers full-raster solid-state recording with higher visual quality than its HDV tape-based stablemate. "

He does say that the resolution is "virtually identical" but that the NX offers full raster 1920X1080 24P which the Z5 just can not do.

He goes on to say:
"Sensitivity, Noise, and Dynamic Range:
I measured the NX5U at ISO 400, regardless of mode (interlaced or progressive). . The NX5U equals the EX1 in 1080p mode."

Larger recorded resolution due to the format. Higher quality is probable due to the better codec, but that depends on the specifics of the implementation. Real time encoding rarely reaches the theoretical capabilities because lots of corners are cut to make it work. A paper that measures that mpeg4 saves 30% of data rate vs mpeg2 does not always apply to this kind of codec. Even the measure itself is usually PSNR which is flawed by design in comparing visible quality. AVCHD is generally a little better in PSNR but IMHO it's just the artifacts that are different and are perceived differently by the PSNR measurement. Also, the 24mbit AVCHD is recording 33% more pixels compared to the 25mbit HDV (1920 vs 1440).

Progressive and interlaced make no difference. The chip is progressive. Interlaced comes from progressive.

The low light and dynamic range should be identical to Z5 and far inferior to EX1. It is also inferior to the CCD FX1/Z1 because the effective pixel area is about 1/2 (no line summing in progressive chips). Sensitivity by itself means nothing, the sensitivity should be achieved with the same image quality in order to compete, in other words, the signal/noise should be comparable at that sensitivity. This is not the case. I can make any compact digital camera have a basic sensitivity of 1600, that does not make it equal to a good large pixel dSLR.

Here is a comparison of Z1 with Z5 in interlaced mode in good and bad light from a german site (slashcam.de). Z1 is interlaced CCD so 2x effective pixel area plus CCD light gathering. I matched exposure.

Z1 low light, Z1 good light
Z5 low light, Z5 good light

Sony has to release a number of cameras every year, that doesn't mean all of them will be a major step ahead, especially when the cost remains the same. The 1/2" models were a major step, but NX5 is probably more of the same.

 

[Cristi Olariu]

studio1972, besides Flash Memory Unit, the NX5 records on Memory Stick Pro Duo and SDHC cards. HMC150 doesn't have any advantage here.

PS: sorry for the late post, I see now it's been explained already

 

[Lat32Media]

I would pick the HMC in a heartbeat if the price diff was 1.5. The HMC is a fantastic camera by all accounts. In the US the NX is selling for roughly $4020 shipped and the 128 GB for $250 (after $500 mail-in rebate until 3/31) thats under $2/GB ! and 11 hrs recording in higest setting.

The lens should be equally wide 28mm vs 29.5 for all practical matters.

Weight diff is not horrendous - the panny list as 1.98 KG with bat and the sony 2.6 kg with the stock NP-F770. Keep in mind that the stock bat of the panny should be way under dimensioned.....but you will know better than me. But sure 600G (21 oz) will make a diff. on extended steadycam shots but not for the 30-45 sec I will be doing.

I was concerned about rolling shutter, but again. This is not a black/white issue. As scans are getting faster (as microchips are getting faster) the diff. will be less. If Iam not mistaken the RED cam uses rolling shutter, albeit a very fast scanning one. If rolling shutter were this big problem, I dont think some of the worlds major cam producers would even consider launching CMOS in this cut throath bizz. But sure you have to match the work you do with the shutter type. aka flash is not good for rolling shutter - but lowlight and correct color rendition is.

I agree that the footage I have seen come of of both the 200 and 150 is indeed nicely color saturated. I good friend of mine shoots with gyrocam from his own chopper but sold both his 170 and 500 due to inaccurate colors - on that account he highly recommended the Exmor.

I guess the question remains - isnt it better to get a clean correct shot, and then work the color scheme in post where you can finely tweak the image rather than the image be "profiled" right onto the media ?

 

[ATL Media Group]

The low light and dynamic range should be identical to Z5 and far inferior to EX1. It is also inferior to the CCD FX1/Z1 because the effective pixel area is about 1/2 (no line summing in progressive chips).

Should be? But apparently it's NOT inferior. You THINK it's the same as the Z5, but apparently the unit Adam Wilt actually tested says otherwise.
I'll take the word of someone that actually tested the camera over what someone thinks it "should" perform like.

Sony has to release a number of cameras every year, that doesn't mean all of them will be a major step ahead, especially when the cost remains the same. The 1/2" models were a major step, but NX5 is probably more of the same.

So, you have the proof that Sony "HAS to release new cameras every year"?

Nice to assume that the NX5 is "probably" more of the same.. I'll take it from someone who actually tested the camera and said:

"the higher image quality afforded by FX-mode AVCHD, as well as the benefits of a tapeless workflow, makes it a no-brainer: I’d take the NX5U over the HVR-Z5U in a New York second. For a $5000 camcorder, it’s a winner."

So apparently there is QUITE a difference between the Z5 and the NX5 (mostly due to the robust AVCHD codec that even Barry Green says is better in many ways that XDCAM EX).

 

[Otis Grapsas]

Companies have to release new cameras, that's how the market works. Sony have reused sensor blocks in the past. They have made some consumer and pro models using the same sensor blocks before.

But why do you want to believe it is better when Sony say it's the same? The specs are the same for the sensor and the low light performance is identical. A change in performance would be heavily marketed.

With 1 megapixel sensors the advantage of 1920x1080 vs 1440x1080 is questionable.

The advantage of 24mbit mpeg4 vs 25mbit mpeg2 is also questionable when the pixels are increased 33%.

Did Adam actually say that this camera has better low light or dynamic range than the Z5? That's impossible.

Barry did not test the specific Sony AVCHD implementation.

 

[Ron Evans]

The lens is almost the same, the NX5 has active OIS so the moving lens element moves more and as such is different.
The sensor block may be the same but just like your car the performance is actually derived from the computer that manipulates the data from the sensor. In the NX5 this is different. It interpolates 1920x1080 pixels as apposed to the 1440x1080 of the Z5. It provides a 10bit, 4:2:2 output for the HD/SDI output.
The NX5 is definitely made from the core of the Z5 with some of the fundamently limitations of the hardware. But just like a car, reprogramming the engine management computer and the gearbox computer will give a very different performance and tradeoffs.

Ron Evans

 

[Robert M Wright]

Here's a link to what Adam Wilt wrote:

http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/awilt/story/preview_sony_nxcam/

Judging from the res charts on the second page of the article, it sure looks like going to recording full raster 1920x1080 (as opposed to 1440x1080) should result in recording more (true) image detail.

 

[Otis Grapsas]

1440x1080 is already capable of 810x1080 lines max. This is HDV 1440x1080 using the same sensor:

http://provideocoalition.com/images/uploads/Z7etc-MB.jpg

And AVCHD Nx5:

http://provideocoalition.com/images/uploads/NXMB1080p.jpg

Any differences are probably because Adam is extracting interlaced frames even in the progressive modes (notice the zipper artifact). The difference is sharpness between 1440 and 1920 will be small with 1megapixel sensors, but the extra 33% of pixels is certainly using bandwidth.

All these cameras (nx5, z5, z7, s270) use the same sensor block. Clearvid EXMOR pattern. 1,037,000 pixels, -6 to 21db gain, 1.5lux auto lux rating. The sensitivity is about ISO300 but that's because of the 6dB gain that is already used in the 0dB setting (see -6dB gain).

 

[ATL Media Group]

As Adam stated at the link provideed by Robert:

"Overall, the NX5U’s FX (24 Mbit/sec) AVCHD looks very good; roughly comparable to 35 Mbit/sec XDCAM EX. With lower bitrates, lower quality: 17 Mbit FH looks a bit better than HDV, 9 Mbit HQ looks a bit worse, and 5 Mbit looks perfectly acceptable as long as there isn’t much motion! "

So... at the 24 Mbit/sec mode it's roughly comparable to XDCAM EX and even at 17Mbit/sec it beats HDV which is what the Z5 records. So, it beats the Z5 at 24Mbit/sec AVCHD as well as the lower bitrate 17Mbit/sec.

Conclusion: It records a better image at higher resolution than the Z5.
End of story.