Sony's FDR-AX100 4K Handycam ships in March for $2,000 (hands-on)

Pretty amazing for the price. Decent sensor-size too.

The 120FPS @ 720, if it's sharp, should still be fun to play with, despite not being full HD.

I've seen some people imply that this camera is 10-bit - I'm pretty sure it isn't - can anyone confirm?
 
What excites me about this camera is the possibility of cropping the image to get a tighter perspective. I imagine that it'd be very useful for weddings. Put it on sticks at the periphery of the ceremony, get a wide angle of the whole scene AND a medium-close angle of the bride & groom. And there's little movement so the codec should hold up great.

I don't expect to deliver any projects in 4K this year but this camera is a "two-fer" that I could definitely start using right away.
 
Simon Shasha said:
Pretty amazing for the price. Decent sensor-size too.

The 120FPS @ 720, if it's sharp, should still be fun to play with, despite not being full HD.

I've seen some people imply that this camera is 10-bit - I'm pretty sure it isn't - can anyone confirm?
Click to expand...

Here's a link to the Sony site regarding the general specs for XAVC S: ......... 10 bit 4:2:0 (4K) and 4:2:2 (HD).
http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/201304/13-038E/
 
"Addition of a compact "FDR-AX100" model to Sony's consumer 4K Handycam® lineup
  • Approximately one quarter the size of the current "FDR-AX1" model, the "FDR-AX100" features a 14.2 effective megapixel back-illuminated 1.0-type Exmor R™ CMOS sensor, and captures images with the realism, detail and depth that only 4K can deliver, all in a compact, handheld body.
  • Records in the XAVC S format, enabling approximately 130 minutes of 4K video recording (when using a 64GB SDXC memory card Class 10)
  • In addition to recording 4K footage, the FDR-AX100 is capable of down-converting 4K images to very high quality 2K (Full HD), using the enormous amounts of data in every 4K frame for spectacular results. It also allows the user to freely select and cut out part of a 4K image to be "trimmed" and then enjoyed on a Full HD 2K TV."
http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/201401/14-002E/index.html
 
AtticusLake said:
100Mb/s is still low-ish for 4k -- that's the same number of bits per pixel as the FS700, which is 8-bit 4:2:0. If the camera crams 10-bit and 4:2:2 in there, that needs even MORE bits.
Click to expand...

I am not sure where you are getting those number but....the FS700, which I own, uses AVCHD as it's internal codec which max's out at 28 Mb/s... Given that 4K is 4 x's HD resolution, than it would sort of make sense that XAVC-S records at 100mb/s which is significantly more information than what the FS700 natively records. Let's also not forget XAVC & XAVC-S are likely to be more efficient and effective CODEC's, given their recent development.

What I don't understand is why they didn't use this sensor in the AX1 and Z100 which are reporting positively horrible performance in low light situations. This looks like a very interesting Camera, with more than enough resolution, I wonder if it outputs at a higher bit rate through the HDMI connection in 4K and then we can use an external recorder like the Odyssey 7Q?
 
It shoots XAVC - S which is 8 bit 4:2:0 at 4K. Still, when you downsample it to 1920x1080 HD, you effectively gain 4:2:2 in 1080p. I'm not sure if shooting XAVC - S at HD resolution will get you 4:2:2 off the bat. In either case I doubt at 4K or HD that it is 10 bit (that would be amazing if it did but I don't think xavc - s is a 10 bit wrapper??)
 
True North said:
I am not sure where you are getting those number but....the FS700, which I own, uses AVCHD as it's internal codec which max's out at 28 Mb/s...
Click to expand...

The 28 Mb/s rate is only available for 60 or 50 FPS; at lower frame rates, you're limited to 24 Mb/s. So doubling the number of frames only slightly increases the bit rate... :-(

True North said:
Given that 4K is 4 x's HD resolution, than it would sort of make sense that XAVC-S records at 100mb/s which is significantly more information than what the FS700 natively records.
Click to expand...

Well it's about right, since it's about 4 times the bit rate for 4 times the pixels. However, what XAVC-S can theoretically do and what the AX100 camera actually does are two different things; recording to class 10 SD cards, they can't do 100 Mb/s. Hence the concern about quality.

True North said:
Let's also not forget XAVC & XAVC-S are likely to be more efficient and effective CODEC's, given their recent development.
Click to expand...

I don't think so. AVCHD is just a wrapper round H.264, and constrains it to 28 Mb/s, 4:2:0, 8-bit, etc. XAVC is also H.264, but with different constraints. The actual implementation of H.264 in the AX100 is unlikely to be a lot better, since it's a smaller cheaper camera, and so likely has less processing horsepower than the FS700.

Now if they had H.265 on here, or VP9, that would be a whole different thing.
 
Looking at the test clip, it really is stunning. Cropping out the center 1080p section and watching it on a 1080p monitor... there are definitely compression issues.

So... on the plus side, using this camera to produce HD output, seems it will be awesome. On the minus side... it's impossible to say, since we're looking at a YouTube-compressed video.

Would be nice to see some raw camera footage here.... ;-)
 
AtticusLake said:
The 28 Mb/s rate is only available for 60 or 50 FPS; at lower frame rates, you're limited to 24 Mb/s. So doubling the number of frames only slightly increases the bit rate... :-(

Well it's about right, since it's about 4 times the bit rate for 4 times the pixels. However, what XAVC-S can theoretically do and what the AX100 camera actually does are two different things; recording to class 10 SD cards, they can't do 100 Mb/s. Hence the concern about quality.

I don't think so. AVCHD is just a wrapper round H.264, and constrains it to 28 Mb/s, 4:2:0, 8-bit, etc. XAVC is also H.264, but with different constraints. The actual implementation of H.264 in the AX100 is unlikely to be a lot better, since it's a smaller cheaper camera, and so likely has less processing horsepower than the FS700.

Now if they had H.265 on here, or VP9, that would be a whole different thing.
Click to expand...
youre confusing Bits and bytes.
Bmpc records 220Mbps ProRes HQ on a 45MB/s card. A lot more Mbps with compressed DNG on a 95MB/s card.

avchd maxes at 28Mbps, canon/gh3. mov 50Mbp-100mbps and records on a lower than 45MB/s card

Usually smaller camera doesnt equate to worst processing power. Lets wait till the camera comes out before judging this. Now if this baby outputs clean hdmi.. Ninja2 baby.
 
Last edited:
dcloud said:
youre confusing Bits and bytes.
Click to expand...

Ah, I don't think so. The AX100 spec says it records 4k on a class 10 SD card (see earlier post). A class 10 SD card is rated for 10 MB/s write, i.e. 80 Mbits/sec, which is less than 100 Mbits/sec. Yes, the BMPCC records at higher rates, but not to plain class 10 cards.

dcloud said:
Usually smaller camera doesnt equate to worst processing power. Lets wait till the camera comes out before judging this.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking cheaper camera usually does equate to lower power... but you're quite right, some real experience -- or at least un-converted camera footage -- is definitely needed before passing judgement.

dcloud said:
Now if this baby outputs clean hdmi.. Ninja2 baby.
Click to expand...

I'm hoping it outputs clean HDMI at 4k... in which case, Odyssey, baby!
 
Bottomline, it can record 100mbps on a proper sd card
quality at 100mbps is another story. Probably robust enough for viewing but not for grading and film.

So far, the 2.8 lens doesnt entice me enough. Its 1 inch sensor becomes moot
 
My New Year's resolution was to pre-order (for the heck of it) the first reasonably priced 4K camera anyone comes out with. Not a very wise decision to say the least, but I really like this one.
 
Considering your calculation also includes audio, the actual video bitrate will actually be 60mb/s, the Sony AX1's lowest setting. Considering the little AX100 has a much larger and better sensor then the AX1, limiting it to only 60mb/s is a disgrace. Sony probably wants to reserve high bitrates to the XQD cards, even though modern sd-cards are more then fast enough. We might see a professional AX100 which also takes XQD cards and with a price to match later on though.......

No wonder bitrates are not present in the product specifications. Sony know pretty well it would dampen the enthusiasm for this camera if they had made them public. Regarding the Odyssey, you have to assume the AX100 outputs a clean, uncompressed 4k signal in order to use an external recorder. Personally, I'd rather have good, solid 2k then compromised 4k. That's why I'm aiming for the CX900, at $500 less and with the same capabilities (minus 4k), including 50mb/s 1080p, it looks like being a winner. Basically an RX10 in a camcorder body.

noirist said:
Good find joe1946! That means the AX100 is recording 4k at roughly 65Mbps, or roughly half the data rate of other low end 4k cameras. That doesn't look good...
Click to expand...
 
Doctor Wu said:
It shoots XAVC - S which is 8 bit 4:2:0 at 4K. Still, when you downsample it to 1920x1080 HD, you effectively gain 4:2:2 in 1080p.
Click to expand...

You mean 4:4:4 in HD?

4k is 4x HD. 4:2:0 has 1/4th the color information. That would make it 4:4:4 when downsampled to HD.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top