Truly Virtuous?

http://www.black-list.cc/miscvideos/outdoorsHD.wmv

right click save as... around 98 mbs...1080p

that is from my FX1 using CF24 and MB for CC. I really dont see enough difference from cf 24 to cf 25. To me it just seems a hassle to shoot in CF25 and then conver to 24p and deinterlace that and slow by 4% here and blah blah blah.....dont get too technical about stuff. Tell your story. Focus on that.

Yeah sonys HDV is compressed and its mpeg, but you get to shoot 1080i to a MiniDV tape all day long. No messing with P2s and having to spend all this money on that when most people wont need to use anything like that. I mean come on SD is still here and still going strong. You would be just fine with a DVX for probably at least another 5 - 10 years.

I never even mess with converting to 24p ever. In fact most people couldn't even tell. I think 24p is still sort of interlaced anyway, since the 24p framed are 'packaged' in as interlaced frames since its going on a tape.

I just think for the price the FX1 was a good buy. I think CF24 mode is definately not too shabby, I 've never been told it looks bad. You get a good HDV 1080i image and can record on tape. Color artifacting? 95% of people cant see any of that not to mention youd have to frame by frame it to notice if there was any anyhow. Great Zeiss lens. pretty damn good on cam mic. But if you dont need HD then go with a DVX. It wont let you down.

EDIT ** if you wanna check out some other things shot with the FX1 check outmy site under VIDEOS.. www.black-list.cc
the 4 promo videos were shot on the fly with that cam. Didn't shoot CF24 though, just straight 60i in DV mode. It was really dark in there so I had to pick myshots and drop that shutter speed down low. It helped with the effect of things too but you do need a good light source to avoid using that gain.
 
Last edited:
reflex said:
http://www.black-list.cc/miscvideos/outdoorsHD.wmv

right click save as... around 98 mbs...1080p

that is from my FX1 using CF24 and MB for CC. I really dont see enough difference from cf 24 to cf 25. To me it just seems a hassle to shoot in CF25 and then conver to 24p and deinterlace that and slow by 4% here and blah blah blah.....dont get too technical about stuff. Tell your story. Focus on that.

Yeah sonys HDV is compressed and its mpeg, but you get to shoot 1080i to a MiniDV tape all day long. No messing with P2s and having to spend all this money on that when most people wont need to use anything like that. I mean come on SD is still here and still going strong. You would be just fine with a DVX for probably at least another 5 - 10 years.

I never even mess with converting to 24p ever. In fact most people couldn't even tell. I think 24p is still sort of interlaced anyway, since the 24p framed are 'packaged' in as interlaced frames since its going on a tape.

I just think for the price the FX1 was a good buy. I think CF24 mode is definately not too shabby, I 've never been told it looks bad. You get a good HDV 1080i image and can record on tape. Color artifacting? 95% of people cant see any of that not to mention youd have to frame by frame it to notice if there was any anyhow. Great Zeiss lens. pretty damn good on cam mic. But if you dont need HD then go with a DVX. It wont let you down.

EDIT ** if you wanna check out some other things shot with the FX1 check outmy site under VIDEOS.. www.black-list.cc
the 4 promo videos were shot on the fly with that cam. Didn't shoot CF24 though, just straight 60i in DV mode. It was really dark in there so I had to pick myshots and drop that shutter speed down low. It helped with the effect of things too but you do need a good light source to avoid using that gain.
Click to expand...

Well still downloading your footage so I cant comment on that yet. But you are right 24PA are encoded interlace, but it not ment to be watched without postproccesing. It first when you watch a 24P encoded DVD you can se the benefit with 24PA. If you gonna watch it on an interlace tv set you could just have shoot 24PN.

As for the difference between CF24 and CF25. The Z1 ccd can sample the picture in either 50i or 60i. So CF is just in camera postproccesing. CF24 is just blend 30 frame to match 24 frames blend every 4th and 5th frame wich is the oposite of 24PN were they shoot 24 frames from the CCD and create every 5th frame from merging the orignal 4th and 5th frame. If you watch on a interlace tv a normal person wouldnt not see the difference.

The difference between 24cf and 25cf is that they both discard one of the interlacet frame/field to create progressive. But 25cf dont need to blend frames because it goes from 50i to 25P. Sure you can do this in post but the advantage is the HDV compression. 25P has half the information 50i has so that makes 25mbit 25cf as 50mbit 50i should have.

Now ive downloaded your footage but it frezzes on my computer so i have to restart. ;)
 
Well it was that my CPU power were at 90% that caused it not your footage (alone)

As for compression artefacts its hard to se the difference as it more compressed in WMV.

But the problem of HDV is usually not the watching procces more the CC that to much compression can cause problem. Or extreme changeable footage like waterfalls. But with cineframe25 that should be less of a problem. So basicly its CC thats makes HDV not an option for professionals.
 
Guys,
I am about to migrate my self and I needed to know.

What is the best affordable 24p HD camcorder out there and for what price?

Thanks!.
 
At the moment, HVX is expensive because of the P2 cards. I would say the JVC is more affordable. Then again, it depends more on which features you absolutely "must" have and which you consider optional. The HVX and JVC each have features that the other doesnt. So check out the features and decide for yourself.

MovieSwede, "technically" HDV should not be an option for CC'ing, but practically, people like McGregor have shown that you can do pretty much anything with the FX1 (HDV).
 
I know this thread has setteled for a while but I was looking through some old articles and reviews on dv.com

Just thought I'd paste this stuff over from an article by Adam Wilt on the FX1... (I'm pasting becuase unless your registered you can't view things on the site.)


Pros:

It's a 1080i/60, 16:9 camcorder for $3,700! Very good MPEG-2 encoding for the bitrate. Decent HD pictures with great down-conversion, 480i DV recording, and legacy SD support. Wide 4.5 mm lens with smooth zoom and focus. Daylight-viewable LCD. Dual Shot Transition presets for programmable moves; six tweakable picture profiles.

Cons:

Low pixel count CCDs with excessive horizontal aliasing. Focusing is harder than it should be due to misplaced controls and low-res finders; focusing aids have annoying limitations. MPEG-2 25 Mbps pictures degrade under heavy stress. Low sensitivity.

Bottom Line:

The HDR-FX1 is the DCR-VX1000 of the high-definition world: It's the first HD camcorder combining truly acceptable pictures, sufficient image tweaks, smooth operational controls, and a price lower than the original VX1000's. This consumer camera, along with its more capable but more expensive sibling the HVR-Z1, makes HD shooting affordable for the masses. It won't displace Varicams and CineAltas, but it brings HD acquisition to a vastly wider market.


-------------


Controls



"It's a tube!" cried a colleague, upon seeing the camera. Indeed, the large lens flows back into the cylindrical body with no diameter changes; the first impression is of a bazooka as much as a camera. The huge lens barrel isn't just for looks: It contains heavy glass, with a front element of nearly 54 mm behind 72 mm filter threads (the same thread size as the Canon XL2's 20 X lens and the Panasonic DVX100A). The lens is an admirably wide 4.5 mm-54 mm zoom, wider than most other 1/3-inch CCD cameras. A clever 16:9 lens hood comes standard, with integrated, lever-activated "shutter"-style lens protection just like the VX2100 and PD170--no more fumbling for a dangling or detached lens cap.


A Sony-smooth servo focus ring encircles the front of the lens. It's not labeled, but the viewfinder reads out the focal distance in metric units when focusing manually. In auto-focus, the ring on the FX1 is disabled (the Z1 allows manual overrides). There is a Push Auto button, but it's nearly 5 inches from the focus ring, buried among several similar controls. When I groped for it, I often wound up pressing the white balance reset or one of the assignable buttons instead. The button's location made sense on the old VX1000, where it was adjacent to the focus ring, but as lenses have grown bigger and longer, the focus switches have failed to migrate forward, severely limiting their usability in live shooting.


Manual focus is assisted by two controls. An Expanded Focus button behind the zoom rocker momentarily enlarges the viewfinder image by 2 X, which is a useful feature found on some Sony digital still cameras as well as on the $250,000 Thomson Viper HDTV camera. Unfortunately, it doesn't function while recording. The analog and FireWire outputs blank briefly whenever the viewfinder goes into or out of Expanded mode.


Peaking sharpens viewfinder focus by a fixed amount. The FX1's peaking is underpowered for my taste, but it's useful nonetheless (the Z1 has three different peaking levels and innovative coloration of the peaking signal, but--at least on the prototypes--it's still weaker than it should be). It's too bad that peaking and zebra can't be used at the same time--it's one or the other, no matter that camera operators need both while shooting.


The zoom ring is a servo using an absolute position encoder, so settings are calibrated and repeatable, and the ring is marked with focal lengths. It's smooth enough to do a nicely ramped zoom, though the 90-degree rotation from wide to tele and a slight amount of static friction makes it a bit twitchier than the buttery-smooth slow manual zooms possible with the VX2100 and similar cameras. Snap zooms take about 1.5 seconds--you can turn the ring faster, but the lens needs time to catch up.


A slide switch enables the ring; you can use the ring or the zoom rockers, but not both (driving the ring under power against its considerable viscous drag would devour batteries). My slowest zoom with the rocker on the hand-grip took nearly 2 minutes--but that slow speed required depressing the rocker nearly halfway, but not a millimeter more; getting slow creeps with the rocker requires a very delicate touch. The fastest zoom with the rocker is about 2 seconds.


The FX1 gives you separate controls for iris, gain, white balance, and shutter speed--no more sharing the selector wheel between the latter three functions. An iris wheel controls aperture, three-position switches let you set gain and white balance, and the menu wheel controls shutter speed. Any manual control shows its setting in the viewfinder, but there is no indication of exposure other than a zebra, which can be set in 5 percent increments between 70 and 100+ (anything over 100 percent). The Z1, but not the FX1, lets you use the iris wheel as an auto-exposure override.


The camera has three assignable buttons, but only six menu functions may be assigned (fader, Steadyshot, index mark, audio dub, display, and colorbars; the Z1 has six buttons and more assignable functions). The FX1 has a comprehensive menu system, as well as six Picture Profile settings--known as custom presets or scene files on other cameras. A user-programmable P-Menu lets you set up a custom menu with commonly used items for quick access, and a Status Check button lets you review five pages of camera setup information without having to navigate any menus.


Two Shot Transition presets behave like a studio camera's shotbox. You can store exposure, white balance, focus, and zoom settings on each of the two buttons, then transition into them smoothly during shooting, greatly easing operations when performing repeatable moves. The transition time is variable from 2 to 15 seconds, and the transition ramp can have hard corners or eases. The Z1 adds automatic triggering of transitions based on a timer.


An i.Link (FireWire) connector projects down from the right rear panel, like the multicore connectors on older field cameras. This sensible arrangement protects the delicate 4-pin connection. LANC (remote control) and headphones jacks reside just behind the handgrip, and the analog I/O bay sits in front of it (see the bottom image on the right). The camera offers Y/C on its own jack and combines stereo audio and composite video on a four-conductor miniplug (an RCA adapter cable is supplied). Component analog has its own delicate-looking proprietary connector with a triple-RCA breakout cable; plugging in the component cable disables composite and Y/C. The FX1 can record analog SD through the Y/C and composite jacks and convert those inputs to DV, but the only ways to get HD into the camera are via FireWire or through the lens.

A 3.5 mm minijack provides mic-/line-switchable audio inputs. Both channels' gains are controlled simultaneously with a wheel at the back of the camera; either manual or auto-gain can be used. The camera's built-in stereo mic is overridden by audio plugged into the jack.


[FONT=arial,helvetica]Handling[/FONT]

[FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica]
A big, bright 16:9-native viewfinder looks good, but only resolves about 350 TV lines. It's supplemented by a flip-out 3.5-inch LCD innovatively mounted toward the front of the carry handle, swinging out to reveal transport buttons. The LCD is transflective and completely readable in broad daylight; it resolves about 400 TV lines. Consider that the FX1 is an HD camera, and that the monochrome finder on the PD150 and PD170 resolves over 500 lines: focusing the FX1 accurately can be a challenge. Status displays provide useful information but cannot be cleared completely in camera mode; only the upper half of the screen's data is cleared with the Display function. You can use either the EVF or the LCD, but not both at the same time.

The Z1's finder can be switched to monochrome, but it's still a color finder with the same limited resolution. The Z1 lets you use both EVF and LCD simultaneously, and it lets you clear more of the display info off of the screen.

With the LCD relocated to the handle, the tape transport returns to its rightful place on the left side of the camera, as on the original VX1000. Once again, you can reload tapes without removing your hand from the handgrip, a boon in run-and-gun shooting.


Tape searching, aside from Rec Review, isn't possible while in camera mode; you can't shuttle tape forward or backward. In VCR mode, the transport is nicely responsive to both direct control and FireWire commands. Although the FX1 only shows hours, minutes, and seconds in the display while in camera mode, it shows the full timecode in VCR mode (yes, HDV has timecode, and it's sent across FireWire). Timecode is presettable on the Z1, but not on the FX1.


Batteries attach at the rear and charge in the camera. The diminutive NP-F570 supplied with the camera lasts at least an hour in normal usage; I shot an entire day, recording about 20 minutes of tape, without worrying about power. Heftier batteries are available, and both batteries and chargers from the VX2000, VX2100, PD150, and PD170 can be used. Like other recent Sony cameras, the AC adapter charges the battery in the camera only; an external charger is an extra-cost option.

[FONT=arial,helvetica]HD and SD[/FONT]

[FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica]
The FX1 records either in HDV at 1440 x 1080 or in DV at 720 x 480, both at 29.97 frames per second (the Z1 adds PAL-friendly 25 Hz HDV, DV, and DVCAM). HDV recordings are always 16:9, while DV can be shot at either 16:9 or 4:3, with a semitransparent viewfinder mask displayed to show the 4:3 area. Bright blue status lamps on the camera indicate the mode, as does the viewfinder.

When shooting HDV, Y/C and composite outputs show a down-converted SD picture. You can choose anamorphic full-screen display or letterboxed display for 4:3 monitors. The component output shows either 1080i or down-converted 480i depending on your preferences, while FireWire can be similarly configured to output 1080i HDV or 480i DV, making it quite feasible to shoot in HDV yet edit as DV, or to use a portable DV disk in the field while recording HD on tape.

Down-conversion options are present both in camera and VCR modes. Up-conversion from 480i to 1080i isn't provided. The camera is supposed to play (but not record) 720p/30 tapes shot with the JVC HDV cameras, but I had no such tapes to try out.

[FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica]
[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
 
[FONT=arial,helvetica]Performance[/FONT]

[FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica]
The camera uses three 1/3-inch, 16:9 native HD CCDs, each with 960 pixels per scanline. The green CCD is bonded to the prism offset horizontally by half a pixel, increasing the apparent resolution by up to 50 percent, or 1440 pixels. And 1080i HDV records 1440 samples per line (as does HDCAM), so the effective resolution of camera and tape format mesh fairly well.

However, the standard-definition Canon XL2 also uses 960 (or 962) pixels per scanline, while Sony's other 1080i cameras use either 1440 or 1920 pixels per scanline; in other words, the FX1 is relatively undersampled horizontally. In terms of the picture, this undersampling shows up just as it does on its SD counterparts, the PD170 and VX2100: noticeable horizontal aliasing on fine vertical detail, especially when image enhancement is used. It's visible when shooting test charts, but less so in the real world; with 16 different "sharpness" settings available on the FX1, it's easy to vary the picture from "mushy" to "edgy" and trade off apparent detail against aliasing problems. In my tests, sharpness settings in the range of 4-12 gave perfectly acceptable pictures.

In other aspects, too, the FX1 is similar to its SD cousins. Colorimetry, dynamic range, and tonal scale rendering are very close to those of the PD150 I tested alongside the FX1, right down to the dynamic knee the cameras share, which varies the extent and scope of highlight compression based on scene content. The FX1 offers a "Cinematone gamma" that, like the Cine gamma on the XL2, pulls down midtones a bit and flattens the contrast curve, but it offers no other controls over the tonal scale (the Z1 adds a second, darker Cinematone gamma and a black stretch control). Vertical smear is comparable to the PD150. Luma noise is slightly less prominent than on the SD camera; chroma noise is slightly higher. Only in sensitivity is there a marked difference: the FX1 is 1.5-2 stops slower than the PD150.

On the test charts and in the real world, the camera makes crisp, detailed pictures. In HDV recording, I saw roughly 650 TVl/ph of horizontal resolution in playback, with visible but aliased detail out to 750 TVl/ph, and 800+ lines vertically (my current test chart maxes out at 800 lines). The numbers look unimpressive, but consider that the horizontal resolution of 1080i maxes out around 872 TVl/ph (http://bssc.sel.sony.com/Professional/markets/production/productsite/files/24PTechnicalSeminar2.pdf ). Fine detail leapt out of the FX1's HD pictures, and the doubling of vertical resolution compared with SD made tilts and diagonal lines smooth and clean, with vastly reduced scanline artifacts. Although the camera isn't up to the specs of a CineAlta, its high-definition images were clearly a cut above SD pictures from the PD150 and DVX100 I tested alongside it.

In DV mode, playback resolution was limited to about 520 TVl/ph and 400 lines vertically, as you might expect. The FX1's SD pictures were as sharp as those from an XL2 or DVX100, albeit with slightly more noticeable horizontal aliasing than either of those.


The built-in down-converter works well. SD pictures are crisp, clean, and free from obvious scaling artifacts, in either full-screen or letterboxed modes. One benefit of down-conversion is that slow shutter speeds can be used in DV mode with greatly reduced aliasing. Like other Sony cameras, slow shutters field-double, but the field-doubling happens in HD and the down-converted images suffer only a slight vertical resolution loss instead of a halving of it.


The FX1 offers two Cineframe modes, simulating 30p and 24p. Cineframe30 field-doubles, resulting in a 30 fps image update rate with halved vertical resolution (halved in HD, but only marginally impaired in SD).


Cineframe24 uses a five-frame cycle of full frames and doubled fields that looks at first glance like 3:2 pulldown, but the camera itself is still running at 60i and the motion lacks the smoothness of true 24p (see www.adamwilt.com/ HDV). I'd stick with 60i for my film-outs.


In 1080i HDV recording, the FX1 uses long-GOP MPEG-2 at 25 Mbps. Sony's implementation is very good and has fewer artifacts than I expected. Most images look pristine, with little of the "mosquito noise" that plagues DV. With very busy details and lots of in-frame motion, perceived image noise in normal playback increases slightly. Single-frame or slow-mo playback reveals blocking or "quilting" errors, scattered and localized mosquito noise, color trailing, offset spatial details, and posterization, but it takes fairly extreme circumstances, like intentional shakycam with short shutter times, to generate substantial artifacts of this sort.


I wouldn't recommend HDV for compositing, slow-mo, or still frames, but overall, the degradation due to compression was less than I see on most DVDs or in over-the-air HDTV broadcasts.


HDV has two channels of 48 kHz, 16-bit audio, squeezed 4:1 using MPEG-1 Layer 2 compression. I'm no Jay Rose, but both voice and music recording sounded clean and artifact free. The built-in mic is par for the course, picking up handling and motor noises in quiet surroundings, but line-level inputs from a mixer were accurately recorded and reproduced.


The FX1 is just a little bit longer, wider, taller, and heavier than a VX2100. Like other Sony Handycams, it's well-balanced fore and aft, but the 4-pound, 10-ounce weight combined with the 6-inch width makes the camera side-heavy, like a DVX100. The camera is perfectly usable handheld, but it's approaching the upper limit for the Handycam form factor.

[FONT=arial,helvetica]Conclusion[/FONT]

[FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica]
Although the HDR-FX1 resembles the DCR-VX2100, its true progenitor is the DCR-VX1000, the Handycam that triggered the DV revolution. Its pioneering position partially explains the FX1's 4.5 score and its DV Award of Excellence.


Despite its quirks, the FX1 makes a compelling case for transitioning into HDTV production--or at least acquisition. The FX1's built-in down-converter and comprehensive DV support makes the transition something you can negotiate at your own speed; you can even shoot HDV for the future while editing that footage as DV for today.


At $3,700, the FX1 undercuts the VX1000's original price of $4,200. Who says there isn't progress? For those frustrated by the limitations of the FX1, the professional HVR-Z1 provides some relief, despite the heftier $5,946 price tag.


Of course, there's more to HD than the camera; I'll discuss some of those issues in an upcoming issue of DV. For now, bear in mind that SD isn't going away any time soon; there are plenty of reasons to consider the Canon XL2, Panasonic DVX100A, Sony PD170, or similar cameras as sensible choices. Stay tuned.
[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top