abortabort

I don't know, there are always factual errors in every one of Andrew's posts. Like the one about the GH4 being 'the first 4K camera for $2000'... Uhm, nah.

AX1 does 150Mbps 4K with XAVC-S, 60Mbps is a chosen limitation of the AX100 aimed at consumers. http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.sonydigitalimaging.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/AX1_Brochure.pdf&sa=U&ei=9nY_U7zKE4nwkAWakIHADQ&ved=0CBUQFjAE&usg=AFQjCNEnzhcRHMt1363hqjOHZH4woLmqtg Edit: 150Mbps @ 50/60fps 100Mbps @ 24/25/30fps But this shows XAVC-S is not limited to 60Mbps.

Or maybe I am.thinking of the AX1, but XAVX-S I believe can do higher than 60Mbps.

From memory the AX100 does 100Mbit 4K and 50Mbit 1080p.

First of all, don't call me 'dude'. If a punk cinematographer calls me 'dude'... they don't get a job. Simple as that. This is YOUR forum where you pretend to be a professional cinematographer, at least try to act like it. Secondly - "Better stuff out there"? Really? So when it was announced a few weeks ago there were better 4K options for $2K were there? I guess those featured prominently on your site yes? Thirdly - Your site stopped being about 'DSLRs' a long long time ago, in fact you fairly recently dismissed DSLRs as nothing interesting happening there. You reviewed the RX10, RX100 and RX100 II, you have articles on the Arri AMIRA, BMCC, Olympus OM-D, Panasonic GH4, Sony A7R, RX1, C300, C500, C100, REDs, Digital Bolex and on and on.... Not a single one of which is a DSLR. But you choose the 'it's not a DSLR' card on this? Fourthly - The only reasonable thing you have said is that the lens is slower than the RX10, yes, yes it is. Bravo. I forget that 'dudes' like you think that being a 'lite 'pro' cinematographer means having tiny DoF in every single shot otherwise it's just not 'pro' and if a camera can't do that it totally isn't worthy of their 'pro-ness'. Lastly - Are you really 'that' stupid smart that you think you can pull 8MP frame grabs out of 4K and expect them to be poster sized print quality? Good luck with that.

First of all, don't call me 'dude'. If a punk cinematographer calls me 'dude'... they don't get a job. Simple as that. This is YOUR forum where you pretend to be a professional cinematographer, at least try to act like it. Secondly - "Better stuff out there"? Really? So when it was announced a few weeks ago there were better 4K options for $2K were there? I guess those featured prominently on your site yes? Thirdly - Your site stopped being about 'DSLRs' a long long time ago, in fact you fairly recently dismissed DSLRs as nothing interesting happening there. You reviewed the RX10, RX100 and RX100 II, you have articles on the Arri AMIRA, BMCC, Olympus OM-D, Panasonic GH4, Sony A7R, RX1, C300, C500, C100, REDs, Digital Bolex and on and on.... Not a single one of which is a DSLR. But you choose the 'it's not a DSLR' card on this? Fourthly - The only reasonable thing you have said is that the lens is slower than the RX10, yes, yes it is. Bravo. I forget that 'dudes' like you think that being a 'lite 'pro' cinematographer means having tiny DoF in every single shot otherwise it's just not 'pro' and if a camera can't do that it totally isn't worthy of their 'pro-ness'. Lastly - Are you really 'that' stupid smart that you think you can pull 8MP frame grabs out of 4K and expect them to be poster sized print quality? Good luck with that.

AX100 won't give you the wide you desire. GH4 will struggle to give you the wide you desire, but still possible. Something like the Sigma 8-16mm should take you down there. Also the Panasonic 7-14mm as the other option. Nothing else is really wide enough. Speedbooster will need to take whatever lens down to around 7.5mm to give you 18mm on the GH3, so that's another option. Maybe a Samyang 10mm? Some of the 10-whatevers will as well. 9mm of the Olympus will be 21mm - About 14mm on your current 12-24.

I'm curious Andrew, you liked the RX10 seemingly a lot for it's great feature set (for a run and gun shooter), but hated the AVCHD codec. You are also (obviously) very keen on 4K at the minute. So my question is this - It's been weeks since CES and not one peep from you about the AX100? Obviously it is not in direct competition with the GH4, but it does seem to fix the issues with the RX10 and add a similar 4K capability into the bargain... And at $1999 no less! Seriously don't get why this wasn't plastered all over EOSHD? This is the first 4K for $2K camera ever, has a 2.7x crop sensor (vs 2.3 in the Panasonic) with a decent ranging lens, 100Mbps 4K, scraps the crap AVCHD in 1080p, even supposedly does 120fps. So what gives? It was like a week after you proclaimed going to 4K and everyone else should follow... So, could your trip to Panasonic have had something to do with both of those things (your post about everyone should go 4K and your complete silence on the AX100)?

Yes, but if as above you compare the total light path the A7/R is miles ahead of the Olympus, IS (for stills) isn't as useful as people make out, you still need usable shutter speeds for anything other than taking some pictures of plastic figurines on your desk and going 'oohhhh, aaahhhhh, look ma' I can handhold down to X shutter speed'... In real world shooting you still need a decent shutter speed most of the time, so the advantage of IS is lost. The disadvantage of a small sensor however remains. You say 'at least Canon and Nikon have a big range of IS lenses... Including fast primes like the new 35mm f2 IS - You say 'like' as if to suggest this is but one example, thing is that lens is the ONLY lens in the Canon range that has IS and is faster than f2.8. Hell even their f2.8 standard zoom (24-70) does't have IS. So you can't go 'like the 35mm f2 IS' because there is nothing else 'like' the 35mm f2 IS (which I use on my A7, with IS for what it's worth). In fact, SONY, until very very recently were the only company in the world to produce IS lenses faster than f2, that is until Panasonic's new 42.5mm f1.2. We can definitely expect OSS primes from them for the A7/R, but not Zeiss branded ones. I have used IS based cameras from the beginning and all my systems I have leaned towards IBIS, including Sony / Minolta, Pentax and Olympus. Is it nice to have? Sure. Is it necessary or make any real world difference? Not really. I can handhold my RX10 at 200mm @ 0.8 seconds shutter speed with good results, is that useful? No.

Yet another idiotic 'look' at this camera... Because there is nothing like it people seem to try to compare it to a number of other things and that just doesn't work. Let's start with the most glaringly obvious of these - You start by saying that after using this camera you bought a D700. Two sentences down you start moaning (like nobody have ever mentioned it before) that the primes don't have IS (or OSS, or whatever you want to call it). So Andrew, would you like to point me to the IS primes you use with your D700 instead? Well? Hmmm... See the thing is, when you start comparing something like this to multiple cameras, because there is no direct competition, things get muddied. Every single 'review' of this camera goes (in a round-about way) to this conclusion: 1. The camera doesn't have the IBIS of the Olympus (it's mirror less competition) 2. It doesn't have the AF of a 5D MkIII etc (It's full frame competition) The problem with this is the FF competition doesn't have the IS of the Olympus either, but that gets forgotten about, and the Olympus doesn't have the AF tracking of the FF DSLRs. Nobody expects the Olympus to focus track like a FF DSLR and nobody expects the FF DSLRs to have 5-Axis IBIS... But somehow, because the Sony is a full frame AND a mirror less it is expected to have both? I'm not suggesting the camera is perfect, FAR from it, but I just struggle to understand the lack of thought that goes into these comparisons. You can't bash it from both sides I guess is the point. Either it's a mirror less and needs to be compared to other mirror less or it's a DSLR alternative, don't go stacking cons from both piles and say 'look it's crap because it isn't better than both of these cameras'. Then getting onto the lens comparison with a speed booster, yes a speed booster will help, but it is only going to close the gap between m43's and APS-C, so still looking at a stop behind. So with the Sigma 'f1.3' we are really talking about an f2.8 zoom on the Sony, both of which are available and both would be MF, though the Olympus with have IS. What about some other, native lenses though... Well let's compare the 'crap range of lenses' that Sony have released thus far in m43's terms, they have 5 lenses announced at launch, 5 more this year, 5 next. The 5 we have at the moment would require m43's to have the following native lenses to compensate for the difference in sensor, but not resolution: 14-35mm f1.8-2.8 OSS (this is the cheap-assed 'kit' lens that comes with your body for $200). 12-35mm f2 OSS 35-100mm f2 OSS 17mm f1.4 27mm f0.95 All of these AF, are native mount and the zooms have IS. m43's users would be squealing and shaking with excitement had Olympus released such lenses for m43's, especially at what is a fairly modest cost, yet all there seems to be are complaints. I know this is a video oriented site, so the IS of the Olympus bodies and the codec choices, sensor readout etc are all important in this regard and the Sony is mostly CRAP in all these regards and it shows (though some other usability features are actually kind of nice), video on the A7/R sucks. Stills however are a different matter entirely.

Interesting preview Andrew. Still think the GH2 has some better handling qualities to it than a DSLR, which I mostly think are more important than outright IQ.

[quote author=Andrew Reid link=topic=812.msg5914#msg5914 date=1339160580] The HX9v did 1080/50/60p and there's also an Olympus compact that does it. 60 and 50p conform to 24/25p (50p perfectly so) and you also have the capability to do dreamy slow-mo. So don't confuse it with crappy 60i or 30p it is far better than that. Focus peaking and manual control in video mode is GREAT for this camera. As for clean HDMI out - not sure why you think the HX9v had that? It did HDMI out but it wasn't clean or enabled during recording. [/quote] Sorry Andrew for some reason I overlooked the many Sony models that do 60p now including HX9v, HX10v, 20v, 30v, 100v, 200v and one of their high end slim models (can't remember the model). But which Olympus model supports 1080 - 50/60p? In regards to clean HDMI output, I actually thought it was you Andrew who put me onto that through a video shot with the HX9v and Atomos Ninja on one of the trade show floors? I also recall it being of not much advatage in terms or quality, but that isn't the only reason to use an external recorder. Maybe I am wrong, but I was certain it was you and saying that because it wasn't 'pro' enough they hadn't disabled it? Perhaps my memory is failing me! I don't own, nor have I owned an HX9v so I way purely going off other users information.

[quote author=markm link=topic=813.msg5832#msg5832 date=1338833034] Why oh why did Black Magic cripple it with lens choice All they needed to do was stick a FOUR THIRDS mount on it or make one that could be interchangeable. [/quote] Ok so don't buy it. I think BMD made a good call, they are trying to take market from the Canon dSLR video set and what better way to do that then with a camera that their lenses work on natively? You can still adapt a heap of different SLR lenses to it as well as PL pretty easily, but EF mount is more difficult to adapt from another mount due to electronic aperture control, so having that built in to the camera means not having to buy a much more expensive adapter like the Metabones etc. While a short flange option like E-Mount would have been great, I think BMD made the right call. Who knows if there is demand for it we could see an E-Mount version of m4/3's version later down the track. Hell an interchangeable mount of their own that they sell E, m4/3's, EF, Nikon, PL etc mount adapters for would be even better. But for a first version EF mount was the right choice, it also seems to be becoming the de facto for step-up cinema cameras, look at the RED Scarlet launch and how much rejoicing in the street there was with the Metabones EF adapter for E-Mount. Basically EF is one of the hardest to adapt with a simple adapter, making it standard and built in is effectively saving hundreds of dollars and in itself is reasonably adaptable.

[quote author=hoodlum link=topic=812.msg5885#msg5885 date=1339014322] dpreview has confirmed there is no 1080p24.  Here is some more info. http://***URL removed***/previews/sony-dsc-rx100/4 "The RX100 allows P,A,S or M exposure modes to be used when video shooting. Autofocus remains available in movie shooting, regardless of the exposure mode used. Alternatively the camera's focus peaking can be used to aid manual focus (which can be assigned to the front dial). This, combined with the camera's active image stabilization during movie shooting, makes it a pretty capable and pocketable camera for grabbing footage." [/quote] Very disappointing! I presume the 30p is wrapped up in 60i? So in PAL regions it should be 50i (wrapped 25p) and 50p. I don't care for 24p as 25p would have been fine, but to not have 25p is very annoying (or 24p for those in NTSC land). On the plus side, this is the ONLY compact I know of that includes 1080 50/60p. It is also the only compact I know that offers full manual control over exposure, AF + MF with control ring, focus peaking etc. While it isn't perfect, it is streets ahead of any other fixed lens camera and better than a lot of interchangeable lens cameras. Also the UI is taken from Sony's SLTs rather than their compact cams, so I am guessing clean HDMI out like HX9v is out of the question... Plus it is in the WORST place I could imagine.

[quote author=abortabort link=topic=812.msg5851#msg5851 date=1338880154] I hope this has clean HDMI out like the HX9v! Being that it is a Cybershot and not a NEX/Alpha, I am hopeful it will! [/quote] Argh! the HDMI port is right NEXT to the tripod socket!!! Hands down, worst feature of this otherwise seemingly awesome little camera :(