Archive for January, 2007

Sony FX7 vs FX1 comparison

Published by Administrator January 25th, 2007 in Digital Technology, HD Cameras and Video Production. 3 Comments

I keep staring at the specs for the new Sony HDR-FX7. It’s hard to see the differences between the “old” Sony FX1 and it’s upgrade.


Here’s the side-by-side comparison:

  • Resolution: Sony claims FX7 now supports “full” 1080 HD
  • Sensor: FX7 now sports 3 x 1/4” ClearVid CMOS
  • Light sensitivity: worse by 33% (4lux)
  • Zoom: increased to 20x optical zoom
  • Lens/filter: decreased to 62mm
  • Video out: FX7 includes HDMI
  • Weight: FX7 now weighs only 1.6 kg (3.52 lb.)

The small form factor and the zoom increase are important for some applications but I do have concerns about the light sensitivity. First, it looks like the lens has gone DOWN in size which affects the light hitting the sensor. Second, the sensor change to CMOS also means worse low-light performance.

Most consumers who use cameras in that range usually don’t use professional lighting, so they often experience problems with underexposed video or video with too many artefacts.

Q: HD quality of different cams

Published by Administrator January 22nd, 2007 in Digital Technology, Film School, HD Cameras and Video Production. 1 Comment

Kaspar had this question to ask:

I’ve come across your webpage and have been reading your reviews on HD cameras. May I ask you a question concerning this? It seems you have quite some experience — and I seem to lack it!

I am working together with a small group of creatives and we would like to make a series of short movies: some movies about dancing/arts (for fun) and some ad movies for customers (to be shown on fares, public advertisement screens, and maybe one or two clips on television).

We have experimented a little bit with MiniDV (in combination with FinalCutPro, After Effects, and Shake) and found it disappointing. We frequently had to use keyers (to get rid of a white/green background) and the results were really bad, even though we started with a pretty good white background.

I am now hoping that HD changes this a little. But I see that many HD cams use heavy compression and therefore I fear that the resulting artefacts will make editing difficult, again. Is this so?

Or more concrete: Could you tell me maybe a camera that you could recommend (without responsibility, of course) for this type of
work? A low-budget one (say up to $2000), a semi-pro one (up to $4000) and an even better one?

I thought the answer could be helpful to others as well:

I’m afraid the quality of the video won’t change much from DV to HD. The resolution definitely will change but it seems to me you’re not after resolution. From the sound of it, you have a problem with removing the background.

First off, when doing blue/green screen work, you need a studio of some sort. You could probably do it yourself but the resulting video will suffer. The key problem with greenscreen is EVEN lighting. The way it’s done in studios is that you create a “rama” with lights spread out at precise intervals. It’s rather expensive if you want to create a similar setup at a stage (if you’re dancing on a stage that is).

In terms of cameras, any camera below $6000 is going to use HDV (25Mbps) to record the signal which means a lot of compression. So you’re right about that - HD will introduce more compression artefacts, not less. At about 6,000, you can get Panasonic HVX200 which supports 100Mbps recording ( i.e. much higher quality recording).

I certainly understand your frustration. When I bought my first camera (a SONY VX2000) I was pretty disappointed as well. Then, I bought a Lowel light kit (4 lights) and I loved the results. Your goal is a bit more ambitious but I think you’ll find out that once you solve the lighting, everything else will be easy.

Keep the questions coming :)

Filmlike video

Published by Administrator January 20th, 2007 in Digital Technology, HD Cameras and Video Production. 0 Comments

I just found this video tutorial (?) about achieving filmlike video. It talks about screen ratios, interlaced vs progressive shooting, and more.

Filmlike video

Right-click video, then select “Save Target As…”

For a 5 minute video, it packs plenty of info. It missed one very important point (that I frequently come back to): LIGHTING.

Lighting is one of the magic ingredients when going for filmlike video. Just look at the segment in question - the blue background light creates much needed separation between subject and background. (In video, this separation is often achieved by adding a certain color - usually blue; in film, you have many more options.)

I’m not 100% sure if this is a Panasonic HVX200 in the background. I was hoping to see someone putting the new Sony FX7 to good use!

Sony HDR-FX7

Published by Administrator January 19th, 2007 in Digital Technology, HD Cameras, News bits and Video Production. 4 Comments

It’s hard to keep up with SONY’s new cams for one very good reason - they are skipping numbers! I thought the successor to the very successful Sony FX1 will be called FX2. Or, perhaps, FX3.


When it comes to the product name, Sony isn’t content with incremental improvements. We’re now straight to number 7. Not so when it comes to the product itself. Maybe, Sony felt that neither Canon XL H1 nor Panasonic HVX200 changed anything in the market, so why bother.

Many reviewers have likened the FX7 release to the release of the VX2100 model, hot on the steps of VX2000 (I’m a proud owner of the latter). The VX2100 offered some minor improvements in light sensitivity and a variety of interface features that made things a bit easier for the prosumer shooter.

Let’s look at Sony FX7 and see what advantages it offers.

  • Affordable (Canon XL H1’s price is almost 3 times higher)
  • Real HD 1080 support (unlike FX1’s 1440×1080 chip)
  • Good video with low light capabilities (though admittedly worse than FX1 because of the CMOS)
  • Long battery life
  • Standard HDV (using MiniDV cassettes)

On the negative side we’ve got:

  • Fixed lens (though it has been bumped to 20x zoom)
  • No XLR inputs for audio
  • No true 24p

If you look at Sony FX1’s advantages from last year, you’ll see the camera has the same things going for it with a few notable differences.

To me, the biggest difference is the sensor. In the last year, SONY has introduced a several of his low-end HD cams with CMOS sensors (e.g. Sony HC1 and Sony HC3). Is CMOS good enough for $3,000 cam though?

Harry Haruna, Manager of Camcorder Product Planning for Sony USA, had this to say:

As for resolution, because you have the CMOS technology the FX7, resolution is much higher than the FX1 in decent light conditions. On the contrary, under low light conditions the FX1 is better than the FX7, since the FX1 has a larger CCD sensor.

Sony HDR-FX7Hmm, I thought FX7 was an upgrade. It looks like it’s something of a sidegrade: if you have an FX1, keep it. If you don’t, you can either get the FX1 if you need a cam with a better sensor and bigger lens or go for the new FX7 with its smaller form factor and “full” HD 1080.

Still, if I was into wedding videography or guerrilla filmmaking, the FX7 could be quite tempting.

Then again, Canon has recently introduced more affordable versions of its $9,000 monster, the Canon XL H1. At just $500 more than the FX7, it introduces some much needed competition. If I can get FX1 for less than $2000 (Apple store had an offer like that), I’d be the happiest person … for the next 6 months or so.

I’m considering switching from my web cam to this baby. Here’s a short guide on how to select a web cam.

Sharp’s ultra high res monitor

Published by Administrator January 16th, 2007 in Digital Technology, HD Cameras, News bits and Video Production. 2 Comments

While I’m debating with myself whether I should go for a 1080 TV or settle for a 720 one, Sharp have introduced an amazing 64 ” monitor that’s 4000×2000 pixels. That’s right, it’s effectively an 8 megapixel monitor. Four times the resolution of a 1080 TV.


Sharp Ultra high res monitor

That’s still about 25 million pixels shy of the UHDV format (7,680 × 4,320 pixels) pioneered by JBC.

It took quite a while for cameras to catch up with regular HD, Sony recently upped their FX1 cam to “full HD 1080″ with the new Sony FX7.

Review: Blood Diamond

Published by Administrator January 9th, 2007 in Book/DVD Reviews, Movie Reviews and Storytelling. 3 Comments

Blood Diamond Caprio ConnollyI saw Blood Diamond on Saturday and the impression still lingers (I’m not sure if I want to go as far as to call it still a fresh impression).

The movie opens with the mandatory explanatory sequence. In this case, it’s probably necessary since the movie is set in 1999, Siera Leone. At that time, the country is torn by a civil war, with rebels on one side and government troops on the other. Solomon Vandy (Djimon Hounsou), a husband and a father of three, falls in between those two forces.

A rebel group attacks his village and takes him to a working camp to dig diamonds. As chance would have it, he soon finds the biggest pink diamond anyone has seen (a 100-karat monster). He manages to hide it when the government troops assault the camp. He’s then taken to prison as an alleged rebel.

While in prison, the rebel camp commander identifies Salomon as the person who dug the biggest diamond in the world, which makes Leo’s character, South African “soldier of fortune” Danny Archer, go after him.

To cut a LONG story short, the film documents their journey back to the camp where they have to find the diamond and also deal with the unwanted attention of rebel commanders and rogue colonels.

That’s exactly one of the problems of the film - it’s length. It often drags its feet and even the action sequences cannot easily get it running back at full speed. The violence is everywhere but it’s not shocking because it usually happens to innocent bystanders.

Finally, I just can’t picture Leo as the next Rambo. In the several action sequences he shoots cold-heartedly at least a dozen people with a hand gun. I don’t wanna see him get hold of a machine gun, in true Rambo style.

One of the reasons I’m harsh about the movie is that it plays in (roughly) the same league as Hotel Rwanda and The Constant Gardener (throw in Lord of War too). Both had better acting, a more intense plot, and a feeling of conclusion (not always the same as happy end).

HD DVD marches on

Published by Administrator January 8th, 2007 in Digital Technology, News bits and Software. 0 Comments

Or is it? The North American HD DVD Promotional Group took advantage of CES to get out the following:

As of January 5th, the group estimates there were more than 175,000 HD DVD players sold in America, with an annualized attach rate of 28 movies per player. The group projects sales will reach 2.5 million players by the end of this year and more than $600 million worth of movie revenues. HD DVD buyers can look forward to more HDi enhanced titles, now featuring internet features that were demoed at the event, as well as more players hitting the market from manufacturers like Lite-On, Alco, Alpine, Meridian and Onkyo. Look for the trend of combo releases to continue, as the format’s backers see it as a viable way of introducing current DVD owners to the format and building a library prior to upgrading.

Numbers usually don’t lie. And the numbers here (at least in terms of players) are very much skewed in favor of the Blu-ray camp. The reason? One million Playstation 3 have been purchased and I bet this is just the beginning.

Recommended Gear

More Links