Tag Archive for 'fx1'

Canon HV20 Camcorder

Published by Administrator August 24th, 2007 in Digital Technology, HD Cameras, News bits and Video Production. 1 Comment

Although I’m not a big fan of “consumer” camcorders like Canon HV20, I’m always tempted to try them and see if they compare well to my preferred segment (that’s $3,000 to $8,000).

Canon HV20 CamcorderFirst off, the good news. It’s a small camera that you can fit virtually anywhere. It weighs less than a kilo (with battery), so you can CARRY it anywhere.


The sensor is a single CMOS sensor with over 2 million active pixels. That means a native support for 1080i format (1920×1080 pixels).

The bad news is its light sensitivity, mic inputs, and the battery life. Battery life can be extended by purchasing a better battery (BP-2L14) and you should definitely consider it if you’re shooting anything longer than an hour (which is most stuff).

DV.com’s Chuck Gloman has a more detailed review of the camera. Overall, he was impressed by the outdoors footage and the form factor. I’m still not convinced I’ll trade a small-factor Sony (like Sony HC3).

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

Sony V1

Published by Administrator March 31st, 2007 in Digital Technology, HD Cameras and Video Production. 1 Comment

Adam Wilt at DV Magazine, is taking a first look at Sony V1.

Sony V1

In a typical SAT fashion: with V1 Sony has upgraded the Z1 “prosumer” camcorder the same way it upgraded the revolutionary Sony FX1 to Sony FX7. If you’re already familiar with the FX7 or you’ve already read the comparison between FX1 and FX7, you’ll find relatively few bits of new info.


At the same time, Sony V1 is significant because it confirms Sony’s dedication to putting CMOS sensors on its prosumer line of camcorders instead of CCDs. This is an important change of direction as it affects light sensitivity, vertical resolution, and more importantly the “full 1080 HD” of FX7 and V1.

Let’s go quickly through Adam’s points:

  • Design and form factor: Sony V1 is smaller than the other HDV camcorders and its form factor is close to Sony’s smaller DV models like the PD150/170. It’s also lighter than all previous prosumer models. The top handle has been moved a bit to the front which balances the camera perfectly. The LCD is on the side and has changed very little in practical terms.
  • Controls: Here Adam seems to be enthralled by the new Sony: “This tight grouping of shooting controls puts them readily within reach of your focusing hand… In my opinion, this is the best Handycam control layout Sony has done.
  • Audio: There’s little difference from Z1 and PD150 when it comes to audio. The camera features two professional XLRs.
  • Video: The 1/4″ CMOS sensor is less sensitive to light but offers increased resolution (full 1080 HD). It also offers true 24 frame progressive mode - highly sought after by wannabe filmmakers who strive to shoot filmlike video.

Again, it’s a “sideways upgrade” because you lose some, you gain some. Here’s Adam’s conclusion:

Sony squeezed out some features in the quest to put HDV into a PD170-sized package: analog-in recording, 50 Hz/60 Hz switchability, low-light capability, and standard video connectors on the camera body. But the result is a compact, lightweight Handycam that shoots sharp, clean HDV while offering the best laid-out controls found on a small Sony, and true progressive capture to boot. Rolling shutter will be an issue for some, but overall, the V1 looks like a worthy addition to the choices available to HDV shooters.

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

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.

Canon XH Series

Published by Administrator July 28th, 2006 in Digital Technology, HD Cameras and Video Production. 3 Comments

Canon XH A1 cameraI love cameras. Recently, I posted about HVX200 winning an award for design. I admit it’s a well-deserved award - HVX200 is a good-looking camera.


I just got word (and a few photos) about the upcoming Canon XH series: XH A1 and XH G1, both are based on Canon XL H1. Man, this camera is at least 10 times sexier than HVX200. Look at the specs as well:

  • 1.485 Gbps uncompressed HD-SDI output (XH G1 only)
  • GenLock input and Time Code input /output (XH G1 only)
  • 3 x 1.67mp CCDs (1/3rd-inch, 1440 x 1080, same as XL H1)
  • Digic DV II processor supporting 30fps & 24fps (same as XL H1)
  • Built-in 20x HD OIS lens with new “Instant AF” autofocus system

Just compare the 1.485 Gbps throughput to my USB 1.1 vs USB 2.0 discussion. Amazing!

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

Steve Jobs on Sony HC1

Published by Administrator January 14th, 2006 in Digital Technology, HD Cameras and News bits. 0 Comments

Steve Jobs have captured hearts and minds with his Macworld San Fran 2006 presentation (I got it as a torrent for iPod). I’ve seen posts about it all over the place, some praising his presentation skills (Guy Kawasaki), some commenting on the Intel insides of the new MacBook Pro.

There’s a ton of new stuff coming from Apple, but the interesting bit is below. Steve Jobs included one HDV camera in the presentation: the Sony HC1 .

Steve Jobs presents ... Sony HC1

More robust cameras like Panasonic HVX200 and Canon XL H1 shouldn’t feel threaten though. I’d imagine Steve included it because HC1 is an ultra-affordable HDV cam at the $1,500 range, truly a remarkable achievement for Sony. Apple should really look up to Sony - I want them to take one of Sony’s LCDs and put it on the next generation of video iPods, so that they play movies.

As to Steve, what can I say… great minds think alike. I did a review of the Sony Hc1 just a day before Steve :)

Update: Kevin Smith touts HVX200, so Sony HC1 is not the only “winner”.

Four-camera shootout

Published by Administrator January 11th, 2006 in Digital Technology, HD Cameras and Video Production. 2 Comments

Barry Green (from DVXuser) has been teasing us for some time now about a four-camera shootout. The four cameras in the shootout are:

I expect that by the end of the week, Barry will be done. Disclosure: Barry is one of the people behind DVXuser so he faced some “suspicions” from some of the posters there. They expected his report will be skewed in favor of the HVX200. That’s why he has some “witnesses” to verify his findings.

Update: There’s been a major forum war on the finding of the four-camera shootout. As far as I’m concerned, there’s no winner-loser. If you want the raw 40 pages of posts, I have two links: DVX forum and Dvinfo forum.

Sony HDR-FX1: one year later

Published by Administrator November 14th, 2005 in Digital Technology, HD Cameras and Video Production. 14 Comments

Sony HDR FX1Sony’s first HDV cam, the HDR-FX1, stirred the HD video production world with its introduction an year ago. In that time several new HDV camcorders came on the market (Sony Z1 and JVC GY-HD100U). Sony’s main competitors in the DV field both have announced their HD cams: Canon XL H1 and Panasonic HVX200.


So where does the Sony FX1 stand right now? Is it still a good buy or it’s worth to wait a little longer? I’ll answer these below.

Different shooters have different needs. In my recent post about HD cameras for guerilla filmmaking, the FX1 wins fair and square. What about other uses though?

Let’s look at FX1’s advantages:

  • Affordable (Canon XL H1’s price is almost 3 times higher)
  • 1080i support (actual chip is 1440×1080)
  • Vibrant video with some low light capabilities (3 lux)
  • Long battery life
  • Standard HDV (using MiniDV cassettes)

On the negative side we’ve got:

  • Fixed lens (albeit a good Carl Zeiss one)
  • No XLR inputs for audio
  • No true 24p

If your end-product stays on video (DVD) and you don’t need balanced audio, Sony FX1 offers the best value. Wedding and corporate videographers will have an easy time selling their services as well. The FX1 is black and sexy and although it’s not a shoulder cam (like JVC GY-HD100U or Canon XL H1), it does look professional.

On the other hand, if you need balanced audio and you hope to be able to transfer to film, it’s best to wait a bit. Here’s why:

Canon XL H1 has interchangeable lenses and supports Canon XL mount and full range of lenses. This will allow you the flexibility to simulate a “filmlook” more easily. For example, shooting with a tele lens to create a narrow depth of field.

Panasonic HVX200 is the only cam under $10,000 that supports variable speeds (including true 24p). If you’d like to create filmlike video with real slo-mo effects, this is the cam to get.

In short, the FX1 is best suited for videographers who acquire, edit, and distribute on video. Aspiring filmmakers will find the features limiting, but hey, you only pay a fraction of what others are paying so you can’t complain. If $3,000 is still too much for you, you could get Sony HC1 for less than $1,500 - it’s a more affordable, entry-level HDV camcorder.

Update: Sony released Sony FX7, a three-CMOS sensor camcorder that provides a “horizontal” alternative to the Sony FX1.

Recommended Gear

More Links