http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ Videomaker Community Forums » Tag: fx1 - Recent Posts en Wed, 15 Feb 2012 07:55:37 +0000 http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/hd-vs-sd-for-wildlifeshort-films#post-68312 Tue, 31 May 2011 18:34:58 +0000 vid-e-o-man 68312@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p> jbetz, I don't know if you are still monitoring this thread but my suggestions for your situation would be the Sony nex 5 or nex 10. I don't have any experience with them but I have seen some excellent footage. They take interchangeable lenses. They have a few proprietary lenses and some shooters are using other lenses but without using the autofocus. Adaptors make almost an infinite variety to be used, maybe some old prime lenses from previous 35mm days. Keep shooting. </p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/hd-vs-sd-for-wildlifeshort-films#post-68301 Mon, 30 May 2011 20:08:11 +0000 Ian James Smith 68301@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p> I have the same problem, with a HD camera approaching the top of my wish-list. I also have another problem, namely that it will be used for filming portions of a documentary series which I commenced in October 2005. Recently, we capitulated, at last, to the 'obvious' and bought a modern flat-screen TV and video/recorder-player. Our initial recordings were of the BBC 'Life' series of Natural History docos. A copy could only be downloaded from the video-recorder in mpg2, because of DVD limitations and so I did so. Seeing that the camcorder I intend to buy shortly is also 'Panasonic' and fully compatible, I intend to shoot in HD, but allow the recorder to do the mpg2 transcoding, which it does brilliantly on our example. I will have the advantage, as I see it, of first-rate Standard definition, which at 720 x 576 will be a breeze to edit without 'proxies' and by downloading and storing my 'Hi-Def' footage for possible future use, options for the future, should I need them. I have excellent mpg2 codecs of my own, installed, and that way I can ensure continuity of what I am doing, and enjoy all of the advantages.</p> <p>I prefer mpg2 currently to many of the more modern formats. It has had a huge amount of research/development, go into it and avoids the pixel-clustering tendencies of many contemporary formats, when they are not set up optimally.</p> <p> One more note, it is all in 16:9 widescreen, which I have used exclusively since 1975, using in those days, a 16mm Bolex reflex and anamorphic lens. </p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/hd-vs-sd-for-wildlifeshort-films#post-63732 Thu, 25 Nov 2010 08:34:30 +0000 adddibrux 63732@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p> Using two Panny GH1's here. Every lens I try, is like a new gift. Even with the GH2's big advantage of HDME direct out, the apparent cheaper build quality, and button re-design, will keep me with the GH1.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/hd-vs-sd-for-wildlifeshort-films#post-63460 Fri, 12 Nov 2010 12:32:10 +0000 bbi bogdao 63460@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Both HD and DSLR are good. Just consider buying from a good producer. I'd go with Sony.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/sony-hdr-fx1-for-sale#post-55374 Fri, 19 Feb 2010 07:25:58 +0000 freshyfresh8 55374@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>I'm not sure if I'm posting this in the correct spot, but I have a Sony HDR-FX1 that I'm trying to sale for $1800. It comes with the standard battery, 2 extended life batteries, and a new Sony dual battery quick charger. I have the original box, manuals, cables, and cords. Please email me at <a href="mailto:ccfinc@hotmail.com">ccfinc@hotmail.com</a> if you are interested.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/hd-vs-sd-for-wildlifeshort-films#post-50874 Wed, 16 Sep 2009 16:37:21 +0000 jbetz 50874@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Thanks for all the info. I'm definitely considering a DSLR but since I need to save up a bit more money before I buy anything, I'll wait to see what happens in the coming months. I read a rumor that Canon may be releasing a new camera at the end of the month, perhaps something like the 7D but in camcorder form. We'll see. Until then, I have a lot to think over.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/hd-vs-sd-for-wildlifeshort-films#post-50872 Wed, 16 Sep 2009 13:58:02 +0000 composite1 50872@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Jbetz,</p> <p>Glad to be of assistance. As for my comment 'You'll probably pay as much to outfit an XL2 kit...' goes, I base that on my own purchase and rigging of our XL1s kit. I got the cam for the same reasons you're eyeballing the XL2. I ended up doing a full pro-rig for it including; MA200 4-audio input and shoulder mount, FU-1000 monochrome viewfinder, 16xs, 16xm and 3x lenses, Nightvision lens and adapter, portable dual battery charger, 8 batteries, lens filters, Kata camerabag not including accessories like tripod, etc. 75% of that list was bought at the same time and it came out to just under $11k. </p> <p>Now, you're probably not going to 'pro rig' your initial choice as cam's are so much further along, but if you get an XL2 some of that stuff will be essential if you're serious. So my point is; if you're going to have to hork up the money anyway, why not take the next step up front?</p> <p>You mentioned the DSLR cameras and that is a really good idea. Though I'm using JVC's GY200UB and am quite pleased with it, the MkII and the 7D are definitely in my co's acquisition future. The only drawback for a wildlife shooter is the 12-minute rule with the Canon's. I haven't heard whether the 7D is also limited by that, but you'll save a heap o' cash not having to pay for 35mm adapters. The cheapest one you can get for the XL2 is the one Canon makes for use with their 35mm lenses. You could use that money to buy a mattebox kit from Redrock Micro or Zacuto. Plus the fact is, the MkII is a 5k camera! I don't know what the 7D is rated at since the CMOS is smaller, but I'm sure it's still 2k or better.</p> <p>The money you'd spend on an XL2, you could get a DSLR kit and be at the cutting edge for a while. Something to think about. </p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/hd-vs-sd-for-wildlifeshort-films#post-50871 Wed, 16 Sep 2009 12:57:13 +0000 TheWildlifeStudio 50871@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>The quality of the output from the DSLR's is excellent, while the longer lenses you require do not HAVE to be the 'L' class optics that the still guys need, as there is not the resolution required.</p> <p>The lenses can still be used at a later date with adaptors! :)</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/hd-vs-sd-for-wildlifeshort-films#post-50867 Wed, 16 Sep 2009 09:24:12 +0000 jbetz 50867@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Thanks for the info composite1. I just want to respond to one of your comments.</p> <blockquote><p>You'll probably pay as much to outfit an XL2 kit as you would to get an HDV kit these days.</p></blockquote> <p>I am only considering cameras with interchangeable lenses, and so that basically means I'm considering cameras like the XL2 and XLH1. Both can use 35mm lenses with adapters, and so even if I purchased a XL2, I wouldn't be wasting money on the lenses because I could always use these on a future camera. So it's the difference between a $2500-$2800 SD camera and a $5000 HD camera, which for me is a big difference.</p> <p>I just want to throw out a couple more options to consider:</p> <p>1. HD camera like the XHA1 with teleconverters. Anyone have experience or advice?</p> <p>2. DSLR like the 5d Mk II or 7D. Seems like it could be a good option as it provides interchangeable lenses and full HD video, as well as being two things at one: a temporary inexpensive (at least for the 7D) HD camcorder and a great quality still camera that will be useful even after I buy a more expensive HD camcorder later.</p> <p>Any thoughts?</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/hd-vs-sd-for-wildlifeshort-films#post-50859 Wed, 16 Sep 2009 07:36:46 +0000 composite1 50859@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>jbetz,</p> <p>It all boils down to what can you afford? Despite HD taking over for SD, cameras like the XL series particularly the XL2 are still great for direct to DVD and internet streaming. You'll probably pay as much to outfit an XL2 kit as you would to get an HDV kit these days. Also, what are your customers/clients asking for? Shooting wildlife footage is hard work and you should have a plan to sell stock footage in mind. If you shoot in HD, then you can downres clips to SD and offer the footage in two formats.</p> <p>Granted the XL rig will be a bit cheaper in the short run. You'll need less harddrive space to store SD footage. Shooting tape is cheaper than solid-state and SD footage is less hassle to edit than HD. In the long run, you will have invested time, cash and other resources in a format that is near the end of its run. </p> <p>Paying as you go for gear is the best way to build your kits. But you also want to pick out gear that has as long a shelf life as you can afford. If you stay with indy video production, you'll eventually have to go HD anyway. It's a tough decision, but take a hard look at your budget and what you plan to accomplish with said camera. Once you've done that, I have no doubt you will be able to make the best choice for you. </p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/hd-vs-sd-for-wildlifeshort-films#post-50850 Wed, 16 Sep 2009 05:16:45 +0000 grinner 50850@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Sure it is. You'll upgrade to HD when paid to do it. Till then, I see no need for the expense. </p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/hd-vs-sd-for-wildlifeshort-films#post-50848 Wed, 16 Sep 2009 05:11:44 +0000 jbetz 50848@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>I am looking to purchase a camcorder, and I am wondering what others think about the HD vs SD dilemma, especially with regards to wildlife subjects. I am an aspiring wildlife filmmaker and so far have shot all of my footage in HD (on a Sony FX1 and Canon XHA1). I am happy with the quality of the footage I shot on these cameras, but for wildlife filming longer lenses would obviously be a benefit. Here is a link to my showreel if you would like to see some of my footage: <a href="http://www.vimeo.com/6371584">EXAMPLE FOOTAGE</a>. Since I just graduated from college and those cameras belonged to my school, I now find myself without a camera.</p> <p>I have done a lot of reading on choosing cameras in books and on forums, and I believe I have a pretty good handle on the costs and benefits of both HD and SD for wildlife, and in general. I know that interchangeable lenses are often considered a necessity for wildlife work, and as I have a knowledge of lenses and multi-lens setups I feel that I am ready to handle this type of setup. I know it adds a lot of cost, weight, etc, but again, for wildlife it seems like more of a necessity than perhaps in other film genres. Because of this I have been considering the Canon XL2.</p> <p>On the other hand, I know that the wildlife film industry, and all video in general, is quickly transitioning to HD. I love the quality and resolution I was able to obtain using the FX1 and XHA1, but I just didn't get the magnification I need to film many subjects. While I could get close enough to woodchucks (within 10ft) to get decent close-ups, I can't get this close to a fox, deer, bear, etc. I am working on a budget, and so I can't afford something like the Canon XLH1 at this point, and so any HD camera I purchase would not offer interchangeable lenses.</p> <p>At this point my main goal is NOT to produce lots of footage to sell to anyone, but to improve my reel with effective sequences of behavior so that I can show that I am able to shoot for sequence-editing and will subsequently be noticed by producers.</p> <p>Is a camera like the XL2 good enough for this purpose? Or do I absolutely NEED HD footage in order to compete in today's HD world, even in terms of my showreel? Any advice or thoughts would be greatly appreciated.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/fx1-and-35mm-adapter#post-49424 Thu, 23 Jul 2009 19:34:42 +0000 TDedmonSBP 49424@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>perhaps it would be better to know what information about the adapter you are looking for. Do you want ot know which to buy and if it's worth it? or did you buy one and are looking for tips? Sometimes the more specific your question the better help you get.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/fx1-and-35mm-adapter#post-49391 Wed, 22 Jul 2009 17:41:38 +0000 Don 49391@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>probably cheaper to buy a d-slr with hd video and go form there......</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/fx1-and-35mm-adapter#post-49378 Wed, 22 Jul 2009 11:19:15 +0000 usmolindo 49378@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p> Anyone has any experience with 35mm adapter and FX1?</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/please-help-fx1-wont-connect-to-vista-through-firewire#post-48325 Wed, 24 Jun 2009 09:46:27 +0000 cfulton 48325@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Please consider using some punctuation in the future... that'll make your posts a lot easier to read.</p> <p>You shouldn't need any drivers at all.</p> <p>Did you buy the camcorder new or used? I've seen FireWire connectors stop working on older camcorders. In practice, FireWire connections (particularly the 4-pin connectors) are more delicate than a lot of people would care to admit.</p> <p>Does your computer's FireWire port work with other things that you connect to it? If you attach the camcorder to another computer, is it detected then? (It also doesn't matter a bit on the brand of the computer.)</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/please-help-fx1-wont-connect-to-vista-through-firewire#post-48240 Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:17:57 +0000 markyboyle 48240@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p> i have just bought a fx1e and i cant capture through the firewire i have tried looking for help on the sony website and they dont have the driver but they say it is compatable with vista but it doest come up in the hardware profile after spending £1500 i am a bit confused to how one sony product cant reconise the other as i have a sony vaio laptop and using adobe premiere cs3 so i really need your help please</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/what-does-cineframe-and-cinematone-on-an-fx1-do#post-47643 Mon, 08 Jun 2009 08:17:32 +0000 NormanWillis 47643@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Thanks, XTR!</p> <p>Norman</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/what-does-cineframe-and-cinematone-on-an-fx1-do#post-47593 Sat, 06 Jun 2009 12:32:23 +0000 XTR-91 47593@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>From what I read in your post, it looks like cineframe is the same as frame rate. For example, 30p is a framerate of 30 with Progressive video. 60i is a frame rate of 60 where the video is Interlaced. From a little bit of research, it looks like Cinematone is something to do with color, not frame rate. If YouTube converts all video to 24p, I would export in 24p when uploading.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/what-does-cineframe-and-cinematone-on-an-fx1-do#post-47456 Tue, 02 Jun 2009 10:11:20 +0000 NormanWillis 47456@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Hello.</p> <p>I have a Sony HDR-FX1.  It is HDV, 1440x1080i.  I will be looking to extract the footage to 30p (I think) with the Cineform NeoScene codec.  I have chosen 30p because 90% of our views will probably be online HD through YouTube, Vimeo and/or company.</p> <p>(Someone said that YouTube converts everything to 24p in order to save bandwidth.  I cannot verify that, but the general consensus seems to be that one wants to upload to YouTube and Vimeo at 30p, and in the H.264 codec.  I do not know that for a fact either, so if someone here actually knows from successful experience, I am all ears.)</p> <p>My question, then, pertains to two special features contained in the FX1.  One is "What is Cinematone?", and the other is about the choice between Cineframe 30 and Cineframe 24.  Does anyone know if these two Cineframe settings have anything to do with 30p and 24p?  Or does it just make it look like they do?</p> <p>I read on one site (if I understood it correctly) that Cineframe 24 would initially record the footage at 24p, and then the FX1 would put the 24p inside of a 60i interlaced 'wrapper.'  Then the Cineform Coded allegedly extracts the 24p from inside of the 60i wrapper, yielding a true 24p with only minor loss of quality.  </p> <p>So for uploading HD to YouTube, Vimeo and the rest, to I need 30p, or 24p?  And do I choose Cineframe 30, or Cineframe 24?  And what is Cinematone?  Does it affect the frame rate?  Or just what exactly does it do?</p> <p>I am plenty confused, so if anyone actually knows from experience, or could even just point me to where I could read something definitive, I would really appreciate it.</p> <p>Thank you,</p> <p>Norman</p> <p> </p> <p> </p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/fx1-de-interlacing-1080i-and-cineform-neoscene#post-47272 Wed, 27 May 2009 17:55:01 +0000 NormanWillis 47272@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Apparently capture is handled through NeoScene.</p> <p>The one downside appears to be that it is not yet compatible with x64, so I will have to install x32 Vegas!</p> <p>sigh...after all those upgrades to my workstation!</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/fx1-de-interlacing-1080i-and-cineform-neoscene#post-47239 Tue, 26 May 2009 21:25:02 +0000 NormanWillis 47239@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Hi Rob.</p> <p>Cineform confirms that I should shoot in Cineframe 24, which will put 24p inside of a 60i interlace.  Then when I convert the footage they will extract the original 24p, so I will end up with 24p.</p> <p>I still need to confirm what the specs are they are using for YouTube, but I won't know that until tomorrow.</p> <p>See you then,</p> <p>Norman</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/fx1-de-interlacing-1080i-and-cineform-neoscene#post-47226 Tue, 26 May 2009 13:20:25 +0000 NormanWillis 47226@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>That's what I'm being told.  I will attempt to verify, and then let you know.</p> <p>Thanks.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/fx1-de-interlacing-1080i-and-cineform-neoscene#post-47224 Tue, 26 May 2009 12:29:16 +0000 robGRAUERT 47224@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>That's news to me. I didn't know Youtube converted to 24p. I would experiment with Cineform and see if the output satisfies your needs. </p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/fx1-de-interlacing-1080i-and-cineform-neoscene#post-47222 Tue, 26 May 2009 11:50:52 +0000 NormanWillis 47222@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>I am being told that YouTube and Vimeo all convert their stuff to 24p for bandwidth issues, so I should use the Cineform codec to convert to 24p.</p> <p>Does that sound right to you?</p> <p>Thanks,</p> <p>Norman</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/fx1-de-interlacing-1080i-and-cineform-neoscene#post-47221 Tue, 26 May 2009 11:03:38 +0000 robGRAUERT 47221@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>You won't lose quality if your capture settings match your shooting settings. </p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/fx1-de-interlacing-1080i-and-cineform-neoscene#post-47218 Tue, 26 May 2009 10:15:08 +0000 NormanWillis 47218@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>I guess I just do not understand what I am into just yet, and want to make sure I do not lose any (or much) resolution.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/fx1-de-interlacing-1080i-and-cineform-neoscene#post-47215 Tue, 26 May 2009 09:19:57 +0000 robGRAUERT 47215@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>I really don't have experience with Cineform. If it converts interlaced footage to progressive during capture, that's cool, but I don't see a need to get all tied up with that issue. You should have no problems capturing your footage with capture settings that match your shooting settings. </p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/fx1-de-interlacing-1080i-and-cineform-neoscene#post-47205 Tue, 26 May 2009 08:39:21 +0000 NormanWillis 47205@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p><em>&gt;&gt;Computer screens work at 30p, which is why you have to de-interlace you're 60i footage.</em></p> <p><em>Make sense?</em></p> <p>That part makes perfect sense.  If 90+% of my views are probably going to be website, then I need to turn it into 30p.</p> <p>I called Jon at Videoguys, and he said if I just feed in via firewire and then apply the Cineform codec I can turn the footage into 30p, and I should not lose hardly any quality.</p> <p>I still have to read the Cineform site again this morning, and then will get back with you.</p> <p>Thank you,</p> <p>Norman</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/fx1-de-interlacing-1080i-and-cineform-neoscene#post-47202 Tue, 26 May 2009 06:26:03 +0000 robGRAUERT 47202@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>"I am not clear at exactly what point I would de-interlace, or how."</p> <p>The point when you would de-interlace is AFTER you are finished editing and you are ready to export a file for the web. That is when you de-interlace if your footage was shot as interlaced. If you shot progressive footage, then there is no need to de-interlace.</p> <p> </p> <p>"If I understand, I would just feed the tape in without de-interlacing, and then edit everything interlaced."</p> <p>Umm...kinda. You say it as if you have the option to de-interlace while capturing. You cannot de-interlace while capturing unless you have expensive hardware, such as the AJA Kona3 and Xena capture cards. I am guessing you do not have them. So yes, just make sure your capture settings are set for interlaced footage before you capture. Then you will be editing interlaced footage, which is what you want if you shot 1080i.</p> <p> </p> <p>"Then before rendering, I would de-interlace whatever was headed for the web, but not de-interlace anything that was slated for DVD and Blu-Ray; is that correct?"</p> <p>Right. But don't make the mistake of looking for a "de-interlace" filter in your editing program. What the editing program does is drop one of the fields, which is degrading to the image and not truly de-interlacing. Proper de-interlacing requires either hardware, such as those mentioned above, or software dedicated for compression/converting.</p> <p> </p> <p>"The Cineform site says I can extract 24p from 1080i."</p> <p>Uhh yes and no. You can transcode anything to anything. There isn't anything physically stopping you, but that doesn't mean you should do it. If you choose to, you need a program dedicated to compression/converting. If you want 24p, ideally you should shoot 24p. Exporting 1080i as 24p I doubt will look the same as initially shooting in 24p, nor will it looks as good. Also, you mentioned you are going to post on the web, therefore, 24p is not your best option. Computer screens work at 30p, which is why you have to de-interlace you're 60i footage.</p> <p>Make sense?</p>