HDR-FX1 CineFrame24 rating on a scale of 1-10?

[Guest NBC Shooter]

I've read a lot of posts from other HDV boards from people who have actually used the new Sony 3CCD 1/3" HDV camera with its "pseudo 24P" mode, but have yet to find any reliable, qualitative statements on how that mode looks. Can anyone who has actually seen the Sony HDR-FX1's CineFrame24 mode in action (in either SD or HD), please comment on its "look?" It's fairly well known now that Sony's new HDR-FX1 DOES NOT have any true 24P capability, only this mocked-up "CineFrame" stuff (which no one is really clear on how it actually works). One person said that CineFrame24 "looked great." Another said it "looked horrible." Still another said that CineFrame30 "looked better than CineFrame24." Another said that "CineFrame30 was unusable."

 

For the sake of simplicity, let's just say that the "24P look" of a Panasonic DVX100/100A is a '10' in its 1/48th-second shutter speed, 24PA setting (I know, that an SDX900, HDW-F900, Varicam, etc. are way better cameras). And at the other end of the scale, let's say that the "24P look" of a Sony VX2000 shooting 1/60th-second at 60i is a '0.'

 

Given the above, what would you rate the Sony HDR-FX1's faux CineFrame24 mode at on a scale of 1-10, '10' being best? Thanks.

[J. Lamar King IMPOSTOR]

Did you look at those samples posted on dvinfo.net? I didn't like the 24cineframe mode. Looked like shite. I give it a 0.

 

I would wait to see if the pro model has actual 24p 2:3 pulldown. Some people think Sony is going to pull a fast one and have 24p but not at 'HD' resolution.

Edited November 2, 2004 by J. Lamar King

[Elhanan Matos]

We just got the FX-1 in last night from Sony. The pictures it makes are absolutely amazing. We had the FX-1 and the DVX-100a side by side both going into a 24 inch Sony broadcast monitor and the FX-1 easily blew it away, this was with the FX-1 set to regular DV mode. The 24 fps mode looked just like the DVX-100's. From what I hear the way that the camera works in Cineframe 24 is that it captures 24 frames and records it to 60i, and then when you take it into your computer there is a plugin that does some sort of pulldown.

[J. Lamar King IMPOSTOR]

Elhanan, which camera do you have? The Pro version? Or the not true Cineframe24 thing? I can't wait to see it first hand. The image was very good from what I could tell but I didn't like the motion rendering I saw in those clips, but I suspect I can't see it properly without the right media player.

[Elhanan Matos]

Right now i have the consumer level one, the prosumer version won't be coming out for a few months, that one will do 24p though. I personally prefer the look of the 60i over the Cineframe 24 with this camera; the camera also has a Cineframe 30, which in my opinion looks better than the 24. I'll try to shoot some tests with it today and have something posted online sometime this week.

[Rachel Oliver]

Hi;

 

Elhanan, could you please quote your source for the info that the Pro version WILL do 24p? You could get alot of money for that crystal ball ;)

Olly

[Elhanan Matos]

Elhanan, could you please quote your source for the info that the Pro version WILL do 24p?

 

I guess I have no source... I probably shouldn't have mentioned it. Sorry.

[Guest NBC Shooter]

The 24 fps mode looked just like the DVX-100's.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Really? Again, several other posts on another HDV board said the CineFrame24 looked horrible. Also, one board's moderator mentioned that the FX1 could only shoot in CineFrame mode at a 1/60th-sec. shutter speed, NOT at the more film-like 1/48th-sec. shutter speed, as in the DVX, SDX900, CineAlta, Varicam, etc. Thanks for your reply. I would love to stop by BandPro and take a look for myself.

Edited November 3, 2004 by NBC Shooter

[Guest NBC Shooter]

Did you look at those samples posted on dvinfo.net?  I didn't like the 24cineframe mode.  Looked like shite.  I give it a 0. I would wait to see if the pro model has actual 24p 2:3 pulldown.  Some people think Sony is going to pull a fast one and have 24p but not at 'HD' resolution.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

See what I mean? One person gives it a '10,' another gives it a '0.' I did download some .M2T FX1 files, but playback on my 3.0 GHz/1 GB RAM/10,000 RPM HDD Windows XP2 machine was less than perfect (stuttery playback with less-than 24-bit color). Any tips on playback? Tried latest versions of both Quicktime and Windows Media Player. Thanks.

Edited November 3, 2004 by NBC Shooter

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

What colour depth do you have your display set to? There's no way you should see less than the recorded colour depth assuming your display is capable of showing it.

 

Phil

[Kevin Zanit]

I just shot some tests tonight with Elhanan.

 

I liked it for what it was: A consumer camera (essentially).

 

The image quality was very good. It looked good on an SD monitor and an HD monitor. One big flaw I saw was that the lens can?t quite keep pace with the resolution of the camera. Not really the fault of Sony, the camera is pretty cheap, putting a better lens in would make it too expensive.

 

The manual zoom lever had a nice feel . . . a lot of drag.

 

Latitude on the camera was lacking. I much prefer the feel of the DVX100 as far as how it handles contrast.

 

The 24p mode (whatever it is) is terrible. The motion is abnormally stutter-y (and this comes from a film guy used to the feel of 24p). I tried to slow my shutter down to counteract the motion but the camera does not allow it.

 

The bottom line is that this camera is a viable HD camera at a low cost.

 

I will post some frames when I get them.

 

 

Kevin Zanit

[Guest NBC Shooter]

Hi,

 

What colour depth do you have your display set to? There's no way you should see less than the recorded colour depth assuming your display is capable of showing it.

 

Phil

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah, I dunno what's going on with my displays . . . I've got dual, 16ms-response, 19" Sharp LL191A flat panel LCD displays, driven by a dual-output, 512MB GeForceFX 8x graphics adapter. Display settings are 1280x1024 at 32-bit color depth running in WindowsXP/SP2 with latest drivers. Maybe a weird artifact of these LCD displays or driver bug? I've seen the artifact before on my PC on some DV footage in Adobe PremierePro 1.5.

[Guest NBC Shooter]

. . . The 24p mode (whatever it is) is terrible.  The motion is abnormally stutter-y (and this comes from a film guy used to the feel of 24p).

Kevin Zanit

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So . . . on a scale of 1-10, '10' being best, you'd give it a what?

[Guest NBC Shooter]

. . . Latitude on the camera was lacking.  I much prefer the feel of the DVX100 as far as how it handles contrast.

 

Kevin Zanit

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, that's not good. The dynamic range (exposure latitude) on my DVX100 is pretty narrow when using CineGamma. The highlights blow out really fast, and (at least in the non-A version) blows out past 100% IRE like a rocket. No knee compression or "DCC-like" contrast control. Lighting ratios and scene contrast ratios must be held VERY narrow using my non-A DVX100. Are you saying that the FX1's dynamic range is even narrower than the DVX100's? Thanks.

[J. Lamar King IMPOSTOR]

See what I mean? One person gives it a '10,' another gives it a '0.' I did download some .M2T FX1 files, but playback on my 3.0 GHz/1 GB RAM/10,000 RPM HDD Windows XP2 machine was less than perfect (stuttery playback with less-than 24-bit color). Any tips on playback? Tried latest versions of both Quicktime and Windows Media Player. Thanks.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yeah, I'm wondering if I'm playing back these files in the proper way too. I looked at it with WMP and that media player they listed on the DVinfo site. It played the material but froze my PC like four times so I deleted it. I guess like all cameras we'll have to wait and see it fist hand. I will say it's good HD video but that 24 movement was wacked.

[Kevin Zanit]

So . . . on a scale of 1-10, '10' being best, you'd give it a what?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

A 0 . . . real bad. The 30p was better, but it looked more like a frame mode than 24fps.

 

 

Kevin Zanit

[Kevin Zanit]

Well, that's not good. The dynamic range (exposure latitude) on my DVX100 is pretty narrow when using CineGamma. The highlights blow out really fast, and (at least in the non-A version) blows out past 100% IRE like a rocket. No knee compression or "DCC-like" contrast control. Lighting ratios and scene contrast ratios must be held VERY narrow using my non-A DVX100. Are you saying that the FX1's dynamic range is even narrower than the DVX100's? Thanks.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I would not say the dynamic range is narrower than the DVX. It is the way it rolls off into highlight or shadows. The DVX, when the lighting is working for the Cinegama has a more filmic curve, whereas this camera looks more video-ish (I hate using that term to describe a camera, but that?s about the best way I can describe it).

 

But, the camera does look very good on an HDTV, one just needs to treat lighting for this camera like they would when shooting video.

 

 

Kevin Zanit

[Guest NBC Shooter]

Thanks for your replies to my posts, Kevin.

[Sevente]

NBC Shooter, your playback problem...I had the same problem and someone suggested...another forum...that I download Videolan's VLC media player and in the preferences give it lots of system resources. Problem solved, m2t files play smoothly. Hope that helps.

[Guest NBC Shooter]

Hey, thanks! I'll try that!