That really did take me by surprise. I like you, was perhaps expecting some 'superior' visual difference, but I couldn't tell between the two. Excellent idea, and thanks for taking the time to test it out.
The comparison is at 2:50 but it will make a bit more sense with the introduction. If you would like to support the channel, please use these links to view or buy the product. BUY UK: amzn.to/2qR9zoo BUY US: amzn.to/2HkkG4t
Once again you've asked an interesting question and demonstrated one way of ascertaining an answer. I guess for me, what you are looking at in order to differentiate between the two codecs isn't something that I would see as being particularly important. For me, I would be more interested in the compression artefacts produced by each codec and it's effect on compositing work and grading since this is really the reason higher end cameras and recording devices utilise higher colour sampling and bit depth codecs like 4.2.2 and 10bit. They are really to cater for post production work. For straight-to-edit-and-render work, an 8bit 4.2.0 codec is fine for the most part. That's my view at least.
Agreed but as these are both 10bit 4:2:2 codecs, I was curious to know whether I could ditch the Atomos for these simple shots with only basic color correction. I really didn't expect them to look so similar as, regardless of bit depth and chroma sampling, delivery codecs always look a bit poo in comparison to e.g. ProRes.
Just to add extra info here, I've just had a go at grading the SLOG3 (S.GAMUT3 CINE) footage out of the camera (10 bit HD and 8 bit 4K) and the XAVC codec holds up equally well. It looks great.
That's interesting to note. I'm not a Sony man but for those that are it's good to know that they have prosumer cameras with codecs that are post ready as standard. Are you listening Panasonic?!
Indeed. It's only the PXW-Z90 that records 10-bit but I'm guessing the lower priced versions of this camera using XAVC-S rather than XAVC-L perform the same. It seems to be a fairly robust codec. I know it's not new...but it's new to me in this variety.
Using an FDR AX700 in both 1080 and 4k (30 fps 4k or 60 fps 1080) I struggle to find the slightest fault with either. I did set up a profile for 1080 as it was a bit soft and muddy looking and have it set for the second level HLG which I am very pleased with, almost cannot improve it in post. I have downloaded Resolve and installed it but I am trying to avoid colour grading and the learning curve to use it. Only complaint with the AX700 is its image stabilisation is nowhere as good as my AX53 which is still a nice "on the fly" camera to use in 1080. Great review, I like objective testing.
If You encode the XAVC files to XDCAM Mpeg HD 422 100 Mb/s with the Sony Catalyst Browse, or buy the Mpeg option. You will get a same jigling, scrolling, pushing speed under editing like the Prores. This is what I use from more than 3 years with the X-70. ah, and all of Your editing software will handle smoother the footages! Adobe, Davinci, Sony, Microsoft, Apple.... the GPU is just laughing on Mpeg... Try it!
XAVC is an excellent codec , especially the 10bit variants. They should grade about the same and I suspect the only really difference you'll see between the two is for, precisely as you say in the video, complex motion scenes where Prores should look better - especially if you pixel peep. Complex motion doesn't have to mean fast motion. A slow pan of a detailed scene or a tree with all it's leaves rustling in the wind present a very difficult compression task for LongGOP codecs so that would be where differences should be visible. Still in general I think attaching a Shogun to a Z90 is overkill.
Attaching an Inferno completely destroys the beautiful portability of the camera. However, if you're doing simple footage from a tripod, it's still nice to use as it's a much nicer monitor. It's also nice to have all the footage immediately saved to an intra-frame codec like ProRes. Much nicer to play around with.
Ah, yes. I’d love to get my hands on a Z280. I even considered it for a while but it’s outside my price range and I completely ruled it out when I started looking into media prices.
I totally understand. I picked up a PXW-Z190 almost 30 days ago and it only shoots up to 156Mb/s in XAVC-L at 8-bit 4:2:0 in 4k but DOES shoot XAVC 10- bit 4:2:2 in FHD 1080p/60fps. I have two more days to decide if I want to return it and drop another $4,000 on the Z-280 but I'm just not sure I really need the Z-280. Its driving me CRAZY. The Z-190 is nice but once I heard that you can still do top quality bitrate 600Mbps XAVC-Intra on the Z-280 by using the SxS to XQD adapter with no problems, I'm really considering getting the Z-280. But I still love the Z-190 even though it only does XAVC-Long GOP on SDXC cards, the quality and low light are insanely good and $3925 is a lot more affordable than $6975.
@@neosabre z280 is 4 times brighter in low light compared to z190 at the same settings. the noise level is high in z190. there is no comparison, z280 is the best camcorder. z90 compared to z190 is just 1 stop brighter despite of the 1 inch sensor, but z190 comes w 3 rings and better usability. facts so keep your z90, don't buy the z190, or save for z280
@@neosabre I heard the Z-190 is really bad in low light. how is it compares to the old goodie EX1 in low light ? I am in the same boat as you struggling to decide on Z-190 and others. I am using EX1 and it is a good camera in low light, but it's codec is too old for nowaday.
Is there any chance you can look into or talk about this subject..... Instead of continuing to make camcorder with 1/3”or 1/2 “, sensors such as Sony pxw z150 and z280, why can’t Sony also make a camcorder with the sensor and mount of their D-SLR A7 series cameras. Just imagine a camcorder with the quality, low light ability of A7sii (or the new A7siii), with audio Xlr, no more over heating issues, no more video limit of 30min, Built in ND filters etc etc not forgetting the full frame bokeh!!!!! surely there is a Market for this type of camcorder with a full frame sensor and mount??? So why hasn’t Sony made such a camcorder????? Kull
That really did take me by surprise. I like you, was perhaps expecting some 'superior' visual difference, but I couldn't tell between the two. Excellent idea, and thanks for taking the time to test it out.
The comparison is at 2:50 but it will make a bit more sense with the introduction.
If you would like to support the channel, please use these links to view or buy the product.
BUY UK: amzn.to/2qR9zoo
BUY US: amzn.to/2HkkG4t
Good video. You answered the question I had about Prores and Sony.
Interesting results. Thanks for the share and effort.
Once again you've asked an interesting question and demonstrated one way of ascertaining an answer.
I guess for me, what you are looking at in order to differentiate between the two codecs isn't something that I would see as being particularly important.
For me, I would be more interested in the compression artefacts produced by each codec and it's effect on compositing work and grading since this is really the reason higher end cameras and recording devices utilise higher colour sampling and bit depth codecs like 4.2.2 and 10bit. They are really to cater for post production work. For straight-to-edit-and-render work, an 8bit 4.2.0 codec is fine for the most part.
That's my view at least.
Agreed but as these are both 10bit 4:2:2 codecs, I was curious to know whether I could ditch the Atomos for these simple shots with only basic color correction. I really didn't expect them to look so similar as, regardless of bit depth and chroma sampling, delivery codecs always look a bit poo in comparison to e.g. ProRes.
Just to add extra info here, I've just had a go at grading the SLOG3 (S.GAMUT3 CINE) footage out of the camera (10 bit HD and 8 bit 4K) and the XAVC codec holds up equally well. It looks great.
That's interesting to note. I'm not a Sony man but for those that are it's good to know that they have prosumer cameras with codecs that are post ready as standard.
Are you listening Panasonic?!
Indeed. It's only the PXW-Z90 that records 10-bit but I'm guessing the lower priced versions of this camera using XAVC-S rather than XAVC-L perform the same. It seems to be a fairly robust codec. I know it's not new...but it's new to me in this variety.
I would be more interested in how well they grade.
Can you record to SD cards while live streaming through the hdmi w/o it dropping the live stream?
Using an FDR AX700 in both 1080 and 4k (30 fps 4k or 60 fps 1080) I struggle to find the slightest fault with either. I did set up a profile for 1080 as it was a bit soft and muddy looking and have it set for the second level HLG which I am very pleased with, almost cannot improve it in post. I have downloaded Resolve and installed it but I am trying to avoid colour grading and the learning curve to use it. Only complaint with the AX700 is its image stabilisation is nowhere as good as my AX53 which is still a nice "on the fly" camera to use in 1080. Great review, I like objective testing.
Can you share your picture profiles? Would be cool to give them ago.
This was a fucking genius bait and switch.
In this case, however, not illegal and both variants are available to you :-)
@@tdcattech doing illegal things is cool though
Prores is good for editing, easier to use but gives you larger files.
Thanks.Very interesting.
Was this Xavc s or xavc-i?
how long can the sony Z90 record for? sadly the DSLR I have stops at about 30 minutes.
As long as you want. The two card slots mean you can continuously swap cards out whilst continuing to record.
If You encode the XAVC files to XDCAM Mpeg HD 422 100 Mb/s with the Sony Catalyst Browse, or buy the Mpeg option. You will get a same jigling, scrolling, pushing speed under editing like the Prores. This is what I use from more than 3 years with the X-70. ah, and all of Your editing software will handle smoother the footages! Adobe, Davinci, Sony, Microsoft, Apple.... the GPU is just laughing on Mpeg... Try it!
I used to use MPEG on the XF100 camera years back. It was excellent in post. I'd like it on the Sony but it's a little steep at £500
TDCatTech then use the software. On My workstation the conversion speed is around 400 - 800 % of the play speed.
Gonna give it a go. Cheers!
XAVC is an excellent codec , especially the 10bit variants. They should grade about the same and I suspect the only really difference you'll see between the two is for, precisely as you say in the video, complex motion scenes where Prores should look better - especially if you pixel peep. Complex motion doesn't have to mean fast motion. A slow pan of a detailed scene or a tree with all it's leaves rustling in the wind present a very difficult compression task for LongGOP codecs so that would be where differences should be visible. Still in general I think attaching a Shogun to a Z90 is overkill.
Attaching an Inferno completely destroys the beautiful portability of the camera. However, if you're doing simple footage from a tripod, it's still nice to use as it's a much nicer monitor. It's also nice to have all the footage immediately saved to an intra-frame codec like ProRes. Much nicer to play around with.
You could always get a Sony PXW-Z280 and shoot in 4k 10-bit 4:2:2 XAVC-Intra 600Mb/s. :-P
Ah, yes. I’d love to get my hands on a Z280. I even considered it for a while but it’s outside my price range and I completely ruled it out when I started looking into media prices.
I totally understand. I picked up a PXW-Z190 almost 30 days ago and it only shoots up to 156Mb/s in XAVC-L at 8-bit 4:2:0 in 4k but DOES shoot XAVC 10- bit 4:2:2 in FHD 1080p/60fps. I have two more days to decide if I want to return it and drop another $4,000 on the Z-280 but I'm just not sure I really need the Z-280. Its driving me CRAZY.
The Z-190 is nice but once I heard that you can still do top quality bitrate 600Mbps XAVC-Intra on the Z-280 by using the SxS to XQD adapter with no problems, I'm really considering getting the Z-280. But I still love the Z-190 even though it only does XAVC-Long GOP on SDXC cards, the quality and low light are insanely good and $3925 is a lot more affordable than $6975.
@@neosabre what did you end up getting? Am looking at those options too.
@@neosabre z280 is 4 times brighter in low light compared to z190 at the same settings. the noise level is high in z190. there is no comparison, z280 is the best camcorder. z90 compared to z190 is just 1 stop brighter despite of the 1 inch sensor, but z190 comes w 3 rings and better usability. facts
so keep your z90, don't buy the z190, or save for z280
@@neosabre I heard the Z-190 is really bad in low light. how is it compares to the old goodie EX1 in low light ? I am in the same boat as you struggling to decide on Z-190 and others. I am using EX1 and it is a good camera in low light, but it's codec is too old for nowaday.
Is there any chance you can look into or talk about this subject.....
Instead of continuing to make camcorder with 1/3”or 1/2 “, sensors such as Sony pxw z150 and z280,
why can’t Sony also make a camcorder with the sensor and mount of their D-SLR A7 series cameras.
Just imagine a camcorder with the quality, low light ability of A7sii (or the new A7siii), with audio Xlr, no more over heating issues, no more video limit of 30min, Built in ND filters etc etc not forgetting the full frame bokeh!!!!!
surely there is a Market for this type of camcorder with a full frame sensor and mount???
So why hasn’t Sony made such a camcorder?????
Kull
There is Sony Venice :D
And now FX-9!
2