www.supervideo.com
Sony Shoot-Out
VX versus FX

VX2100E on Left vs HDR FX1E High Definition on right    HEAD TO HEAD Shoot-Out.

The next explanation covers how I captured the stills ‘off tape’ in a fair comparison situation. I set a Vegas 5 edit session up for 1920x1080i format. Then I captured the two tapes, which had been started simultaneously at record and left running for the duration of the tryout. The VX2100E was captured as DV into Vegas and dragged onto the timeline. The HDR-FX1E was captured via the Cineform HDLink capture utility, converting from mpeg2 to AVI then dragged to the same timeline as a separate track below the previous one. By moving the upper track until synchronism was achieved, it was possible to switch between the DV and HDV tracks at identical times for both camcorders in order to compare accurately their performance.

We now have a set of stills off tape that are both at 1920x1080i, although obviously the VX2100E originated as 720x576.

There was no need to de-interlace, as the camcorders were both on a tripod and therefore steady enough to get good pictures from.

The first test that I expected to show a difference was red text on a dark background. My pet hate has always been the Hi-8 and subsequently DV color bleed that occurs when shooting brightly colored objects. There was a convenient crane on the dockside with red writing on it.

Original shot on HDR-FX1E:

To compare, and be fair, the choice of area has to be centre field, minimizing any lens aberration.
       Left is the HDR-FX1E   and   right is the VX2100E.

That is a very fair comparison and to me shows that, not only does the HDR-FX1E possess superior colour resolution than the VX2100E, but also that the HDV tape format with its mpeg2 compression preserves it excellently.

Another test was to look at fine detail with a range of contrast, original FX1E scene:

Taking a close-up from near centre that shows contrast and fine detail (thin branches).

HDR-FX1E on the left compared                 with the VX2100E on the right.

There is no sharpening or processing applied to any of these pictures, or indeed on the camcorders themselves. All settings were left as Sony’s ‘default’ on the setup menu.

I am amazed at the clarity in the HDR-FX1E picture. The fine lines of detail that are almost obscured in blur on the VX2100E look startlingly obvious on the HDR-FX1E.

This is detail indeed. Once again, no sign of color bleed on the HDR-FX1E.

The above picture example was at a medium range, so now to try with a long distance shot of a complex scene and see what will materialize in terms of comparison there.

Original shot from the HDR-FX1E on ‘infinity’ focus setting as with the VX2100E for the comparison below.

I have taken the large house on the hill, with the hotel roof sign as near centre for this comparison.
As previously, the HDR-FX1E is left                                                                and the VX2100E is right:

Boat rigging is very clear on the left but blurred on the right. The same can be said of the hotel roof sign. This is to be expected with a camera that claims a larger and better lens as well as more than double the overall picture resolution. The dynamic accuracy of the HDR-FX1E seems superior to the VX2100E, which is a VERY pleasant surprise. Remember all these pictures were compared from shots taken at the identical split second time.

The limitation of this test is in the still nature of the comparisons, which is all we have with this format of document. However, I think in a lot of respects, this is more stringent than the usual screen tests. Most domestic TV sets have a resolution of less than 500 lines, and as both these camcorders exceed that, no difference would be observed if viewed on such a medium. Here at least, we can see the real performance of each camcorder off tape, which is essentially how it will always be used.

The motion tests are needed in order to assess correctly the performance of the camcorders, and the compression to tape used, and these were performed only on the HDR-FX1E as the established DV format is without contention.

Before the motion test, let us have one more ‘shoot out’ comparison:

This time I’ve taken 3 different areas to compare, with the
HDR-FX1E on the left side   and the VX2100E on the right as before:

I would regard this as fairly substantial evidence that the Sony HDR-FX1E is indeed all that it claims to be in the HD resolution and the quality of the HDV tape medium.

The next area is purely on the HDR-FX1E as mentioned previously, that there have been some questions about motion artifacts on the mpeg2 compression.

The tests shown next have been off tape stills taken from a video that contains moving objects. If there were any artifacts, then these would show up as edging or strange patterns around the area of movement. It is difficult to forecast the performance under ALL conditions, but these few tests should give some idea.

The following still was taken from a recording made at sunrise. The dog is wagging its tail vigorously as it searches for a sunken ball in the pond:

The above picture shows no evidence of unexpected distortions, with the expected interlace ‘shear’ being viewed more like ‘film blur’ due to the finer nature of the 1080i vertical resolution, 540 lines will be at the first 50th of a second, the other inter-leaved 540 lines will be at the second 50th of a second. Now, please understand that this is PAL video format here. Motion that extends across the 25th of a second period will produce a difference in the two parts of the interlaced image as above. Tail interlaced detail is shown below. Nothing unusual there!

For a second test, a smaller object is chosen:

The highlighted bird above, in full flight, and at dawn, so in low light conditions looks like this when enlarged:

 

A perfectly clear interlaced observation.

I would comment from these observations, that the mpeg2 compression used in the HDV tape format on the HDR-FX1E is actually better than standard DV.

There is one final feature that I was pleased to see, in addition to the many other facilities and features that Sony have placed on this wonderful camcorder, and that is the ability to select a ‘Cine-gamma’ and Cine-frame’ mode of working.

Personally, the Cine-gamma interests me the most, as I’ve never been a fan of the flicker-mode that seems to be sought by so many film type applications.

The first time that I had time to go out and take some shots in colorful surroundings was an autumn midday. I chose a woodland area because of the fine detail in the various foliage and the spread of color evident in the seasonal decay.

The next three stills were taken with color settings higher than default, and soft focus in conjunction with the Cine-gamma ON.

This is no Cine-gamma, default settings:

By comparison below, Cine-gamma ON, sharpness to 8 (11 is default) and colour level to +2

The interesting observation, is that the auto focus appeared to be very slow in reaching a conclusion in this very detailed shot. When it did finally reach focus, I realized the reason. The superb lens on this camcorder resolves such a high level of detail, yet has a depth of field more like a film camera, or broadcast lens.

So when on auto focus, in lower light as here, the depth of field allows differential focus to be seen. This confuses the assessment of real focus, and explains Sony’s inclusion of a ‘zoom focus’ button on the camcorder which expands x 2 the area in the viewfinder to facilitate accurate manual focus. This option I now use as standard, and rest assured that my pictures are correctly focused at all times.

Another shot in the same woods with the Cine-gamma and settings as above:

Despite numerous comments … this is NOT "Middle Earth" !
 

Another similar Cine-gamma shot. I really like this setting, on playback it looks exactly as I recall my eyes perceiving it.

The detailed color rendition is without bleed artifacts, something that I have only seen on broadcast standard high resolution cameras previously.

In summarizing this ‘brief’ report, I believe strongly that Sony have done an astounding design exercise in the HDR – FX1E. There are so many features on it that are ergonomically placed and the light weight is perfect for versatile use. The battery life of 5 hours plus on an NP970 battery is also superb.
Well chucky...    I am one very happy camper.... er owner!    Sincerely zee koor-meister

More when I get the chance...