Sony Z1U versus the new Z7 Rant
by Bob Carpenter
on
Dec 23, 2007 at 12:30:03 am
Where does this new Z7 fit in? The sony Z1U street price when it first appeared was around $5000.00 The new Z7 though with some fantastic features has a MSRP at close to $7000.00 so I'm assuming street price will be in the high $5000.00 range.
The Z1U made for a fantastic Event videographers camera at the time but now there are many low end video companies that are picking up FX1's and used Z1Us and there are even consumer HDV cameras. I cant see event videographers forking over $6000.00 when their competition is buying up cameras in the low $2000.00 that do relatively the same thing. Really is the picture on this new Z7 that much better. Sure we could use a better low light model and perhaps a better LCD display probably in a lighter camera. If people honestly want the ability to change lenses and want a better camera why not for $1000.00 more go with Sonys new HDCAM. At least you are dealing with a better codec.
I was excited to learn that sony had indeed released a new HDV until I learned of the price. I forked out $5000.00 for several of these Z1Us when they first came out and I could market HD easily because the competition didnt have HD. Now 3 years later they are everywhere and HDV is a matured codec. HD will probably remain a hot commodity but there are many entry level cameras that make it difficult for our client base to see the difference.
I'm going to have to pass on this camera, the price to upgrade doesnt make it worth while.
Re: Sony Z1U versus the new Z7 Rant by Michael Slowe on Dec 23, 2007 at 11:32:48 am
Bob, what you say is good sense but I was really thinking of my own situation making documentaries single handed with a camera that has a few disadvantages. The Z7 corrects some of them. Whether the pictures are better I haven't yet heard. When you refer to "Sony's new HDCAM" I think you mean XDCAM because the full HDCAM is Digi Beta size etc etc. You are right about the better codec and I think it is nearly perfect except I can't edit that codec, the price of the cards is too high and how do we store footage on a shoot and in the period prior to editing (months sometimes in my case)?
Re: Sony Z1U versus the new Z7 Rant by Geoff Addis on Dec 24, 2007 at 2:38:52 pm
Michael,
I have just read a very extensive (UK) review of EX1 in which the lens was given a particularly enthusiastic vote of confidence. The overall picture quality was stated to be much better than the Z1 and 'just a tad' below that of the XDCAMs.
To me, the advantage of reduced DOF due to the 1/2", as oposed to 1/3", CCDs is a very welcome step; 2/3" would be even nicer though! The possible disadvantage of the EX1 is that the lens is integral, but looking at the present range of detachable lenses for 1/3" sensors one will have to pay as much for an alternative lens as for the camera itself to achieve a worthwhile improvement over the standard lens eg. JVC GY-HD110 system camera.
As far as storage and archiving is concerned, I feel that the time needed to download the files from the memory card into a laptop + external hard drive is of no great concern, but I realise that for some this may not be the case. Long term archiving on a hard disk is, I would suggest, more reliable than it would be on tape; hard disks are not expensive these days.
The ability to record on tape and/or memory card is very attractive, I just wish that the Z7 had larger CCDs. However, my main dislike applies to Z1, EX1 and Z7 cameras and it is that of the small buttons/switches which, in comparison to those on the larger professional cameras, are quite difficult to feel/find when shooting; having migrated down from a full size DVCAM to a Z1 this is something that I really miss.
Like you, I am now looking at the next progression and am torn between the convenient size and portability of the EX1 and the greater flexibility of its bigger XDCAM brothers.
[Geoff Addis]"To me, the advantage of reduced DOF due to the 1/2", as oposed to 1/3", CCDs is a very welcome step"
Just keep in mind that the DoF is still going to be quite deep with this camera. A 1/3" sensor will give a deep DoF approximately the same as 8mm film. A 2/3" sensor will have a DoF more like 16mm film (which is still extremely deep, compared to 35mm with a negative five times bigger). The 1/2" sensor will fall pretty much in between.
The camera really seems to have a lot going for it, but if you have expectations of very shallow 35mm-like depths-of-field, unfortunately that is not going to be one of its benefits. Even 2/3" cameras have very deep "videoy" DoFs. There may indeed be many good reasons to buy the EX, but I wouldn't let the hopes of a much-shallower DoF be a swaying factor or even any real argument. The difference is going to be so negligible that I doubt hardly anyone could tell the difference in the DoF of the EX and any smaller 1/3" camera.
T2
__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com
Re: Sony Z1U versus the new Z7 Rant by Geoff Addis on Dec 24, 2007 at 4:18:03 pm
Todd,
I quite agree, but any reducion in DOF is to be welcomed.
Sony appear to be bringing out several new models, I've just 'discovered' their HVR270E, due in February; it appears to be a shoulder mounted version of the Z7 and I would expect it to have larger switches and buttons, but I suspect that it uses 1440 X 1080 CCDs.
Re: Sony Z1U versus the new Z7 Rant by Michael Slowe on Dec 24, 2007 at 9:13:11 pm
Todd, presumably then you don't really think that the Z7 is going to be worth considering if one is already using the Z1? There are attachments etc available to boost the lens at both ends and of course a long tele will reduce the DOF. The main thing for me would be the same manual lens controls as on the Ex together with the much higher res screen (really important).
[Michael Slowe]"Todd, presumably then you don't really think that the Z7 is going to be worth considering if one is already using the Z1?"
No no... I'm not giving a recomendation at all or saying anything is "not worth considering," etc.
The one and only thing I was saying was that one shouldn't have false expectations of the EX's 1/2" sensor greatly reducing depth of field. If that is what you are going after, that is not a reason to consider this camera... as the DoF is not going to be reduced very much.
These and any cameras should be scrutinized and compared based on their features, output, usability, etc. Sure, a 1/2" sensor is bigger and presumably better than a 1/3" sensor... but consider it "better" because of improved image capturing irrespective of depth of field. That's all I was saying.
I'm just afraid that from the buzz that I'm hearing here and elsewhere that many people are looking to the EX to give much reduced and more filmlike DoFs... and that's not going to be the case. Really, the only way to get super shallow DoF with a 1/3", 1/2", or even a 2/3" camera is with a 35mm DoF converter.
The EX does look like a great camera (although I sure wish it had a removable lens)... and I would highly recommend that people check it out and give it due consideration among the models they are considering.... but NOT because of depth of field reduction, as that will be minimal at best.
T2
__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com
Re: Sony Z1U versus the new Z7 Rant by Kevin Shaw on Dec 26, 2007 at 2:41:00 pm
I've tested the Sony EX1 and found the depth of field look it produces to be noticeably nicer than other HD cameras with smaller 1/3" or 1/4" sensors. Obviously not as much so as cameras with even bigger sensors or shooting on 35mm film, but for the price it offers a useful DOF improvement which the Z7U will lack. I think Sony is confusing everyone with their choice of features and pricing for the Z7 and S270 cameras, which should have had the same 1/2" sensor as the EX1 based on their prices.
Re: Sony Z1U versus the new Z7 Rant by Don Greening on Dec 27, 2007 at 1:39:57 pm
[Todd at Fantastic Plastic]"that is not a reason to consider this camera... as the DoF is not going to be reduced very much. "
Todd, I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with your above statement, at least where the EX1 is concerned. The other day I pointed the camera outside through one of my house windows and focused onto a palm plant growing just outside and about 3 feet away from the house. I was able to successfully rack focus back and forth between 3 different leaves which were separated by a distance of approx. 6 or 7 inches. Then I focused on a bush about 12 feet away from the house then right across the street to the neighbour's house. This was all done within one static tripod shot (not panning or zooming at all). The EX1 was at full zoom during all of this (14x) and I never messed with that setting during the whole time I was recording. The DOF indicator in the LCD screen was showing just a few inches of focus headroom.
If you think you're surprised at this, consider how I felt while recording it all. I'll tell you, I would have never been able to achieve this shot with any of my 1/3 inch cameras which are a PD170 and an XL2. I can only assume the shallow DOF would be even more pronounced with something like a Letus or a Mini35, but really, for me I wouldn't consider buying an adapter for regular shooting, as the EX1 does an admirable job all by itself.
I certainly don't doubt your findings... although they would seem to defy the principals of physics and optics a bit.
How would you say the DoF compares to say a 2/3" camera or 16mmm? Were you using fairly long focal lengths which would demonstrate the shallower DoF.
I freely admit that I haven't used an EX yet... but I will be officially dumbfounded if I can see a DoF difference at normal-to-wider focal lengths. I keep an open mind, though.
And no, I wouldn't use a Letus either... but I love my Mini35 so much I practically sleep with the darn thing. When desired, I can get a DoF as shallow as one or two inches even with a 50mm or wider prime.
I will test drive the EX when I get a chance, though.
T2
__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com
Re: Sony Z1U versus the new Z7 Rant by Kevin Shaw on Dec 27, 2007 at 5:26:37 pm
"I certainly don't doubt your findings... although they would seem to defy the principals of physics and optics a bit."
On the contrary, the laws of physics and optics imply that the EX1 should have noticeably better DOF than any HD camera with a 1/3" sensor - which it does. It may not be as much better as some would like, but it is better.
[Kevin Shaw]"EX1 should have noticeably better DOF than any HD camera with a 1/3" sensor"
I think it comes down to aesthetics... and what one's definition of "noticeably" is.... and whether "noticeably" and "sufficient" are the same thing.
I'll compare 1/3" cameras and their big brother 2/3" cameras. The 2/3" camera will have a DoF that is noticably shallower. But it's still going to be extraordinarily deep compared to, say, 35mm DoF. That's one of the reasons that even super high-end HD cameras (except for big-sensor cameras such as RED or Genesis) still look "videoy."
Will the 1/2" sensor yield shallower DoF? Certainly. Will it be noticable? Probably, especially at long focal lengths. Will it be sufficient? Well, that will depend on the desired visions of the DP and the director. For some, it will be plenty. For others, not nearly enough. Guys who have been used to shooting 1/3" will probably find it enough of an improvement to make great use of it. DPs who come from a larger sensor or film background (especially 35mm) will no doubt find the DoF still extraordinarily deep, and cannot be made shallow enough for their liking (especially in shots where shallow DoF is the goal... of course that is not always the case).
I'm certainly not knocking this camera... it has a lot going for it. I just think that there might be some people out there with false expectations that believe that the slightly larger sensor is going to make a dramatic difference in depth of field. And yes, it will make a difference, but no, I don't believe it is going to be a dramatic or gigantic difference, especially with normal-to-wider lenses. If the desired result is super-shallow DoF at anything other than long focal lengths, I don't believe a 1/2" senor is the panacea.
I think the 1/2" sensor is a great thing... and will no doubt improve image quality. I'm sure that's what Sony had in mind. You might think of the slightly reduced DoF as "value added," but it's certainly not the primary reason for the bigger sensor... and not the sole reason to look at this camera if super-shallow DoFs are your goal.
T2
__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com
Re: Sony Z1U versus the new Z7 Rant by Kevin Shaw on Dec 30, 2007 at 9:13:29 pm
Like I said, the DOF of the EX1 will be good enough for some people and not for others. But for those of us who can't afford a "RedOne" video camera or the cost of developing 35mm movie film, let's appreciate that the EX1 is a step in the right direction for the price. 'Nuff said.
Re: Sony Z1U versus the new Z7 Rant by ken hon on Dec 28, 2007 at 8:48:35 pm
Todd,
If you look at Don's original post, he had the camera fully zoomed in. Made me go out and get our EX and look at it. Fully zoomed it does have a decent shallow DOF, but so do DV cameras (which have much larger pixels too). Full wide with the iris fully opened, it has an extremely wide DOF, maybe a meter or more at 2-3 meters. I didn't go back and look at our FX-1, but I suspect that Don is right, that it has much shallower DOF than it. Anyway, the laws of physics are still in tact.
[ken hon]"Full wide with the iris fully opened, it has an extremely wide DOF, maybe a meter or more at 2-3 meters."
Yep, that's about what I would suspect. Even a "full size" 2/3" sensor camera is probably not going to beat that by a whole whole lot, especially at shorter focal lengths.
If one desires shallow DoFs at medium-to-wider focal lengths that's gonna require either 1) a lens converter, 2) a call to Kodak for 35mm stock, 3) ringing up Panavision to book a Genesis, or 4) getting in line and waiting for a RED.
Easiest of those choices is using a lens converter... at least that's what we usually do (although the call to Kodak still comes now and then).
T2
__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com
Re: Sony Z1U versus the new Z7 Rant by Boyd McCollum on Dec 25, 2007 at 5:09:41 pm
[Geoff Addis]"Long term archiving on a hard disk is, I would suggest, more reliable than it would be on tape; hard disks are not expensive these days."
Actually, long-term storage on a hard disk may turn out to be anything but reliable. Hard drives have a pretty short shelf life, especially compared to other types of storage.
Here's a great article in the NY Times talking about some of these issues. (Note, a free membership is required.)
Re: Sony Z1U versus the new Z7 Rant by Geoff Addis on Dec 26, 2007 at 11:42:15 am
An interesting article, but we should remember that nothing lasts forever! Fortunately for most of us, we don't have to store as many masters as Hollywood.
My own experience over the last 35 years is that no medium, tape, CD/DVD, film or hard disk is 100% secure. The worst experience that I've had with professional masters was the degeneration of Ampex tape over a period of 7+ years during which time they absorbed moisture from the air resuling in a thick gooey mess that clogged up tape heads unless the tape was 'baked' in an oven before use!
As one of the first (and extensive) users of recordable CD I can honestly say that I have not experienced any long term losses when these have been stowed in a temeprature controled environment away from direct sunlight. To say the same about DVD and optical disks would be another matter as they are a more recent medium and have yet to endure such stowage times, but so far, so good. Compared to tape, film or DVD, the nature of the construction of hard disks provides better security to the ravages of man, humidity and light; however they are still mechanical devices subject to failure or damage, but much less so than the other media. As with tape. the long term retention of the recorded flux is an unkown, but I would contend that for most of us it is better to archive to disk than to any other medium. To invest in a new hard drive for each project, and maybe to power up that drive every now and again to guard against mechanical striction, is neither a costly or onerous task.
Just another point going back to the original 1/3" v 1/2" debate; of course neither can offer the same DOF characteristics as 35mm film, but I can definitely see the difference between the DOF performance of my 2/3", 1/2" and 1/3" cameras and as I said before, every bit helps! To me, the most attractive aspect of the EX1 is that compared with 1440 x 1080 of the Z7 it has true 1920 x 1080 pixel CCDs thus reducing one stage of interpolation when mastering to high definition within the NLE.
