Sony have seriously misjudged the backlash with the up and coming firmware upgrade, and the over the top price X70 owners are having to pay for a measly licence that many of us insist should have shipped with the camera from day one.
Assuming you need 4K 25p, 420 8bit footage you are expected to pay Sony a further 485 Euros for the pleasure…no chance. At least two of my colleagues own two X70s and they are thinking of now selling them on as the price for 2 licences… a whopping 970 euros is far too dear in their opinion.
To add insult to injury the AX100 (X70 domestic clone) came with 4K as standard and is being updated in March 2015 “The FDR-AX100 will also support XAVC S 4K 100Mbps high-bitrate recording through a firmware update scheduled for March 2015.”
While the PROFESSIONAL PXW-X70 will only support 60Mbps in 4K…this is shocking. Sony do say the following “We are looking to support a higher bit-rate recording mode than 60 Mbps for 3840×2160 XAVC-L in the future“
A word from one of my readers “February 24, 2015, came the news that soon will be released an update for PXW-X70 will be available 4K resolution. Just judging by the presented data, the owners of professional cameras PXW-X70 will be able to improve their equipment to the level of consumer camera AX100, with PAYMENT ???? While AX100 will soon receive improved characteristics with 4K. Correct me if I’m wrong.”
This is turning into a “Marketing Disaster” for Sony Broadcast and I for one will not be paying 485 euros for any 4K 25p frame rate. Panasonic on the other hand recently gave all their Panasonic PX270 users a late Christmas present by giving away their AVC Ultra 200 codec for free, when it was rumoured to cost at least 2500 euros.
I love my PXW-X70 and XAVC HD 1080 50p works fine for me but a lot of disgruntled X70 users are becoming very angry at not only the time it has taken Sony to arrive at the 4K licence price but the unfairness of it all compared to the AX100 !
Lets look at the Mbps of other 4K camcorders…
Sony PXW-FS7 = Best quality 4K @ 600Mbps
Sony PXW-Z100 = Best quality 4K @ 600Mbps
Panasonic HC-X1000 = 150 Mbps
Panasonic GH4 = 100Mbps
JVC GY-LS300 = 150Mbps
Sony domestic FDR-AX100 = 100Mbps (FW coming June)
Does anyone think we are going to get top notch 4K footage at 60Mbps when Sony have already announced a FW update for the domestic AX100 upping it to 100Mbps…sorry but I really feel so angry that Sony Broadcast think professional camera operators will put up with this outrageously bad afterthought when their domestic partners are walking all over us…seriously very poor marketing Sony Broadcast !!!
Further thoughts :
What were we waiting for, the price, we knew that would be over the top and we were right. I thought Sony were working on some amazing professional codec that would give us a minimum 150-200 Mbps XAVC 4K, after all…We the end user bought into the fact that our X70s are “professional camcorders”. I also hoped we would get other codecs like XAVC I for HD work, allowing me to bypass Catalyst Prepare. SDXC speed 3 cards would cope with 150Mbps easily I use them in my X70, A7s and GH4 all the time.
Sonys announcement was a roller coaster for me but to pay so much for so little in return is not cricket.
Update : Before we go into the realms of fantasy the X70 is a 422 10bit HD camcorder but is not capable of processing 422 10bit 4K footage, thats why you buy an FS7 !
Why are we still bickering about 422/420, this video has been pointed out to me as a “Sony said 422” yet in the same German video there is a graphic stating quite clearly UHD is 420 8bit, this was recorded during IBC 2014.
100% agree, I hope they are listening as I’ve been looking at other manufacturers for future cameras now because of this…
I don’t think Sony have any idea just how much they have upset their professional customers with their crass decisions related to several of their products. The irritation is that their products are good but so often not fully functional when released on to the market. This leads to customer irritation which so easily could have been avoided.
I will buy the license if the XAVC-L will be supported by Vegas and FCP and if I can sell the camera with the 4K. My opinion about the entire XAVC container is this: Sony wanted to create something “unique” to sell more gadgets (same as usual) LOCKING THEIR CUSTOIMERS: problem is that they can’t sell stuff that doesn’t even work with their own stuff. That’s the most ridiculous stunt ever made by any manufacturer on this planet since I can remember.
where is the Vegas and FCP support for the mysterious XAVC-L HD (Not even 4k) HD! Where is it ?
Agree.. Bad marketing? Too much?
Hard to say. The base price at $2.2k usd is very reasonable, so had this been higher, maybe the update could have been priced lower.
After all I paid $5K for my AG-AC160A (HD) and even now it lists for $3.7K.
It may be Sony did the math and figure their mistake was on the base price.
Re your FS7 at $8K (lenses extra), I know this is a totally different cam, but the price of the FS7 is way up there compared to the PXW-X70.
I looked at the PXW and what really turned me off was the 3 lb weight and the 12 x.
The 160A weights 5 lbs and does 22 x. I really would not want anything less that 5 lbs. Sure would love a 160A that could do 4K and work off the shoulder as well as hand-held and off tripod.
There are so many options …
Right from day one Sony said that the upgrade would be a paid one. If anyone made the decision and bought the x70 and knew this fact it’s pointless bleating about it. No one forced anyone buy the camera. With the PDW-F700 XDCam we had to pay US$5K for the upgrade to handle SD recording. Welcome to the XDCam world. Nobody forced us to pay this. We knew this from the start like with the x70. With regards to what other manufactures are doing I doubt whether Sony cares greatly. Most of the other manufacturers follow Sony in development. Maybe to keep as much market share as they can they offer features included in the price of their cameras. Your choice if you don’t like what Sony offer buy some other brand. Castigating Sony online won’t change their business model.
HDW : No one was expecting 485 euros !
As someone who bought the camera less than two months ago I am absolutely disgusted with Sony. I hadn’t bought it for the 4K but the XAVC …. however it was nice to think of the camera of having a life beyond full HD but not at this sick price. This is like luring consumers into buying something with an offer that you don’t really want to give.
HD Warrior grats for keeping us in the loop with site!!
Just about to purchase the X70 and the fact that the consumer cam AX100, has more fps, higher data-rate and free 4k etc. it certainly sounds dodgy although the 1080P 4.2.2 is what I want it for immediately and obviously the 4k in future.
Think its best to sit this one out first as there’s a lot of frustration with what could have been an unbelievably successful product and a game changer in the industry for Sony.
I wonder how much x70 users charge per day?!
Total cost of camera incl 4k is about $3 grand.
What a joke $$$. I would hate to make living with this Toycam but users who bought this camera should just keep making $$ with x70. Pay €500 for your humble 4K
and keep getting jobs.
I just wait for new C300 😉
I guess you get what you pay for…
HDW : Jiri you are way off base its Toytown 4K they are offering professional end users. The X70 may be small but its a cracking wee camera for serious unobtrusive doc work.
The upgrade indeed is expensive although it was expected to be in this range from the beginning. At least here in Germany we were told it would be “about 500 Euro”. But I don’t think that too many X70 users will go the 4K way anyway. Contrary to popular belief in parts of the internet 4K is far from being mandatory and all three of my colleagues who shoot with X70s in broadcast and corporate environments for example don’t care about this feature at all. They use the X70 as a very capable FHD camera and it is one. At the moment I am thinking about buying one myself and I don’t consider the 4K upgrade, too, no matter what the price is.
BTW, this upgrade raises the price of the X70 only to the same level where the 4K camcorder HC-X1000 from Panasonic always was. Till now I never saw someone shooting with an X1000…
What is x70 rate for serious doc work? 😉
HDW : Missing the point again.
That*s why I never buy Sony products. They always try to trick us in some way by charging extra money.
The same with Apple products.
It should be a marketing disaster and I won’t upgrade either. It feels like a company in decline grasping for cash. And they treat VEGAS Pro like somebody else’s software not even being able to say if they’re going to transcode XAVC-L in the future. But I do like the camera and the 1080P. Regarding XAVC-L, forget Catalyst Browse. Instead, check out “FootageStudio” at http://www.acrovid.com because it converts multiple clips at once while denoising and more! ……..SONY-WAKE UP!!!
Phil, absolute brilliant blog, even good to see that I´m not alone with my anger! First it took Sony more than two month to send me my bonus present (ECM-MS2), now we get the information that the awaited 4k upgrade comes in 06/2015!! Remember that it was promised for end of 2014!! (IBC report 2014, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sM6YzUzcY7k, ~2:00min, sorry, it´s german).
As Bernd mentioned the german customers were prepared to have ~500€ in the pants for the upgrade, so I was aware of that.
What makes me totally upset is the announcement that we get 4k only in 4:2:0 8-bit!!! Here http://www.sony.co.uk/pro/product/broadcast-products-camcorders-xdcam/pxw-x70/overview/ in the 4th bullet point headlined “…4k ready” we are told that “Image sampling IS 4:2:2 10-bit…” and “…PXW-X70 is ALSO 4k ready…”. The german translation is even more clear with “Darueberhinaus…”. In no word this was limited to HD, it´s written general and the upgrade is mentioned in the same chapter!!
In the IBC report from 2:50 on Michael Lehman-Horn also mentions 10-bit 4:2:2 after the 4k upgrade was already addressed and Manuel Margies from Sony doesn´t counter. In 4:28 the same story, again 10-bit 4:2:2 and no counter or restriction to HD from the Sony agent. The actual overlays to the video that restricts to HD came much later.
Only 60Mbps on the X70 vs. 100Mbps on the AX100 (also AX33!!!) is another BIG shame (ok, XAVC-L vs. –S). The 4k X70 will be nearly twice the AX100´s price with less Mbps and without the high fps options and again, scheduled 3 months later the free AX100 update comes!!
I will pay the 485€ or even more, but I want the “promised” 4:2:2, especially 10-bit in 4k!! Sony, even with this the X70 will not cannibalize higher class cameras like the FS7. The sensor is good but not the same league!
Again, what about Vegas and FCPX users??? The X70 is out half a year now and they even don´t get their own software working?!?!
Glad I´m using EDIUS Pro. I remember a Sony rep on Photokina last year who told me he also uses EDIUS.
There’s a dubious rumor (is there any other kind?) that only 24p would require a paid upgrade. 4K at other framerates would essentially be free.
Wishful thinking?
I also angry about the high update-price, for round about 200 Euro more I can buy a better 4k-Cam the Sony AX33 (without projector), but this upgrade is really to expensive.
At first time Sony says the same with the PMW400 with an upgrade for a special price, after a little time-period Sony changed to free. A fee round about 100 to 200 Euro will be quite good for many customers, but 485 Euro netto are to much.
Hi Guys, I sent this email to Sony and the reply was talk to your retailer. I suggest that we send similar emails to Sony, see below
Dear Sony
I am writing to complain about being misled when I purchased my PXW-70 camcorder. I purchased this camcorder over others due to it being marketed as a Sony Professional camcorder as it is professional standard work I need it to do and I also payed extra costs over a domestic model due to the promised 4k upgrade which would be rolled out. I have waited patiently for the upgrade to be available which was promised to be available at the beginning of 2015 and now will not be available to access until June this year. Worse than that the upgrade is only 25p and 30p not 50p and is at an amateur level of only 60 mps which is less than the consumer model AX100 which is being upgraded to 100 mps.Being a professional camera I expect professional codecs and this upgrade is of no use to me whatsoever.I was prepared to wait as I was confident Sony would have been working on improving the quality of the codec not offering something worse than that already exists.
I am very angry about this as I could have purchased my camera from other manufacturers and received a much higher standard of 4k without waiting months.
I would like a refund on my purchase immediately or a professional 4k upgrade immediately, can you inform me how to realise this.
Yours sincerely
Matthew Dalziel
The 4K upgrade cost for the FS700 was 500 Euro and it was AU$400 down here in Aussie. You guys in the EU get a bad deal to start with re what you pay for kit and upgrades! That’s bye the bye anyway. Not too much screaming was heard about the FS700 upgrade and that did NOT include 4K on board.
I can understand the reticence of paying a big price for any upgrade if you are an amateur shooter but come on guys if you are shooting professionally what’s the big deal. I hire out with a full size XDCam disc camera or an FS700 or an x70 for the same money per day. Clients pay me for my skills and quality of work regardless of what I shoot on. I’ve now done some twenty plus jobs on the x70 ranging from nationally broadcast pressers to corporate video and entertainment shoots. All at full day rate and only once did a corporate client comment and say “I see you have a new camera.” I said “Yes they are getting smaller and that’s great.”
Two jobs and the camera was paid for. From there on in it’s all mine and that works for me. If I want or need the 4K upgrade and if I think it’s worthwhile I will pay for it quite happily as that cost will be recovered over a single half day shoot.
Old story, I pay the carpenter for his skills whether he uses a 2″ chisel or a circular saw. The x70 is just another nice small pretty efficient tool in the toolbox. You get nothing for nothing in this world and if you want a real 4K camera with high bit rates and 422 10-bit you have to pay for it. Anyway who’s shooting 4K professionally unless it’s for the very high end. The broadcasters don’t want it. I don’t know of anyone delivering 4K in the corporate world. If and when that time arrives ok I will look to upgrading to a 4K camera… and will be able to do so easily because the x70 cost so little in the first place and will still be generating a good income stream.
Good hint Matthew, I also already wrote an E-Mail to Sony, but with a slight different contents.
I WANT the “promised” 4:2:2 10-bit 4k and I want it at 23.98p. Nothing that wasn´t expected. At least 100Mbps also would be to expect as AX33 and AX100 also get this.
They didn´t answear yet.
Roland.
Roland & Matthew ~
If indeed Sony ‘promised’ 422 10-bit then you may have a case. Please tell us all where these x70 4K specs were released or promised. I for one would love to know.
Sony Basingstoke’s original press release of July 2014 stated:
Multi-format recording and 4K ready The PXW-X70 records XAVC Long GOP 422 10-bit 1920×1080 60p/50p/60i/50i/30p/25p/24p at 50 Mbps and 35 Mbps, 1920×1080 60i/50i at 25 Mbps, as well as 1280×720 60p/50p at 50 Mbps. It is also possible to record AVCHD 420 8-bit at 1920x 1080 and 1280×720 and DV. The PXW-X70 is also 4K ready and can handle 4K recordings with a future upgrade.
Specs for all the HD and SD formats specified but nothing for the 4K. I know of no instance where Sony has announced let alone specified what the 4K specs were going to be on the x70.
We might all have expectations as to what Sony should supply by way of a 4K upgrade but as far as I can see so far everyone’s expectations have been based on their own wish lists or reading things into Sony’s press releases that just aren’t there.
I’ve never read anything put out by Sony that has led me to believe that the x70 would have 4K 422 10-bit recording.
Read well first. Caveat emptor guys. Never truer words said.
the discussion here is not about the cost “per se” but more about the cost related to the lower offer.
We all knew that 4K wasn’t coming for free, and we all expected to use a real 50mbps 4-2-2 in HD instead of a caricature that nobody can distinguish from the basic avchd.
Ok, let’s see what was written in the brochures (because in the US and UK it will be illegal to come short from the ads).
Hi Guys
I know that Sony did not specify what the 4k upgrade would consist off, that is clear. I do think however I for one did purchase this camcorder because I wanted to migrate to 4k from HD so I did buy into the selling point of the 4K upgrade and the ‘future proof’ attraction of the camera. The other reason I purchased this camera was that it was from Sony’s Professional’ range of camera’s not the domestic range. Purchasing from the professional range I think you are entitled to believe/speculate that the 4k upgrade would be of a professional standard not below that of the domestic model. I think it is quite reasonable and logical to have had these thoughts. This is a hard lesson and I am very disappointed that I feel misled by sony although in a court of law they could get away by offering a really basic upgrade lower than domestic standard and that is what they have done.
Matthew
It seems to me that many have missed Sony’s announcement that there will be a higher bit rate offering than 60-mbit down the line. Obviously if x70 users can’t wait for future upgrades then they may have to look at alternative kit if you need 100-mbit plus.
It has taken over two years to get the bulk of the promised upgrades for the F5 / 55 cameras out to market. Sure it’s frustrating waiting but they have come. It was over a year for the PDW-F700 to get the standard def upgrade. You don’t hear the bulk of XDCam and F series users in the world screaming blue murder over the progressive development of firmware for their cameras.
Since the introduction of digital processing cameras based on programmable FPGA chip sets this constantly evolving firmware path has become the norm. Professional cameras have been evolving for years.
Good grief the Alexa since its introduction in April 2010 has had many many variant reincarnations and upgrades based off it the original.
The Alexa Plus, Alexa Plus 4:3, Alexa M, Alexa Studio, Alexa XT.
Over time this camera has offered various different codecs, frame rates etc.
The fact that Sony is now offering this sort of FPGA upgrade technology in what is ostensibly the very bottom of the professional range is pretty amazing and is to be welcomed. Professional will welcome it.
The consumer orientated “I want it and I want it now!” crowd will forever be disappointed. It seems to me that many people aren’t prepared to sit through a camera’s development and evolution process and and make it pay for itself during that evolution period. I feel sorry for those that feel this way as they will constantly live in a winter of disappointment and discontent. Be patient guys. Be thankful that there is a well spec’d good performing little camera out there that sits at a pretty amazing price / performance ratio.
HDW : I just don’t get why 2 cameras out of the same stable…AX100 gets 4K out of the box while the so called PRO X70 is a future paid upgrade.
The words “4K Ready” must never be believed or even “HD Ready” because they describe something which is not ready.
I commiserate with all who have fallen foul with expectations not meeting what Sony have actually delivered.
I still am awaiting the last free firmware update for the Sony PXW-Z100 which was put on the market in late 2013 and is not yet fully functional. I believe we have all of the codecs now, but not the use of the USB (A) socket which was never even mentioned as non-functional in the original marketing material, only in the Operating Guide after purchase.
“Caveat Emptor” indeed!
cyvideo, it’s described in my first post from 5th of march, 9:29pm. Especially the Sony rep on the IBC report didn’t refuse when the reporter said 4k, 4:2:2 10-bit in one sentence, and that for two times. In the Sony text 4:2:2 10-bit was also not restricted to HD, and the chapter is headlined 4k and 4k is also mentioned in between.
Sorry Roland but if you are referring to the following paragraph in the link in your earlier post that says:
“Breadth of recording format capabilities and 4K ready
Provides multiple choices depending on application required, including XAVC, AVCHD and DV file-based recording. When recording in XAVC, the PXW-X70 uses the MXF file format, efficiently compressing full HD (1920 x 1080) resolution using the MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 CODEC. Image sampling is 4:2:2 10-bit with high-efficiency Long-GOP compression at 50 Mbps, 35 Mbps or 25 Mbps. The PXW-X70 is also 4K ready and can handle 4K recordings with a future upgrade (fee required).”
Then I see no reference to any technical specification of the future 4K upgrade. All it says is:
“The PXW-X70 is also 4K ready and can handle 4K recordings with a future upgrade (fee required).”
4k ready it is as it has a 4k chip. But by no stretch of the imagination in the English language can this last statement be construed to mean that all the HD tech specs apply to any future 4k upgrade.
I think a lot of facts related to the x70 have been misconstrued, falsely and wrongly interpreted. I still maintain I have not yet seen ANY Sony official written material from any part of the globe that mentioned 4k, 422, 10-bit all in the same sentence. To the best of my knowledge the first and only 4k technical spec released so far for the x70 is the recent release that specifies 60-mbit, 420, 8-bit.
I repeat until someone can point me to an official Sony release stating the contrary I’m afraid people are misconstruing the factual written words rather than accepting the fact that there is NO mention in any official Sony release that referrers to 422, 10-bit and 4k in the same sentence.
Forget what people say. The world is full of hearsay. If what you guys are claiming to be true in that Sony has stated in writing that the 4k upgrade is going to be 422, 10-bit don’t waste your time on forums. Obtain the documentation that supports your claims present it to your solicitor and get them to deliver a letter of demand to Sony marketing for your money back. They won’t have a leg to stand on. If someone DOES find documentary evidence to the 4k, 422, 10-bit claim please post any relevant links. If this documentary evidence is not in existence then it stands to reason people have misconstrued what they have read. They have taken the information as presented and read into it what they wished for. Is there any other explanation? Not in my view at any rate but then we are all entitled to draw what conclusions we want from the facts at hand. I don’t see the facts or written evidence to support the claim that Sony has stated that the x70 4k upgrade will be 422, 10-bit.
@cyvideo I don’t see the reason for “point you” anything. You said that you don’t care about 4K so why are you even here discussing about it?
sorry HDW but I couldn’t resist
cyvideo, again as in my first post, http://youtu.be/sM6YzUzcY7k, at 4:26 “4k, 4:2:2 and 10-bit” in ONE SENTENCE, the Sony rep doesn’t counter!
In the fourth bullet point on the Sony website: …Image sampling is… IT IS, IT IS (!!!!) for all formats mentioned and HEADLINED in the chapter!!! It is not restricted like 4:2:2 10-bit -in HD-, 4:2:0 8-bit in upcoming 4k. It’s not written “best possible image sampling is…”. No, image sampling ALWAYS is… simple english language! It is announced and written that 4k is coming in the same chapter, the chapter is about the recording format.
In german it’s more clear “darueberhinaus…” refers to what was writted before, similar and more strict to “also”.
A good lawyer would turn them inside out from that announcement, there is no question.
HDW : If you care to re visit the video you will notice a graphic that clearly states 420, 8bit.
http://www.hdwarrior.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/420.jpg
HDW: you’re absolutely right, but as I stated initially these overlays haven’t been there when the video was published, they were added recently, long after many bought the cam. I think they were added when Sony announced the further “facts”.
I wouldn’t care, I would pay another 485€ if Sony would bring 4:2:2 10-bit in a stage two upgrade with also at least 100Mbps and maybe “overdone” gamma curves. Full manual night shoot would also be “cool” for IR filming.
Many are dreaming of 4k 50p, but I think this is not possible with that sensor/processor and was never anywhere mentioned.
Mark this is the problem, people reading things into statements.
NOWHERE did I state as you put it “You said you don’t care about 4k…” Absolutely incorrect. Let’s get the facts straight what I said was “Anyway who’s shooting 4K professionally unless it’s for the very high end. The broadcasters don’t want it. I don’t know of anyone delivering 4K in the corporate world.” If it’s for the higher end of the market I would be using, in Sony kit at least an F55 or similar. Hardly an x70 even if it had 150-mbit.
I want 4k for the freedom of positioning and zooming in post not specifically for display purposes. I see far more value in 4k for these reasons than 4k display in the near future.
Roland. You have me at a disadvantage re the video you reference as I don’t speak German. What I do see though on the video quite clearly presented at the top of the screen in a text block at 4:25 is a statement that says, I quote the screen text:
“UHD (4K): in 8bit 4:2:0.” it then goes on to say “In HD auch 10bit, 4:2:2”
The statement is quite specific about the differences between the 4k and the HD colour space.
I understand enough German to understand this Michael Lehmann-Horn from Magic Multi Media, whoever they are, make totally incorrect assumptions in summing up when he says “Ah so. 4k. 10-bit. 4::2.” Totally unfounded assumptions on his part. The Sony rep was no big help in not correcting him. In fact the rep probably didn’t have a clue at that point in time so he just shut his mouth and let this Lehmann-Horn guy run on like a runaway train. Doing everyone a great disservice in the process It’s Lehmann-Horn making all the assumptions and verbalising those assumptions and if anyone has taken his utterances as gospel then they have put too much faith into his totally unconfirmed statements.
BTW you overlooked supplying a Sony website URL where this fourth bullet point re Image Sampling is so a bit hard to comment on that.
In its present state the X70 is like a Pro version of the CX900 which is about $400 less than the AX100. So the upgrade price for the X70 4K is of the same order as the price difference for the AX100 and CX900. The only comment I would have is why the time difference.
As to the comments on 10bit etc I have seen no comments anywhere that would support the claim of 10bit 4:2:2 4K for the X70. In English the content must be in the same sentence not just the paragraph. That is why legal documents have page long sentences !!!! Even the Z100 Long GOP is 8bit 4:2:0 just like the FDR-AX1 . MXF for the Z100, mp4 for the AX1. Consumer to Pro differences, AX100 is mp4 and X70 will be MXF.
The bottom line is who wants 4k at 420 8bit 60mbps. That upgrade should be free. And later if they offer 420 8bit 100bps—–What professional wants that? What I do want is 422 10bit 150mbps or better in the $200-$300 range. My guess is that by the time they offer that, I’ll be looking at another camera. And never again will I hold out hope of a future upgrade from Sony.
So in summary,
This 4K is unusable. Just because Sony put XDCAM
Badge on it, does not make it $20,000 proper camera.
Well at least it gives you range of HD Codecs,some lens,SDI…not bad for what it cost.
Would not use it on my live shows because severe problems handling Video Screens in background.
That is why we do not see this Cmos in high end XDCAM cameras where CCD is still a King.
Can not understand from marketing point they can not give this humble 4k to x70 FIRST ahead of Sony100 and give it for free and then charge $$ for proper 4k.
I am sure within 6 months there will be x77 for $3,500 with standard usable 4k…..or wait for Canon’s haidryer;-)
@Ron Evans I agree . in sony’s defense I’d add that this time is not some marketing decision but pure and simple incompetence. Like incompetent is the design of the entire XAVC wrapper: impossible to understand in the L format , but it takes a huge amount of room totally unnecessary. a failure, born to create something “unique” and lock the customers selling them more mandatory unbelievably expensive gadgets (the cards need to be faster/bigger or even sony’s own kind (XQD? that nonsense that cost an arm and a leg LOL)and just because the XAVC is sooooooo idiotically big.
Result: erratic software, updates that make no sense, nonsense of the XAVC-L (alleged 10-4:2:2 50Mbps) that gives exactly the same pictures of the avchd. what’s going on here? are they playing with us?
Mark.
Your comment “XAVC-L (alleged 10-4:2:2 50Mbps) that gives exactly the same pictures of the avchd. what’s going on here?” This statement flies in the face of fact and reality.
Sony’s XAVC-L format on the PXW series of cameras, x70 included, is based on the Material Exchange Format, in other words MXF. MXF is a SMPTE broadcast standard that is used worldwide and is utilised by Sony, Panasonic, Ikegami, JVC and numerous other camera and third party suppliers to the broadcast industry. The MXF container came about so that there was a common standard interchange format that carried all the necessary data about the essence of the video. This data is contained in the .XML files that accompany each clip. A common standard that would work with network databases that had to carry all this information. The PXW cameras, x70 included, comply with this SMPTE XAVC MXF standard and part of this standard for HD is based on 4:2:2 color space and 10-bit depth.
On the other hand the AVCHD and XAVC-S, as in the Sony a7s is based on the consumer based AVC standard and comes in an MP4 wrapper. No .XML metadata information relating to the video essence contained is in the MP4 wrapper. If you understand the MP4 wrapper there is no provision to carry all the necessary data required by the SMPTE MXF standard and therefore the MP4 wrapper does not meet the requirements of the Media Exchange Format so is unusable straight out of the camera for direct file based ingest into a newsroom’s MXF based server. AVCHD carries none of the information required for this type of broadcast integration.
Back to your first statement “XAVC-L (alleged 10-4:2:2 50Mbps) that gives exactly the same pictures of the avchd. what’s going on here?”
Agreed Mark. On a quick visual analysis there is not much to be seen between AVCHD (H.264 24-mbit 8-bit in an MTS wrapper) at 24 or 28-mbit compared to XAVC-L (H.264 50-mbit 10-bit in an MXF wrapper.) If you want to stress test these two H.264 implementations get a garden hose and spray out a quick fine streaming mist of cascading droplets with the sun coming through them shoot that and then compare. There is no comparison. The lower bit rate of the AVCHD will show a world of difference in quantization noise and macro bock structure. With only 24-mbit and 256 levels to handle all the detail it falls far short of the 50-mbit and 1024 levels ability to handle complex image structure and movement. A data inspection of the various video samples follows if HDW feels it is not making the post too long.
Regardless of what the MXF wrapper contains whether it is at 60, 100, 150 etc bitrates and whether its contents are at 8 or 10-bit depth is not the point from the broadcast point of view. What this MXF wrapper means is the output from this flea sized camera is from a technical point fully compliant with the SMPTE MXF standard used in the broadcast world. This camera was aimed at the video/journo self shooter working for networks. More and more networks are employing this manner of news gathering. Hence the next version x70 software will include streaming capability for journos to get the material back as fast as possible. The XAVC media along with the .XML data files out of this camera can be ingested straight into a network MXF server based workflow.
Mind you whether 10-bit has a massive advantage is debatable in cameras that have a SNR output from their ADC of less than 60dB because at 10-bit at 1024:1 samples you need a clean signal to noise ratio of 60dB. Example. The Canon C300 can reach 72dB in the luminance channel. Overall though when combined with the color channels and the processing that goes with that matrix process the overall output is 54dB which is battling to reach a pixel depth of 9-bits. But that truly is a different discussion.
To put a final point on it an 8-bit 4:2:0 60-mbit recording delivered in an MXF wrapper complies with the SMPTE standard. An 8-bit 4:2:0 100 or 150-bit recording delivered in an MP4 container doesn’t meet the standard.
The question for the camera buyer is do I need an MXF based camera workflow. If a buyer decides yes then they have to accept the fact that they have bought into a workflow where the development and approval of any changes and advances in that standard have to be ratified by the governing bodies such as SMPTE and it is going to involve a much slower pace of upgrades.
If you are not in the broadcast supply end as a shooter then no maybe you don’t need the MXF based workflow and its slower development path. But remember this is what you have bought into.
HDW if you find the following examples too long please feel free to ditch them.
The examples:
AVCHD 50i @ 24-mbit
Format : BDAV
Format/Info : Blu-ray Video
File size : 26.8 MiB
Duration : 9s 276ms
Overall bit rate mode : Variable
Overall bit rate : 24.1 Mbps
Maximum Overall bit rate : 24.0 Mbps
Video
ID : 4113 (0x1011)
Menu ID : 1 (0x1)
Format : AVC
Format/Info : Advanced Video Codec
Format profile : High@L4.0
Format settings, CABAC : Yes
Format settings, ReFrames : 2 frames
Format settings, GOP : M=2, N=13
Codec ID : 27
Duration : 9s 280ms
Bit rate mode : Variable
Bit rate : 21.6 Mbps
Maximum bit rate : 22.0 Mbps
Width : 1 920 pixels
Height : 1 080 pixels
Display aspect ratio : 16:9
Frame rate : 25.000 fps
Color space : YUV
Chroma subsampling : 4:2:0
Bit depth : 8 bits
Scan type : Interlaced
Scan order : Top Field First
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.416
Stream size : 23.9 MiB (89%)
Audio
ID : 4352 (0x1100)
Menu ID : 1 (0x1)
Format : PCM
Format settings, Endianness : Big
Format settings, Sign : Signed
Muxing mode : Blu-ray
Codec ID : 128
Duration : 9s 355ms
Bit rate mode : Constant
Bit rate : 1 536 Kbps
Channel(s) : 2 channels
Channel positions : Front: L R
Sampling rate : 48.0 KHz
Bit depth : 16 bits
Delay relative to video : -80ms
Stream size : 1.71 MiB (6%)
Text
ID : 4608 (0x1200)
Menu ID : 1 (0x1)
Format : PGS
Codec ID : 144
Duration : 8s 775ms
Delay relative to video : -80ms
A7s XAV-S 50p @ 50-mbit 8-bit 4:2:0 MP4
General
Format : XAVC
Codec ID : XAVC
File size : 138 MiB
Duration : 22s 80ms
Overall bit rate mode : Variable
Overall bit rate : 52.4 Mbps
Encoded date : UTC 2014-08-07 12:13:45
Tagged date : UTC 2014-08-07 12:13:45
Video
ID : 1
Format : AVC
Format/Info : Advanced Video Codec
Format profile : High@L4.2
Format settings, CABAC : Yes
Format settings, ReFrames : 2 frames
Format settings, GOP : M=1, N=12
Codec ID : avc1
Codec ID/Info : Advanced Video Coding
Duration : 22s 80ms
Bit rate mode : Variable
Bit rate : 50.4 Mbps
Maximum bit rate : 60.0 Mbps
Width : 1 920 pixels
Height : 1 080 pixels
Display aspect ratio : 16:9
Frame rate mode : Constant
Frame rate : 50.000 fps
Standard : PAL
Color space : YUV
Chroma subsampling : 4:2:0
Bit depth : 8 bits
Scan type : Progressive
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.486
Stream size : 133 MiB (96%)
Encoded date : UTC 2014-08-07 12:13:45
Tagged date : UTC 2014-08-07 12:13:45
Audio
ID : 2
Format : PCM
Format settings, Endianness : Big
Format settings, Sign : Signed
Codec ID : twos
Duration : 22s 80ms
Bit rate mode : Constant
Bit rate : 1 536 Kbps
Channel(s) : 2 channels
Sampling rate : 48.0 KHz
Bit depth : 16 bits
Stream size : 4.04 MiB (3%)
Encoded date : UTC 2014-08-07 12:13:45
Tagged date : UTC 2014-08-07 12:13:45
Other
Type : meta
Duration : 22s 80ms
Pay particular attention to the massive structure and content difference in an XAVC MXF wrapped video file with regards to an MP4 wrapped file. Specifically the number of audio channels, the SMPTE time code and data etc:
X70 XAVC-L 50p @ 50-mbit 10-bit 4:2:2 MXF
General
Format : MXF
Format profile : OP-1a
Format settings : Closed / Complete
File size : 136 MiB
Duration : 21s 120ms¬¬¬¬
Overall bit rate mode : Variable
Overall bit rate : 54.2 Mbps
Encoded date : 2014-10-19 04:34:20.000
Writing application : Sony Mem 2.00
Writing library : Sony Mem 2.00
Video
ID : 2
Format : AVC
Format/Info : Advanced Video Codec
Format profile : High 4:2:2@L4.2
Format settings, CABAC : Yes
Format settings, ReFrames : 2 frames
Format settings, GOP : M=3, N=12
Format settings, wrapping mode : Frame
Codec ID : 0D01030102106001-0401020201316001
Duration : 21s 120ms
Bit rate mode : Variable
Bit rate : 50.0 Mbps
Width : 1 920 pixels
Height : 1 080 pixels
Display aspect ratio : 16:9
Frame rate : 50.000 fps
Color space : YUV
Chroma subsampling : 4:2:2
Bit depth : 10 bits
Scan type : Progressive
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.482
Stream size : 125 MiB (91%)
Color primaries : BT.709
Transfer characteristics : IEC 61966-2-4
Matrix coefficients : BT.709
Audio #1
ID : 3
Format : PCM
Format settings, Endianness : Little
Format settings, wrapping mode : Frame (AES)
Codec ID : 0D01030102060300-0402020101000000
Duration : 21s 120ms
Bit rate mode : Constant
Bit rate : 1 152 Kbps
Channel(s) : 1 channel
Sampling rate : 48.0 KHz
Bit depth : 24 bits
Stream size : 2.90 MiB (2%)
Audio #2
ID : 4
Format : PCM
Format settings, Endianness : Little
Format settings, wrapping mode : Frame (AES)
Codec ID : 0D01030102060300-0402020101000000
Duration : 21s 120ms
Bit rate mode : Constant
Bit rate : 1 152 Kbps
Channel(s) : 1 channel
Sampling rate : 48.0 KHz
Bit depth : 24 bits
Stream size : 2.90 MiB (2%)
Audio #3
ID : 5
Format : PCM
Format settings, Endianness : Little
Format settings, wrapping mode : Frame (AES)
Codec ID : 0D01030102060300-0402020101000000
Duration : 21s 120ms
Bit rate mode : Constant
Bit rate : 1 152 Kbps
Channel(s) : 1 channel
Sampling rate : 48.0 KHz
Bit depth : 24 bits
Stream size : 2.90 MiB (2%)
Audio #4
ID : 6
Format : PCM
Format settings, Endianness : Little
Format settings, wrapping mode : Frame (AES)
Codec ID : 0D01030102060300-0402020101000000
Duration : 21s 120ms
Bit rate mode : Constant
Bit rate : 1 152 Kbps
Channel(s) : 1 channel
Sampling rate : 48.0 KHz
Bit depth : 24 bits
Stream size : 2.90 MiB (2%)
Other #1
ID : 1
Type : Time code
Format : MXF TC
Time code of first frame : 00:02:19:34
Time code settings : Striped
Other #2
ID : 7
Format : Acquisition Metadata
Muxing mode : Ancillary data / RDD 18
Duration : 21s 120ms
Frame rate : 50.000 fps
Other #3
Type : Time code
Format : SMPTE TC
Muxing mode : SDTI
Time code of first frame : 00:02:19:17
@cyvideo
I’ll be quick : two things
about the XAVC-L nonsense of the X70
1) If I don’t see any difference compared to avchd then there is no difference
2) if it doesn’t work with FCP or Vegas then it doesn’t work and it’s useless
I wonder if Sony actually have done this because they somehow knew that or at least was unsure of the hardware were able to deliver 422 in 4K.
This is from:
https://pro.sony.com/bbsc/ssr/micro-xdcam/cat-broadcastcameras/product-PXWX70/
“XAVC HD422 10bit recording, and 4K ready in near future”
Mark.
So you are saying you have shot fine spraying fountains and breaking surf spray in the sunlight with the two codecs and seen no difference? You obviously have empirical evidence of this and can confirm this with samples no doubt?
With all due respect you obviously have not been involved with the concatenation issues of AVCHD throughout the broadcast chain. That’s one of the reasons why it is not a ratified broadcast standard. I’m not saying it isn’t broadcastable. Phone video is broadcastable but it’s not a broadcast standard. On the other hand XAVC at 50-mbit is ratified for broadcast as it avoids most of the problems involved with video signal degradation through concatenation.
Re codec handling. XAVC-L native integration with Vegas will come from Sony SCS USA at the end of this month. Also a Catalyst Browse update will be released with XAVC-L to XDCam 422 50-mbit export support for those of us who have networks requesting this codec… which are many worldwide. You are aware of course that Sony Catalyst Browse (a free download)was released for PC with export to XAVC-I and for Mac with export to ProRes. Vegas supports XAVC-I and FCPX supports ProRes.
FCPX XAVC native plugin is not being done in the US it’s being done by Apple in conjunction with Sony Japan in Japan. No time frame on its release yet but told it’s close.
@cyvideo
I work every day for a TV station in NYC and what you say is total BS, completely invented: it’s on SDI and SD. XAVC-L is completely absolutely out of the question.
what are you for real?
The beauty of the internet is that every once in a while you get the wrong person to play with: and for you that person would be me.
LOL
give it a rest: XAVC-L and AVCHD give the same pictures.
4K is amazing, also put into a 1080 timeline. No questions. But it has to work. Now this HD XAVC-L phantasm here of the X70 is getting ridiculous with some users trying so hard to see any difference with the AVCHD. some swearing that they saw a difference, it was a rainy day when they put the pictures into the computer , maybe some particular lighting in the computer room and they saw a difference: on a green screen? that usually work as an excuse: so halleluiah . not really able to repeat it but they swear that they saw it, maybe for a moment …
now methinks that noone should work THAT hard trying to catch the difference, if any: if it’s better then it should be obvious, if not then it’s exactly like AVCHD. What do I think? that the XAVC-L is a joke and it’s in fact the AVCHD 10 times bigger (the file) but the pictures are the same. In fact “real” editors can’t fall for it. just can’t.
So this 4K thing for the X70? first must work , then we can consider it: but it has to work with FCP and Vegas first, no more jokes and excuses and no more phantasms.
it has to work and the pictures must be better than AVCHD. Better to the naked eye, no games and illusions.
Your point is well taken if you’re a professional. Myself, am just an advanced amateur. And right now I’m very happy with “Footage Studio”, transcoding to any ProRes format I want and editing with Vegas Pro. And the denoise feature in “Footage Studio” effectively doubles my low light capacity. And color grading is easier too. As for higher quality, I use a blackmagic, hyperdeck shuttle with the SDI cable. It’s impressive and I don’t have to transcode. So my point here is purchasing the 8bit 4k upgrade really doesn’t get me anything because I won’t be creating any 4k final product for quite some time. On the other hand if I could shoot 10 bit 4k and render 1080. Run and gun begins to sound a lot easier. So again, I say to Sony. Whether you promised it or not, you need to deliver 10 bit 422 4k or it doesn’t help.
Gentlemen,
just buy JVC 300 (which i am testing soon) and get far more practical camera 4K ready 🙂
Am i right HDW??
HDW : Getting the LS300 today for review (Wednesday)
So am I.
Will you give it 2 stars as for C100 two years ago :-)??
I will let you know Cameraman’s Verdict.
Yes I am looking at it from a professional point of view. As I say if you are not a professional you may not need the XAVC workflow at all.
What you do everyday for a TV station Mark is not the point unless it has some objective relevance to your technically based statements. I’m BBC trained, am a registered TV engineer, was a SMPTE member for years have done TV station system installation and integration and trained TV network engineers and techos. Designed and integrated the large screen playout system for the Sydney 2000 Olympics and have TD’d well over 200 OB’s for TV. I was on the Sony Vegas Beta test team and still feed back to SCS. My business has also shot, edited and produced over 450 shows for TV. So I guess I might be considered a professional. My statements are based in fact and years of experience. If they were based on BS I would not have any credibility in the industry and would end up with no production bookings.
BTW if you think resorting to insults by calling someone else’s comments BS you are pretty well misguided and do not advance your credibility at all. Trying to smash someone else’s comments just because you don’t like or agree with what they say is not part of a very mature discussion is it. Those sorts of statements don’t lend much credence to your arguments whatsoever. In fact it weakens them. I stand by what I say.
@Doug Brown
or use handbrake , denoise medium or strong for a much smaller and cleaner file after vegas. handbrake is free and works fantastic (also for the noise)
So JVC300
Nice little cam for $4,000
More practical then x70
but
No good for low light, more then 9db unusable
Cliping in highlights even with Cine log, no good DR as compared to c100.
EVF not very good but screen is OK.
Cheap to run with decent everyday codecs.
Body is not as good quality as c100, more like fs700 plastic 😉
Still would go with c100 mk2 if Canon will give it better codec at NAB…
@cyvideo
then don’t sell the 50Mbps for broadcast again. That’s to keep the amateurs away. The XAVC idea was interesting for the S and the I . Then it came the L and it was a disaster. The reason? to keep it under another Sony proprietary thing (and in part to sell handycams with regular cards). But the proprietary thing was the main reason. Well .. the L doesn’t work, no matter how we try to make it work: it just doesn’t deliver anything more than the AVCHD. No 10bit , no 4:2:2 , no 46-47 MBps. it’s HD @28MBps (and most likely 8bit , ’cause -and I don’t know how to say this better: 10bit should bring 4 times more details on the screen, and not in your imagination, on the screen where everybody can see it.. if not then what’s the purpose?)
If you are who you say you are then you came out with all the wrong things in here.
sorry.
feel free to insist, no problem.
Wow what a heated debate. So the topic is really hot !!!. I’m worried about one of the points of this dispute, namely – paid upgrade 4K. Many argue. that buyers knew in advance that it will be paid. Maybe version of the official website of the company Sony differ in the description, but I’ll give the literal text of the brief information on the chamber X70 of the Russian version of the site.
Wide range of recording formats, and support for 4K
The camcorder provides various options formats depending on the desired application, including record-based files XAVC, AVCHD and DV. If an entry is made in the format XAVC, camcorder PXW-X70 uses the format MXF, effectively applying compression resolution full HD (1920 x 1080) and using the MPEG-4 codec AVC / H.264. The sampling frequency of the image is 4: 2: 2 10 bit effective Long-GOP compression at 50 Mb / s, 35 Mbit / s or 25 Mbit / s. Camcorder PXW-X70 supports 4K format and can work with records in 4K after further updates.
At what point indicated on the paid upgrade ???
Meanwhile, Sony introduced the Action Cam Sony FDR-X1000VR cost about $ 600. That is, soon everything will be on board 4K, but not professional X70 ….
Mark, if you don´t see any difference between XAVC-L (@10-bit) and AVCHD (max. 8-bit possible) in post (grading e.g.) perhaps look out for a different NLE or glasses ;-)!
Premiere CC and EDIUS 7.4 both support XAVC-L from PXW-X70 e.g. natively.
@Roland Schulz
LOL realllly? let’s see : you need special glasses to catch a difference (if any) between a 28Mbps and 47MBps 4:2:2 10bit?
what was that, a joke?
ya joking right?
now I saw fanboys before but this XAVC-L joke is surpassing all the fanboys ever seen before.
now I need special glasses to see the difference.. oh my ….
and what now? do I have to buy a boatload of glasses for all the people watching my work?
@Roland Schulz
look : it has to work with FCP and Vegas, all the others are not real editors. Beside that given the fact that the result of the transcoding (after the fact) is exactly like thge AVCHD I seriously doubt that those are transcoding it right, or the source is the same AVCHD wrapped in that idiotic XAVC-L just for show.
either way it doesn’t work.
it HAS to work with FCP and Vegas, all the others don’t count.