updated 20 Jun 2005

 

Jon Fordham's FX1 Review, Part One
an article by Jon Fordham, Director of Photography, D.I.T.

Jon is a contributing member of our DV Info Net Community.

As many of you may recall, in November of 2003 I was asked by Heath McKnight to put his JVC JY-HD10u next to the Panasonic AJ-HDC27F VariCam while shooting the film "3 Days" (now called "Cleansing") for Illusions Entertainment. At the time, Heath and I had been discussing my involvement with his upcoming feature film "9:04AM" and we were both interested in testing our working relationship on a small short film shoot during the 2003 holidays. Heath wanted to shoot the short film with his HD10 and I welcomed the opportunity to take the camera for a spin. In preparation for that shoot, Heath sent his HD10 to me in New York so that I could become familiar with it prior to jumping into production with it as the primary camera and asked that I write an article that chronicled my experiences with the camera during that test period for the DV Info community.

As a Cinematographer I am always eager to learn the new tools that are, or may become available to me to practice and perform my craft. And as a Cinematographer, I must be familiar with the available tools to responsibly report to producers and directors what is and is not suitable for a particular production and/or application. By putting a new tool, such as the HD10, next to a tool that I am already familiar with, like the Varicam or the DVX100A, I can get an idea of where the performance of the new tool is falling. I know I have stated this before, but I feel it is an important point to make for anybody reading this article as it should give you a clear understanding of my motivations and points of interest.

For those of you who have not taken the time to read the series of articles regarding my experiences with the HD10, I recommend you do so. You may find them of interest as they formed the foundation on which I approached my testing of the new Sony HDR-FX1.

To recap my HD10 experiences...

I was disappointed with the performance of the HD10. While the camera and format did provide some positive possibilities, I found that the overall design of the camera was flawed and lacking in what I would consider the basic necessities. Why JVC chose to design and market a "professional" camcorder without full manual control is beyond me. I have always thought of JVC as a manufacturer that built a decent and reliable camcorder for an affordable price. Their GY-DV500u and subsequent models rival the image quality of Sony's DSR-300. And to this day, the DV500 remains a workhorse of the industrial videography crowd. JVC was even generous enough to loan me their JY-DV700u widescreen "Cine-Line" camcorder in 2002 for a demo shoot. I was very impressed with the image quality and performance of the DV700. Again, it wasn't a Sony DSR-500WSL. But it did offer one hell of a nice picture for an affordable price. For anyone interested in a native 16:9 2/3" MiniDV camera, the DV700 demands consideration. So even though the specs of the HD10 were suspect, I was hoping for better. Of course the "why" is of no consequence at this point in time. Success or not, JVC's HD10 ultimately will go down in the history books as the first prosumer HD camcorder. And JVC does deserve the praise for introducing the first "HDV" camera and "setting the wheel in motion."

Now a full year later, Sony has grabbed the wheel and given it good hard spin.

Without too much fanfare, but plenty of buzz and expectation, the Sony HDR-FX1 hit the streets last November. I'll admit, I even paid a visit to B&H myself that first week hoping to get a look at the camera. Unfortunately B&H didn't have one out on the floor yet...

While shooting a Super 16 project on location in Westchester, Heath called me and once again asked if I would be interested in testing out the FX1 on a short film project during the Holidays. Having failed in my attempt to get a look at the camera at B&H and knowing my schedule had me booked on shoot after shoot until I was scheduled to fly to Florida for the holidays, I happily said yes. Oh yeah, I guess I might as well mention that Heath is a friend, I have agreed to come on board his upcoming feature, and what else was I going to do between teaching a couple classes at the Palm Beach Film School and enjoying the warmer Florida weather! Besides, it's a $3,500 HDV camera from Sony. Who wouldn't want to take it for a spin?

I first got my hands on the FX1 a full three days prior to the shoot. Let me just take the time right now to say that the FX1 is damn sexy! The pictures you've seen just don't do it justice. And it feels quite nice as well. It's not ridiculously heavy, yet it doesn't lack weight. It does feel plastic, yet not cheap. Unfortunately due to my Christmas schedule I only had minimal time to really get a feel for the camera and shoot a few test shots. Thankfully, the FX1 is a Sony through and through. For anyone who has solid experience with Sony's 3 chip DV camcorders, you shouldn't have any trouble getting used to the FX1 in a short period of time.

Like the legendary VX1000, the tape transport door is on the operator's left side. For those of you who haven't touched a VX1000 in years and have become very accustomed to the left side flip out LCD on the subsequent VX2000, PD, TRV, DVX, etc, etc, you'll probably do the same thing I did over and over: Reach for the LCD and thumb around on the door a time or two before remembering that the LCD is located on the top of the camera. I first found the LCD placement strange to say the least. But after getting use to it, the LCD placement is actually a comfortable fit for shooting. Even for guys like myself who aren't taller than average, most will end up with the LCD tilted up and looking down while shooting with a PD170 or DVX100A. You get use to it. But having an LCD at the top of the camera where you can more easily see the action with your peripheral is a much better way working. Having a lot of experience with top mounted LCD's on HD and Film cameras (which are sometimes just as awkwardly placed), it didn't take too much time to adjust to the location of the LCD on the FX1.

Whether it's a better design for the camera remains to be seen for two reasons. One, I felt like the LCD was in a fragile place. I doubt it's in any more physical danger than any other flip out LCD. But not being use to the placement it felt like it might be harms way more often than not. And two, with the near endless array of accessories and add ons from dozens of manufacturers for the established placement of the LCD on the VX2K, PD, TRV, DVX, etc, did we really need to be thrown a curve by a camera that requires a whole new set of adapters and accessories? I get that the point of business is to make money. And the more accessories, add ons, and adapters you can dream up and sell the more money you make. Certainly the prosumer video realm can and often is a high turnover, high volume, money maker for some manufacturers. In my opinion the best strategy for design and marketing a new product for maximum appeal is one that produces a product that not only offers new features and superior quality, but is also compatible with the customers existing tool set.

Compatibility with my existing tool set came on the FX1 in the form of a 72mm thread mount. For owner/operators of the XL and DVX series of cameras, you shouldn't have any trouble using your 72mm accessories on the FX1, except that the Sony lens hood and on-board mic placement will restrict how many and what size those accessories are. The FX1's lens hood and its eyebrow lens cap design only allow enough room for a single 72mm screw on filter. And as reported and lively discussed on the DVi boards, matte box usage is difficult if not impossible due to the on-board mic protruding so far out from the front of the camera. My set of P series Cokin filters and modular lens hood did fit the camera with no problem. And though not the worst way of working, using resin filters for HD acquisition is certainly less than desirable. Even it is only HDV... For diffusion or effects filtering, resin filters such as the Cokin P series with modular lens hood should be perfectly acceptable. But for color filtering where you don't desire any possibility of softening or accentuating the diffusion you are already employing, glass filters are a better choice. Not to mention that since the FX1 employs a 1/3" chipset, it's much more likely that the inevitable scratches that befall resin filters will be visible due to the inherent depth of field.

The lens hood and on-board mic placement are certainly an annoyance. Especially when compared to the DVX100A and XL2. Neither of which have any trouble mounting multiple filters and can easily accept a variety existing of matteboxes. The ability to mount a quality 4x4 mattebox is serious issue for shooters who work with a variety of cameras and lens types. I have a healthy of set of 4x4 filters that I use with everything from a DVX100A and HDW-F900 to an Aaton Minima and Arri S16. Limiting my ability to use my set of 4x4's, limits my tools available to me as a cinematographer. Some days it's nice to just walk on set and not have to worry about being MacGyver all day just to get the shot you want. It only takes a few frustrating minutes of applying and then ripping wads of gaff tape and black wrap off a $30,000 Fuji HD-EC zoom before the AC has to hold my arms back from clamping maffers and cartollini's to the damned thing! The FX1's 72mm thread mount is a step in the right direction. I just hope Sony puts a little more thought into designing the next HDV model's lens front. I mean seriously, how hard would it have been for them to make sure that the eyebrows were set and opened far enough apart to attach more than one filter?

Another nice point of compatibility on the FX1 is the type of batteries the camera uses. The FX1 accepts the same NP-F batteries as the VX2K/2100, PD150/70, TRV900, PD100, and other Sony camcorders. This was a real lifesaver for me as the unit I was given for testing only had the token battery that ships with the camera. And unfortunately the FX1 sucks power! I mean it really burns through a battery fast! Fortunately, I had a Sony NP-F950 left over from the days when I was using the VX2K and PD150 regularly. On a VX2K, the NP-F950 would last almost a full day of shooting. On the FX1, the NP-F950 gave me about three or four hours. And when compared to the DVX100A which easily gets a full day and change on my D-54's (even when phantom powering a mic), the FX1 feels like a power hungry monster! I highly recommend that anyone venturing away from AC power with the FX1 have at least two of Sony's NP-F970's if you don't want to end up dead in the water.

The placement of the buttons and controls are pretty well thought out and easily accessible. The rotating iris dial eliminates the small jumps in exposure adjustment experienced on the VX2K and PD150 for smooth changes in aperture. The programmable user menu is a nice touch. It gives the user the ability to program the most used menu options into a separate menu for quick access. And the user assignable buttons also further aid in a customized shooting experience.

During my few days of testing the camera prior to the shoot, I experimented with a variety of settings and subjects. Interlaced, CineFrame, high color saturation, B&W, sunsets, people, ducks, lakes, and so on...

Before I get into the performance of the camera during the short film shoot, I'd just like to thank Heath for deciding on the day, that the script he had given me, the one I had created a shot list for, the one the scripty had already broken down and lined in preparation, wasn't the script we were going to shoot! Thank you Keith! I mean Heath. :)

Move on to Part Two of Jon's FX1 review.
Move on to Part Three of Jon's FX1 review.
Written by Jon Fordham, Director of Photography.
Thrown together by Chris Hurd.