Blog

Like many videographers who don’t have a huge amount of money to spend, choosing a new camcorder is not a decision that can be made easily, and many of us have been weighing up between the Sony FS100 or the less expensive Panasonic AG-AF100. Prior to this decision, I spent a long time trawling, researching and vacillating before deciding on the model that would replace my ageing HVX202. I went with the FS100, but there’s not really a clear line of distinction between the two. You can stare at charts and numbers and graphs until you can’t remember what it was you were looking for in the first place, but like a lot of things in life, it comes to down what feels right for you.

This is not a post about which one is better – I can’t make that decision for you, just as you can’t say what would work better for me. But I thought I’d share some of my feelings about the Sony FS100 now that I have one, in the hope that it might prove interesting or useful to others who are still weighing things up.

Ergonomics and handling
It has been mentioned on a number of occasions that the ergonomics of this camera are unusual, to say the least. And I have to agree that placing the LCD on the top does introduce some limitations to how it can be used. But those who claim that it prohibits top-down shooting (over crowds, for example) haven’t considered holding the body upside down and simply flipping the footage in post. The view on the LCD adjusts itself accordingly, and it’s no more difficult to operate in this manner than any other 2-3Kg camera would be when held at arm’s length.

I shoot a lot of interviews where I’m both cameraman and interviewer, so being able to see the LCD from either side of the camera allows me to set up how I like, and not where I need to be to see the LCD. And in the same vein, I recently tripod-mounted the camera over a table so that I could record a drawing as it was made, and it allowed me a clear view of the LCD during the procedure – I’m not sure a left-side LCD would have made this as easy.

I shoot a lot of interviews where I’m both cameraman and interviewer, so being able to see the LCD from either side of the camera allows me to set up how I like.

I have mixed feelings about the loupe that attaches to the viewfinder. In some ways it feels like it places too much strain on the LCD hinge and the locknut is awkward to operate, but at the same time I’ve found that it adds an extra degree of stability during handheld shoots – with the eyepiece resting against your face, and your hands on the grip and lens, the camera feels more solid. It’s still not going to be comfortable to use for prolonged periods – but this has always been an issue with handycam-style formats.

Buttons—check. Dials—check. Switches—check. Little coloured lights—check.
I’m not going to bitch about buttons – switchgear on cameras is a fact of life, and frankly more buttons usually means more immediate access to camera controls, which is certainly the case here. I’m still a long way off instinctively knowing where to press without looking, but it’ll come with time. I wasn’t sure about the need for a touch-screen either, but still found it useful to have access to a set of controls that were the right way up even when the camera was inverted.

But again, I can’t help feeling that the critics have slightly missed the point here

Some have criticised the fact that the FS100 grip needs to be manually unscrewed in order to adjust the angle. I’ve used cameras with a quick release (like the PMW-EX1), and yes, being able to release and lock the grip in a couple of seconds is a great function.
But again, I can’t help feeling that the critics have slightly missed the point here. Sony could certainly have implemented the same device on the FS100, but it would require a permanent mount – and personally, I like the fact that I can remove the grip entirely. Not only that, my old HVX202 doesn’t have this function at all, so I can’t be too picky about it.

Getting a handle on things.
If there’s one thing I’m really not happy about, it’s the accessory mount/handle. The fact that it can often interfere with the LCD is definitely an annoyance, and I have my doubts about the microphone clamp itself. Having swapped out the stock Sony shotgun with my Rode NTG2, the clamp simply isn’t tight enough to stop this longer, heavier mic from tilting if you need to run-and-gun. And that’s a pain. It’s certainly more flexible that any other mic mount I’ve used, and allows the mic to be angled, or even reversed easily, but the assembly is over-engineered and not actually all that good for its main role in life – which should be keeping the microphone in place. I also agree that using it as a carrying handle gives you pause for thought, but at the same time, I’ve not felt concerned when lifting the camera with it (sometimes with the tripod still attached).

the assembly is over-engineered and not actually all that good for its main role in life

The bottom line on ergonomics is this – the FS100 is a very compact box that you can attach things to. It’s a simple design principle, and I respect what Sony has done here. No other camera that I know of can be adapted this easily to such a range of situations. I don’t have the budget for it, but you can see how easily this unit could be kitted out with all manner of rails, matte boxes, follow focus systems, external monitors etc. And I really like the fact that I can break it down – much of my work involves travelling light, and this camera packs up a lot smaller than my old HVX202 or even the new AG-AF100 (which I wasn’t expecting), letting me fit a surprisingly comprehensive setup into carry-on luggage.

Kit and kaboodle.
Okay, I’ll admit it. I bought the camera with the kit lens. It’s not a particularly impressive piece of glass, but it’s a reasonable all-rounder, and I’m not sorry I own it, but I will be looking to add some new glass to my setup when I can afford it. Or joining the queue for a Birger EF adapter that’ll let me use my Canon lenses on this camera.
The biggest criticism levelled at the 18-200 OSS lens is that it’s slow, with the F3.5 at full wide dropping down to a dismal F6.3 at full zoom. But it’s not like you can say that it comes as a surprise – the specs are on the box, after all. This does mean that you’ll not get that super-shallow DOF out of the box, which is ironic, given that this was one the main reasons I decided to move to a larger-sensor camera like this one.
It’s a bit of an ugly brute at full extension, and the zoom ring is stiff as a board, but I’m okay with that. Slow zooms aren’t part of my repertoire, anyway.
What surprised me the most, though, is that despite the rigidity of the zoom ring, the lens itself is prone to creep when facing downwards (something else the tabletop shoot pointed out for me). You can lock it at full wide, but I ended up having to tape the lens in place to stop the creep from happening.
That said, I’m looking at getting another lens – probably the 50mm F1.8 OSS prime. I’m tempted by the Zeiss 24mm 1.8, but it’s a bit rich for my budget right now.

Early indications are that this is not the camera for green-screen work, so I’ll be keeping my HVX202 on hand for now.

The codec – good or bad?
Given that I’m moving from an HVX202, there’s a huge difference between the 100Mbps DVCPRO HD 4:2:2 codec used by the Panasonic and the 28Mbps H.264-based AVCHD 4:2:0 codec employed by the Sony. While H.264 is certainly more economical than the HVX202, I have noticed a couple of things during the edit. For starters, Premiere Pro doesn’t really like it – live previews are dogged by blocking and compression artefacts (they’re not in the final encodes) which is irritating, and the codec doesn’t really like to be touched very much. You certainly can’t push colour correction as far here. I’ve not performed any extensive chroma key tests, so I can’t really comment about how well it handles it, but early indications are that this is not the camera for green-screen work, so I’ll be keeping my HVX202 on hand for now.

Having said that, I am reassured by the fact that the HDMI output can provide 4:2:2 output to an external recording device (possibly even 4:4:4 when a device comes out that supports it), so there’s always that option. What surprises me is that this option isn’t enabled by the 128GB FMU drive that plugs into the side of the camera. It would be extremely useful to have the option of a more ‘professional’ codec – particularly as I have received the FMU128 and a couple of high-capacity batteries (which fit rather nicely into my LED lights) as part of Sony’s current FS100 promotion. What’s even more surprising is that the FMU128 needs to be removed from the camera to be read – I had assumed that it would be visible as a removable drive along with the SDHC / Memory Stick slots when you connected the camera via USB, but nope – you have to unscrew the grip and pop the drive out. Annoying again, but a small price to pay for a massive amount of recording time and the option to simultaneously record to card and drive (great for the worrisome producers among us).

Low-light
I’m not even going to pretend that I have anything meaningful to say here. There are very clever people out there who have done side-by-side tests of the FS100 and the AF100 and still managed to disagree with each other. I’m inclined to accept Barry Green’s assessment that suggests that the low-light performance is similar on both cameras, but that the Sony allows you to push the gain higher. All I know is that it blows my HVX202 away in low light, and that having the extra few stops reach beyond the AG-AF100 (even in Super Grainovision) will come in very handy. Post-processing to remove noise is more feasible than compensating for under-exposed footage (particularly if it’s also noisy).

I’m sure that the absence of built-in ND filters is going to cause a problem for me at some point, too. But there’s always the option of a variable ND filter in that case.

And that’s it, I guess
Like I said at the beginning, this wasn’t meant to be a review, or even a comparison between the AG-AF100 and the NEX-FS100. It’s just a few observations from a guy who’s been using his new camera for a couple of weeks. There’s a number of equally compelling arguments as to why you should choose the AF100 and not the FS100, and if I’d bought the former, I’m sure I’d have written a different article.

There’s a number of equally compelling arguments as to why you should choose the AF100 and not the FS100

Video cameras are such personal choices, but I’m always surprised by the strength of feeling demonstrated by those who chose a different camera to yours. The world is certainly big enough for the choices that we have, and for those of us who have to use these cameras on a professional basis, client satisfaction is the only opinion that matters in the end.
I’m more than happy with the FS100. Just like every camera I’ve ever worked with, I’m starting to understand its capabilities and its limitations, learning to work around its faults and play to its strengths. It’s the camera I chose, for the way I work. It’s compact and flexible, kinda funny looking in a serious way, and hints at potential beyond its price bracket. And now I have to start building a collection of new lenses.

But I can totally see that it’s not for everyone. If you’d like to share your views, ask a question, correct my mistakes or question my parentage, feel free to drop some text into the comments field provided.

Cheers!
Laurence