Overall I’m pleased that so many have found the review I’ve done on the Sony HXR NX30 helpful and informative.
I wanted to address a valid issue brought up by several people by giving a little more perspective to the image stabilization (“stabilisation” for you Brits).
When I first started watching video reviews of this camera I was somewhat disappointed in the short shrift given to it’s performance. A lot of talk, a lot of description, but very few actual shots, and some poorly done at that. Not really enough to get a feel for what the camera could do. So I decided to give it a go myself.
My shots were, on the other hand, perhaps somewhat exaggerated in that they were overly long. But I did that for a reason: It’s easy to put up a 3-5 second shot of the best bits which really doesn’t give you much time or opportunity to evaluate what you’re looking at. What I would want to see as a cameraman would be lots of footage under varying lighting conditions, varying focal lengths, and, in the case of stabilization, lots of examples of a long enough duration that I could get a feel for the camera’s potential.
So that’s what I did. And I didn’t edit out the bad bits. I showed you the whole thing, warts and all. And because the FCPX stabilization feature is so fast and easy (unlike FCP7), in many cases I plugged that in too.
That, of course, showed up some of the combined faults of both camerawork and the bad side-effects of trying to stabilize footage that’s a bit too shakey to begin with.
I had to assume most people interested in this camera were already familiar with the stabilization characteristics (or lack of) of their own cameras past or present.
So here was an “orders of magnitude” comparison–meaning, “here’s what I could knock off with little to no effort under the same conditions you might have tried doing the same thing with your current camera”.
In reality, NONE of those shots would ever be used as-is. Take the flat-out running shot behind the young girl. Such a shot would be part of an ACTION SEQUENCE and action sequences are generally fast cut with few shots on screen for any duration. Actions scenes are intercut from several cameras whether real-time or from subsequent re-takes of the same scene.
Consider those long walking shots. BORING. You’d never use any of those in their entirety in any production. You might use 2-5 seconds bits of any of them, but that’s about it.
So in APPLICATION (in the case of these hand held tracking, dolly or boom shots) one would hardly ever bother using any of the bad bits. It’s easy to say that one could get it perfect with a Steadicam, but the truth is, even Steadicam or Glidecam shots get blown and have to be re-taken. For that matter I’ve had my share of dolly and crane shots I wasn’t happy with and had to re-take.
It’s not easy to walk a camera hand-held in the first place. It takes some practice to minimize the natural tendency to bob up and down as you walk.
This camera doesn’t eliminate that. It minimizes it. So if you practice good technique in minimizing it and add to that a camera that minimizes it further toward something approaching the fluidity of a good steadicam shot, then you should start getting interested.
And if the result of your technique and the camera’s technology give you a result that is pretty steady and without any bobbles, then you have to option to stabilize it even more with your editing program–and with all these things at near optimum, you probably won’t get any bad side-effects such as jello. –That comes when the editing program stabilization (or indeed the camera’s built-in stabilization) are trying to handle too much at once. On the other hand, you could do it so well that you don’t even need to further stabilize it–realizing that in application you’re only going to see a few seconds of that shot in juxtaposition with many others. SURELY you can get it good enough that you don’t jolt the audience’s attention out of the arena with bad technique.
So remember there’s an editorial aspect to everything you shoot in terms of what will be actually used and how. Don’t expect perfection from the camera. Don’t expect perfection from your own technique. Just get them, through practice, to the highest standard you can achieve.
I, for one, prefer less equipment, not more.
The spirit of this review was that this camera allows you that freedom like few other camera’s or systems I have ever used. And at a truly inexpensive price.
The one thing that doesn’t come in the box with the camera, I assure you, is technique and judgment.
To be honest, I’ve used this camera in paid productions and made some embarrassing mistakes in each one. But that was my own fault, not the camera’s.
Live and learn.
Have you any idea why Sony dropped this product ?
I’m trying to get one even second hand is impossible to find
Any idea what might be best or better now
Thanks in advance
It seems that the PXW X70 is considered its replacement. The NX30 is several years old now. I own both. Here’s the X70 review (which, in part, compares it to the NX30) https://thevideowhisperer.wordpress.com/pure-frickin-black-magic-the-sony-pxw-x70/
I have to say these are not only the most enjoyable investigations into new technology, they are also the most thorough and informative.I saw exactly what you are getting at on the NX30 “long /full” takes, and having just shot a sequence that was imposed on me on short notice, i would have killed for the NX30. As it was, my Sony FX1000 handled much of it OK but the NX30 would have done superbly under the many walking shots that were required to keep up with a fast moving storyline. You did great on this. Also I would hold up your EA 50 UH review as an example to those who claim that cameras images are lacking — in the hands of an experienced cameraman it did very well, as did you sick and all! By the way a very interesting environment you have to shoot in -Thanks so much.
Thanks Rusty, Yeah, it’s a drag living in quintessential rural England, a short hop from France, but somebody has to do it. Still waiting for the Sony PXW-70 from Sony Marketing London to review. (I only review what I want to!) I have a feeling that’s going to be the next best camera for run ‘n gunners. Though that Sony review was popular (mostly for the reasons you mentioned), it was still a bit rough around the edges, so I hope to do a better job on the PXW-70.
I can’t for the life of me find out how to turn OFF the flash when using the still camera in low light situations. Have you recovered the secret? Also, i don’t suppose its possible to put final edited movie BACK onto the camera in order to use the projector? would it be?
could it be? YA
thank so much
Laura in Brooklyn
Hi Laura, If you go into the “Camera Audio” menu and scroll almost all the way to the bottom you will see where you can turn flash on or off and where you can set flash level and red eye reduction. As to putting a movie back onto the camera, you can try putting the movie onto your SD card and see if the camera then recognizes it in order to play back. Might be a problem with it being a different file type though. Good luck!
Thanks a lot for the tutorials I do not have the NX30 but I have a son y 1000u And the functions are similar
Any observations/recommendations for settings to get that talking head look where the head and shoulders are sharp/focused and the background is blurred out?
That’s a function of aperture and the size of your image sensor. The wider the aperture the shallower the depth of field. For the same aperture, the larger the sensor, the shallower the depth of field. So with the NX30 you have a relatively small sensor (1/3 inch I believe). It’s bigger than the Canon version of that size camera, but smaller than a DSLR for example or some of the more high end cameras. That said, in just talking about the NX30, simply set your metering for aperture control and set it for wide open. Then set your lights for a proper exposure at that aperture. You can also vary the ISO (higher) or shutter speed (faster) to accomplish an exposure for that aperture setting with whatever lighting conditions you have. That will give you the least depth of field, no matter the focal length (for the same image size). I have a feeling you’re wanting the real shallow depth of field you see with DSLR shots. Same goes there but with much better results. You’ll get it with a lens that is f2 or faster. (I get beautiful shallow depth of field with my Canon 600 and it’s 50mm 1.8 lens set wide open).
Thanks! That tracks with what I already know, but I’m having limited success with this camera getting a really luscious blurred background and sharp-focus talking head. But no matter, this camera is so terrific in other respects. Rock on!
Thank you for your clarity of explanation and the time you’ve put into your reviews. You’re helping a lot of people.