Yep. The worst are the ones where you listen to the guy talk for 8 minutes before you ever even see the gear or sample footage. This is a great demo video. Most TH-cam videos would be twice as good if they were at least half as long.
One of the best tests I've seen on the net. Excellent job and very worthwhile. I would say the Sony (which I own) has a higher black level (contrast) and is a tad sharper. Panny has lower blacks giving the false impression it is better in low light. Post adjustments on both cams make this a pick'm contest in my opinion. A tweak here and there would make them virtually identical. BUT the Panny is a good bit cheaper and in the prosumer market that's a significant edge to the Panny. I love my AX53 but I wish the optimum stabilization setting would not automatically force the clear image zoom on.
Interesting comment, Denis Torres. I own them both, I regularly tape live concerts, and have to say I'm struggling a lot with the FDR AX-53. In my humble opinion, it doesn't perform so well in low light conditions. The Panasonic 990 for its part performs a lot better in such conditions and delivers (much) better results. So it really boils down to what you need the ecam for. General everyday use? Maybe it would be safer to go with Sony. Regular low-light shots? Panasonic may be the (much) cheaper answer
Thank you for the review. Amazing review.. not a word spoken but so clearly demonstrates the difference. I like the Sony better for better detail, less blowing the detail in highlights and better saturation. And the BOSS stabilization is simply amazing!!
Perfect comparison, Panasonic seems to have better in low light. Sony has better image stabilizer. Its a hard choice to make, both cameras have their strong points. I would have thought that Sony would have been better in low light, as they claim to have a new 16/9 sensor. Thanks for taking the time, to do this video and share it with us.
When I wanna buy a camcorder, I would choose Sony because one thing that comes into my ultimate consideration is image stabilisation. Sony is superior in that department.
One thing I would like to mention, Sony has interchangeable batteries, that work in almost all there camcorders. Panasonic keeps changing there battery design, every time they make a new camera. Sony also has better low voltage consumption in their products, therefore your battery will last longer with Sony products.
Subjectively, the Sony appeared clearer and appeared to have a better wide-angle, although the swan scene looked to have barrel distortion. I'm normally a Panasonic fan, but on this video the Sony just seemed more sharper. I take the other reviewer's comment about the white balance - Sony's being a bit colder. Thumbs-up for Sony.
Great video, myself after watching this video went for the Panasonic HC-VXF990 as the colours were more realistic and better in low light .Sony found colours too enhanced and too much blue although good sharp video. Panasonic as a lot more functions and the menu layout is very similar tools to my old Panasonic sd900 ,less of a leaning cure for me.Sony still a good cam but more suited for someone that does not use a lot of controls.
MKROXTON Yes. But not the new HC-VXF1 and HC-WFX1 They work twice as well in low light compared to the Sony and the Panasonic has a larger more sensitive sensor. And it has the same internal mechanical balanced Optical steadyshot as the Sony. And a more powerful optical Zoom. And more stable at longer zoom lengths. And has a selectable high-contrast mode that make the image look exactly like a Sony Camera
Thank you. Exact comparison for which I was looking. Excellent presentation. Let images speak louder and more accurately than words. For my eyes it will be the Panasonic. Again, thank you.
Both seem nice quality, Sony seems more vivid (bluer blues, greener greens etc) but the Pany has a more natural (cinematic) look...guess it depends on your preference...I'm going with the Sony. Thanks for the video!
Although this shows differences it's not a particularly good comparison regarding colour cast. I would put money on a comparison test between 2 out of the box Sony AX53 camcorders that they would not look the same as each other. Apart from the Sony having a wider angle lens the Panasonic can easily be adjusted to match the colour difference. Both are very good cameras and can give excellent results once you get used to using them.
Looks like both do a good job, but I see a bit more detail in the Sony. The Sony stabilized shots appear comparable to a Steadycam, which is pretty awesome. Panasonic does better in low light IMO.
+Beer nMetal Have a look at the low light footage this Pana is putting out at 7m15s - it is using a hell of a lot of ISO, rather than the Sony which has more clarity. Its darker but this can be altered in post without affecting the quality of image. Unlike this Pana.
Tengo la Sony, pero reconozco que la Panasonic es muy buena y no me hubiese importado tenerla también. No sabría cual elegir si tuviese que decidirme solo por una. En ocasiones veo la Panasonic un poco falta de saturación de color y contraste. Y en otras a la Sony falta de iluminación en zonas oscuras. Con poca luz y de noche ( 6:13 ) me gusta mas la Panasonic.
I tried the Sony AX53 but was disapointed because of the poor dynamic range compared with my Lumix GH3. In your video Panasonic has no better dynamic range. Thanks, now I don't need to try VXF990 by myself.
There were several issues. With GH3 I was using this method: point the focus area from screen, lock focus + exposure and then dial +/- if needed. With AX53 I could go manual exposure wich is only +/- but great to have, but I could not lock the focus. Then if I choose manual focus with peeking I really couldn't tell where exactly is the sharpest distance. In paper the view finder has a lot of pixels, but the image is not magnified - to your eye it's small image and without eye cup very unconfortable to use. I found it very difficult to film flying birds and I suspect it was partly because of the image stabilisation. Other people have complained that AX53 is not suited for tripod shots as you cannot lock steadily the floating lens element. One more thing, the photo button is very close to the zoom lever and very sensitive. If you toach it accidentally when zooming you got a pop up window that says "you cannot take still when in 4K mode". Then you have to use touch screen to close up the pop up window. Overall, to me it was way too consumer oriented and lacked the semipro feeling wich GH3 has.
I liked the choice of background music! :-) Panasonic had always been a bit brighter, like it had EV + 0,5 in all the recordings… is it the case? (Or Sony EV -0,5)?
Panasonic: Better in low light (in auto mode I presume). Sony: Better in daylight but colors tend to turn blue in darker situations. It had the superiour shake control though. So I'll the Sony and in darker situations put in on low lux mode.
Sony's very smooth with stabilization, were those moving shots hand held?... Compared to the Panasonic, it seemed like the Sony was on a gimbal and the Panasonic hand held... Both very nice, but the Sony seems sharper and smoother, whilst the Panasonic has that beautiful flat colour to it, that would be a dream to work with in post... Love both of them for different scenarios!
How often do you shoot in low light? It can be adjusted in quality video editing program to light up a little bit more. But a shaky video is a shaky video. Well the panasonic is not a bad camera. (have one older model) but I would go for the Sony. Good luck with your buy and have a nice summer.
No, low light needs to be adjusted before filming. Editing diminishes quality. Warmth can be edited though I do like the contrast and sharpness of the Sony.
Might only notice the difference in detailed scenes (lots of detail and movement) where the larger bit rate would accommodate the recording of more detail. The H264 codec that compresses in normal mode can discard some of this detail. Think shrubs with wind moving all the individual leaves... Lots of detail that might be a little blocky in normal mode. Trade-offs is reduced battery life and large files to deal with Pro mode offers more options for you to edit the video and specify you own enhancements and compression... I doubt tho, that you'll see major quality improvements but why not use it if it is available, right?
Panasonic beats Sony: Low light, speed shoots definition (look at the numbers at 5:50) Sony beats Panasonic: Image Stabilization, sharper general shoots
From 08:00 onwards the decay was showing as very poor on the Panasonic BUT it looks like it was on auto and presumably by that default setting, its gain was naturally to high and revealed blackfield artefacts more noticeably and given that, then the Sonys auto handled it way better - after all, manual settings at night aren't particularly easy on any camera.
you are right about the stabilization, 1st thing I noticed. I have to check this comparison again; am I right that the sony looks a bit sharpened image?
Correct. The Panasonic has much too warm colors overall, the green foliage and grass have a yellowish tint, and so do the whites. Sony looks a lot more accurate, at least on my monitor.
I have built up a collection of batteries that fit the Pansonic 990 which i had some problems with. and am wondering if they would also fit the Sony ax53 should I decide to change to Sony.?
Hi Magazinevideo. I love your no nonsense video comparisons. Im thinking of getting either the 990 or vxf1. I got this thing about low light and lack of noise in the image. Is the Vxf1 better than the 990 in low light? If I purchased the 990, is there a way to control the noise levels by keeping the ISO low? Thanks in advance.
Well I prefer the panasonic. yes stabilisation on sony is great but it records all the mistakes too. Panasonic is more smooth and it is better to keep nice memories. It is more like a movie.It is warmer. A good cam recorder have to make disapear some of the reality mistakes. It have to leave a memory that is like the one you are keeping in your mind not show all the defect you did not notice at the time otherwise you will never show it or look at it. Panasonic is better for that at least on this test.
Thanks. What I see Sony has better stabilization. However Panasonic in better in details. Stabilization you may compensate via additional stabilizer and/or in postcorrection, but it's more difficult to give details if you don't have them in your video. For me Panasonic looks more exciting.
The Sony looks better in this test, and has better stabilisation. However the Pany is way cheaper and seems to perform well for the money. Colour rendition can be tweaked to personal taste in post on any camera, just that some handle this better than others.
like the film-stabilisator in Sony. But the most importance is that you do like any camera you buy. Cus it is a personal choice. And my choice is the Sony but with respect for Panasonic lovers.
Hello...nice comparasion! Is it possible to use hardware in HC-VXF990 & HD Writer software for format conversion like 4K footage in 1080p or mpeg2? On my old Panasonic HDC SD-700 that method speed up 10 times 1080p50 to standard mpeg2 conversion compared to that when using only PC resources. My machine is corei5 3.10Ghz, 16GB ram, Nvidia GeForce gtx660... I didn't find in manual this info(?) Also maybe someone knows if Sony also offers these features or something similar(?)
This IS a tough choice for me. What took my attention was the way the Panasonic rendered the tree trunk with all the details in it. It looks a bit...smeared out. Not sure if theres some anti-noise filter on, but the image really looked, well smeared. Which cam did you go with? Btw, how do you make focus adjustments in MF with the Panasonic? Do you suppose to use that tiny wheel (and does it work well and precise?)
I will definitely choose Sony although the Panasonic did a great job too. Sony has more definition while the Panasonic, although very subtle, has a very thin layer of blur (unnoticeable) which is not a problem at all. Sony has the better quality in terms of being more natural even though in darkness that's not quite true. But definitely Sony.
Great video! I see a huge difference in low light. Stabilisation could be improved with a tripod but low light performance I think cannot be improved in any way right? In that case, Panasonic for me.
di you tried to do a white or color balance on both before footage although Sony has more color saturation Panasonic is warmer , the comparison can be done if i turn colors of on my monitor to analyze exposure and granulation on shapes and gain at dusk.
I would have helped if the two videos were zoomed at the same level, the Panasonic was zoomed in further and the comparison was not as accurate as it should have been. Sony does the sky colour better and looks to have higher colour accuracy. I recently bought a Sony FDR AX53 and the only complaint was it is fixed at PAL frame rates where what I really needed was NTSC 60 frame for better panning.
When I shooted on both cameras in wide angle, I can't obtain the same level because the Sony has a wider angle than Panasonic. When I zoom, it's the same logic. I show the maximum telephoto of each camcorder. My goal is to show the quality picture when Panasonic goes further than Sony.
For the first time sony is getting closer to panasonic but my old full hd 770 sd has travelled the world and never let me down may be people should look at how good there computer is because it is a massive part of putting the film out there.
Макс Бакс панас. Смотри куски видео со слабой освещенностью, там где кошка по дороге ходит. Панас реальные цвета и детализация. Сони синит и не вытягивает темные участки, хотя в солнечную погоду картинка у нее красивее.
The color is easy to fix in post since its just a slight adjustment on way or the other warmer or cooler (even with this highly compressed video codecs) So non issue for me. But the wider lens and better IS on the SONY are pretty key for me in this test.
Sony AX53 and AX33 has problems of shaking with tripod if you use zoom , it's a bug of Sony and there is not any firmware for solver. alternative can be Sony AX100.
A lot of people including myself have noticed when we mount the FDR-AX53 on a Tripod and you Zoom in there is a Terrible Shakiness like Jelly Wobble i hope Sony can sort this out as it means i can't use a Tripod.
+Johnathan Noechel-Shunn already thought of that which ur really supposed to do also a couple of users said he automatically turns on in 30 seconds when mounted on a Tripod.
the Sony looks better -- higher contrast and sharper images but.......... in February 2019 most people have replaced their 991 and AX53 with the newer/ better Panasonic HC-VXF1 and or the HC-WXF1 they cost about the same compared to the 991 and 53 👍 these Panasonic have a great HDR option included in the menu settings
Si t'as changer de ideè tu pourrais aller pour une mirrorless sony a6300. Avec un objectif kit standard s'acoute 200 euro plus que la camcorder, mais pour "low light" c'est la seule solution que vraimant funcionne. Je regarde le camcorders parce-que je fais tout avec soleil
Alors satisfait Night Walk,? j'ai une lampe LED max 900 lumens (courte distance mais faisceau large) une chance de pouvoir faire des images de nuit avec la AX 53 ?
I actually have both of these cameras and find that although the Sony has a very good stabilization system the Panasonic beats it hands down for control of exposure via iris/shutter speed as the Sony doesn't have the option of adjusting both at the same time. The Sony isn't anywhere near as user friendly with the other controls IMHO but having used the Panasonic camcorder range for the last 15 years I would obviously have got very used to them as they haven't really altered. Both are capable of giving the same results apart from the built in gimbal of the Sony, if I use my external gimbal on the Panasonic the stabilization is better than the Sony, also the best stabilization on the Sony isn't available in the 4K setting also the auto focus is very slow to work and the manual focus is a joke and unusable It depends on the situation as to whether you want to take a lot of other gear with you or simply take one camera , also how important your type of filming is going to be (or want it to be).
One thing does perplex me - a GH4 is my main rig, but how can the Panny beat the Sony in low light? Settings were as identical as possible? Great video - thanks.
+Paul Allen I didn't know Sonys were better built. Your source ? The best quality in low light is the Sony. But I can't answer about the best quality overall. It depends of your preference : the Sony is accurating with more contrast, the Panasonic is more sweet.
Sony's color is better, if i want an effect in 'the air' like the panasonic gifs already, i would use some software. Look at the sky's. The stabilisation of Sony is also better, look at the cat. In the dark, the panasonic gifs more light and details. In the light Sony gifs little more details. I realy wouldnt know what to buy. Anyway, great test. Tumbs up.
Sony seems to have better IS, which is awesome for what I need, but Panasonic has warmer colors right out of the camera, can you somehow compensate for that either in post or in camera? I'm looking for an "idiot-proof" (really easy to use ) 4K camcorder
In most of the cases the Sony recognize the sky and outdoor colors way much better. The sky is blue not purple or pinky. Tell that to Panasonic. Also the fresh grass is green not yellowish. Sharpness is good. As far as overall quiality they are same in my mind. So the cheapiest one wins.
junkano You want great dynamic range then get the Panasonic HC-VXF1 or the HC-WXF1 the difference is: WX has a micro camera in the pull out viewfinder and the VX does not You save money buying the VX -- my personal choice
Great video! Thank you! The Sony here seems far more stable, way better color, and more crisp and sharp. Whereas the Panasonic looks more dull and even blurry or washed out. Zooming seems the Sony's only downfall in this comparison. But that can be fixed with adding a lense.
Both cameras are excellent, but the low light clarity of the Sony wins out for a better, more all-around camera. The Sony's color profile in the light is over-saturated, which is common in all of Sony's Camcorders, where the Panasonic is definitely more accurate in the color one sees. Some people like a more saturated image, but it's really NOT accurate. I just happen to love an over-saturated image, so the Sony wins in this example. One caveat...Sony's menu blows!
Hello. I have the Panasonic vxf990 and the 4 k looks almost just like the 1080/50p-50mbs. Not so impressive. In low light you have a lot of noise over 9bd, but i use it mostly up to 6bd. You dont have agc/you cannot limit your auto gain level. Only in manual mode you cant control it.What i like is sound quality because it sounds good,clean. Contrast and hdr are also pretty good for a small sensor. I don't recomend it for low light scenes. You need at least 15 to 25 lux to get an acceptable image whithout too much grainy/noise artifacts. Also the compression at 70mbs is kinda poor. Sony has better compression rate at 100mbs. I would say also that many times Panasonic has better colours and contrast.
one of the very best comparisons i have ever in my life seen on You Tube very very well done
Yep. The worst are the ones where you listen to the guy talk for 8 minutes before you ever even see the gear or sample footage. This is a great demo video. Most TH-cam videos would be twice as good if they were at least half as long.
One of the best tests I've seen on the net. Excellent job and very worthwhile. I would say the Sony (which I own) has a higher black level (contrast) and is a tad sharper. Panny has lower blacks giving the false impression it is better in low light. Post adjustments on both cams make this a pick'm contest in my opinion. A tweak here and there would make them virtually identical. BUT the Panny is a good bit cheaper and in the prosumer market that's a significant edge to the Panny. I love my AX53 but I wish the optimum stabilization setting would not automatically force the clear image zoom on.
Interesting comment, Denis Torres. I own them both, I regularly tape live concerts, and have to say I'm struggling a lot with the FDR AX-53. In my humble opinion, it doesn't perform so well in low light conditions. The Panasonic 990 for its part performs a lot better in such conditions and delivers (much) better results. So it really boils down to what you need the ecam for. General everyday use? Maybe it would be safer to go with Sony. Regular low-light shots? Panasonic may be the (much) cheaper answer
Thank you for the review. Amazing review.. not a word spoken but so clearly demonstrates the difference. I like the Sony better for better detail, less blowing the detail in highlights and better saturation. And the BOSS stabilization is simply amazing!!
yes, if one has a lot of out-of-hand shooting instead of tripod, the Panasonic is useless.
Perfect comparison, Panasonic seems to have better in low light. Sony has better image stabilizer. Its a hard choice to make, both cameras have their strong points. I would have thought that Sony would have been better in low light, as they claim to have a new 16/9 sensor. Thanks for taking the time, to do this video and share it with us.
"better in low light" : not really, more clear but not better because you can see a lot of "noise".
When I wanna buy a camcorder, I would choose Sony because one thing that comes into my ultimate consideration is image stabilisation. Sony is superior in that department.
But in the video, panasonic looked much better in image stabilisation.
One thing I would like to mention, Sony has interchangeable batteries, that work in almost all there camcorders. Panasonic keeps changing there battery design, every time they make a new camera. Sony also has better low voltage consumption in their products, therefore your battery will last longer with Sony products.
Subjectively, the Sony appeared clearer and appeared to have a better wide-angle, although the swan scene looked to have barrel distortion. I'm normally a Panasonic fan, but on this video the Sony just seemed more sharper. I take the other reviewer's comment about the white balance - Sony's being a bit colder. Thumbs-up for Sony.
Благодарю вас мне стало все понятно
Great video, myself after watching this video went for the Panasonic HC-VXF990 as the colours were more realistic and better in low light .Sony found colours too enhanced and too much blue although good sharp video. Panasonic as a lot more functions and the menu layout is very similar tools to my old Panasonic sd900 ,less of a leaning cure for me.Sony still a good cam but more suited for someone that does not use a lot of controls.
*The Picture-Stabilisation by Sony is many times better as by Panasonic*
MKROXTON
Yes. But not the new HC-VXF1 and HC-WFX1 They work twice as well in low light compared to the Sony and the Panasonic has a larger more sensitive sensor. And it has the same internal mechanical balanced Optical steadyshot as the Sony. And a more powerful optical Zoom. And more stable at longer zoom lengths. And has a selectable high-contrast mode that make the image look exactly like a Sony Camera
Thank you. Exact comparison for which I was looking. Excellent presentation. Let images speak louder and more accurately than words. For my eyes it will be the Panasonic. Again, thank you.
I noticed two slight things in both cameras, the Sony has better color under daylight test while the Panasonic footage is better at night test
Both seem nice quality, Sony seems more vivid (bluer blues, greener greens etc) but the Pany has a more natural (cinematic) look...guess it depends on your preference...I'm going with the Sony. Thanks for the video!
I'm impressed by the kapoeira guy
Although this shows differences it's not a particularly good comparison regarding colour cast. I would put money on a comparison test between 2 out of the box Sony AX53 camcorders that they would not look the same as each other. Apart from the Sony having a wider angle lens the Panasonic can easily be adjusted to match the colour difference. Both are very good cameras and can give excellent results once you get used to using them.
Looks like both do a good job, but I see a bit more detail in the Sony. The Sony stabilized shots appear comparable to a Steadycam, which is pretty awesome. Panasonic does better in low light IMO.
+Beer nMetal Have a look at the low light footage this Pana is putting out at 7m15s - it is using a hell of a lot of ISO, rather than the Sony which has more clarity. Its darker but this can be altered in post without affecting the quality of image. Unlike this Pana.
***** Yeah, that's true too, about fixing it in post.
Tengo la Sony, pero reconozco que la Panasonic es muy buena y no me hubiese importado tenerla también.
No sabría cual elegir si tuviese que decidirme solo por una.
En ocasiones veo la Panasonic un poco falta de saturación de color y contraste.
Y en otras a la Sony falta de iluminación en zonas oscuras.
Con poca luz y de noche ( 6:13 ) me gusta mas la Panasonic.
The sony clearly does not need a lot of post-video coloring...damn
I tried the Sony AX53 but was disapointed because of the poor dynamic range compared with my Lumix GH3. In your video Panasonic has no better dynamic range. Thanks, now I don't need to try VXF990 by myself.
There were several issues. With GH3 I was using this method: point the focus area from screen, lock focus + exposure and then dial +/- if needed. With AX53 I could go manual exposure wich is only +/- but great to have, but I could not lock the focus. Then if I choose manual focus with peeking I really couldn't tell where exactly is the sharpest distance.
In paper the view finder has a lot of pixels, but the image is not magnified - to your eye it's small image and without eye cup very unconfortable to use. I found it very difficult to film flying birds and I suspect it was partly because of the image stabilisation. Other people have complained that AX53 is not suited for tripod shots as you cannot lock steadily the floating lens element.
One more thing, the photo button is very close to the zoom lever and very sensitive. If you toach it accidentally when zooming you got a pop up window that says "you cannot take still when in 4K mode". Then you have to use touch screen to close up the pop up window. Overall, to me it was way too consumer oriented and lacked the semipro feeling wich GH3 has.
In memory of HannuYK
Simple solution:
Panasonic HC-VXF1 or the HC-WFX1 much better camera at the same cost here in February 2019
I liked the choice of background music! :-) Panasonic had always been a bit brighter, like it had EV + 0,5 in all the recordings… is it the case? (Or Sony EV -0,5)?
Panasonic: Better in low light (in auto mode I presume).
Sony: Better in daylight but colors tend to turn blue in darker situations. It had the superiour shake control though.
So I'll the Sony and in darker situations put in on low lux mode.
Sony's very smooth with stabilization, were those moving shots hand held?... Compared to the Panasonic, it seemed like the Sony was on a gimbal and the Panasonic hand held... Both very nice, but the Sony seems sharper and smoother, whilst the Panasonic has that beautiful flat colour to it, that would be a dream to work with in post... Love both of them for different scenarios!
panasonic looks warm and sony looks cool But panasonic low light wins over sony slightly dimmer video at the end. I'll buy panasonic
Tampatec what is the music name
How often do you shoot in low light? It can be adjusted in quality video editing program to light up a little bit more. But a shaky video is a shaky video. Well the panasonic is not a bad camera. (have one older model) but I would go for the Sony. Good luck with your buy and have a nice summer.
No, low light needs to be adjusted before filming. Editing diminishes quality. Warmth can be edited though I do like the contrast and sharpness of the Sony.
Hi can I ask you why you would go for sony one? thanks a lot!
Ugh, I wish it didn't go offsale.
Panasonic = MP4 Sony = XAVC S.
The Sony files too big for long recording
sony has fv100 battery can record 5 hrs, panasonic vw 380 can record 3 hrs
Might only notice the difference in detailed scenes (lots of detail and
movement) where the larger bit rate would accommodate the recording of
more detail. The H264 codec that compresses in normal mode can discard
some of this detail. Think shrubs with wind moving all the individual
leaves... Lots of detail that might be a little blocky in normal
mode. Trade-offs is reduced battery life and large files to deal with
Pro
mode offers more options for you to edit the video and specify you own
enhancements and compression... I doubt tho, that you'll see major
quality improvements but why not use it if it is available, right?
Panasonic beats Sony: Low light, speed shoots definition (look at the numbers at 5:50)
Sony beats Panasonic: Image Stabilization, sharper general shoots
I know this is an video now, but does anyone know if either or both of these cameras has an IR night time mode, and a mic jack? Thanks.
From 08:00 onwards the decay was showing as very poor on the Panasonic BUT it looks like it was on auto and presumably by that default setting, its gain was naturally to high and revealed blackfield artefacts more noticeably and given that, then the Sonys auto handled it way better - after all, manual settings at night aren't particularly easy on any camera.
The sky in the Panasonic was to purple for my taste. Image stabilization was poor. I'll take the Sony.
you are right about the stabilization, 1st thing I noticed. I have to check this comparison again; am I right that the sony looks a bit sharpened image?
Correct. The Panasonic has much too warm colors overall, the green foliage and grass have a yellowish tint, and so do the whites. Sony looks a lot more accurate, at least on my monitor.
Robert Bascelli
that's not an issue with the Panasonic as it has a red/blue manual setting adjustment to match one's personal preference
Good cameras!
- Sony is so much wider
- Panasonic is slightly brighter & sharper
I have built up a collection of batteries that fit the Pansonic 990 which i had some problems with. and am wondering if they would also fit the Sony ax53 should I decide to change to Sony.?
Sony is the best by far. The Panasonic is making scenes look morbid and dusty.
Elle teste vidéo qui a été fait encore sans la vision nocturne.
C'est quand même incroyable.
Hi Magazinevideo. I love your no nonsense video comparisons. Im thinking of getting either the 990 or vxf1. I got this thing about low light and lack of noise in the image. Is the Vxf1 better than the 990 in low light? If I purchased the 990, is there a way to control the noise levels by keeping the ISO low? Thanks in advance.
Well I prefer the panasonic. yes stabilisation on sony is great but it records all the mistakes too. Panasonic is more smooth and it is better to keep nice memories. It is more like a movie.It is warmer. A good cam recorder have to make disapear some of the reality mistakes. It have to leave a memory that is like the one you are keeping in your mind not show all the defect you did not notice at the time otherwise you will never show it or look at it. Panasonic is better for that at least on this test.
This is very useful, thank you for showing this.
とても良い比較動画ですね。 比較動画以前に、映像作品として純粋に素晴らしいです。
SONYは空間光学手ブレ補正がある分、劇的な手ブレ補正が出来る代償として光学ユニットが小さくなってしまうのだから、
暗がりでの撮影はむしろPanasonicは勝って当たり前、勝たなければいけない、といった感じですね。
それ以外では色味や画角など好みはあれどもSONYが優勢ですね。
ただ、価格が全く違うので、総じてPanasonicは低価格でよくぞここまで検討してると思います。
私はAX55（日本モデル）を使っていますが、フォーカスの弱さなど不満も多いです。
このクラスのカムコーダはまだまだ発展途上なのかも知れませんね。
Thanks. What I see Sony has better stabilization. However Panasonic in better in details. Stabilization you may compensate via additional stabilizer and/or in postcorrection, but it's more difficult to give details if you don't have them in your video. For me Panasonic looks more exciting.
Sony by a mile.. Natural colours, contrast and better stabilization and smoother panning.. Made my mind up, thanks..
Why do you have the panasonic zoomed in more. Its a good 10 mm or more higher zoom .
I'll buy the Sony AX53
Si je ne me trompe pas, le Panasonic n'enregistre pas à 30 ips alors que le Sony le fait, ¿est-ce vrai?
Concernant la couleur un peu trop chaude du Pana, c'est pas un réglage à faire dans les menus plutôt ?
The Sony looks better in this test, and has better stabilisation. However the Pany is way cheaper and seems to perform well for the money. Colour rendition can be tweaked to personal taste in post on any camera, just that some handle this better than others.
Really nice comparison. Still deciding on the sony or panasonic. What is the name of the track you used in this video please?
For the music, I don't find the song I have'nt saved on my computer. Sorry...
like the film-stabilisator in Sony. But the most importance is that you do like any camera you buy. Cus it is a personal choice. And my choice is the Sony but with respect for Panasonic lovers.
is it true that panasonic in auto mode the camera changes the shutter speed to even 1/1500 on a sunny day?
Hello...nice comparasion!
Is it possible to use hardware in HC-VXF990 & HD Writer software for format conversion like 4K footage in 1080p or mpeg2?
On my old Panasonic HDC SD-700 that method speed up 10 times 1080p50 to standard mpeg2 conversion compared to that when using only PC resources. My machine is corei5 3.10Ghz, 16GB ram, Nvidia GeForce gtx660...
I didn't find in manual this info(?)
Also maybe someone knows if Sony also offers these features or something similar(?)
When the Panasonic to get rid of this yellow-green-brown?
la séquence de carnaval avec la music bresilienne est enregistrer avec le micro de quel camera ??
Bonjour vincent, de mémoire, AX53. Mais les deux caméras délivraient un son exploitable et comparable sur ce type de séquence.
what would be a result if we tested sony fdr ax53 vs panasonic hc-VXF1?
Sony tend to lose the fine details, thats where it matters. (In my opinion)
This IS a tough choice for me. What took my attention was the way the Panasonic rendered the tree trunk with all the details in it. It looks a bit...smeared out. Not sure if theres some anti-noise filter on, but the image really looked, well smeared. Which cam did you go with? Btw, how do you make focus adjustments in MF with the Panasonic? Do you suppose to use that tiny wheel (and does it work well and precise?)
I will definitely choose Sony although the Panasonic did a great job too. Sony has more definition while the Panasonic, although very subtle, has a very thin layer of blur (unnoticeable) which is not a problem at all. Sony has the better quality in terms of being more natural even though in darkness that's not quite true. But definitely Sony.
Thanks this is helpful. Did you shoot anything on 4k though? Appreciate your efforts in many kinds of shots!
yes, almost everything on 4K
Great video! I see a huge difference in low light. Stabilisation could be improved with a tripod but low light performance I think cannot be improved in any way right? In that case, Panasonic for me.
di you tried to do a white or color balance on both before footage although Sony has more color saturation Panasonic is warmer , the comparison can be done if i turn colors of on my monitor to analyze exposure and granulation on shapes and gain at dusk.
No, I let the balance in Auto mode.
I would have helped if the two videos were zoomed at the same level, the Panasonic was zoomed in further and the comparison was not as accurate as it should have been. Sony does the sky colour better and looks to have higher colour accuracy. I recently bought a Sony FDR AX53 and the only complaint was it is fixed at PAL frame rates where what I really needed was NTSC 60 frame for better panning.
When I shooted on both cameras in wide angle, I can't obtain the same level because the Sony has a wider angle than Panasonic. When I zoom, it's the same logic. I show the maximum telephoto of each camcorder. My goal is to show the quality picture when Panasonic goes further than Sony.
Good. Sensor size VX990 is bigger at 1/2.3" than AX53 of 1/2.5" size. Seem to have better view in night video.
Should I get Ax55 or Sony RX100 V? Any reasons to get a camcorder nowadays?
Sure. Handycam has much better image stabilization, and its cheaper than RX100V
For the first time sony is getting closer to panasonic but my old full hd 770 sd has travelled the world and never let me down may be people should look at how good there computer is because it is a massive part of putting the film out there.
I have panasonic x920 and I don't know if buy panasonic vxf 990 or Sony AX100 ?
Très bien prestation est ce virement 4k les deux seul ont vous qu'elle est le meilleur?
The Sony problem is that they camcorders give you a MEGA overexposed footage . For example - look at the sky at 04:46 or 05:59. etc... or 04:13...
stabilization is on point
Would have liked to have seen the images full screen.
спасибо за видео. А что б вы могли посоветовать для съемки видео в дома при среднем освещении ?
Макс Бакс панас. Смотри куски видео со слабой освещенностью, там где кошка по дороге ходит. Панас реальные цвета и детализация. Сони синит и не вытягивает темные участки, хотя в солнечную погоду картинка у нее красивее.
comparaison here in youtube in FullHD quality????????
Sony AX53: clear light blue sky.
Panasonic: dull purple-ish sky.
Hi! In Your opinion which camcorder is better in low light?
+Ioan Grigore Popescu It seems to be the FDR-AX53
Thank You!
+magazinevideo Look at 8:21
The color is easy to fix in post since its just a slight adjustment on way or the other warmer or cooler (even with this highly compressed video codecs) So non issue for me. But the wider lens and better IS on the SONY are pretty key for me in this test.
Clayton Moore
Better yet...
that's not an issue with the Panasonic as it has a red/blue manual setting adjustment to match one's personal preference
Sony AX53 and AX33 has problems of shaking with tripod if you use zoom , it's a bug of Sony and there is not any firmware for solver. alternative can be Sony AX100.
Yeah if you have an extra few hundred £££ lying around.
£50 the sony is more expensive. Tough, real tough choice.
+David Feeley I bought AX100 and stabilitation is poor and 4K only has 25 fps I return and will try Panasonic HC-X1000 it récord 4K 50fps
trusted reviews, say it's poor in low light, small sensor, minimal dynamic range
they look quite a lot different but I like the Sony FDR-AX53 best.
The HC-VXF990 seems to have more picture and wider?
A lot of people including myself have noticed when we mount the FDR-AX53 on a Tripod and you Zoom in there is a Terrible Shakiness like Jelly Wobble i hope Sony can sort this out as it means i can't use a Tripod.
Try turning stabilization off while it's on the tripod.
+Johnathan Noechel-Shunn already thought of that which ur really supposed to do also a couple of users said he automatically turns on in 30 seconds when mounted on a Tripod.
the Sony looks better -- higher contrast and sharper images but..........
in February 2019 most people have replaced their 991 and AX53 with the newer/ better Panasonic HC-VXF1 and or the HC-WXF1 they cost about the same compared to the 991 and 53 👍
these Panasonic have a great HDR option included in the menu settings
Merci beaucoup mon ami. Excellente comparaison. Tout est clair sans mots. Sony a gagné. Avec les salutations de la Russie
Bonjour j'hésite entre les 2 . Vous conseillez lequel pour filmer en balade nocturne ?
Merci de votre aide
Je conseille l'ajout d'une torche LED avec réglage de l'intensité.
Je pensais utiliser ma lampe leds que j'avais sur mon ancienne camera .
et finalement j'ai pris la sony fdr ax53 alors j'espère que ça va le faire
Si t'as changer de ideè tu pourrais aller pour une mirrorless sony a6300. Avec un objectif kit standard s'acoute 200 euro plus que la camcorder, mais pour "low light" c'est la seule solution que vraimant funcionne. Je regarde le camcorders parce-que je fais tout avec soleil
Alors satisfait Night Walk,? j'ai une lampe LED max 900 lumens (courte distance mais faisceau large) une chance de pouvoir faire des images de nuit avec la AX 53 ?
both are nice
Great vid👍
Great compariasion video.👍
Thank you
re salut avec quelles logiciels fait tu tes montages videos
I actually have both of these cameras and find that although the Sony has a very good stabilization system the Panasonic beats it hands down for control of exposure via iris/shutter speed as the Sony doesn't have the option of adjusting both at the same time. The Sony isn't anywhere near as user friendly with the other controls IMHO but having used the Panasonic camcorder range for the last 15 years I would obviously have got very used to them as they haven't really altered. Both are capable of giving the same results apart from the built in gimbal of the Sony, if I use my external gimbal on the Panasonic the stabilization is better than the Sony, also the best stabilization on the Sony isn't available in the 4K setting also the auto focus is very slow to work and the manual focus is a joke and unusable
It depends on the situation as to whether you want to take a lot of other gear with you or simply take one camera , also how important your type of filming is going to be (or want it to be).
One thing does perplex me - a GH4 is my main rig, but how can the Panny beat the Sony in low light? Settings were as identical as possible? Great video - thanks.
panasonic f1.8 1/2.3 ....sony f2 sensor 1/2.5
Rod Rocketon
Why not a better camera that cost the same: Black Magic Pocket Cinema Camera --- twice as good as any Lumix camera
does this panasonic camcorder do flash for stills?
Which one in your opinion has the best quality i know the Sonys are always better built than the Panasonic's.
+Paul Allen I didn't know Sonys were better built. Your source ? The best quality in low light is the Sony. But I can't answer about the best quality overall. It depends of your preference : the Sony is accurating with more contrast, the Panasonic is more sweet.
which has better night vision? I'm getting one for ghost hunting
+Pegleg Media I think it's Sony
Sony FDR AX53 Хорошее качество.Спасибо
Sony's color is better, if i want an effect in 'the air' like the panasonic gifs already, i would use some software. Look at the sky's. The stabilisation of Sony is also better, look at the cat. In the dark, the panasonic gifs more light and details. In the light Sony gifs little more details. I realy wouldnt know what to buy. Anyway, great test. Tumbs up.
Sony seems to have better IS, which is awesome for what I need, but Panasonic has warmer colors right out of the camera, can you somehow compensate for that either in post or in camera?
I'm looking for an "idiot-proof" (really easy to use ) 4K camcorder
No, I have not compensated the colors
***** but could you do that in camera if you wanted to?
no, except with manual balance
***** what are, in you opinion, the main advantages of the Panasonic over the Sony?
what is the music track in the video?
Salut la quelle des deux voudrai tu me conseillé.
impossible de départager, cela dépend de l'usage.
Pour filmer des rallyes automobiles, lequel choisir ? Merci !!! Zoom rapide, stabilité et balayage droite gauche et gauche droite !!!!
In most of the cases the Sony recognize the sky and outdoor colors way much better. The sky is blue not purple or pinky. Tell that to Panasonic. Also the fresh grass is green not yellowish. Sharpness is good. As far as overall quiality they are same in my mind. So the cheapiest one wins.
The most important difference is that the Sony has wider angel, but the Panasonic has HDR which means a better detail in contrast. Now I'm more lost.
is HDR enabled on the Panasonic?
junkano
You want great dynamic range then get the Panasonic HC-VXF1 or the HC-WXF1
the difference is:
WX has a micro camera in the pull out viewfinder and the VX does not
You save money buying the VX -- my personal choice
sony!
Sony looks better. Better colors, sharper images.
Great video!
Thank you!
The Sony here seems far more stable, way better color, and more crisp and sharp.
Whereas the Panasonic looks more dull and even blurry or washed out.
Zooming seems the Sony's only downfall in this comparison.
But that can be fixed with adding a lense.
Gutes Video habe mir diese sony gekauft
Panasonic HC-VXF990 Супер!
Both cameras are excellent, but the low light clarity of the Sony wins out for a better, more all-around camera. The Sony's color profile in the light is over-saturated, which is common in all of Sony's Camcorders, where the Panasonic is definitely more accurate in the color one sees. Some people like a more saturated image, but it's really NOT accurate. I just happen to love an over-saturated image, so the Sony wins in this example. One caveat...Sony's menu blows!
+Jim O'Callaghan Well if the Panasonic menu system is anything like the Panasonic TM900 menu's that its a double fail then.
Hello. I have the Panasonic vxf990 and the 4 k looks almost just like the 1080/50p-50mbs. Not so impressive. In low light you have a lot of noise over 9bd, but i use it mostly up to 6bd. You dont have agc/you cannot limit your auto gain level. Only in manual mode you cant control it.What i like is sound quality because it sounds good,clean. Contrast and hdr are also pretty good for a small sensor. I don't recomend it for low light scenes. You need at least 15 to 25 lux to get an acceptable image whithout too much grainy/noise artifacts. Also the compression at 70mbs is kinda poor. Sony has better compression rate at 100mbs. I would say also that many times Panasonic has better colours and contrast.
review the damn camera is almost two times the price difference in Russia Sonya 80.000 50.000 and Panas..and what the difference as you realize