HD is creating a lot of interest, so we were curious to put one of the first widely available prosumer HD cameras through its paces. Physically, this is very much like the older Sony VX2100, and seems to be based on a very similar tape transport (it still makes a slight whine while running) and electrical specs. The battery system is the same as the one used in all of Sony’s models for at least the last five years – a good thing, because the battery supplied is the smallest in the range, but isn’t capable of more than about half an hour’s use.

The mid-range form factor – larger than a palm-held, smaller than a true shoulder-mount professional unit – is popular, but has some drawbacks that are worth noting. The FX1E is too heavy to use as a palm-held (at least not without using both hands), and not long enough to be convincing as a shoulder-mount. So we found it a little awkward to work with for extended periods. There’s also a handheld waist-height option, but clearly this can only be used for a relatively small number of shots. These disadvantages are offset by a more comprehensive feature set than is usual on a camera in this price range. There are two levels of Neutral Density filtering, manual iris control, and also a choice between manual ring-pull or button activated zoom, with a choice of two speeds for the latter. Casual home video makers may find it all a bit much, although there are point-and-shoot options for most of the features, so only the fascinated and curious will need to get to grips with the details.

Output Modes
There are two output modes: HD and standard iLink/SD. The latter converts HD footage down to the SD format, and can be used with an PC and video editor that features FireWire/iLink input and output. The former is more specialised, and also less reliable. When tested, the ouput with Sony’s own Vegas 6 editor, capture seemed to work properly, although the preview window in Vegas didn’t show the input stream correctly. And HD playback from disk on our 2.2GHz test PC was impossibly jerky; not a Sony problem, but more of a limitation of the format itself.

But is the video quality worth the effort? Compared to previous Sony SD camcorders, the results are stunning – very detailed, and with a particular talent for wide-screen panoramic views. The actual look is still very video-like though, and will be familiar to users of older Sony models. Colours and contrast both lack punch, and even with the Carl Zeiss lens there seemed to be some slight softening of the image. This might appeal as an effect added in post-production, but shouldn’t really have been a permanent fixture. It’s possible to get good results from this camera, but for really excellent results such as rich colours and deep blacks, it needs extra software post-processing.

Overall, we’re not quite convinced by this iteration of HD. The extra resolution is very impressive, but in many creative applications, a camera that’s capable of a more film-like and less obviously video-like can still outgun this model, even with a lower effective pixel count. So this is a good choice for corporates and for high-end home movie making, where its ability to zoom between panoramic shots and close-ups is particularly useful. But the fact that HD doesn’t have any real broadcast potential yet, and that it will slow all but the fastest of today’s PCs to a crawl, mean that it might not be a first choice for video producers.