Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: New 4k Sony  (Read 15759 times)
billy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 266


« Reply #80 on: April 25, 2012, 06:47:25 PM »
ReplyReply

"Insert Quote
I always thought the Sony was an insult to ergonomics, but now the handle is relocatable I could see working with one.

http://vimeo.com/40527844

Slap a TVLogic EVF on the front, & you've got a proper, yet compact, package.
Posted on: April 15, 2012, 11:21:29 AM"


Did the DP in the video say 8 auto-focus points and face detection auto-focus as well? Wow.
Logged
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #81 on: April 30, 2012, 04:15:29 AM »
ReplyReply

I always thought the Sony was an insult to ergonomics, but now the handle is relocatable I could see working with one.

http://vimeo.com/40527844

Slap a TVLogic EVF on the front, & you've got a proper, yet compact, package.


Bern,

Have you worked Scarlet for a month?   Just kidding  . . . well sort of.

You know at first I loathed the fs100 and the buttons drove me nuts until I realized they all had a purpose.   Also some are redundant but act as quick keys.

The second thing that bugged me about the fs series was the highlights would blow, but setting the screen to bright, slightly underexposing fix that.

The third thing I didn't like about the Sony is the avchd wrapper.   It's h264 which is a derivative of mpg4 so why not just make it that and save us some time in post?

Anyway,

During our last shoot and prior and later in testing I've tested the Scarlet, RED 1 and FS100 next to each other in exact circumstances and regardless of the numbers, mps, 4:4:4 vs 4:2:0 what ever, I don't see a 10% difference in the files from the REd to the Sony, probably not 5%.

I know at RED user net i'd be stoned to death for that remark, but that's what I see whether I grade in Di-Vinci, Apple Color, and it  shows me that I can hold highlights, hold mid-tones, have clean blacks and move the tile around.

Let me repeat though that you have to work the file in post, though I've never met an image that didn't require some post production, still or motion.

I know all RED's  feels like a military grade instrument and that I can really appreciate, where the Sony has that plastic video cam feel, but the two things I deeply care about are stability, usability and price.

I've beat the heck out of the Sony and it keeps on tickin", where the RED's always pull something on me I don't expect.

When it comes to video or motion cameras or whatever the term is it's the black hole of money and time.  You can take a 5d3 and kit it out, minus lenses and get to 12 grand so fast your head will spin, not including the cost of color grading suites and as unless someone knows a magic potion, we always color grade.

Then you get to sound.   If you think your the world's greatest image maker, do a series of dialog videos and clean sound is the 600 lb gorilla in the room.  Maybe 100lbs.

Now the only thing I wish with the new Sony is it had a little higher build quality and some less sensitive side controls, but for all it does the standard 2k version of the fs series is one heck of a deal.

The only thing I wish will all the digital video I own is if 1.   They would should a prorezz file to go straight to the editorial suite for cutting as a proxy and/or the ability to match the viewer screen and the evf that color calibrated to match the computer output.

I can understand why europe is ga-ga over the arri, because it produces a file ready to begin editing, but the downside is it's in Lamborghini territory, minus the floor mattes.   The upside is is if your a brand junkie the Arri is an Arri.

Oh and I also wish  continuous lighting didn't cost a gazzion dollars a watt, but at east hmi's have become smaller and more usable.  LED's are a good price but the light output is small and they sometimes color cast on flesh tones, but if your moving 14 cases of stuff around europe, and you see those overage charges gone ding, ding, ding, you learn to love LED's.

Bottom line is I still love my R-1, (wish they had image stabilization), but I dg the cameras.  Knowing that, there is nothing I've shot in two years that I could not have shot with the Sony and I wait for the 4k version, though will not plop down the money until the 4k module is out and fully tested.

Also Sony needs to up the level of their e mount lenses, like some T(F) stop constant zooms.   17 to 35.   35 to 70, 70 to 200.   That'll do it, other than the new mirror adapter which loses 1/3 to 1/2 of a stop (I can live with that) but limits all lenses to 3.5 at their most open aperture.

The Scarlet the jury is still out on.   The lcd is a love hate with that glossy screen, the autofocus even with the latest firmware is an easter egg hunt and that constant fan, even at 25% can be heard.    I know RED will fix most of this (someday in RED's don't ask time frame), but they'll fix it.

I know there is a module for the back that allows RED's mini xlr inputs (only two and we need 4), but it's a $3,500 tbd piece so I won't hold my breath.  To me the Scarlet kind of sets there waiting for the updates and it may be the only camera I will sell, I mean I still have my original 1ds, so I'm not an e-bay type of guy.

IMO

BC

P.S.  I've said this before and not to get onto RED's bad or good side (I doubt they know I exist), but I do know they've pushed the market forward like no other maker in either stills or motion.  I also wish them more than well if they would just do one thing . . . get rid of those silly damn waiting lists and be clear of where you stand and when stuff will be out.






Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #82 on: April 30, 2012, 09:36:13 AM »
ReplyReply


During our last shoot and prior and later in testing I've tested the Scarlet, RED 1 and FS100 next to each other in exact circumstances and regardless of the numbers, mps, 4:4:4 vs 4:2:0 what ever, I don't see a 10% difference in the files from the REd to the Sony, probably not 5%.

I know at RED user net i'd be stoned to death for that remark, but that's what I see whether I grade in Di-Vinci, Apple Color, and it  shows me that I can hold highlights, hold mid-tones, have clean blacks and move the tile around.

I second that. I did similar testings some months ago and came to the same conclusion. In normal circunstances the impact of highly compressed h264 is almost impossible to detect in a blind test.
I reiterated the tests with Panasonic P2 files, uncompressed formats, Prores 444 etc...because I thought I made a mistake, and nothing. Regardless of the file size and compression. I bet nobody would win on a blind contest "who's who" unless it's been projected on a giant screen.
Michael Reichmann did also some testing with an ext recording device and could not detect either the magic increment in quality compared to the h.264 of the camera.
But under circunstances when there is a clear exposure issue, Raw wins so Red wins.
What yes do have a drastically impact are the bits. I've never seen a Red or Alexa footage with banding, yes all dslrs and the gh2, all 8bits devices. 8 bits isn't good really, and that's visible from the planet Venus (but not always).


The only thing I wish will all the digital video I own is if 1.   They would should a prorezz file to go straight to the editorial suite for cutting as a proxy and/or the ability to match the viewer screen and the evf that color calibrated to match the computer output.

That's the grail but it's not unfortunatly wysiwyg as you point.  I've been close doing a D.I.Y following the advice of a cine crew. I shoot a typical location and reviewed the footage on a calib monitor conected to the computer. Then I play the same frame on both the camera field monitor and I'd use the monitor's controls to get the closer to what I see live on the computer. Same with the camera settings themselves. It sort of works. It's interesting to have on monitors HDMI in and out so it's possible to set multiple monitors at the same time. It's not a perfect solution but it avoids bad surprises.
I use a lot the histogram as we don't really have a reliable monitoring.

I can understand why europe is ga-ga over the arri, because it produces a file ready to begin editing, but the downside is it's in Lamborghini territory, minus the floor mattes.   The upside is is if your a brand junkie the Arri is an Arri.

But also because, to be frank, the output is outstanding. DR is enormous and it looks like film. Then, the implementation of the controls are made in such a way that cine operators feel at home.
Color is great, it's weather sealed and can handle harsh climate and rain as it, it's not too big, it shoots also Avid codecs, it has a good worldwide service, it features the hability you talk on the previous paragraph (images recorded = images seen), the menu is the best and most intuitive I've ever seen included still cameras,
etc...
So in the end it's not just about 5, 6, 7ks but IMO the Arri, despite being not as muscled as Red is a real serious tool that helps the workflow in all most demanding aspects. I think it's more than the name-reputation, but it's unfortunatly expensive.
« Last Edit: April 30, 2012, 09:49:39 AM by fredjeang » Logged
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #83 on: April 30, 2012, 11:34:39 AM »
ReplyReply

Cinematographers make still photographers look asleep when it comes to brand worship.

Videographers seem to care more if the Rocker switch is easy to use, the lens is a Fujinon and it green screens.

Once again, I'm brand agnostic and I don't care if it's made from plastic or platinum, as long as it works and the file looks good.

I briefly read some guys review of the Sony and he hated the because the handle  felt loose.  Buy a washer.    

I haven't shot an Arri, don't know if I will, I do doubt seriously if I'll buy one, but I'd love to do my own tests and see what the difference is because I've seen little difference between my REDS and the Sony and yes I've seen banding, but I've twisted the file so hard that the sensors used for the hubble telescope would have banded.

My point is it's all the file, the usability and the costs.    The thought of dropping 80k on a camera body is more than my brain will absorb.  I feel the same way at 50k and I own three RED's, though the Scarlet is an inch away from going onto RED user for sale   section.   I'm just tired of waiting.

All I can suggest anyone do is close the web, go rent or borrow a few cameras and shoot them.   Mount sound receivers, a decent tripod, shoot the file, download it and twist the hell out of the curves and tell me which is which, because unless you have a 10,000 pixel display I'll bet you can't tell.

The motion capture biz sit on it's hands for 4 decades with the options being film, 4 grand prosumer cameras, $200,000 ENGS, or 2 million dollar vipers.  Then RED saw the hole in the market and boom everybody has jumped in . . . some better than others.

My suggestion is to buy a sony, epoxy a 4lb block of finned cast iron onto the base and change all the logos from Sony to xRED.

Either that and paint it gray put an 8lb block of smooth cast iron on the base and change the logos to xARRI.

That should do it.

IMO

BC


Maybe if most cinematographers bought instead of rented they'd see the world different.   They remind me of colorists that use to work in those now closed 4 story buildings and used Pablo 4k at $114,000 a pop and thought Apple color was for their uncle Harvey, until they we're forced to freelance and now say yea man, that ol' apple color sure is good.

« Last Edit: April 30, 2012, 11:36:59 AM by bcooter » Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #84 on: April 30, 2012, 01:49:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Got your points James, specially on the astronomic budgets side and how you draw the panorama. It's true.

Now about the Arri, it depends really. After all it's just about a little more expensive than those magical high-end MF backs...(each time I think about it I'm indignated).

But I've been sort of knowing you through your posts since I joined the forum and you expressed your needs and desires that are constant in both still or motion.
Well, the Arri is in fact, in my humble opinion, a camera for you. But I agree that it's expensive.

With the log-C, you'd gain DR in both shadows and highlights, a lot. It allows some filming that otherwise would go to the garbage.

It's dangerous: if you rent one and work with it, there will be no return, and you'll be trapped: You'd want one. I'm sort of teasing but only 1/2.

I've worked with one an afternoon and coincide with Alexa's guys on set a par of time and of course jumped on questions with the operator-owner.

The equation is simple: maximum image quality, absolutly hassle-free and direct workflow, no noise. It's an enormous gain of time, problems to solve and in the end it's money saved.
Being able to shoot prores or dnxhd and output superb files ready to cut can justify the expense. As you often point, there are sometimes false economies and some device can be expensive at first but
money saver later.

It weights for my taste but on shoulder it's ok. A normal broadcast camera. It's rather small.

I would say the same if instead of Arri it would be named Barri or Garri. The fact is that the camera is a monster for advertising.

The only thing is that it's not a convergence camera.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWcqdMFkbhU

But yeah, Sony does very good products and well priced.
« Last Edit: April 30, 2012, 02:29:35 PM by fredjeang » Logged
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #85 on: May 01, 2012, 03:01:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Got your points James, specially on the astronomic budgets side and how you draw the panorama. It's true.


snip

With the log-C, you'd gain DR in both shadows and highlights, a lot. It allows some filming that otherwise would go to the garbage.

It's dangerous: if you rent one and work with it, there will be no return, and you'll be trapped: You'd want one. I'm sort of teasing but only 1/2.

snip


Fred,

No . . . don't do this.   Not 80 grand.

 We are the production company and work from a bottom line.  Every inch of the bottom line from currency exchange to all travel.   Adding 80k for a camera body is virtually out of the quesiton rent or buy.  My R-1 will do the same, as well.  Maybe I loose a few hours in Cinex putting out a semi pleasing image ready for grading, but I've got two, I'm covered on backup and b cameras and don't want to think about adding anything.

BTW:  I have B cameras but don't ever shoot B footage, don't even address it when a client mentions it because when they say shoot a little footage got "reduced rate";

Reduced rate is that shot you get at the clinic when your 17.

You know the cost of this stuff.  Right now we're an inch away from moving to PeeCees, because Apple is dead in the water.  That means new software, for everything, new monitors, new internal drives, ram, mice, keyboards and that week of trouble shooting.

In fact I don't even care about working in 4k.  RED is pushing 4k footage like a Baptist preacher dunking heads in the river, but I don't see 4k for delivery for a long time.

If I'm wrong about projecting 4k,  my R-1's shoot 4k so I'm good.

I don't even want the fs700 except for the slo-mo (which I'll use 3% of the time) and the ND filters.

Even then I won't spend a penny until they really deliver 4k.

Same thing with the Scarlet.  89% of what I need is listed to come . . . really.

Th thing about the Scarlet and R-1 I thought they were suppose to be a R1 in a smaller package and they're missing some key features;

Cameras aside

What I'd really like is easier color grading.  We're learning Di-Vinci resolve and it's good but a dumb ass interface that is redundent and slow.  Sure it tracks well, so does apple color and compared to apple color which takes about 4 hours to learn, everyone says it takes years to get good at resolve.

Maybe Adobe will come out with something smart in CS6, but I kind of have my doubts.   I have a good colorists and can outsource, but it's as big a time suck as doing it ourselves.

I don't want Lightroom for video, I want photoshop for video that tracks and works without adjustment layers, but real layers with selections, in other words like photoshop works with stills.  Do a frame and transfer the settings throughout the clip.  Mark a face or a body or a shirt and let the adjustment track wthout ten minutes of setting up preference.

Also I'd like rendering under a week.

Anyway, The R1's are our workhorses, the Sony for fun imagery, the Scarlet  . . . well I'm still not sure what it does and if you think any motion file makes a stunning sill, shoot the session in motion, then dedicate a few moments wth a 5d3.  

You will see a big difference and make you wonder why tried to combine the two.  "Today it's more marketing than substance".

Tomorrow who know?

IMO

BC

i'll admit I do have a soft spot for old venerable names in our's and other industries.

Hasselblad, Arri, Zeiss - Contax, even Nikon and Pentax mean something to me, pretty much in that order.



« Last Edit: May 01, 2012, 09:01:33 AM by bcooter » Logged
Bern Caughey
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 179



WWW
« Reply #86 on: May 01, 2012, 11:54:14 AM »
ReplyReply

I've never met a DP who owns an Alexa, but do know operators that do. One recently ordered two of the new Studio versions.

But their business model is rental, specifically for shows they're working on. They'll churn, & burn, so wouldn't see much depreciation.

I can't imagine many others owning ARRIs.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2012, 12:13:12 PM by Bern Caughey » Logged
Bern Caughey
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 179



WWW
« Reply #87 on: May 01, 2012, 12:08:46 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm very interested in the next Sony, but almost wish it wouldn't do 4k, rather save the resolution for downsampling to pristine 2k. What I do want is smoother gradients, much improved highlight rendition, & great skin.

It kills me that Sony provides little information about their recorder. I'm tired of waiting on promises, & want complete solutions that are ready to go.

If the Canon's overcrank looked as good as it's 24p I'd likely buy in, & be done with it, but this limitation combined with it's 8 bit depth, keep me hoping for a more complete solution.

« Last Edit: May 01, 2012, 12:18:36 PM by Bern Caughey » Logged
Bern Caughey
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 179



WWW
« Reply #88 on: May 01, 2012, 12:50:32 PM »
ReplyReply

Roll off & details looking good. Love the rendition of hair.

http://vimeo.com/41323029
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #89 on: May 01, 2012, 01:23:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Well, this AF doesn't work for me. At all.

I know it's desirable, I know they are getting better, I know how good it will be but yes, it's a step, not the goal.

For the moment I think it's not working.

This isn't a stress AF test. The man should go to see Van Halen playing Eruption and try to film his fingers from the gtr neck with narrow focus while playing, and fingers have to be in focus and you have about 30cm of d.o.f and just about 1/2 second between hand changes position, and lets see how the contrast or phase detection or whatever detection we'd call it works. (I'm saying that because it's real world, it actually happened to me, so...)
The day tech allows this, I'd go AF.

Now, I think the camera looks good indeed.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2012, 01:35:57 PM by fredjeang » Logged
billy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 266


« Reply #90 on: May 01, 2012, 01:43:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Roll off & details looking good. Love the rendition of hair.

http://vimeo.com/41323029

I agree. The AF also seems to work remarkably well. He mentions the 2 types of AF; Phase detection with the A series lenses, and Face detection with the E mount lenses. These 2 types seem to both work well in their own way. Does anyone know if these 2 types of AF are available on the FS100 as well? I know you can use both types of lenses on it ( with the adaptor for the A series ). I am trying to grasp what the differences in AF are between the FS700 and FS100.

Sorry Fred : ) I need AF for run and gun corporate work.
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #91 on: May 01, 2012, 02:37:21 PM »
ReplyReply

I agree. The AF also seems to work remarkably well.

It's a conspiracy !
« Last Edit: May 01, 2012, 07:12:15 PM by fredjeang » Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2196


WWW
« Reply #92 on: May 01, 2012, 07:32:06 PM »
ReplyReply

The AF - Its certainly not working in his into

Sure it focuses, but on what

As for the rest hmmm....

S
Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #93 on: May 01, 2012, 07:47:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Morgan,

Nice to see the wild nite prowlers still alive at 2.30 in the morning. Just finished a bloody render that had some issue with QT (to change...) because of a 10 bits rare codec issue but now it's finally fixed.

Ahh...saw the same. The AF is not working, it's reassuring to hear it too, but the rest looks great.

Cheers and good night.

Logged
Peter McLennan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1625


« Reply #94 on: May 01, 2012, 11:50:26 PM »
ReplyReply

I've never met a DP who owns an Alexa, but do know operators that do. One recently ordered two of the new Studio versions.

Two things. 

First, no operator is going to bring a camera on set that hasn't been approved or probably specified by the DP. 

Second, the Alexa Studio has a optical viewfinder.  None of Arri's competitors (with the possible exception of the Sony F65) can make this claim.  Operators like optical viewfinders for several reasons,  most importantly that an optical viewfinder provides "safe area".  As far as I know, EVFs can't do this without sacrificing pixels.
Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2196


WWW
« Reply #95 on: May 02, 2012, 02:39:13 AM »
ReplyReply

but the rest looks great.

Did not watch it all but (and this is what I dont like about 'park videos') the AF didnt seem motivated in any way

AF only works if you/the director wants Character A tracked and the AF does track Character A

Sure it picked some things and got them sharp..

Until there are selectable user controllable zones its IMO useless for 90% of shots .. and a lifesaver in 5% where a clean subject approaches the camera at speed

S
Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
Bern Caughey
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 179



WWW
« Reply #96 on: May 02, 2012, 01:09:09 PM »
ReplyReply

First, no operator is going to bring a camera on set that hasn't been approved or probably specified by the DP.

Or the production. Sony's notorious for specifing Sony cameras for their productions, though I think they may have tried Epics on the more recent episodes of Justified.
Logged
Bern Caughey
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 179



WWW
« Reply #97 on: May 02, 2012, 01:17:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Hopefully the shimmering highlights will be fixed in the production camera.

http://vimeo.com/40773589

Logged
billy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 266


« Reply #98 on: May 02, 2012, 04:35:02 PM »
ReplyReply

I agree. The AF also seems to work remarkably well. He mentions the 2 types of AF; Phase detection with the A series lenses, and Face detection with the E mount lenses. These 2 types seem to both work well in their own way. Does anyone know if these 2 types of AF are available on the FS100 as well? I know you can use both types of lenses on it ( with the adaptor for the A series ). I am trying to grasp what the differences in AF are between the FS700 and FS100."

Can anyone respond to this? I cant find the info online. Or does anybody know a good Sony dealer in the US that can answer questions like this?

Logged
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #99 on: May 04, 2012, 08:43:39 AM »
ReplyReply

I agree. The AF also seems to work remarkably well. He mentions the 2 types of AF; Phase detection with the A series lenses, and Face detection with the E mount lenses. These 2 types seem to both work well in their own way. Does anyone know if these 2 types of AF are available on the FS100 as well? I know you can use both types of lenses on it ( with the adaptor for the A series ). I am trying to grasp what the differences in AF are between the FS700 and FS100."

Can anyone respond to this? I cant find the info online. Or does anybody know a good Sony dealer in the US that can answer questions like this?



We have the convertor on order, but seeing the focus on some of the sony tutorials are pretty amazing.

Now the fs100 isn't perfect, but it's damn good, kills a 5d3, kills just about everthing but a RED One and will do things you just can't do with a RED One.

You can put it in a large carge and have a true locked down studio cam, two clicks on the cage and stick it on chest or shoulder mount and shoot hand held and fast.

The autofocus isn't perfect but works as well as any autofocus I've tried and will result in more useable imagery than most locked down cameras.

I can't wait for the 700s built in nd filters and whether it ever shoots 4k I don't care because I don't know anyone editing in 4k, unless it's for a RED conference.

Put an AJ mini box on a back plate and you'll go straight to prorezz without conversion which will save you 3 hours a days minimum in making a work print (I guess we have work prints in the digital world.)

The only downside is the new convertor loses 1/2 a stop and keeps a lens a 3.5 in autofocus, though if you compare a a mount ziess next to the kit lens, both a 3.5, for some reason the out of focus a mount zeiss is much more cinema looking than the kit lens.

Anyway, youi can do most of what you want to do with the fs100 and I think the 700 is a little overpriced (I think all this stuff is overpriced), but if you want to say you shoot a 4k camera this is probably the best way to get there.

BTW:   I mentioned this before but we just did a 4 country shoot, dialog and wild, using the R-1, Scarlet and the fs100.  75% was shot on one of the RED's, 25% on the FS100 and through our first edit 65% or more is from the fs100 because it's so moveable and fast.

Does the RED shoot a better file . . . yes by about 10 to 20%, but in color grading they get much closer.  Does the RED look more industrial and kick ass, yes by themselves they do wihtout a cage or an external monitor, but does the RED let you do what the FS100 and FS700 does?   Not yet.

IMO

BC
Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad