Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 43
  1. Collapse Details
    The Sony a7 III is a Killer Video Machine
    #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Vietnam
    Posts
    151
    Default
    I've never enjoyed shooting video so much as I have with the Sony a7 III. It's been trouble-free from the get-go - and while it would be a treat if Sony offered a better codec in the a7s III, I like the fact that the 8-bit files take up so little space on my hard drives and they're a cinch to grade. Coming from the GH5, face-detect video AF is like a dream come true since all I shoot is people. The a7 III just allows me to concentrate on shooting. Even the menu, which many say is too complicated - well, there's a function menu with twelve instantly accessible menu items; menu items can also be added to My Menu; and there are a bunch of function buttons that are programmable as well - meaning I seldom need to go into the menu for anything. I can't recommend this camera enough for video shooters!

    https://youtu.be/lcA2OHLBneo


    1 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #2
    Default
    Good colors and skin tone. Cine2? I've been going between SLog2 and Cine4. Don't care much for HLG. Do you mind sharing your camera settings?


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Vietnam
    Posts
    151
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by David Del Real View Post
    Good colors and skin tone. Cine2? I've been going between SLog2 and Cine4. Don't care much for HLG. Do you mind sharing your camera settings?
    Thank you, David. Yes, I used Cine2, along with Paul Leeming’s recommended settings here:
    http://www.leeminglutone.com/downloa...etup_Guide.pdf
    I did not use a LUT on the footage though.


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    158
    Default
    I use Cine2 and apply my lut A7RIII709toSlog3Cin3.cube to convert Rec709 to Slog3Cine3 and next apply slogIII lut. Perfect to match with FS7 (slog3Cine3) with very good looking and without 8bits banding.


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Prague, CZE
    Posts
    240
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by jonpais View Post
    ...all I shoot is people...
    love this )


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #6
    Senior Member Run&Gun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    3,645
    Default
    Some friends use a couple of A7 series cams for gimbal and "extra cam" work with their F55 and F5 and they stopped using any form of s-log with the A7 and started baking in a look, because the image just falls apart when grading from scratch with s-log. I know I've seen lots of nasty examples, like the sky turning pink...


    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    592
    Default
    Still Sony color, which IMHO looks like crap when shooting people I've never been able to hand off Sony footage to a colorist and have it turn out looking decent, I have always had to massage it myself to get skin looking not-dead. These issues don't exist with Canon or Arri footage - they just work right.


    1 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Beverly Hills, CA
    Posts
    2,073
    Default
    I was able to get pretty decent skintones from the A7S II with Slog2 + SGamut3.cine + saturation (in camera settings) which typically only required minor tweaks in post. While it's true that Sony's AWB isn't nearly as good as Canon's, most people here would use manual WB. To really dial in Sony manual WB, it's sometimes necessary to also set WB offset to further correct magenta/green (sometimes red) due to light/environment conditions.

    Slog2 is almost *exactly* the same gamma curve as Canon's CLog- so it's not really pushing 8-bit that hard (see: https://cameramanben.github.io/LUTCalc/ ). SLog 3 is closer to Canon Log 2, which is *much* flatter (both similar to ARRI LogC (can even use ARRI LUTs in PP CC, etc.)), and thus I never used SLog3 after seeing banding in 8-bit. So SLog2 + SGamut3.cine is pretty much the same as Canon CLog in 8-bit in terms of gradability/usability in post where the Sony's have more actual usable DR (better sensors).

    From reviewing A7 III footage online, it's clear that Sony improved color over the A7S II. Jon's example is just as good as anything from Canon (even the new kid on the block, the Fuji X-T3):


    Agreed when using standard settings, AWB, and not bothering to tweak anything in-camera, Canon, Fuji, Nikon, even Panasonic can look better than Sony. Certainly puzzling why Sony doesn't make the standard/default-shipped settings look as good as possible. Perhaps the A7S III will have VENICE color as the default. Here Max makes the A7 III look terrible and doesn't set the cameras for equivalent DOF and exposure:


    Max apparently doesn't have the time/desire to really make each camera look the best, perhaps just uses default settings, which is fair, and lets the chips fall where they may. The reason ARRI looks so good so often is why Canon looks so good so often: default settings are working better (most people don't want to tweak settings, and that's understandable). However even Canon's default settings aren't great (too much red/yellow, crushed blacks/too-much-contrast/limited-DR). I was able to get Canon DSLRs looking a lot closer to ARRI in-camera with a highly modified picture style (using the desktop editor):


    Canon will not produce that quality with built-in settings (must use the Picture Style editor desktop app). For Jon to get great color out of the A7 III with minor settings adjustments shows the A7 III can indeed do excellent skin tones with a little extra effort (vs. default settings).


    1 out of 3 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    380
    Default
    I conducted a A7III test a few months ago and me and a fellow photographer (which is a die hard Canon colour fan) concluded there's nothing wrong with colours. The thing we discovered was that it looked as good as any camera with the right settings and we made one profile as a starting point.

    The thing with the A7IIIA/7RIII is that due to the codec one can't use the wider colour gamut as it will introduce colour artefacts that can turn skin tones into messy and odd colour shifts. Used with the more narrow gamuts it's fine. So when people uses Slog3 and with the wide sgamut things starts to fall apart.

    But when used without Slog3/sgamut it's easy to get just as good colours and look as any Canon camera.


    1 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    #10
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by rudo_fr View Post
    I use Cine2 and apply my lut A7RIII709toSlog3Cin3.cube to convert Rec709 to Slog3Cine3 and next apply slogIII lut. Perfect to match with FS7 (slog3Cine3) with very good looking and without 8bits banding.
    Interesting. Is your A7RIII709toSlog3Cin3.cube lut available?


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •