Page 27 of 34 FirstFirst ... 17232425262728293031 ... LastLast
Results 261 to 270 of 335
  1. Collapse Details
    Senior Member Grug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    3,693
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by dmitrizigany View Post
    Nitpicking, but I believe itís 7 stops on the FX9.


    That is one of my concerns. When the FS7 was released it was a pretty damn robust codec, itís still ok, but going forward it doesnít feel so future proof.
    One of my main issues with the FS700 is that I have to use it with an external monitor/recorder, which makes it unwieldy. So one of the main reasons for getting an FX9 would be to get away from having to use and external recorder.
    Iím sure the internal codecs of the FX9 will be ok for 90 of my work but I fear I will miss ProRes. If Iím not mistaken, even ProRes LT is almost twice the Bitrate of the internal XAVC of the FS7/FX9 at 4K (while being almost equal in HD).
    If you really need it, external recorders are cheap and powerful these days, and with the 12G-SDI on the camera you'll be able to feed 4k up to 60p out to a Prores recorder (assuming the camera does eventually have that feature enabled).


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Berlin
    Posts
    1,503
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Grug View Post
    If you really need it, external recorders are cheap and powerful these days, and with the 12G-SDI on the camera you'll be able to feed 4k up to 60p out to a Prores recorder (assuming the camera does eventually have that feature enabled).
    Yes, but then I’m back to having to attach a recorder to the camera, which is one of the reasons to upgrade from the FS700 - so I don’t have to do that!
    And on the initial firmware the FX9 only outputs HD via the SDI...
    Sony NEX-FS700R | A7S | Odyssey 7Q+ | Atomos Ninja V
    FE: Sony 24-70/2.8 GM, 70-200/2.8 GM, 28-135/4, 50/1.8, 28-70, SEL: 50/1.8, 35/1.8, 18-105/4
    Samyang 16, 35 & 85mm Cine
    Sachtler Flowtech 75 | Benro S8
    MacBook Pro 2018 6-core i7 2.6 ghz / 32gb ram / 512gb HD | macOS Catalina
    Hackintosh i7-8700K 6-core 3.7 ghz / 32 gb ram / 512gb NVMe / Radeon RX 580 | macOS Mojave


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Worldwide
    Posts
    2,940
    Default
    The difference between the internal codec on the FS7 and ProRes is minimal compared to the difference between ProRes and the internal codec on the FS700.
    New Website: www.liamhall.net
    TWITTER: @FilmLiam
    INSTAGRAM: @picsbyliam


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Berlin
    Posts
    1,503
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Liam Hall View Post
    The difference between the internal codec on the FS7 and ProRes is minimal compared to the difference between ProRes and the internal codec on the FS700.
    Yes, I’m aware of that. And for majority of what I’ll be doing it’ll be fine so maybe and external recorder on the 10% I can live with.
    Just would have been nice with a slightly beefier codec.
    Sony NEX-FS700R | A7S | Odyssey 7Q+ | Atomos Ninja V
    FE: Sony 24-70/2.8 GM, 70-200/2.8 GM, 28-135/4, 50/1.8, 28-70, SEL: 50/1.8, 35/1.8, 18-105/4
    Samyang 16, 35 & 85mm Cine
    Sachtler Flowtech 75 | Benro S8
    MacBook Pro 2018 6-core i7 2.6 ghz / 32gb ram / 512gb HD | macOS Catalina
    Hackintosh i7-8700K 6-core 3.7 ghz / 32 gb ram / 512gb NVMe / Radeon RX 580 | macOS Mojave


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Denver, Colorado
    Posts
    926
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Grug View Post
    It works tremendously well. Because it's not trying to guess at the motion like a warp stabiliser does - it KNOWS what the motion was, so can compensate accordingly.

    24fps @ 180 shutter has a lot of motion blur though. And stabilised footage with motion blur stretching out in directions that (once stabilised) are no longer apparent, can look very strange... That's exactly what it is, stabilisation implemented through gyroscopic measurements recorded as metadata.
    When we debate new features, IBIS, stabilization metadata, AF, electronic ND; the tendency is to upsell the feature by exaggerating the extent of the problem without the feature. As I stand by and read the debate, we start sounding less like the professionals and more like the prosumers. The job of a pro is to shoot like a pro. The most highly regarded content comes from shooting full manual; everything.


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Worldwide
    Posts
    2,940
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Roper View Post
    The job of a pro is to shoot like a pro. The most highly regarded content comes from shooting full manual; everything.
    Good grief.
    New Website: www.liamhall.net
    TWITTER: @FilmLiam
    INSTAGRAM: @picsbyliam


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    707
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by dmitrizigany View Post
    Nitpicking, but I believe it’s 7 stops on the FX9.


    That is one of my concerns. When the FS7 was released it was a pretty damn robust codec, it’s still ok, but going forward it doesn’t feel so future proof.
    If I’m not mistaken, even ProRes LT is almost twice the Bitrate of the internal XAVC of the FS7/FX9 at 4K (while being almost equal in HD).
    In reality in Resolve on a decent platform I've found very little difference in XAVC-I and ProRes UNLESS the XAVC is considerably underexposed. When underexposed I find XAVC will exhibit more noise when pulled up over ProRes. There again I try not to underexpose and if anything in S-LOG3 I over expose. If shooting in Custom mode and exposed correctly IMHO I cannot see any difference that is going to impinge on the quality of the final edit. But then again I try to avoid intense pixel peeping. I only become my own worst enemy as I've never had a client that buries himself in the minutia of pixels. Or a client who can pick the difference even on a $25K Trimaster OLED monitor. If both are exposed correctly push and pull the grades pretty hard on both and I 'm sure you'll find he same. In 4K the difference is file size. I find the quality difference so hard to discern that if I do pixel peep that in 99% if there is any difference I'll happily trade it off not to have all the extra junk of external recorders hanging off the camera to record either ProRes or DnX. The other thing is one cannot always equate or quote bit rate vs bit rate when one codec uses predictive motion estimation vector analysis and pre-coding prior to compression and another codec like ProRes doesn't. For example Sony's 600Mbps I-Frame uses Sony's own proprietary pre-coding Canon's 810Mbps does not and Canon have never to the best of my knowledge ever patented a pre-coding scheme or process for their XF-AVC. In other words 'yer can't just go by the numbers. You have to suck it and see for yourself. Z Systems did quite an interesting comparo between XAVC and ProRes in 4K.

    Until my productions need to exceed the quality, motion handling and detail retention shown in these videos, all shot XAVC I'm quite happy to stay with XAVC.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbNd7edNPa0

    https://pro.sony/en_FI/insight/filmm...se-filming-fs7

    Chris Young

    http://zsyst.com/2015/10/xavc-vs-prores-422hq/

    Sony XAVC precoder.jpg
    Last edited by cyvideo; 10-20-2019 at 10:33 PM. Reason: added url


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

  8. Collapse Details
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    27
    Default
    The electronic, variable ND doesn’t impact the image in any way. It’s amazing. And it’s a fluid scale rather than applied in steps so you can use it while filming.


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

  9. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Worldwide
    Posts
    2,940
    Default
    Decision made:

    I had a play with the Canon today, last week I had a play with the Sony. These cameras are both great and produce great images. I'd happily use either, though the Canon just beats the Sony for me and my needs. YMMV. Canon has offered me a loaner next month and I hope to have my own camera in December. Exciting times:-)
    New Website: www.liamhall.net
    TWITTER: @FilmLiam
    INSTAGRAM: @picsbyliam


    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    Senior Member Grug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    3,693
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Liam Hall View Post
    Decision made:

    I had a play with the Canon today, last week I had a play with the Sony. These cameras are both great and produce great images. I'd happily use either, though the Canon just beats the Sony for me and my needs. YMMV. Canon has offered me a loaner next month and I hope to have my own camera in December. Exciting times:-)
    Nice What is it about the Canon that sealed the deal for you?


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 27 of 34 FirstFirst ... 17232425262728293031 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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