Page 7 of 29 FirstFirst ... 3456789101117 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 287
  1. Collapse Details
    #61
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    6,830
    Cool
    Quote Originally Posted by cyvideo View Post
    DLD I think the reason is because as an encoded file the XAVC specification has a maximum resolution of 4096 x 2160.
    Until the XAVC spec gets updated and 6K recording becomes standard. ( Now I'm curious as to what Panasonic is using to record 5.9K IPB footage in the S1H ? )


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #62
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Vik Kamenicky View Post
    I'm still wondering why there isn't a 12 bit XAVC 4:4:4. The codec can handle it. Attachment 136890
    Same. Something 12 bit would have really opened this camera up. Still 10 bit 422 means no upgrade in that department.

    Quote Originally Posted by DLD View Post
    The rest depends on how well their processing works with the all the XAVC flavors. It's quite possible that the docs, reality, corporate, interviews will be done at 480 rather than 600 anyway.
    The above bitrates only happen in S+Q. 600 is only for 60fps. 24 is 240 mbps in XAVC-I.
    Even if they had given us the XAVC 480 that the F55 and Venice can do that would have been some kind of step up in codec that would have been an upgrade. No upgrade in codec is the only thing holding this camera back.


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #63
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    16
    Default
    Nobody here thinks that shooting full-frame will be a useful marketing ploy, especially to corporate clients for whom overkill is never enough?

    One of the things I like about the C500mk2 is the smaller form factor - much easier to mount on a gimbal, no?

    And, all else being equal, isn't it a competitive advantage to have a camera that anyone can see is more expensive? I had a conversation with an agency a few years back who told me that they were interested in FS7s and C300mk2s but that they took the C300mk2 more seriously. That thinking changed as their demand for 4k60p increased, but now Canon finally has a camera that offers slow motion in its max resolution. And it bests the FS7 on resolution.

    Re:color, I think that Cinetone looks really nice from what I've seen. Possibly cooler/moodier than the Canon? I don't think color science will hold either camera back.
    Last edited by ahalpert; 09-16-2019 at 08:02 PM.


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #64
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    6,148
    Default
    This question about cameras and clients is raised all around the forum in different sections and the answer is the same; the decision is always in the hands of the people paying you.

    Some won't know or won't care, others may only consider ARRI or RED, and/or some will only look for a specific camera (even an old one).

    It's not the same world it was in 2014-2015-2016 (with the FS7) and there are no guarantees.

    [And color science will definitely not make or break a camera.]


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #65
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    16
    Default
    Yeah, I think that if your clients don't care what camera you shoot on, it makes less sense to upgrade to the FX9. Although if you could make use of the AF and low-light performance, it could probably improve your footage. The upgrade from C300mk2 to C500mk2 seems like a clear win for slow-motion alone.


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #66
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    6,148
    Default
    Most people dropped the C300 Mark II 2-3 years ago and are rocking the C200...and that upgrade is more difficult.


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #67
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    16
    Default
    Why do you say more difficult? Less of a reason to upgrade because the C200 already has 4k 60p? Or you mean it's a big price difference? I thought the codecs were holding back the C200. I still see C300mk2s in NYC all the time and get requests to use them but I have never seen someone using or had requested a C200 on an FS7/C300mk2 type shoot.


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #68
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    6,148
    Default
    There are tons of C200s out there...it's of course a big world with lots of video production.

    It's more difficult because you'd be paying a lot of money for mostly everything else but an improvement in image quality (which most people wouldn't see anyway).


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

  9. Collapse Details
    #69
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    659
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by TheDingo View Post
    Until the XAVC spec gets updated and 6K recording becomes standard. ( Now I'm curious as to what Panasonic is using to record 5.9K IPB footage in the S1H ? )
    Well this is where the whole codec things gets bit interesting. Too many of us get swayed by the 'big numbers.' The bigger the bit rate the better it's got to be hasn't it? The answer is a categorically no when you look at the math.

    I haven't researched the figures for 4K as the bulk of my work is still HD but if you take Apple's HD ProRes specs from their white paper as a benchmark of sorts where ProRes 422 has a frame data load of 2.34MB and ProRes 422HQ has a frame data load of 3.5MB. It's then interesting to look at Panasonic's 400Mbps 422 10-bit all Intra. At 25p 400Mbps 422 10-bit all Intra has a frame data load of 1.9MB per frame. This is well short of what Apple deems necessary.

    All Intra 400 Mbps would fall short of Apple's recommended bit-rate for 422 10 bit colour. In effect what Apple is saying is that you are missing 0.44 MB from your ProRes 422 frame and 1.6 MB from ProRes 422 HQ and you have 0.3 MB more than ProRes LT.

    If you are interested in getting the best out of the Panasonic's in 10 bit colour then you should look at the HD All Intra 200 Mbps codec as it has enough quality and headroom to allow manipulation. It is in fact the only codec that has a bit-rate higher than ProRes HQ in 24 and 25 fps.

    Chris Young

    You can do your own calculations here:

    https://blog.frame.io/2017/03/06/cal...formulasTarget
    Last edited by cyvideo; 09-17-2019 at 02:03 AM.


    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    #70
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Worldwide
    Posts
    2,900
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by JPNola View Post
    per Sony website...
    Fs7 power consumption- Approx. 35.2 W (while recording XAVC-I QFHD 59.94p, SELP28135G Lens, Viewfinder ON, not using external device)

    Fx9 power consumption- Approx. 35.2 W (while recording XAVC-I QFHD 59.94p, SELP28135G Lens, Viewfinder ON, not using external device)
    The FS7 draws 15w. It draws 30w if hooked up to the XDCA.
    New Website: www.liamhall.net
    TWITTER: @FilmLiam
    INSTAGRAM: @picsbyliam


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 7 of 29 FirstFirst ... 3456789101117 ... 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
  •