RIP Sony a7s III

[markfpv]

Lenny - "rating" the camera to 6400 is different than actually physically setting the ISO to 6400 - which I completely concur, do not do that! In my mind, it's no different, than when shooting in CineEI mode on the FS7, I would rate the camera at 800 or 1000, even though it's native was listed by Sony as 2000.
And yes - the gamma assist will look a bit overexposed... but I prefer to monitor without a LUT for the majority of my shoots. The exposure compensated LUT - on an external monitor, is for client only.

 

[markfpv]

Tom - the a7sIII will apply gain with each ISO setting on the dial... and Lenny is correct, it would be silly to shoot (particularly in Slog - but more than likely on any other Profile as well) at an ISO just beneath the higher 12800 native ISO - which is beautifully clean.
For the mirrorless line (or at least for sure for the a7sIII and older models), Sony only has profiles for you to choose from. So, they can be similar to "Custom" on the F55 / F5 / FS7, etc.... but technically they aren't the same / identical.

Also - something I still find interesting, is that with the A7sIII and then FX6 / FX9, Sony (sort of quietly in my mind), suddenly allowed you to WB to a white card while shooting CineEi (or Slog3 on the a7sIII) to any value - though I believe early on with F55 they said this was a limitation of shooting Slog (but I could be wrong about that).

 

[ahalpert]

Goodness! No one on earth said it did! One school of thought goes that today's sensors aren't that noisy anyhow and that there is no disadvantage to amplifying the signal as long as it doesn't impact dynamic range negatively. Whichever camp one belongs to, there's no denying that having options is a good thing and that having Cine EI integrates the FX3 better into Sony's cinema lineup. Only a bad actor would argue otherwise. As for Brawley, isn't he the one who denies that there's any product placement whatsoever on The Morning Show when throughout 74 ‌Apple TV+‌ episodes studied by the WSJ, 300 iPhones, 120 MacBooks, and 40 pairs of AirPods were shown during certain scenes, equating to over 700 Apple product placements? And that he doesn't like RED's ethics but gladly serves as a brand ambassador for one of the most corrupt corporations in Japan? A company involved in one of the biggest and longest-lived financial scandals in the history of corporate Japan; a workplace where corporate corruption is so ingrained that just five years ago it was ordered to pay a fine in connection with a scandal in the USA in which nearly $600 million was disbursed in the form of kickbacks, including grants, bribes, gifts, and other forms of payoffs - the largest kickback lawsuit for a medical device company in U.S. history?

What a massive ad hominem tangent that does nothing to address the debate in question

 

[ahalpert]

I might be off with some of my Cine-EI assumptions but I still think the A7SIII has enough use cases over the FX3. It's a great light-weight camera for traveling, vlogging that delivers great video footage. It's a video centered hybrid camera where the FX3 clearly is meant as a video only tool. I would say they are different tools.

I have 1 of each and use them interchangeably. I've had the FX3 overheat in the same (very rare and high-stress, usually only with prolonged wifi smartphone monitoring) circumstances as the a7siii, so I'm not sure it has a true advantage there. I haven't used the top handle or XLR input, they're still in the box. I like the tally lights but miss the EVF. I think the new firmware update is cool and has its uses but, as jonpais says, mostly for slotting in with your workflow on other FX cameras. If you're not doing that, I don't think it's going to make much difference at all. I don't use the EVF much but it definitely comes in handy at times

 

[jonpais]

^ Um, yeah.
I've been a working "videographer" for over 30 years now and have been shooting with the Sony FS7 using CineEI since it came out. My point, and to risk stating the obvious... while no where on my a7sIII camera does it say CineEI... it doesn't really have to in order to get the best dynamic range out of the camera.

”I'm confused how the CineEI on the FX3 is different or better than shooting in Slog3cine on the A7sIII at either base ISO and rating the camera to expose one stop over?” - markfpv

Cine EI is decidedly not the same as shooting at base ISO and overexposing by one stop. To begin with, one has to ask why you are shooting at base ISO and overexposing in the first place. If it is in order to get the optimal image out of the sensor, that is what Cine EI is all about. However, what you’re suggesting doesn’t sound like ETTR, because most advocates of ETTR who shoot with Sony that I’m aware of recommend +1.66 stops or more, depending on the camera. But that’s neither here nor there.

Applying gain reduces the dynamic range of the camera. At higher ISOs, say ISO 3200 on certain cameras, this drop in dynamic range can be dramatic - as much as two stops compared to the base or native ISO. Negative gain, or going lower than the native ISO can also hurt dynamic range as picture information near black may be shifted down below black when you subtract gain or lower the ISO. This is a very simple concept understood by most professional DPs. Sony expert Alister Chapman also explains this in his encyclopedic articles on Cine EI which I recommend reading. Cine EI maximizes the dynamic range of the camera. With RED cameras, which work broadly similarly (ISO is just metadata), you can simultaneously ETTR. I hope that clears it up for you.

“while no where on my a7sIII camera does it say CineEI... it doesn't really have to in order to get the best dynamic range out of the camera.”

As you move further away from either of the two base ISOs in custom mode, dynamic range most assuredly suffers. With the a7s III, it is not possible to shift the ISO to allocate more dynamic range above or below middle gray to protect the highlights or shadows. Unfortunately, the a7s III will not be getting Cine EI, as it is not part of Sony’s cinema line.

 

[ahalpert]

Recording in cine EI always records at base iso (high or low). You could record at base ISO on the a7siii and get the same results. All that differs is your monitoring and post workflow.

BTW your God Alistair Chapman mentions that he only overexposes high base FX6 by 1 stop, rating it at 6400.

When using the high base ISO or 12,800 ISO there is a bit more noise and when using high base I will typically set the EI to 6400 EI as the 1 stop brighter recordings that this will result in helps compensate for the increased recording noise.

https://www.xdcam-user.com/2020/12/a...ei-mode/?amp=1

If you're recording a baked-in look (as per client request), the discussion is neither here nor there. Also, does anyone know when the camera introduces gain? Is it after A/D conversion or before?

Personally, I'm rather fond of using false color instead of an overexposure LUT. Once you have experience with the camera, you know just what you're getting from every part of the image and how you're balancing DR.

In the above-linked article, Chapman mentions that using a consistent overexposure is primarily useful as a means of speeding up post production because the footage can be treated similarly. I would agree that different scenes/shots would benefit from different exposures

 

[jonpais]

Recording in cine EI always records at base iso (high or low). You could record at base ISO on the a7siii and get the same results. All that differs is your monitoring and post workflow.

In custom mode, you cannot redistribute the dynamic range above middle gray to protect highlights or below middle gray to prioritize shadows and reduce noise.

 

[ahalpert]

You don't redistribute anything if you maintain base ISO. The image it records is the image it records. You just grade it differently

 

[jonpais]

You don't redistribute anything if you maintain base ISO. The image it records is the image it records. You just grade it differently

Someone here referred to being 'locked in' to Cine EI, but nothing could be further from the truth. Custom is the less flexible mode. The dynamic range above and below middle gray is unalterable, offering fewer creative choices. With the Komodo, which works similarly to Cine EI, when shooting indoors, I can rate the camera at ISO 250, expanding dynamic range in the shadows and getting a cleaner image. Shooting at ISO 800 under those circumstances, the image will be noisier and have less dynamic range in the shadows, with correspondingly less flexibility in post. Nothing prevents me from also exposing to the right while using this method. Likewise, with ISO set to 800 on the FX3 in Cine EI mode, selecting 400 allocates a full extra stop of dynamic range to the shadows, while at 200, that figure increases by a whopping two extra stops, along with the tangible benefits of less noise. Nothing anyone does in post can magically increase dynamic range that isn't there in the first place. Being able to determine precisely where you want the most dynamic range is a powerful option to have in your tool kit.

 

[LennyLevy]

Markfpv - We're in agreement . Just a question of nomenclature. By "rating" the camera I assumed you meant changing the ISO which is apparently not what you meant . So setting ISO at 12,800 and overexposing 1 stop is the same as setting ISO at 12,800 but rating it a 6400. Just how how you think about things.

Tom - With the FX9 and the A7siii/FX3 Sony finally allowed us to set auto white balance off a white card while in Slog . I've always wondered whether the previous cameras really couldn't do that or Sony was just trying to "stupidly" emulate film. In the FX3 Sony unfortunately eliminated the choice of a continuous AWB in Cine EI . I actually used that a lot on an industrial project shooting lots of machinery shots and had to move very fast but light was always different. Shot everything in Underwater White Balance. No can do with FX3 in Cine EI mode.

jonpais, To be honest I'm not sure what you're disagreeing about. Recording in Cine EI or ordinary Slog ( what you're calling Custom though that word is no longer being used) if you record at a base ISO you get the full dynamic range available in Slog . Changing the EI or overexposing doesn't change the fact that you are always effectively recording full Slog range at base ISO. In either mode - overexposing the A7siii at base ISO or using Cine EI and dropping the EI by one stop you will overexpose the Slog so that it needs to be "printed down" in post . You will lose some dynamic range at the top in favor of better noise and solid blacks at the bottom. This is much more important at the high base and more an issue on the A7 than the FX9 . It was also more of an issue on the FS7 and F55 which were noisier. Two different ways to do exactly the same thing and yes it is ETTR . As to how much you should overexpose - that depends on the shot . In most cases you don't need to worry about whites 3 stops over so you can overexpose by a lot 1.66 or even 2 stops. If you're outdoors with a lot of brights in the shot and not many blacks to worry about you might even record at base. Choose your poison and your dose.

The only difference Cine EI makes to this process is that the camera will adjust to your overexposure and send a LUT corrected image to your EVF and monitor if you wish or even embed the LUT into your recording. Also a LUT corrected waveform or histogram if you wish. An exposure corrected LUT at your monitor will produce the same result.

This whole discussion is making me lean towards sending the FX3 back BTW .

Lenny

 

[markfpv]

”I'm confused how the CineEI on the FX3 is different or better than shooting in Slog3cine on the A7sIII at either base ISO and rating the camera to expose one stop over?” - markfpv

Cine EI is decidedly not the same as shooting at base ISO and overexposing by one stop. To begin with, one has to ask why you are shooting at base ISO and overexposing in the first place. If it is in order to get the optimal image out of the sensor, that is what Cine EI is all about. However, what you’re suggesting doesn’t sound like ETTR, because most advocates of ETTR who shoot with Sony that I’m aware of recommend +1.66 stops or more, depending on the camera. But that’s neither here nor there.

Applying gain reduces the dynamic range of the camera. At higher ISOs, say ISO 3200 on certain cameras, this drop in dynamic range can be dramatic - as much as two stops compared to the base or native ISO. Negative gain, or going lower than the native ISO can also hurt dynamic range as picture information near black may be shifted down below black when you subtract gain or lower the ISO. This is a very simple concept understood by most professional DPs. Sony expert Alister Chapman also explains this in his encyclopedic articles on Cine EI which I recommend reading. Cine EI maximizes the dynamic range of the camera. With RED cameras, which work broadly similarly (ISO is just metadata), you can simultaneously ETTR. I hope that clears it up for you.

“while no where on my a7sIII camera does it say CineEI... it doesn't really have to in order to get the best dynamic range out of the camera.”

As you move further away from either of the two base ISOs in custom mode, dynamic range most assuredly suffers. With the a7s III, it is not possible to shift the ISO to allocate more dynamic range above or below middle gray to protect the highlights or shadows. Unfortunately, the a7s III will not be getting Cine EI, as it is not part of Sony’s cinema line.

I'm not gonna reply to any of this nonsense ... as you don't seem to understand anything about the A7sIII and what I've been saying... so I'll just requote how Ahalpert responded... which is exactly right...
Recording in cine EI always records at base iso (high or low). You could record at base ISO on the a7siii and get the same results.

 

[markfpv]

Markfpv - We're in agreement . Just a question of nomenclature. By "rating" the camera I assumed you meant changing the ISO which is apparently not what you meant . So setting ISO at 12,800 and overexposing 1 stop is the same as setting ISO at 12,800 but rating it a 6400. Just how how you think about things.

This whole discussion is making me lean towards sending the FX3 back BTW .

Lenny

Yes, Lenny, glad to know we are totally in agreement and appreciate others with knowledge joining in.
But this thread is starting to feel like click-bait and it's creator doesn't seem to want to understand or learn.

 

[jonpais]

jonpais, To be honest I'm not sure what you're disagreeing about. Recording in Cine EI or ordinary Slog ( what you're calling Custom though that word is no longer being used) if you record at a base ISO you get the full dynamic range available in Slog . Changing the EI or overexposing doesn't change the fact that you are always effectively recording full Slog range at base ISO. In either mode - overexposing the A7siii at base ISO or using Cine EI and dropping the EI by one stop you will overexpose the Slog so that it needs to be "printed down" in post . You will lose some dynamic range at the top in favor of better noise and solid blacks at the bottom. This is much more important at the high base and more an issue on the A7 than the FX9 . It was also more of an issue on the FS7 and F55 which were noisier. Two different ways to do exactly the same thing and yes it is ETTR . As to how much you should overexpose - that depends on the shot . In most cases you don't need to worry about whites 3 stops over so you can overexpose by a lot 1.66 or even 2 stops. If you're outdoors with a lot of brights in the shot and not many blacks to worry about you might even record at base. Choose your poison and your dose.


Lenny

Of course you get the maximum dynamic range of the camera when shooting at base ISO - but you have absolutely zero control over how those stops of dynamic range are distributed. Cine EI gives you greater creative freedom by allowing the photographer to decide where he wants that dynamic range. In the image below, shooting at EI 800 and selecting 200 increases dynamic range in the shadows by a full 2 stops according to Sony's generic charts. I can even expose to the right if I like. Shooting in flexible ISO or whatever it's called, you'll always have two stops less dynamic range in the shadows in this scenario. Wouldn't it be great if you could borrow some of those stops from the highlights? As it turns out, Flexible Exposure Mode is actually the least flexible mode!

 

[LennyLevy]

Sorry Jon , I have to agree with Markfpv. I think you don't quite get the concept . Overexposing at base ISO in "Custom" is exactly the same as using a lower EI in Cine EI - EXACTLY THE SAME. pointless to argue over it though.

 

[jonpais]

Sorry Jon , I have to agree with Markfpv. I think you don't quite get the concept . Overexposing at base ISO in "Custom" is exactly the same as using a lower EI in Cine EI - EXACTLY THE SAME. pointless to argue over it though.

I’m frankly not interested in opinions, just facts. RED, Kinefinity, Sony and other cinema camera manufacturers provide charts that detail precisely how dynamic range is distributed above and below middle gray when using EI or similar schemes; monitoring LUTs that allow you to evaluate the effect on the image in real timr; and whichever EI you choose is passed along in the form of metadata for post-production, eliminating all guesswork. Kinefinity also offers a clever system that works with ISO. Would you be so kind as to share your findings regarding how shooting at base ISO and overexposing distributes DR in the highlights and shadows without impacting middle gray; how that information is passed along to speed up post-production; as well as documentation concerning precisely how many stops are allocated to the shadows and highlights? If you’re talking about ETTR, your midtones will be all over the place, creating a headache in post. Anyone can see that there’s a world of difference between Cine EI and ‘base +1 stop’ - whatever on earth that is supposed to mean. Everyone here pretends that Cine EI can just be boiled down to overexposing at base ISO, when nothing could be further from the truth. Correct exposure always involves giving the sensor as much light as necessary while avoiding clipping and maintaining acceptable noise levels. Beyond that, you’ve got to decide which method allows you to achieve those goals consistently, while providing room for creative decisions and the greatest flexibility in post. Quite honestly, base +1 stop as a strategy sounds like a recipe for disaster.

 

[ahalpert]

Jonpais, take a scene in custom mode slog3 at base ISO and overexpose 1 stop. Then use cine EI, rate the camera 1 stop lower than base ISO, and expose properly. Compare the 2 sets of footage without a LUT and tell us what you see.

Cine EI -> Standardize exposure method and simplify/speed up post workflow = yes. Magically alter what the camera is capable of recording = no.

 

[jonpais]

Jonpais, take a scene in custom mode slog3 at base ISO and overexpose 1 stop. Then use cine EI, rate the camera 1 stop lower than base ISO, and expose properly. Compare the 2 sets of footage without a LUT and tell us what you see.

Cine EI -> Standardize exposure method and simplify/speed up post workflow = yes. Magically alter what the camera is capable of recording = no.

As I'm sure you're well aware, that doesn't answer the question. What is it with everyone here just talking about base ISO + 1 stop anyhow? That's no exposure strategy! LOL

 

[ahalpert]

How does that exposure strategy differ from rating high base at 6400. Doing that merely causes you to overexpose by 1 stop

 

[LennyLevy]

Jon, I don't wish to continue this any longer . The only thing I'll say is that like Mark I have been shooting for over 30 years , starting in film and have been shooting Slog since it first appeared. I don't know what magic you seem to think is going on with Cine EI but believe there isn't any. I suggest you look at Alister Chapman's great articles . Overexposing and printing down is what we did with Film Negative and what we do with Log . Same principles. Yes that changes reduces dynamic range in the brights and increases them in the shadows and of course it changes your mid point - but you can shoot any way you choose.

 

[jonpais]

Jon, I don't wish to continue this any longer . The only thing I'll say is that like Mark I have been shooting for over 30 years , starting in film and have been shooting Slog since it first appeared. I don't know what magic you seem to think is going on with Cine EI but believe there isn't any. I suggest you look at Alister Chapman's great articles . Overexposing and printing down is what we did with Film Negative and what we do with Log . Same principles. Yes that changes reduces dynamic range in the brights and increases them in the shadows and of course it changes your mid point - but you can shoot any way you choose.

No need to recommend what I should be doing. Alister Chapman himself has said that he simply cannot understand why anyone would not be shooting Cine EI with a Sony camera. If you really shot film then you’d know that we did not always overexpose - we also intentionally pushed film as do DPs like Darius Khondji, to bring out the natural grain and add texture. Or Jamie Cairney, talking about the Sony Venice: “Its digital negative is similar to film in its response and rarely falls apart when pushed or pulled.” Or this: “We shot all those scenes at 2500 ISO and for the night green screen with just practical lighting inside the bus I underexposed a couple of stops and the image was absolutely fine. It’s a really interesting camera for low light in terms of underexposure and our London-based VFX company Dupe said it was some of the easiest stuff they’ve had to deal with."

Anyhow, I believe you’ve got it backwards: Cine EI is more like shooting film, not Flexible Exposure Mode.

”The CineEI mode in some regards emulates how you would shoot with a film camera. You have a single film stock with a fixed sensitivity (the base ISO). Then you have the option to expose that stock brighter (using a lower EI) for less grain, more shadow detail, less highlight range or expose darker (using a higher EI) more grain, less shadow detail, more highlight range. Just as you would do with a film camera.” - Alister Chapman