squig
Veteran
It's theoretically possible to hack the raw sensor data, I didn't say it was going to happen.
A7s sample footage
- Thread starter squig
- Start date
Don't confuse the codec with the soft image. The 5d codec has several advantages over XAVC-S listed here:
1. All-i. No compression artifacts that stem from encoding b-frames. No motion artifacts.
2. No proprietary folder structure. .mov files that can be renamed in camera. XAVC-S folder structure is silly and all the files are named the same...
And that's enough. I'd rather have the a7s with the 5d h264 codec (remember, the codec isn't responsible for the soft look of the 5d, that same soft look comes out through the HDMI. The all-i codec is actually almost imperceptable from the HDMI output.). They both use h264 with different settings.
squig
Veteran
Intra-frame codecs like prores & ALL-I handle fast motion better than inter-frame codecs like XAVC-S and IPB. I've noticed some nasty looking macroblocking scrubbing through XAVC-S footage but you don't notice it at 24fps. After testing the A7s with external prores recording vs XAVC-S I ended up sticking with XAVC-S because I didn't notice any real IQ improvement with the PIX 220 prores recordings.
How well the codec behaves is far often more about manufacturer implementation than maximum theoretical performance of inter vs intra frame. I've almost always found that lowly AVCHD from my FS100 or FS700 has far fewer visible compression artefacts than most of the Canon DSLRs I've worked with.
Personally, I think XAVC-S is a welcome improvement on AVCHD. Although... The first time I was horrified by the poor quality of XAVC-S... Until I realised I'd pulled the 720p proxies off the card, not the actual clips!
I'd be more than happy shooting XAVC-S for most corporate jobs and personal work. XAVC-S holds up surprisingly well to punishment, and the extra dynamic range of the A7S is really lovely. For broadcast, I'd probably still record ProRes to an external recorded (but only because of the strict European requirements). But I would with the 5D or GH4 too.
You must have really been filming some crazy motion to get macro blocking! I've not seen any significant macroblocking in anything except the proxies.
Personally, I think XAVC-S is a welcome improvement on AVCHD. Although... The first time I was horrified by the poor quality of XAVC-S... Until I realised I'd pulled the 720p proxies off the card, not the actual clips!
I'd be more than happy shooting XAVC-S for most corporate jobs and personal work. XAVC-S holds up surprisingly well to punishment, and the extra dynamic range of the A7S is really lovely. For broadcast, I'd probably still record ProRes to an external recorded (but only because of the strict European requirements). But I would with the 5D or GH4 too.
You must have really been filming some crazy motion to get macro blocking! I've not seen any significant macroblocking in anything except the proxies.
I have worked with the FS700 and the 5dmarkIII and the 5dmarkIII all-i codec is visibly better. FS700 went to **** with a simple shot of a flame in 60p mode. Completely full of macroblocking.
Matt Gottshalk
Resident Preditor
This is some of the nicest A7s footage I've seen:
dustylense
Veteran
I'm trying to figure out what is going on at 00:38 secs. Those reds look good though.
FrameFarmMedia
Veteran
They have baywatch shirts so I imagine the girl in red is 'Pam Anderson' and stuffed to be as silly looking
zwarte_kat
Active member
One of the reasons I got an A7s (besides it's size) was cleaner slow motion compared to my FS100. I was pretty much fine with 24p on the FS100 already, but 60P was pushing it.
I think the 60p on the A7s looks really nice, and is comparable at least with 24P on the FS100 in terms of sharpness/quality. I'm even using 720p 120, which looked better than I expected!
BTW it was interesting to read that the mud video posted above was shot without any PP, maybe we are obsessing too much about those profiles?
I think the 60p on the A7s looks really nice, and is comparable at least with 24P on the FS100 in terms of sharpness/quality. I'm even using 720p 120, which looked better than I expected!
BTW it was interesting to read that the mud video posted above was shot without any PP, maybe we are obsessing too much about those profiles?
thx for posting!
)
I might add I stopped using superflaat curves etc. with my nikon dslr too, most of my best shots were nearly complete ooc, just a little touch of sharpening and contrasts...
)I might add I stopped using superflaat curves etc. with my nikon dslr too, most of my best shots were nearly complete ooc, just a little touch of sharpening and contrasts...
Terrence Wilkins
Active member
There is a lot of A7S footage mixed with 5d raw in this video for Adidas
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3ibgoAlM1Q&feature=youtu.be
See if you can spot it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3ibgoAlM1Q&feature=youtu.be
See if you can spot it.
Here's mine. 80% 5d raw. All the forest and nightshots in the forest are with the a7s:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbYk2K3p3tk
It's a bit weird though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbYk2K3p3tk
It's a bit weird though.
Hello,
this are 2 test with A7S in lowlight with no PP and SLOG2 with LUT
http://youtu.be/IYxXFV2ixtA
http://youtu.be/7PQgMvyuxTs
Best regards
this are 2 test with A7S in lowlight with no PP and SLOG2 with LUT
http://youtu.be/IYxXFV2ixtA
http://youtu.be/7PQgMvyuxTs
Best regards
Samuel H
Major Contributor
Yesterday night I had my HOLY CRACKERS! moment with the crazy lowlight capabilities of the a7s.
I had to shoot a vikings-themed thing with a few friends after a cosplay event which ended a lot later than announced. When we went out, it was already sunset. We shot in a big park, with available lighting, more than 25m from the nearest streetlight. 30 minutes after sunset, I was shooting ISO 25600 and f/2.8 to f/4.0, and the image looks great (soft for theatrical but perfect for youtube; think 5D3+H264 kind of softness, and not noisy at all; maybe not all the camera's fault: pulling focus by that time was pretty hard). 15 minutes later (that's 45 minutes after sunset) I was already at ISO 51200 and f/1.4, and the footage is almost useless... but there's a recorded image and I will be able to edit the full piece. By that time, we were having a hard time moving around the trees, unable to see if there was something on the floor.
I had to shoot a vikings-themed thing with a few friends after a cosplay event which ended a lot later than announced. When we went out, it was already sunset. We shot in a big park, with available lighting, more than 25m from the nearest streetlight. 30 minutes after sunset, I was shooting ISO 25600 and f/2.8 to f/4.0, and the image looks great (soft for theatrical but perfect for youtube; think 5D3+H264 kind of softness, and not noisy at all; maybe not all the camera's fault: pulling focus by that time was pretty hard). 15 minutes later (that's 45 minutes after sunset) I was already at ISO 51200 and f/1.4, and the footage is almost useless... but there's a recorded image and I will be able to edit the full piece. By that time, we were having a hard time moving around the trees, unable to see if there was something on the floor.
Last edited:
Simon Shasha
Well-known member
What methods are you guys using to recover your highlights?
Samuel H
Major Contributor
* You need to bring your output levels to 16-235 if you shoot cine4 or any of the other "normal" gammas, if you use slog2 there's nothing to recover AFAIK
* Well-lit ISO 51200 is perfecly usable, but in my case it's underexposed low-key with some lights in the background, and it ended up both soft and noisy. With some NR, it's now very soft, but not noisy, and I ended up using it because it's a fun shot. This was a small project so I'm already uploading the final result to youtube, I'll post it here when it goes public, tomorrow. (I'm not particularly proud of the cinematography on this one, it was too much of a hurry, but it's a neat idea and it was a ton of fun)
* Well-lit ISO 51200 is perfecly usable, but in my case it's underexposed low-key with some lights in the background, and it ended up both soft and noisy. With some NR, it's now very soft, but not noisy, and I ended up using it because it's a fun shot. This was a small project so I'm already uploading the final result to youtube, I'll post it here when it goes public, tomorrow. (I'm not particularly proud of the cinematography on this one, it was too much of a hurry, but it's a neat idea and it was a ton of fun)