A7s sample footage
- Thread starter squig
- Start date
cyork
Well-known member
Quite the download but Philip Blooms's 4k footage was nice to see. Just rubs it in that Sony decided to re-use the same body that can't take the heat but it looks good for what it's worth. Seems like an early test before this tech goes into better bodies for more money, of course 
ReelWorksMedia
Well-known member
Quite the download but Philip Blooms's 4k footage was nice to see. Just rubs it in that Sony decided to re-use the same body that can't take the heat but it looks good for what it's worth. Seems like an early test before this tech goes into better bodies for more money, of course
Yea, I was thinking the same thing. Wait 8-12 months when this sensor is released in another body with some of the oddities worked out. Until then the C100/Ninja2 is working nicely.
ReelWorksMedia
Well-known member
Totally agree. If they got a handle of the RS, made the base ISO of Slog a bit better, didn't have that silly 16-235 issue, did not have aliasing & moire in 60P and lower resolutions, and were able to internally do 4K...and externally do 4K raw...I would be all over that. Especially if they kept the body in the $5K - $10K range. Being a FF sensor, it would be a great option to have. I imagine that camera is only about a year away. The tech is already developed. We just have to wait a bit for the production line to be turned out. Almost worth saving the investment of the A7s/Shogun and put that into a future camera with better specs.
If they are anything like Canon, the next cam with be out in a month
Last edited:
My guess is that it's less than a year away and more than $5K. I don't think it'd be cheaper than the FS700, though I wish it would be.
My not-so-terrible problem is do I keep my A7s, run it through it's paces and live with it's limitations? Or return it...?
I have no other camera at the moment, so I'd be cameraless.
My not-so-terrible problem is do I keep my A7s, run it through it's paces and live with it's limitations? Or return it...?
I have no other camera at the moment, so I'd be cameraless.
ReelWorksMedia
Well-known member
Would be totally happy with that. I'd definitely rather spend more and get a camera thats really capable in many situations.
So, if that happens (it gets put into the next FS series) there's no reason in the world the price would stay low. It would be at least as high as the fs100 was at introduction, if not higher than the fs700. Totally different markets.
I think people are missing the point of this camera - it's tiny, and they are looking to convert full frame shooters of other brands, and get people who are currently shooting 5D (stills and video) to switch, and to function as a specialty camera (low light) and as a B camera for video shooters who already have a higher level body. All of these other things are possibilities, but probably don't make much marketing sense - the low budget video shooter is a crappy market, frankly, but for the camera to succeed in that market, it only has to hit a couple of points:
1) is the camera better overall in terms of IQ and abilities, ease of shooting than a 5D mk II or III, or a 60d/70d/7d? I think the consensus is yes all around, handily except perhaps for a few aspects of the 5dIII (rolling shutter, and maybe raw abilities, which are a pita). So that's an upgrade market. I'm that market; I shoot about $100k on average of paid work per year, usually pretty fast paced shooting where I have to cover a lot of ground and do a lot of interviews in uncontrolled conditions. I look to spend about $5k to $8k a year on gear. This easily fits into that; I can probably sell my 5D for $2500, so it's essentially a free upgrade to somewhat better image quality and lighter weight, with a 4k path in the future, and a versatile lens mount (albeit a terrible selection of native lenses).
2) is this camera better than off brand competitors (Nikon, etc): yes, without any caveats. So that's an upgrade market.
3) is this camera as good or better than an fs100: I think so? I don't own one.
4) is it as good as a c100? It looks like it; so now it's hitting at the weight class of cameras twice it's price and a multiple of it's weight.
5) as good as the fs700 image wise? It looks like yes, with the caveat of not having the S and Q extended functions, and that the FS700, when shooting RAW to an external recorder, approaches F5 image quality. Triple the price as the a7s, and the A7s has a few tricks that the FS doesn't have - extreme low light, full frame (albeit the FS easily takes a speedbooster) and light weight.
6) c300 quality? Maybe.
7) Could intercut with some heavier hitters like f5? Probably.
I think it can stop there, because quite frankly, the A7s has to only be "good enough" for it's price to be a worthwhile tool, and I think any one of these things, at it's price point, justifies this. All of these complaints, and flipping back and forth, are just silly. It's a remarkable achievement in camera tech for a fairly extraordinary price, and in the right hands will produce great work. I'm still going to upgrade, and in 18 months or so will upgrade again, and so it will go for the rest of a shooting career, unless I get good enough/in demand enough that I own zero cameras. One other point; if you were a billionaire and did not need to use your camera for any work at all, and price was no object, but you simply wanted something that was convenient to use for your personal use, and produced a great image quality, what would you buy? I suspect this camera might be on that list. I've noticed quite a few of my clients that are very very wealthy and could spend 100k on a camera if they wanted to without blinking, tend to own NEX cameras. Because they are a great small package that they can get an excellent picture out of without being a burden to carry around. This is that.
3)
I think people are missing the point of this camera - it's tiny, and they are looking to convert full frame shooters of other brands, and get people who are currently shooting 5D (stills and video) to switch, and to function as a specialty camera (low light) and as a B camera for video shooters who already have a higher level body. All of these other things are possibilities, but probably don't make much marketing sense - the low budget video shooter is a crappy market, frankly, but for the camera to succeed in that market, it only has to hit a couple of points:
1) is the camera better overall in terms of IQ and abilities, ease of shooting than a 5D mk II or III, or a 60d/70d/7d? I think the consensus is yes all around, handily except perhaps for a few aspects of the 5dIII (rolling shutter, and maybe raw abilities, which are a pita). So that's an upgrade market. I'm that market; I shoot about $100k on average of paid work per year, usually pretty fast paced shooting where I have to cover a lot of ground and do a lot of interviews in uncontrolled conditions. I look to spend about $5k to $8k a year on gear. This easily fits into that; I can probably sell my 5D for $2500, so it's essentially a free upgrade to somewhat better image quality and lighter weight, with a 4k path in the future, and a versatile lens mount (albeit a terrible selection of native lenses).
2) is this camera better than off brand competitors (Nikon, etc): yes, without any caveats. So that's an upgrade market.
3) is this camera as good or better than an fs100: I think so? I don't own one.
4) is it as good as a c100? It looks like it; so now it's hitting at the weight class of cameras twice it's price and a multiple of it's weight.
5) as good as the fs700 image wise? It looks like yes, with the caveat of not having the S and Q extended functions, and that the FS700, when shooting RAW to an external recorder, approaches F5 image quality. Triple the price as the a7s, and the A7s has a few tricks that the FS doesn't have - extreme low light, full frame (albeit the FS easily takes a speedbooster) and light weight.
6) c300 quality? Maybe.
7) Could intercut with some heavier hitters like f5? Probably.
I think it can stop there, because quite frankly, the A7s has to only be "good enough" for it's price to be a worthwhile tool, and I think any one of these things, at it's price point, justifies this. All of these complaints, and flipping back and forth, are just silly. It's a remarkable achievement in camera tech for a fairly extraordinary price, and in the right hands will produce great work. I'm still going to upgrade, and in 18 months or so will upgrade again, and so it will go for the rest of a shooting career, unless I get good enough/in demand enough that I own zero cameras. One other point; if you were a billionaire and did not need to use your camera for any work at all, and price was no object, but you simply wanted something that was convenient to use for your personal use, and produced a great image quality, what would you buy? I suspect this camera might be on that list. I've noticed quite a few of my clients that are very very wealthy and could spend 100k on a camera if they wanted to without blinking, tend to own NEX cameras. Because they are a great small package that they can get an excellent picture out of without being a burden to carry around. This is that.
3)
ReelWorksMedia
Well-known member
Yep, all very valid points.
I forgot also appealing to the blackmagic crowd. I borrowed a blackmagic from a friend and shot with it for a week. What a mess. It's really hard to use. The picture can be great but it felt like rolling the dice sometimes as it wasn't always very good. The list of BM issues is well documented, and BM deserves credit for another stunning achievement/price point in camera tech, but I don't want to spend my work life using one. These cams should be refreshing for anybody coming from blackmagic.
I still love my 5D, I never have to look at anything on the controls, it's all laid out very well and simply reliably produces a good picture every single time. But at some point you have to keep up with the times.
I still love my 5D, I never have to look at anything on the controls, it's all laid out very well and simply reliably produces a good picture every single time. But at some point you have to keep up with the times.
paulcurtis
Veteran
Mid grey should be higher, it's only a recommendation
No, i don't think any black level controls would affect the black point, wish they would. Log curves are generally higher because they can allow for negative noise values in the original signal and rather than cut them the elevated black allows them through. But that's only really important if you're 10bit+. Also most codecs tend to kill the shadows as a form of compression, these high blacks actually retain more shadow detail through a compression cycle.
Sony were quoted as saying they created the curve to fit the F35 camera, not film. Cineon was designed for film as you say.
The problem with Slog2 for us (both 700 and A7S) is that the shadow detail is compromised compared to F5,F55 and the cameras designed for Slog2 in the first place, so if you do expose mid grey at 32% then you are putting skin tones quite low in that 256 level container. Mid grey would be around 90ish, take away the black level and you're dealing with 60/70 values from skin to black. Personally i tend to expose up a stop and then pull down a stop in post. This creates more shadow detail, reduces noise and robs you of one of the stops of highlight. So it depends what you're doing.
cheers
Paul
photochris
Well-known member
+1
IMO that's exactly what the A7s is shooting for - DSLR shooters looking for FF video without aliasing and moire, that's also sharp and has more DR than the GH3/4. Its a pretty damn good stills camera as well.
I've been a 5d2/3 stills/video shooter for 5 years now - I've dabbled in other cameras including the FS100, A99, and various Nex's but nothing could get me to part with the 5d until the A7/A7s. I decided to unload a plethora of L lenses and a number of other great lenses after seeing the two samples Den Lennie posted when it was announced, the image just blew me away. Although I didn't think my lens lineup through enough - I forgot about the Metabones adapter - and now I kind of wish I hadn't sold the Sigma 35 & 85 f1.4's and the 70-200/2.8 mkII as they were my favorite lenses, absolutely amazing IQ.
The A7s is forcing me to learn color correction (mostly with the fantastic Hullfish book), color science and how all the adjustment to the picture profiles will impact the final image, so I'm not at the point where I can confidently use it professionally - but the A7s is flat out amazing. I wanted a FF camera with a better 1080p image than the 5d3, the A7s has that in spades.
homestar_kevin
Well-known member
A friend got his yesterday and we played a round of pool at a dark/dive bar around us.
Man, I know the lowlight is already beating a dead horse, but good lord it's crazy.
It's so nice to have aperture/DOF just become another choice your making as opposed to 'how can I expose this image' you end up in with most dark situations.
We were in a dark pool hall and stopped down to f/22 for some shots.
It was crazy to me.
I really like how the camera felt. The buttons feel pretty nice, the EVF was sooooo nice. The camera felt good handling wise and I really like it.
I'll post some of the footage when he posts it.
Man, I know the lowlight is already beating a dead horse, but good lord it's crazy.
It's so nice to have aperture/DOF just become another choice your making as opposed to 'how can I expose this image' you end up in with most dark situations.
We were in a dark pool hall and stopped down to f/22 for some shots.
It was crazy to me.
I really like how the camera felt. The buttons feel pretty nice, the EVF was sooooo nice. The camera felt good handling wise and I really like it.
I'll post some of the footage when he posts it.
A7S is pretty neat, and I hope people figure out how to move the image into something really great.
If you're a BMD user and you haven't jumped ship yet, right now... the A7S isn't going to make you. And I say that because if you haven't jumped ship you're staying for the image, there isn't much out there that gets close... at all.
From my perspective if the A7S actually did get close I would order one without thinking twice. I can work around nearly every mechanical issue a camera has, Image is going to be the image for the most part, thus it's the most important thing to me (and... well... most BMD owners).
I'm on daily looking for A7S examples though, so far it's looking a lot better than the GH4 in the IQ department.
cyork
Well-known member
Well, here's a test from Gizmodo. A7s vs. GH4. Not very useful as the settings where all over the place. https://vimeo.com/99840423
dustylense
Veteran
I still think it boils down to how you shoot. With both cameras I've seen great images and I've seen poor images. I'm gonna give it another week or two before making a decision on the A7s. Thus far, I really haven't seen too many images that sway me to it. I also fear that because of it's attributes we are going to be seeing tons of out of focus shots taken on dimly lit streets with mercury vapor lights that has a look of an awful HDR image. I'm sure we will see great footage. But I've seen great footage coming from cameras that are 6 years old and older.
I find it really strange that there is so much A7s vrs Gh4 going around the web. Two different cameras going on here. I will give the A7s the advantage of high ISO and DR. I applaud Sony for the feat. If you need 50,000 ISO, the A7s is probably your best choice. But I also fear the claimed 14 stops DR in a 420 8bit (and even 422 8bit) is going to lead to some nasty footage out there. We're gonna see some pretty bad color grades from the s-log. Lot's of muddy shadows and off color highlights. I'm sure some people will handle the footage well. The extra DR and S-log is going to give some folks issues. But like I said, we're going to see great footage, bad footage and lots of so-so footage. That applies to all cameras no matter what the low light performance or DR is capable of. 14 stops DR isn't going to make everyone a brilliant cinematographer. And the lowlight capabilities is going to lead to more bad footage than good footage because people are going to get lazy and leave their lighting at home.
Between the A7s and the Gh4, there are pros and cons to each camera. But most of what is being debated is stats read off of paper. It's still gonna come down to what your pointing the camera at, which settings you chose for that scene, and how you executed the shot.
I find it really strange that there is so much A7s vrs Gh4 going around the web. Two different cameras going on here. I will give the A7s the advantage of high ISO and DR. I applaud Sony for the feat. If you need 50,000 ISO, the A7s is probably your best choice. But I also fear the claimed 14 stops DR in a 420 8bit (and even 422 8bit) is going to lead to some nasty footage out there. We're gonna see some pretty bad color grades from the s-log. Lot's of muddy shadows and off color highlights. I'm sure some people will handle the footage well. The extra DR and S-log is going to give some folks issues. But like I said, we're going to see great footage, bad footage and lots of so-so footage. That applies to all cameras no matter what the low light performance or DR is capable of. 14 stops DR isn't going to make everyone a brilliant cinematographer. And the lowlight capabilities is going to lead to more bad footage than good footage because people are going to get lazy and leave their lighting at home.
Between the A7s and the Gh4, there are pros and cons to each camera. But most of what is being debated is stats read off of paper. It's still gonna come down to what your pointing the camera at, which settings you chose for that scene, and how you executed the shot.
philiplipetz
Veteran
just wait until you can record 4K, edit, and then downscale for color correction.
philiplipetz
Veteran
Kohli, need a 55 for your test? We had to send our camera back for a bad sensor, and I am going to be on location next week.
I think this will help a bit for sure. Sadly, no Ultrastudio 4K in my area =[ Had I known I would have gotten one over here for testing.
Such a sick thought though, this sensor/tech going into an FS series camera.
FS700 RAW looks amazing to me, at least what I've seen. Sony's doing great stuff.
Sounds rougggghhhh. I might take you up on that another time though! Hope it gets sorted quickly for you guys.
dustylense
Veteran
Kholi, did you get one to test from Stancali? It will be interesting to see you put it through the paces down at Venice and comparing it to the BMPC (and BMCC) of scenes you've shot in the past. But please make sure to shoot in different gammas too. S-log, Cine1, cine 2 etc.