A7S vs 5DmkIII side by side low light test - Den Lennie

very nice even with youtube. From what i see iso12800 is still maintain everything in quality. After that the noise is just like starting from iso 3000-6400 with other camera. under 50k all not bad. 102400 start noiser at shadow. Wanna see daylight normal shooting with wide aperture footage , f1.4-f2.8 range, still sharp or not. Sony official one all shoot at small aperture.
 
Would be nice to see daylight footage from 100-3200 to compare. Maybe Den Lennie sleeps all day and only shoots at night?

A7s has a lot more detail and looks pretty clean at 100,000, I never shoot the 5d3 above 6400 and 3200 is looking like the max for the GH4. The 1080p looks really good. I guess I'm going to have to wait until my camera ships to see more than night footage.
 
photochris said:
A7s has a lot more detail and looks pretty clean at 100,000, I never shoot the 5d3 above 6400 and 3200 is looking like the max for the GH4. The 1080p looks really good. I guess I'm going to have to wait until my camera ships to see more than night footage.
Click to expand...

I'm in the Sony camp since I own an FS700, but it does not seem a fair comparison unless you are using 5D3 RAW. Stock 5D3 footage is total mush as shown by this video. I would like to see a A7S vs 5D3 RAW comparison. That would be a more level playing field.
 
gene_can_sing said:
I'm in the Sony camp since I own an FS700, but it does not seem a fair comparison unless you are using 5D3 RAW. Stock 5D3 footage is total mush as shown by this video. I would like to see a A7S vs 5D3 RAW comparison. That would be a more level playing field.
Click to expand...

I understand what you are saying Gene but the level playing field is between two STOCK cameras at the same price range more or less. Imagine if the Sony could be hacked :tongue:
 
I'm with gene: I would consider the level playing field to be "the best image each of the cameras can produce". Then you have to think if you're willing to jump through all the hoops with the 5D3+RAW. Plus I still think the a7s will beat the 5D3+RAW in terms of DR, so even if they are just as sharp and I don't mind using a hack to get RAW, I would still clearly prefer the a7s.
 
Well, if you compare 5D RAW with the A7s then you need to include post processing for both. RAW never exists straight out of the camera, it is always post processed. The post processing is where you get all of the DR, detail and color refinements. So it is not a true representation of the sensor alone.

Canon deserves to take it on the chin in all of these comparisons. It was their choice to make the mush. Now they can deal with the aftermath.
 
I have done many music videos that each involved hours and hours of RAW 5D content. From a lot of first hand experience, the benefit that the 5D raw has is totally trumped by a pretty annoying workflow. I created a workflow that I believe is one of the fastest I have seen...and it still is very cumbersome. I would take the A7s over the 5D raw any day. If the A7s is even remotely close in terms of sharpness and DR...its already won in my opinion. On a business level, the 5D raw workflow does not make any sense in terms of time/cost for the client. If a client was budgeting for the amount of time spent using the 5DRaw workflow, you should just rent a better camera, speed up the workflow, and give a better product anyway.
 
just to take it up another notch I use kodak film instead of arri alexa..for the same reasons
 
It would be interesting to see how the A7s holds up against raw, and I'm sure we'll see it shortly after the camera is released. I decided to go the GH4/A7s route for sharper video than the stock 5d3 (which the GH4 clearly has and it appears the A7s does too) and a more streamlined workflow after experimenting with raw on the 5d3 - the volume of cards, processing and storage needs completely dwarf the GH4's 4k at 100 Mbps and the 50Mbps the A7s records internally. I can fit almost 5 1/2 hours of 4k video on 4 ea. 64gb cards, and I'll be able to fit double that with the A7s.

If the 5d3 raw was compressed like the stuff the Blackmagic pocket records - I'd still own it...
 
I really don't see how the "level playing field" is the same between the a7s and 5d iii RAW but ok. I have the 5dIII and as soon as get my a7s, I'll check it out.
 
strancali said:
I really don't see how the "level playing field" is the same between the a7s and 5d iii RAW but ok. I have the 5dIII and as soon as get my a7s, I'll check it out.
Click to expand...


Its not. Not the same at all really....from resolution to workflow. More of a personal preference. When a comparison sample becomes available, we can judge the aesthetics. For me, it's a workflow preference.
 
I'm expecting my A7s to arrive in 2-3 weeks. The first thing I'll be doing is comparing a 5D MK3 raw CDNG debayered & output to prores 4444 in AE vs a an A7s image recorded directly to prores 4444 on a SD pix220. The playing field doesn't get more level than that.
 
So what happens if the rollin shutter turns out to be unusable?

5d mark III raw is actually surprisingly easy and fast using Davinci Resolve. It took me about 30 minutes to convert 600 gigs of RAW material to dnxhd's and start editing. I usually don't go back to the raw files, just continue on with the DNxHD files.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top