FS5: Does FS5 is a noisy camera?

sony3000

sony3000

Active member
Hi there, I am considering to upgrade my lovely C100 mark1. I had fs5 in my hands for an hour and i noticed high noise on 3200 iso. I tried all profiles, those profiles that were similar to wide dr of c100 were noisy to my eyes.
Can some one conform that fs5 has less noise then C100?
 
I'm a former C100 mark I owner who upgraded to an FS7/FS5 combo and can confirm that the FS5 is not particularly noisy. I don't have any specific, scientific comparisons but almost certainly less so than C100 at a given ISO. The ISO is higher and in ungraded log you may see some noise in darker areas, but no worse than C100 in WideDR or Log at ISO 850.

It's a fantastic upgrade from the C100 mark I. Ergonomics are even better (and the C100 ergonomics are the main reason to own it). I have a slight preference for Canon colors but the Sony colors can be really gorgeous, and you gain 10-bit 4:2:2 in 1080p so you can ditch the ninja for broadcast and you gain 8-bit 4:2:0 in 4K which is great. The only negative I can think of is the lack of the dual pixel AF, which really is a neat feature for one touch AF on the Canons.
 
I also upgraded to the FS5 from the C100 MK1. I haven't noticed much difference in terms of noise. I don't have any proper comparisons, but just from what I've seen I would say the FS5 is slightly cleaner at higher ISOs than the C100. I'm mostly using PP5 (Cine1 gamma) at the moment.
 
I sold my C100 mark 1,now I sit and think what to buy.. C100 Mark II or Sony FS5.I saw only two comparative tests C100 VS FS5,in both images C100 has a better picture compared with FS5.I do not care how good the codec on FS5,do not color grading.C100 mark II is much better continu focus ..good for ronin m, colors WDR is very nice.FS5 comes with 4k..ok i still I prefer a better image in lo light.
Anyone could do comparative tests C100 MARK II vs FS5 please?but with normal PP, no s-log PP,someone said that the iso 3200 the image is grainy,I filmed with c100 and ISO 8000 with no problem,personal naw i have A7S this camera is perfect to lo light fot my Ronin M. I'm shooting more events, wedding..where light conditions are bad.still waiting to see a video test that will help me to decide...

a new one test
https://vimeo.com/148701003
 
Last edited:
liondor1969 said:
I sold my C100 mark 1,now I sit and think what to buy.. C100 Mark II or Sony FS5.I saw only two comparative tests C100 VS FS5,in both images C100 has a better picture compared with FS5.I do not care how good the codec on FS5,do not color grading.C100 mark II is much better continu focus ..good for ronin m, colors WDR is very nice.FS5 comes with 4k..ok i still I prefer a better image in lo light.
Anyone could do comparative tests C100 MARK II vs FS5 please?but with normal PP, no s-log PP,someone said that the iso 3200 the image is grainy,I filmed with c100 and ISO 8000 with no problem,personal naw i have A7S this camera is perfect to lo light fot my Ronin M. I'm shooting more events, wedding..where light conditions are bad.still waiting to see a video test that will help me to decide...

a new one test
https://vimeo.com/148701003
Click to expand...

I don't think that's a fair test. It looks like the FS5 is using cine2 straight out of the camera with no grading. That's why it looks so flat and dull.

Coming from a C100, I'm very impressed with the image quality of the FS5 - it's definitely no worse than the C100.
 
I just tested the FS5 and found the compression and noise to be absolutely unacceptable. It was BAD at ISO 3200 on. It's nothing like the FS7, or even the A7RII. I sent it back the same day. I owned a C100 for a long time. It was noisy/blocky sometimes in low light which an external recorder fixed. The FS5 is the same in 4K, but it's even worse. Horrible blocky artifacts on moving contrast junctions that the a7rii, the FS7, even the rx100m4 don't show. This is a horrible camera for 4K use.

I I did not test HD. But the noise is still in those samples. There is just less compression artifacting.
 
I did a test last night comparing the noise on the fs5 and my c100 and the fs5 is definitely not any worse! If anything i'd say it's a tad better. I tested cine2 and slog2 up to 10,000 iso. The artifacts seemed to be a bit finer on the fs5 which made for more of a pleasing image. FYI-I tested HD mode
 
I just did a quick test in 4k mode and that is definitely noisier than HD. I'll have to test it out a bit more to really see how it's handling contrast edges.
 
yoclay said:
Big disparity in responses here. Quality Control issues?
Click to expand...

A quality control issue in terms of the testers you mean? As we need some QC applied to the testers themselves!! lol

As they'll be all over the place with the settings they're using on the camera, their post production workflow, their on subjective sense of what is "noisy", varying different scenes being filmed. Too many factors!!

Waiting still on more detailed info to come out on this.
 
I think the C100 is a noisy camera and the FS7 very clean. Shoot two different jobs, one with my FS7 at native ISO2000 and another on the C100 at ISO2000. The C100 showed much noise and add to that the fixed noise pattern that all Canon sensors have. At least the FS5 shouldn't show any pattern noise having a Sony sensor.
 
I'm interested , have you some video to show?

NeedCreative said:
I just tested the FS5 and found the compression and noise to be absolutely unacceptable. It was BAD at ISO 3200 on. It's nothing like the FS7, or even the A7RII. I sent it back the same day. I owned a C100 for a long time. It was noisy/blocky sometimes in low light which an external recorder fixed. The FS5 is the same in 4K, but it's even worse. Horrible blocky artifacts on moving contrast junctions that the a7rii, the FS7, even the rx100m4 don't show. This is a horrible camera for 4K use.

I I did not test HD. But the noise is still in those samples. There is just less compression artifacting.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top