FS100: Petition to Sony

[maarek]

jonatha: That is somewhat retarded thinking. We've been working here in PAL land with 25p for ages. 25p films have also been shown digitally and have been converted to 24 with success. I see no problem in not having 24 here in the PAL land. I've NEVER used 24 with my 7d and never will if I work in the PAL world. Now I'd love to have 60 though because I can make slowmotions slower!

This camera actually looks to be a great upgrade path from my 7d. I don't like the AF100 because of the 2x crop. My lenses! But the FS100 will take them all!

 

[jonatha]

sorry I am working with motion picture industry,we r shooting with film stock,in 24fps,for slow motion we r doing 60fps, 120fps,and some times 22fps for faster movements with Arri film cameras,So I am looking for replace Arri cam ,if we can get the same frame rate like Arri,we no need to convert to 24p,In AF 100 Panasonic exactly make for a Film like camera,but me also not happy for that crop factor, If I am doing tv based work I am happy with 25p PAL cam,that is my thought,........In film world there is no NTSC and PAL,in BOLLYWOOD and HOLLYWOOD 24 frame per second,that why we are asking for Cinema Mode in FS100.........Thanks

 

[Danielvilliers]

For me I see the ND as third place in what has been omitted in this camera. The number one would be 10 bit output (hdsdi or hdmi), second will be frame rate (24/25p) and then The ND filter. The reason is simple, because there are work around for the built in ND filter. You can use a Matte box or the Fader ND type of lens attachment. They might not be as practical but at least they exist. While when you have a high quality sensor like the one in the F3 and you can only get 8 bit output, while cameras like the $ 4000 NX5U has 10 bit HDSDI is a crime.

For me this camera is not meant primarily at eng and run and gun shooting. Since the first mock-up you could see that the form factor was meant more for the indie filmmakers (mainly those comming or who have gone to the HDSLR). You know what I mean when I say a filmmaker!!! I am not saying the guy who wake-up in the morning and tells himself that he is going to shoot a film today. But the people that have a scrip, casting, searched for location, lighting and planning. I thought that it would be the realisation of the elusive scarlet... just a box with the best image quality for an affordable price (indie market), even better as it has a super 35 sensor. Since I have learned that it had the F3 sensor I was just hopping that it would be it. I thought that the feature set (444, slog, genlock, 3d, hdsdi, more professional form factor etc.) would have been in the eyes of Sony, as enough of a differentiating factor between the two camera. Unfortunately it was not enough as they have cripple it by implementing only 8 bit output. I don't know to what extent it will affect the image quality.

I don't know if people realise it, but this nearly 13 stop (about the same range as a RED MX) low light monster sensor with a 10 bit would have the tipping point for the indie world. Imagine the first time film quality capture for the indie/micro budget filmmaker (at the market price that most have invested in). It would have been a revolution, after 24p in video camera it would have been the last step to that ideal of affordable film quality capture. I would have died for that. This is why I see all the other omission as a bit secondary.

The ntsc/pal version is also a bit annoying and should not exist anymore. For the 10 bit and to a lesser extend 24/25p, unfortunately we don't have workarounds. Perhaps if the camera can be hack latter these could be done.

 

[jonatha]

For me I see the ND as third place in what has been omitted in this camera. The number one would be 10 bit output (hdsdi or hdmi), second will be frame rate (24/25p) and then The ND filter. The reason is simple, because there are work around for the built in ND filter. You can use a Matte box or the Fader ND type of lens attachment. They might not be as practical but at least they exist. While when you have a high quality sensor like the one in the F3 and you can only get 8 bit output, while cameras like the $ 4000 NX5U has 10 bit HDSDI is a crime.

For me this camera is not meant primarily at eng and run and gun shooting. Since the first mock-up you could see that the form factor was meant more for the indie filmmakers (mainly those comming or who have gone to the HDSLR). You know what I mean when I say a filmmaker!!! I am not saying the guy who wake-up in the morning and tells himself that he is going to shoot a film today. But the people that have a scrip, casting, searched for location, lighting and planning. I thought that it would be the realisation of the elusive scarlet... just a box with the best image quality for an affordable price (indie market), even better as it has a super 35 sensor. Since I have learned that it had the F3 sensor I was just hopping that it would be it. I thought that the feature set (444, slog, genlock, 3d, hdsdi, more professional form factor etc.) would have been in the eyes of Sony, as enough of a differentiating factor between the two camera. Unfortunately it was not enough as they have cripple it by implementing only 8 bit output. I don't know to what extent it will affect the image quality.

I don't know if people realise it, but this nearly 13 stop (about the same range as a RED MX) low light monster sensor with a 10 bit would have the tipping point for the indie world. Imagine the first time film quality capture for the indie/micro budget filmmaker (at the market price that most have invested in). It would have been a revolution, after 24p in video camera it would have been the last step to that ideal of affordable film quality capture. I would have died for that. This is why I see all the other omission as a bit secondary.

The ntsc/pal version is also a bit annoying and should not exist anymore. For the 10 bit and to a lesser extend 24/25p, unfortunately we don't have workarounds. Perhaps if the camera can be hack latter these could be done.

I 100% agree with you.....................thanks for this words

 

[tom.wong]

there can be no hack if there are no 10 bit boards in there to begin with. if there were, this camera would be closer to the price of an f3.

 

[maarek]

sorry I am working with motion picture industry,we r shooting with film stock,in 24fps,for slow motion we r doing 60fps, 120fps,and some times 22fps for faster movements with Arri film cameras,

Yes, I've seen your posts all over the net about the FS100 in all kindsoff different forums.

Filmmakers use RED or Alexa. If they don't have the budget for those they use DSLR's at the moment. The first DSLR film to hit Finnish theater just came out and it was shot with the 5d.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUYaYk0mGcE

Are you seriously making films or not? I've seen all your posts and none of them confirm that you are indeed making films ON FILM. You were asking a lot of DSLR info just awhile ago.

25p is very easily converted to 24. We slow it down. We've always done it that way before. The same way as ALL 24fps films are sped up to 25 to conform to PAL. Yes it would be great to have 24p.

But FOR ME it definitely is not a dealbreaker as I have never used it here in PAL land for several years and I have done a lot of things. For you it is important, yes I get it. But it's also unbelievable that I can see the same damn complaints from you on several different forums over and over and over again. I get it! This camera is not for you. Move on.

So I am looking for replace Arri cam

Go for a RED or Alexa. Those are the only sensible solutions if doing film work.

The FS100 seems to be an excellent upgrade path for DSLR users at the moment. Unless Canon comes out with an EF-mount version.

Besides I don't get the huge complainings going on. The AF100 is very good with some minor nibbles. The FS100 seems to be very good too with some other minor nibbles. If you want more then we have the REDs and Alexas and maybe even the F3. Or the DSLR world that is still a very cheap way to go but with more quibbles.

 

[kurth]

sorry I haven´t had time to read the entire thread but as a solution to the ND problem , besides a singh-ray, which seems a simple enough solution, another idea is that sony make an alpha mount smart adapter with ND´s inside. It wouldn´t have to be small so it could include a fliter wheel, and it would give access to alot more lenses- a request for sony to change the design of the camera at this point is absurd , and I´m sure the design team is already working on more cameras using the f3 sensor- the more cameras with the sensor, the more sensors, meaning mass production costs down- so the letter should be meant for future camera designs -the fs-100 cake is already baked - I myself would prefer an integrated lens camera like the z1, which would obviously have all of the goodies inside , like ND´s, and looking at sony´s history I have a feeling an integrated camera is down the road - nex lenses just aren´t up to the task...maybe for the vg-12 but not the fs100

 

[Danielvilliers]

there can be no hack if there are no 10 bit boards in there to begin with. if there were, this camera would be closer to the price of an f3.

There are 8 out of 10 chance that it is true, but what the gh1 has shown is that many many things are controlled by the software in the camera. The manufacturer just has to put a tick on x or y for the fuctionality to be enhance or to remove one. You do understand that it is a marketing choice and not tech one because it is present on the $ 4000 NX5. Which even has an additional Hdsdi connector. The 1.4 HDMI the fs-100 has can even transport 4k 444 signal. I am not saying that it will be possible but I see it as the greatest omission in what could have been a truly revolutionary camera. Guess will have to wait for the final image quality.

 

[Fohdeesha]

Said this before, I'll say it again. The cost to implement 10 bit output is next to nothing, and in some cases, based on hardware design, it ends up being cheaper. The baseband board is dealing with data in a 14-bit space, and to dither it down to output, you have to pay for and implement an sdi/hdmi transceiver capable of doing so, whether it's down to 10-bit, or even further down to 8-bit. I am having an hdsdi to 10-bit displayport adapter built for me by an EE friend, and while I don't have the digikey part numbers on hand right now, you can go have a look at the cost between different bit-depths of clocking hardware/transceivers. They're within 5 or 10 dollars of each other. It's pretty clear sony omitted 10-bit out of pure choice

 

[Jay Birch]

But FOR ME it definitely is not a dealbreaker as I have never used it here in PAL land for several years and I have done a lot of things. For you it is important, yes I get it. But it's also unbelievable that I can see the same damn complaints from you on several different forums over and over and over again. I get it! This camera is not for you. Move on.

No, don't move on.... make noise, get angry,, ask for changes. The camera might well be right for him, with the exception of this (easily fixed) problem.

Just because you are happy with a PAL camera doesn't mean that we should all just accept it and move on. People power works, it got us 24/25p on the 5DII and manual controls.

I shoot so much work in USA but live in Europe.... I have no time for a PAL camera, it is pathetic and hails back to a decade old view of digital video.

 

[Danielvilliers]

Said this before, I'll say it again. The cost to implement 10 bit output is next to nothing, and in some cases, based on hardware design, it ends up being cheaper. The baseband board is dealing with data in a 14-bit space, and to dither it down to output, you have to pay for and implement an sdi/hdmi transceiver capable of doing so, whether it's down to 10-bit, or even further down to 8-bit. I am having an hdsdi to 10-bit displayport adapter built for me by an EE friend, and while I don't have the digikey part numbers on hand right now, you can go have a look at the cost between different bit-depths of clocking hardware/transceivers. They're within 5 or 10 dollars of each other. It's pretty clear sony omitted 10-bit out of pure choice

Yes, I find it strange that people are like brain wash by the Video Camera companies. When you think that a $ 1000 DSLR like the Nikon D7000 does 16 megapixel 6 fps 14 bit raw, it is the same data output of 48 fps 2k (even if it is only for a limited amount of shots) It can do 100 of these in Jpeg, that is take that amount of data in 14 bit compress it into 8 bit jpeg and then store it!!!!!!!!!!! think about the amount of processing in such a small package and such a low cost. The difference is that they are photo camera and don't need to shoot more and they have the mirror and shutter mechanism to cater for. They could shoot much more with only a bigger buffer and a larger case would dissipate heat much better. Nikon even has a patent with a fan cooling system.

All this just to show some people how some very close technology compare to what they are being fed by the video camera industry. This is why we had the HDSLR revolution because there was nothing magical into a s35 size sensor. We photographers have been using it for at least five years (when it became really affordable) at cost as low as $ 500 - $ 600. It was this parallel technology that accidentally met with the hyper conservative market that have provided this revolution. Without the HDSLR we would not have seen camera like the F3, Fs-100 and Af-100 now. We would still have been drooling over the latest 1/3 sensor camera. If someone came and said that we could get an s35 camera for less than $ 5000, many would have said that he was a lunatic. But now Sony just can't give us a 10 bit S35 camera no, even if the NX5 has it and an hdsdi output, and some people find it logical.............. I mean tell me it is marketing choice and not a technological one, then I will understand even if I don't agree with Sony decision at all.

 

[Danielvilliers]

No, don't move on.... make noise, get angry,, ask for changes. The camera might well be right for him, with the exception of this (easily fixed) problem.

Just because you are happy with a PAL camera doesn't mean that we should all just accept it and move on. People power works, it got us 24/25p on the 5DII and manual controls.

I shoot so much work in USA but live in Europe.... I have no time for a PAL camera, it is pathetic and hails back to a decade old view of digital video.

+1, so listening to some, we should stop complaining on such basic thing. Is it that hard to put a 24/25p frame rate choice in a camera. I see it more and more where people (fanboi) who defend all the way what a company does. It is as if they ow the company something. It should be the other way around, we are the customer and they are the one that should satisfy our need. The example of the 5d is a very good example and people, us, customers, should be critical on such silly choice by any manufacturer.

 

[djangosan]

Or if it's simply too difficult to add a physical ND wheel, how about firmware that lets us switch the IRIS wheel to control GAIN, and then adding negative GAIN settings to our options?

The problem with that is negative gain, and any gain for that matter, decreases dynamic range.

Understood, but negative gain on the Iris wheel would mean that when following someone from inside a building to outside you would lose dynamic range, but still have the shot. Without it you have full dynamic range, but don't have the shot. And sometimes the story requires the shot, warts and all. And maybe it also gives you enough time to wait until it's even possible to get out your NDs.

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate your meticulousness and your single-minded vision towards the quality of the image. And I don't distrust the veracity of your statement, but I'm also wondering HOW true it is. Given that the "ASA" settings on other non-film cameras are actually electronic gain (negative and positive) you'd think we'd be seeing this already. For instance, while on the AF100 the image does get noticeably worse when going from ASA 400 to ASA 1600 (2 stop +gain), I don't see anywhere near the same degradation when moving from ASA 400 to ASA 100 (2 stop -gain). (I believe the AF100 chip has a "native" ASA of 400, correct me if I'm wrong.)

Recognizing the OP's original request for an ND wheel (and his desire to keep the rig low-key for surreptitious shooting), and in light of many other posters' insightful comments about the impossibility of Sony to implement the idea at this point in the production cycle, wouldn't a negative gain "fake ND" wheel be a reasonable stopgap request for Sony? It seems like something they could implement in a firmware update as a temporary solution, at least until the MOLCADed FS200 comes out in 2014.

Thoughts???

 

[jonatha]

Are you seriously making films or not? I've seen all your posts and none of them confirm that you are indeed making films ON FILM. You were asking a lot of DSLR info just awhile ago.

I am an ordinary guy working with a film Industry where make and release more than 1000 films every year,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cinema_of_India
why I make this comments abot FS100 and post all the forum,because I like sper35mm sensor camera from Sony.but some thing missing............and this is the thread for Petition to Sony...........I am thinking if I post here may be some Sony people see this thread then they will help us...............this is not an argument ,this is just my wishful thinking ..............thanks for everybody.

 

[imag]

Understood, but negative gain on the Iris wheel would mean that when following someone from inside a building to outside you would lose dynamic range, but still have the shot. Without it you have full dynamic range, but don't have the shot. And sometimes the story requires the shot, warts and all. And maybe it also gives you enough time to wait until it's even possible to get out your NDs.

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate your meticulousness and your single-minded vision towards the quality of the image. And I don't distrust the veracity of your statement, but I'm also wondering HOW true it is. Given that the "ASA" settings on other non-film cameras are actually electronic gain (negative and positive) you'd think we'd be seeing this already. For instance, while on the AF100 the image does get noticeably worse when going from ASA 400 to ASA 1600 (2 stop +gain), I don't see anywhere near the same degradation when moving from ASA 400 to ASA 100 (2 stop -gain). (I believe the AF100 chip has a "native" ASA of 400, correct me if I'm wrong.)

Recognizing the OP's original request for an ND wheel (and his desire to keep the rig low-key for surreptitious shooting), and in light of many other posters' insightful comments about the impossibility of Sony to implement the idea at this point in the production cycle, wouldn't a negative gain "fake ND" wheel be a reasonable stopgap request for Sony? It seems like something they could implement in a firmware update as a temporary solution, at least until the MOLCADed FS200 comes out in 2014.

Thoughts???

If that's the style of shooting you're doing, where getting the shot is the top priority, then this probably isn't the right camera for you. Buy any number of small-chip cameras with all the features you want and could ask for. They will have big DOF, NDs, and be much more comfortable for documentary-style shooting. The FS-100 is just not best for that stuff.

The FS-100 looks to me like it is optimized for image quality in planned shots. And in a planned shot, if you were to go from indoor to outdoor, you would either light the interior or - at the worst case, put a small amount of ND on for the indoor shots so that when you go outside, the camera can stop down and shoot just fine in bright sun. Not that hard.

Either way, an ND filter wheel won't solve that problem, unless you are really going to use it *during* a shot.

The FS is sensitive. Some of us are willing to deal with some ND hassle in sunlight to get access to the low-light shooting capabilities. Since there are dozens of traditional cameras that do just fine at the other stuff, I don't see the problem.

 

[djangosan]

Thanks for schooling me on that one. Wow. I'm glad you don't want it for your "planned" shots. I should really learn to plan my shots like you real filmmakers. And thanks for the tip about small-chip cameras with big DOF and such. Maybe you can teach me the proper way to set a C-stand, too.

Now read the OP:

PS. Dear fellow users of this great forum, please add your comments to this thread so it grows and hopefully gets through to Sony. At the same time, if some of you are of opposite opinion - please refrain from teaching us how to use our mattebixes, cross-polarizing variable ND filters, etc; not in this thread - please

I was trying to add something helpful to the discussion based on the OP's original request to Sony and in light of the engineering/manufacturing contingencies pointed out by other posters. I'm glad you don't need it. But what does telling us that, and then impugning the work of people that do add to the discussion? Also you say that you don't need it now, but believe me when the client asks you to take the FS off the sticks and follow someone around for B-Roll, and you find yourself half a block from your gear, and you're already stopped down to a 8 (and hating the look) and you only have 5 more minutes with the talent, you'll change your mind pretty quickly.

Now back to the topic.... Given that the OP seems to believe (rightly or wrongly) that he would like to have an ND wheel on this camera, and given that it seems impossible to implement in this camera now, would a firmware option which allowed the iris wheel to control negative gain be a workable solution? Why or why not?

If people are reacting to the term "gain" how about calling it variable ISO (since all ISOs but one in every video camera are software generated as sensors are not film)? Again I'm sure there are limitations to how far down we might bring the ISO from its native 800. Do any video engineers on these boards know what those limits might be?

 

[Fohdeesha]

Jeez django...no reason to be so hostile. Why wouldn't you just stop down the lens and pull iris like DP's have been doing to control change in scene lighting for the past....80 years?

 

[imag]

I apologize if I thought you had no experience. It certainly sounded like it. Instead of stopping down to F8 because you "hate the look" you are hypothesizing the invention of an unprecedented amount of negative gain on the chip. Since you seemed to be okay with losing large amounts of dynamic range to "get the shot," my suggestion to just stop down instead was entirely reasonable in context.

As far as the feasibility of that much negative gain, I think it's fair to say that the engineers and manufacturers just might include it if it were workable. I kind of doubt that they just ignored the possibility. So if you get so upset about being treated as ignorant, perhaps you might think about not proposing that the camera engineers are total morons.

 

[Rick Burnett]

The problem is, negative gain isn't doing anything to the photons hitting the sensor. If you are overexposing the sensor, maxing out the pixel values, and you don't want that, the shot will be ruined. With negative gain you are just reducing your dynamic range without giving you anything. Now, if the A/D circuitry is actually the limiting factor, yes, but I've not seen any designs where the A/D was the limiting factor.

Even further, there are two types of gain, analog and digital. Analog gain is digitally controlled, and the circuitry to do this might be stepped and not smooth. This is pretty common. So while you might be able to get smaller steps, it's probably going to be steppy and NOT desired. I agree that in these situations, I would use ND filtering to use the DoF I wanted and I would use a destepped IRIS or cine lens to pull IRIS on the shot. If using certain focal lengths where variable ND filters actually work well (like mine at 30mm) you could probably even rack ND in a pinch.

 

[xbourque]

So... do we even know what is the ISO (or gain) range for the FS100?

Since most recent DSLRs can shoot comfortably from ISO 200 to ISO 3200, why can't the FS100 do it too?

(BTW, when shooting ISO 200 on a DSLR, you are effectively using negative gain, since recent DSLRs have base ISOs between 400 and 800. I don't hear anyone complaining about dynamic range suffering).

-- Xavier