FS7: FS7 w/ SmallHD 502 - Problem in CineEI mode

1

1027Films

Well-known member
Hey guys! Would anyone happen to know why the SmallHD 502 doesn't show a difference at all when changing the EI from 2000 to 4000, or 2000 to 1000? Also, I noticed it doesn't display the in-camera zebras.... I'm not sure if there is any other setting it is not displaying properly, but I would like to figure out how to fix this problem.

Thanks!
 
1) Assuming you are shooting with CINE EI, you will only see a visual difference to the video when you change the ISO if you are applying a MLUT to the signal you are monitoring.

2) Zebras can never be output from the camera.
 
regarding showing a difference when changing ISO try changing your HDMI MLUT setting in the menu. (sounds like your MLUT for HDMI is currently set to OFF)
 
Awesome, thanks guys! However, if I just wanted to use a 3D LUT on my 502 only and not an MLUT through the FS7, would there be a work around?
 
You sort of have two options;

You can just use Custom mode the way you seem to want to use the camera.

Or you can stay in CineEI mode and turn ON your MLUT (so the ISO adjustment impacts what you see) and then set the Monitor LUT Category to 'LUT', and then select the 's-log3' LUT.

With this second option however keep in mind that what you're outputting is a LUT'd signal which is not going to be as "pure" as the true signal you could be recording.
 
Last edited:
oops yes of course, it's the color science locked to specific modes not the gamma. I should avoid late night posting.

The Doug.
 
The workaround would be to have three luts, bright mid and dark.

of course any meta data telling the post team which one you chose would not exist.

S
 
Yeah actually StarCentrals suggestion worked perfect for me. If I change the MLUT to "LUT" and just choose either S-Log 2 or 3 (depending on what I'm currently using) then I can add a LUT on the 502 monitor without problem. I've tried comparing what the image looks like as s-log without the LUT and with the S-LoG LUT applied, but I see no difference at all. I don't know if that's bad to do technical wise though, but I can't imagine it is since I'm still using the same S-LoG preset as the camera. (Hope that makes sense).

Doug, I've tried looking at your FS7 videos (LOVE them btw) but I can't find if what I'm saying is true? Any negatives to this solution?
 
Don't ask me! :-)
I'd rather not speculate because I'm foggy on the use of LUTs onboard the camera now that it has been several months since I produced the FS7 video and book. I have already flushed that information from my brain cells. As most people know, I really have no use for MLUTs onboard the camera and would never use them. Plus I can't really follow what you are doing with the LUTs, or if you are just talking about applying them in-camera vs. post. Better listen to Dennis on this one. Don't ask a vegetarian for advice on cooking a steak (not that I am a vegetarian).
 
1026films - my Ultimate Exposure guide has some details about use of MLUTs and tips around that if you're interested. It's published for the F5/F55 but it is 99.9% identical for the FS7. The only difference will be some tables in the guide reference the SR Codec.

A FS7 centric version is planned along with a few updates but that project has been shelved since I've been very busy lately.


cheers,
 
I just dont get this.

LUTs dont work on the FS7.

- they dont work in play back
-they dont work in Custom
-they dont work in HFR
-luts kill you WFM

Forget the FS7 'supports' LUTs - it doesnt, it just pretends to.

Load a LUT or two into your SmallHD and enjoy them.

In term of monitoring LUTs loaded onto you monitor change the camera from broken to functioning.

S
 
Last edited:
Yeah, those are just a few of the reasons I have no use for MLUTs. And the F55 isn't much better. Once you give up on all that BS, both cameras are a pleasure to use and everything becomes so much simpler. When you look at the gripes people have about the cameras, a lot of them come right back to MLUTs. Of course that is just my opinion.
 
But the DP502 supports its own LUTs beautifully.

So switch em off on the camera and enjoy the fact that the monitor just works with LUTs.

Luts (and focus crash in) in playback are incredibly strong tools that are a significant upgrade to the camera.

S
 
As an aside the RGB histogram on the 502 is super useful for evaluating colour and having a LUT on really helps focus and lighting design.

FS7 is a completely different camera from FS7/502

The 502 does have some issues tho - like 5d batts lasting not long enough.

S
 
morgan_moore said:
having a LUT on really helps focus and lighting design.
Click to expand...

This and spotting any odd colour casts is the reason I use luts even if broken. Slog2/3 I find so flat that you can't spot colour issues with mixed lighting till post and with such low contrast focus can be difficult by eye. I'm sure I'd get used to it eventually but for now the luts are working fine enough for me.
 
The OP has a monitor that supports luts. All his problems with the sketchy lut support, or caused by viewing flat are over.

Ive not had time to 'review' the 502 yet, but simply the camera now feels 'unusable' without it.

S
 
Yes, I am LOVING the easy LUT support on the 502 - it has been a great tool with no flaws for me. The only thing I was saying in my original post is that when using CineEI mode on the FS7, you cant physically see a difference on the 502 (or any monitor/viewfinder) when changing the EI levels UNLESS you have a MLUT activated internally with the FS7.

So my problem was easily fixed by StarCentral's suggestion to activate the S-Log 2 LUT (which is what I use on the FS7 currently) instead of a "Look Profile, like the 709-TypeA.

So essentially when activating the S-Log 2 lut via the FS7 it shows absolutely no difference on my monitor because it is still only S-LOG 2, which then makes it perfect to add a LUT on my 502 without getting incorrect color information - and then I can also now see the difference in brightness when switching through the EI presets.

Make sense?? haha.
 
I agree with Doug, the MLUTs on the Sony's were not that well implemented and continues to be one of the long standing gripes with the camera. The only solution really is not to use the camera for it's LUT capabilities even though the camera is LUT capable, its easier to just use an external device for MLUT previewing on-set, etc... Still, these are absolutely fantastic cameras.

How Sony got into this mess if anyone is interested in my speculative theory, is that originally on the new F generation of camera's the CineEI mode was not designed or able to record internally using any codec. That's right, the CineEI mode was strictly a means to shoot 4K RAW 16-bit on the F5 and F55. To this capacity, some of the limitations we're living with now actually make sense if you look at it from a RAW oriented workflow. ie. If you were shooting RAW you were 100% heading into a post production workflow lifecycle where things like in-camera white balance, exposure, color science version, etc.. didn't matter at all. They will just be selected in post when you bring the footage through Sony RAW viewer and/or possibly other supported software (Davinci Resolve, etc..).

A little later on, a new firmware version was released which made it possible to record using an internal codec while in CineEI mode. Boom! All the problems started. Suddenly the things that really didn't matter for RAW shooters mattered if you weren't shooting RAW. The argument made by some popular internet camera folks was that, "hey cineEI is intended for a post production workflow process so I'm telling you that you don't need white balance". Again this was sort of true when CineEI mode was purely tied to shooting RAW but it was no longer.

Since the FS7 is highly based around the F5/F55 design and architecture but with a less powerful processor, it too inherits these flaws. MLUTs in CineEI mode, not in Custom mode, not in HFR or playback, etc.. we can only speculate perhaps because of where Sony's head was originally at with CineEI mode and RAW. And even that doesn't really explain anything.

I rest my case.
 
Last edited:
Interesting explanation that makes sense. What doesn't make sense of course is what the heck is going on in the Sony design process. Somewhere between marketing and engineering there seems to be a terrible disconnect that frankly makes me wonder how they manage to get anything done at all.
Really - why in the world would you design a camera you intended to sell on a large basis around a 4K RAW 16-bit model? Who comes up with such a concept and rallies the enormous resources of this corporation around a camera that has practically no market. Then some people further away from the design team ( like Juan Martinez I'm guessing) come in later and try to drum some sense into their heads and turn the original concept into something else altogether. What a crazy way to run a company. Imagine what they could do if they just listened to their market first and designed a camera that we wanted?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top