most informative .
- Thread starter sjr
- Start date
Yes, very informative, especially the cost/feature comparison between the Zeiss lenses.
But too bad they spend so much time DSLR-bashing. It's really only Canon-bashing, because when they slam "DSLRs" for overheating and moire, they're really talking about Canon problems, not DSLR form-factor problems. My GH2, for example, does not overheat, nor does it produce moire.
And the fact that they don't know the difference between moire and aliasing really undermines their credibility.
Marketing gaffes aside, I am still impressed by what I have seen from the FS100, and am saving my pennies to buy one.
But too bad they spend so much time DSLR-bashing. It's really only Canon-bashing, because when they slam "DSLRs" for overheating and moire, they're really talking about Canon problems, not DSLR form-factor problems. My GH2, for example, does not overheat, nor does it produce moire.
And the fact that they don't know the difference between moire and aliasing really undermines their credibility.
Marketing gaffes aside, I am still impressed by what I have seen from the FS100, and am saving my pennies to buy one.
Last edited:
moldcad
Veteran
Basically what Juan Martinez is saying is that:
- there is no line skipping on the S35 sensor
- the S35 sensor's pixel is 4-times larger that that on a DSLR sensor (he keeps referring to the Canon 5D MKII, but anyway we're talking some 14+ Mpx here - like Sony's own VG10; considering its 14.5 Mpx in an APS-C size sensor, it would mean the ca. 3,5 Mpx that FS100 specs claim is accurate)
- because of the above, this S35 sensor cannot be considered just another APS-C sensor (as some reviewers still refer to it)
This should answer a lot of doubts created in our minds by the F3 review of BBC's Alan Roberts (assuming it is the very same imager indeed).
- there is no line skipping on the S35 sensor
- the S35 sensor's pixel is 4-times larger that that on a DSLR sensor (he keeps referring to the Canon 5D MKII, but anyway we're talking some 14+ Mpx here - like Sony's own VG10; considering its 14.5 Mpx in an APS-C size sensor, it would mean the ca. 3,5 Mpx that FS100 specs claim is accurate)
- because of the above, this S35 sensor cannot be considered just another APS-C sensor (as some reviewers still refer to it)
This should answer a lot of doubts created in our minds by the F3 review of BBC's Alan Roberts (assuming it is the very same imager indeed).
Last edited:
evilthought
Well-known member
FS100 can do either 4:4:4 8-bit or 4:2:2 8-bit. The external recorder and the camera will shake hands and determine automatically what is the highest possible setting they can share
Thanks, c. I stand corrected.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Moire is a specific manifestation of aliasing. A moire pattern is caused by aliasing, but there are many effects of aliasing that aren't moire.
Rick Burnett
Section Moderator
The presenter is wrong with his assertions about m4/3 with respect to at least the AF100. When shooting 16:9, there are extra pixels on both sides to keep the diagonal distance the same regardless of 4:3 and 16:9.
Moses Chisel
Active member
Maybe the sensor is the same as NEX stills, but with hardware summation and big fat microlenses. Sony in the past have used hardware summation at the expense of resolution for low light in their ENG cams.
Sony pulled the NEX-3 in Japan, maybe they are scavaging the 14mp sensor for this
Sony pulled the NEX-3 in Japan, maybe they are scavaging the 14mp sensor for this
No, the EXMOR Super35 CMOS is a real video sensor (3.2MP when shooting 16:9). It is not a 14MP still sensor downsampled for video.
See bottom p. 4 of this Sony UK brochure: http://www.sony.co.uk/res/attachment/file/59/1237480643259.pdf
... a lot of things. Can't seem to get physical dimensions vs. # of pixels straight, for one thing.
Rick Burnett
Section Moderator
Yep. Not that there isn't good info there as well, but as most marketing goes, there is a lot of misinformation too.