FS7: New firmware for the FS7 will allow you to bake in gain/offset in Cine EI

It seems the purpose of this Applied CINE EI is to further reduce noise. One way of doing this now is by overexposing by a stop or more and bring down by the same in post. But of course when you do that, you lose the same in exposure latitude. With this new feature, which seems to be some sort of LUT that brings you down another stop, wouldn't you still be overexposing by a stop or more to improve the signal? But with the stop reduction from the LUT, wouldn't that bring you down another stop on top of that, so there isn't much headroom if using the LUT and overexposing too? Or would you just use this LUT feature and no need to overexpose any longer?

I am just curious about this because it took me a while to get my mind around CINE EI in the first place.
 
I have refrained from writing about this until the firmware is actually released and some additional tech info from Sony is available. I have not been able to get much shaking the Sony tree. My presumption is that is effectively just baking in the over exposure. The real advantage here is for handing footage over to editors and colorists. It does save the step of adjusting exposure, particularly if someone with less experience or skill is posting the project. Now it could also be changing the actual sensitivity of the sensor, which I highly doubt. So I need some additional. Really does little for me because I edit and color whatever I shoot and whenever possible I shoot SLog at EI800 or EI1000
 
There is no talk of a Venice look update for the FS7? I'm wondering why Sony is giving this only to the FS5. Actually the one camera which is naturally entitled to that is the F65! It's what the Venice replaces and Sony did squat for the F65. The F5 and F55 got updates after updates and the F65 was left in limbo. Now they try to give the current look to their most low end camera and again overlook the F65. If the FS5 is getting that all their line up should. FS7, F5, F55 AND F65. This is the reason I will ever only get a Venice when they are selling for bargain basement prices, in 4 years. Sony is ridiculous. What gets me is why none of these bloggers ask the hard questions in trade shows. They are just there to lick Sony up and down. Why they don't ask how Sony feels for leaving the people who paid for their F35 and F65 out in the cold? Why nobody asks why their flagship F65 had no real updates, while the F5 and F55 were getting one every week? Or why they feel people should put their money in the Sony piggy bank, after the way Sony treated F35 and F65 buyers? Of course they will never ask that. If Sony was called out for their actions maybe they wouldn't be so cool about it.
 
Last edited:
Learn who sony are - you probably cant change them or thier licking bloggers (who you can unfollow)

Its the wild west and once one starts seeing cameras as a 'price/times used before they are a doorstop' equation then one proceeds with great care.

I walked (empty handed) from the sales room at both Red and with the F5 - not an easy thing to do in a physical shop (or pinewood in Reds case)

i had evaluated the cameras as a poor business proposition (for my business)

As it happens with the F5 I may have been wrong - but they were trying to sell me an 'HD only camera' due to the firmware cripplement at the time.
 
agreed .. the F5 "hack" forcing Sonys hand to give the 4K internal upgrade definitely saved my arse .. as 4K came on much faster than I had thought..and many others .. for the extra $1K it became a much superior camera.. with the relatively low purchase price its been a very good investment.. still my only camera and work still piles in for it.. paid for itself many times over.. buying gear is just about the only way to make decent money in this game now.. turning up with a pulse as a DP is a harder game.. rates have stayed the same for about 20 yrs or more now..
 
There is no venice look, only marketing talk for the fs5 standard look that no-one serious will use anyway?
 
nsoltz said:
My presumption is that is effectively just baking in the over exposure. The real advantage here is for handing footage over to editors and colorists. It does save the step of adjusting exposure, particularly if someone with less experience or skill is posting the project. Now it could also be changing the actual sensitivity of the sensor, which I highly doubt.
Click to expand...

Yep. That's exactly what it is.
 
If you mean the Venice s709 LUT, there is no reason not to load that into an FS7 / F5 / F55 as a user 3D LUT, then in CineEI mode use it either as a monitor LUT or bake it is if you want. It is just a 33x33x33 3D LUT targeted at S-Log3/S-Gamut3.cine, so set your camera to that and you should be good.

Different sensors / dyes read noncontinuous light differently (ie cheap LEDs and many practical fluoris), but under tungsten, decent LEDs and genuine daylight things should be fairly consistent, and if you are sticking to one camera its not really an issue.

As a rule, manufacturers tend to target 'broadcast' looks little more towards straight / Rec709 6500 kelvin display, with cinema-centric looks edging orange / low display kelvin. I've seen this in Canon cine lens manuals, and in Sony's s709 white paper.

In that white paper, s709 is targeting 'cinematic' colour, and LC709 / LC709a targeting 'broadcast' colour. It should be pointed out that this is about aesthetic tweaking; Rec709 itself uses a reference display white of 6500K, and cinema colourspaces like P3 are set in grading, so the idea is nudging things a little around Rec709 to give a 'nice' look.

The glib shorthand is LC709 / LC709a is unvarnished and serious, s709 aims to give everyone a day or so in the sunshine. :-)

Ben
 
Last edited:
cameramanben said:
If you mean the Venice s709 LUT, there is no reason not to load that into an FS7 / F5 / F55 as a user 3D LUT, then in CineEI mode use it either as a monitor LUT or bake it is if you want. It is just a 33x33x33 3D LUT targeted at S-Log3/S-Gamut3.cine, so set your camera to that and you should be good.
Click to expand...

Yes, the Venice LUT. The way they advertise these things makes the unsuspecting user believe their FS5 has had an upgrade. It hasn't, it's still the same camera, with the same low-bit rate codec and the same dynamic range. Nice LUT though.
 
Liam Hall said:
Yes, the Venice LUT. The way they advertise these things makes the unsuspecting user believe their FS5 has had an upgrade. It hasn't, it's still the same camera, with the same low-bit rate codec and the same dynamic range. Nice LUT though.
Click to expand...

What's the official word on the FS5 dynamic range? Same as FS700, FS7?
 
PaulReam said:
You're welcome... unfortunately, it obviously didn't change Sony's approach to BS marketing one jot !!!
Click to expand...

I didnt want to use your name.. but yes Im well aware sir .. you saved lots of people having to trade up to an F55.. naughty little pork pies from Sony :).. funny old company but still like the cameras.. I have owned them since Betacam 400AP days.. just never be under any illusion they are out to do you any favors .. they just want to shift boxes and put folding green in the vaults.. they are not the artisans like their German cousins ..
 
400AP was the first Sony I purchased too... although I'd been using others a lot earlier !!!
I think what annoys me most is the way tech is held back with the sole purpose of repeatedly selling 'upgraded' models over many years. To be fair, they did say they would support the F5/55 for five years... and it's still on sale now, but we all know that the FS7II is in some ways a better camera... and certainly a better business proposition for many freelancers. I get the whole argument that nobody wants to make the perfect camera... but Sony take this approach to the extreme.
 
PaulReam said:
I get the whole argument that nobody wants to make the perfect camera... but Sony take this approach to the extreme.
Click to expand...

You know, I really don't feel that way at all. If anybody takes that to the extreme, it's Canon. Just take a look at their C200. Could've been a monster camera, but they purposely gave it no middle ground for a codec (no 10-bit 4:2:2 with decent bitrates) as well as only one CFast card slot. Talk about cutting your potential to protect yourself. The 5D MK IV is no different, with log being an extra purchase, 4K's crop being a joke, a terrible codec, no peaking options and a max of 60p in HD.

Sony on the other hand does a relatively good job of providing great cameras full of features at a great price. The FS7 was truly an amazing installment into the Sony line and offered so much for so little. The A7III that just came out blows the door off of any other entry level full frame camera available and offers almost everything the A7RIII and A9 offer yet at a fraction of the price.

I just don't get the argument that Sony is extreme in cutting out features to protect their higher lines. Sure, they didn't give the FS5 10-bit color in 4K and sure the FS5 MK II isn't a quantum leap over the MK I. Sony naturally has to offer some sort of boundary or else they couldn't offer different lines. But they tend to do a dang good job of offering a ton of amazing features for great prices aren't afraid to cannibalize themselves as we saw in the FS7 release and the A7III release. That's a large part of why I shoot Sony.
 
PaulReam said:
400AP was the first Sony I purchased too... although I'd been using others a lot earlier !!!
I think what annoys me most is the way tech is held back with the sole purpose of repeatedly selling 'upgraded' models over many years. To be fair, they did say they would support the F5/55 for five years... and it's still on sale now, but we all know that the FS7II is in some ways a better camera... and certainly a better business proposition for many freelancers. I get the whole argument that nobody wants to make the perfect camera... but Sony take this approach to the extreme.
Click to expand...

Yes but for a timely tip off from my Sony guy.. I would have bought the 4-3 sensor digibeta .. literally a week or two before the 16-9 one suddenly appeared .. but have been very happy with my f5 with all the firmware up grades..admittedly not if it had stayed only an HD camera.. but there again that was my mistake thinking 4K was still a few years down the road.. yes I often wonder if my f5 was stolen tomorrow would I buy another one or the fs7II.. not such a nice camera to actually use.. but the variable ND could win me over..and the new mount can handle Cine lenses..
 
PaulReam said:
. . . but we all know that the FS7II is in some ways a better camera.
Click to expand...


Seriously? Even if that's what you think, please don't make a blanket statement about what "we all" know. Because I for one, and I'm sure many others will agree with me, the FS7II doesn't even come close to an F55. The only way the FS7II might be considered better is the Variable ND filter, but that is just one tiny little thing in the big scheme of things. Don't get me wrong, I am huge fan of I the FS7 and FS7II and I think they offer more bang for the buck than any other cameras in history, but let's not pretend they are better than an F55.
 
You'll note I said "in some ways"...
You confirmed the variable ND and I'll add the size, cost and more flexible "E" mount of the FS7II.

My F5 has worked well for me, but the business argument for a freelance owner operator to purchase one now, just isn't there. Most clients don't care which camera you prefer... they want you to have what everyone else is using! The F55 has indeed been a great camera... it also has some advantages (better colour space, global shutter), so there's no need to get upset if you disagree !!!

Sorry you didn't get the point I was trying to make about Sony marketing... do you not think it's possible for them to put these various advantages together without the Venice price tag?
 
PaulReam said:
so there's no need to get upset if you disagree !!!
Click to expand...

What's with all the exclamation points? I am not upset in the least. I'm just calmly saying that your saying "we all know" does not apply to everyone. Not even close. The F55 is a vastly superior camera, especially when rigged with an R5 or R7.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top