Yes. It’s a pay for what you want world. Why would they offer it for cheap when they can make more for it? It’s a business not a charity organization. It also costs more to produce a more powerful camera. But people on forums seem to want everything now and for pennies.
New Sony FS E-mount 4K camcorder to be announced at IBC
- Thread starter Rishaar
- Start date
Yes. It’s a pay for what you want world. Why would they offer it for cheap when they can make more for it? It’s a business not a charity organization. It also costs more to produce a more powerful camera. But people on forums seem to want everything now and for pennies.
philiplipetz
Veteran
I posed this in another thread - but what about focal plane distance? The crop mode is one thing, but is it possible to get an adaptor to have the lens in exactly the right place for correct focus?
If not, what about an optical adaptor - which as well as compensating for the above could spread the image to cover the whole sensor? With all the MFT lenses about, and the severe lack of video-centric MFT bodies around, there would seem to be a market?
FrameFarmMedia
Veteran
The Veydra primes are offering an adapter to change lenses from M4/3 to E mount so it is possible
I believe that the Veydra lenses actually replace the mount on the lens, which is different than using an adapter. According to this Wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flange_focal_distance there is a 1.25mm difference in focal flange distance between E-Mount and Micro Four Thirds. Is this enough for an adapter to fit? I guess it depends. If there's also space provided by a smaller diameter lens mount (I believe that MFT has a smaller diameter than E-mount), it might also help.
Nevermind, I found one already available here: it's very thin, like I imagined: http://www.amazon.com/Fotodiox-Mount-Adapter-E-Mount-Camera/dp/B0095OLT6Q
Nevermind, I found one already available here: it's very thin, like I imagined: http://www.amazon.com/Fotodiox-Mount-Adapter-E-Mount-Camera/dp/B0095OLT6Q
Yes and no. Native M4/3 lens with electrical contacts can be physically mounted on an E-mount camera like the FS5, but they will vignette somewhat and you won't be able to adjust the aperture and focus. Not very useful. However, manual lens with a M4/3 mount, like most Rokinons, will work just fine, because optically they're designed to cover a larger sensor.
philiplipetz
Veteran
The camera has a crop mode that should eliminate all these problems, at least in HD.
Danilo Del Tufo
Well-known member
Anyone has noticed the artifacts in "Free Spirit" video (the scene with trees)? Because I've watch also the 4K version on youtube and they are still present but little.It could be a problem the XAVC-L codec compression? For Fs7 users is XAVC-L a robust codec?
combatentropy
Veteran
I haven't used it, but according to my calculations XAVC-L should be at least as resistant to compression artifacts as AVCHD. We know that AVCHD is 8 bit and 4:2:0. Those facts bring their own artifacts. But if you're talking about MPEG-4 artifacts like mosquito noise, blocking, etc., I had always read that AVCHD is fairly resilient.
So not only does XAVC-L have 64 times as many possible colors as AVCHD (1024x1024x1024 vs 256x256x256), it has twice the color resolution (4:2:2 vs 4:2:0), and it is less compressed with MPEG-4 (20:1 vs 24:1). Furthermore, the PXW-FS5 in particular should show fewer compression artifacts than other cameras, due to its 2-pass encoding.
- Uncompressed 8-bit 4:2:0 HD at 24 fps is about 597 Mbps. AVCHD is 25 Mbps. So AVCHD has a compression ratio of about 24:1.
- Uncompressed 10-bit 4:2:2 HD at 24 fps is about 995 Mbps. XAVC-L is 50 Mbps. So XAVC-L is about 20:1.
- Furthermore, Juan Martinez said in the interview that the PXW-FS5 does something most other cameras don't: 2-pass encoding. From my DVD days I remember the distinct improvement that a good 2-pass encoder made.
So not only does XAVC-L have 64 times as many possible colors as AVCHD (1024x1024x1024 vs 256x256x256), it has twice the color resolution (4:2:2 vs 4:2:0), and it is less compressed with MPEG-4 (20:1 vs 24:1). Furthermore, the PXW-FS5 in particular should show fewer compression artifacts than other cameras, due to its 2-pass encoding.
Last edited:
Danilo Del Tufo
Well-known member
Thanks, but it's possible that the tree scene of "Free Spirit" is just a bad compression by Youtube and Vimeo, it's not caused according to your calculations by XAVC-L itself. So if you are a FS7 owner, do you use this kind of compression XAVC-L?
Samuel H
Major Contributor
When the a7R II came out I also pointed out that there were obvious codec artifacts in the official test films. By how those artifacts looked, I was afraid the bitrate might be too low. Nobody seems to complain about low bitrate on the a7R II right now, which probably means that it was just a youtube thing.
Danilo Del Tufo
Well-known member
a7R II uses XAVC-S codec, is XAVC-L better than XAVC-S codec? What's the difference?
Danilo Del Tufo
Well-known member
I've another question, I've read this on a webpage dedicated to FS5 : "The camera comes with an HFR High Frame Rate mode akin to what was introduced in the lower end Sony line this year. You get 120fps recording in full sensor full HD for 16 seconds, 240fps full sensor full HD for 8 seconds." This means that you can't shoot more than 16 seconds or 8 seconds when you do slow-motion?
in Quad HD 3840 x2160 both are 8bit 420. Up to 30p they are identical except for:
XAVC-S can be 60Mbps or 100Mbps at 24/25/30 and 150Mb/s at 50/60p.
XAVC Long GOP is 100Mbps at up to 30p and 150Mb/s at 50/60p
XAVC-S uses the .mp4 wrapper / XAVC L uses .MXF
The big difference is in 1080p:
XAVC-L is 10bit 422 at 50Mb/s
XAVC-S is 8bit 420 at 50Mb/s
in 240fps and above you are limited to recording in a burst - up to 8 seconds in 240fps - which x 10 gives you 80 seconds real time. You'd have to put the camera in S&Q mode and then choose to either start trigger or recorder at end trigger. Then wait until the slow mo is recorded onto the card - in the meantime the camera is not recording , but writing the buffered slo-mo recording onto the SD card. Same as in the FS700 and RX10 II and RX100 IV.
Danilo Del Tufo
Well-known member
Thanks, instead at 200p and 100p (PAL) how many seconds you will be shoot before stops, and how the playback at 25p would be in seconds?
To me that's the advantage of the FS7, 180FPS continuous. No waiting for the buffered footage to write to the card etc, just record slow motion when you want to without missing any moments. It would be nice if they bumped the FS7 to 240FPS without an external recorder.
Danilo Del Tufo
Well-known member
Is 180FPS continuous available also for FS5?
Not to my knowledge.