FS5: "New tests show Sony FS5 macro-blocking and noise issues when recording 4K internally

I posted this in another FS5 forum but I thought it could be useful here as well...

I got my FS5 at the end of November, I think I would be called an 'early adopter'. After reading these posts, I'm going to try to avoid Cine and normal Rec709 (PP3) until further notice. I did a recording yesterday in Rec709, and then switched it today to Rec709 800% (PP4). I can't scientifically prove it, but in viewing in through a SmallHD 501 monitor (excellent monitor BTW for general checking of focus and exposure) I 'feel' that the image is a lot better and is also a bit brighter. I'm at ISO 4000 because I have to be. I'm doing this with a FS5 with a Metabones Speedbooster Ultra and a Canon 70-200 f4.0 L IS lens and I'm effectively shooting at f2.8. I'm also using the 'clear image zoom' to get even closer or reframing without having to zoom the Canon lens which isn't parfocal. I started with the 18-105 kit lens, and while this lens is 'ok', it's not as sharp and the image is not great, and manual focusing is pretty terrible and unusable because of the 'focus by wire' feature of the lens. I feel that all the 'focus by wire' lenses by Sony are at a disadvantage to manual or EF lenses, the only thing they do better is autofocus, because even with the 'cadillac' of electronic EF-Emount adapters, Metabones, the autofocusing feature seems to be non-functional with the FS5.


I'm using just one FS5 rather than what I did before which was to use a Sony EX1 for closeups, and a GH4 for a wider view. I'm using this gig to see if I can replace my EX1 + GH4 with just one camcorder and then crop in post for the closeups. The image quality being superlative isn't a requirement for this gig so I'm using it as a "test" for the FS5, profiles, and workflow. The 'bug' of the FS5's internal LCD/EVF being disabled is tolerable since the 1.10 firmware update. Having info on the FS5 and image on the external monitor works, though when the SmallHD suddenly shuts off due to batteries running out is inconvenient because you are basically blind! You can't switch of the FS5 setting that turns on the internal LCD in lieu of the 4K HDMI output while recording! That should be a button assignable function and should be switchable while recording but I doubt it's technically possible.


In doing this, I feel I can replace my trusty old EX1. I feel the image quality with this combo I have now is way better than the EX1, more light sensitive, and almost as versatile and certainly more versatile in post. This gig extends to tomorrow and I plan to try out some SLog profiles along with trying to get a LUT into my SmallHD 501 for previewing the final image.


All all, I'm kind of OK with the FS5. I'd like it to be perfect, I feel a little bit fooled by the advanced marketing, including the filmmakers / paid promoters reports on the FS5. I feel Alistar Chapman is an awesome and amazing resource for all of us, I've been following him since the EX1 introduction. I'm slightly perplexed by his stance on the FS5 as I feel that it should be at least as good as a A7rII or A7sII, Canon C100 or C300 in low light and I don't feel it is at this point. For example, for this gig, I have a very 'fast' lens setup with a 2.8 and I still need to be at 4000 iso because of the environment. Seminars are often like this. I feel the my new A7sII (and even the old A7s) is better, out of the box, image wise, than the FS5, which is a bit disappointing to me. But using the A7sII as a camcorder (I've tried) is a hassle compared to the FS5. Having dual SDXC slots with mirror or relay recording (I'm using relay recording for this current gig) unlimited recording time, electronic ND, Clear Image Zoom, large battery capability, and ergonomics of the FS5 is awesome! But we are early in the FS5. Within a month of the release, we've already had a significant HDMI output update that makes the FS5 much more usable in the real world.


I knew going in that the FS5 might not be a 'Cinema' camcorder like the FS7 or the C300MkII or the upcoming Ursa Mini 4.6K. I was hoping for a bit more initially, and we may get closer, and if Sony comes out with a Raw output update it may get there, but then it loses it's portability advantage.


I'm not sure if I've ever seen as many posts, blogs and reports about a new camcorder's problems as this new FS5, I feel Sony has to be hearing these reports and will take them seriously. But we shouldn't hold back! If you see problems let Sony (via this and other forums) know!


I'll be discussing all this and more on my podcast about Cinematography, Post Production and Workflow, TechMove in the near future.

-Keith Moreau
 
There is absolutely no way it would ever be as good in low light as an A7s. They are completely different beasts. There is not a dedicated video/cinema camera in the world at any price with a capability like that.

But to be honest shooting at 4000 iso on a camera that looks bad at iso 2000 with an f4 lens tells me you have other options available to you. Like a) add light or b) use a faster lens.
 
Ben, I'm talking image quality not necessarily equivalent low light capability when comparing to the A7sII. I've done a couple of well-lit low ISO shoots with both and I feel the A7sII has a bit less grainy image quality (but this was before I knew about this thread's issue and I was shooting with Rec709) And I would expect for video it would compare to a A7rII as the sensor size is similar, and while I don't have an A7rII, for ISOs below 6400, I suspect the image quality, at this point, is better on the A7rII than the FS5. And I know that the A7rII has more pixels but the FS5 has bigger pixels. I'm using Canon 70-200 L F4 lens with a speedbooster because its a fantastically sharp longish zoom and with the speedbooster is f2.8 which is pretty darn fast for a zoom. Of course I have other options - I could light the hell out of this venue's stage and it would look terrific with the FS5! And I could use fast long f1.4 primes but then the DOF would be so shallow that would be a pain. By the way Ben do you own a FS5? I'd like to hear your thoughts on if if you do. -Keith
 
I have used the FS5 once and have to say I utterly hated it. The A7sII has a much better image quality for me.

2.8 isn't fast if you're underexposed at 4000iso. Plenty of 2.8 zooms would get you another stop or so with the Speedbooster.
 
An update for those interested. I've been in touch with Sony Professional about the edge tearing artifacts since I got the FS5 in mid-December. Today I got an email stating that the issue has been forwarded to Japan, and that they are evaluating it.

So at least they're taking a look at it.
 
An update for those interested. I've been in touch with Sony Professional about the edge tearing artifacts since I got the FS5 in mid-December. Today I got an email stating that the issue has been forwarded to Japan, and that they are evaluating it.

So at least they're taking a look at it.

:cheesy::cheesy: :)
 
As a prospective buyer I spoke to the big cheese at the Sony professional stand (CES 2016) about the issues and various forum posts. My guess is that he will feed back the concerns he has been presented with.
 
I was doing a bit of slow motion testing with the FS5 at 240fps, and was thrilled with the look. I then burned a DVD and viewed it on a samsung 55" led tv and the blocking around each moving image was awful. I was shooting geese landing on a local lake and around each bird was this horrible pixilation so I went back to the NLE and I had to really look but I could sort of see it on my apple 30" monitor. So I decided to do a bit more "testing" and I burned a blu-ray at 1920x1080 and it is as clean as a whistle. Absolutely perfect both on the LED tv and on my plasma. But when I output it to a mov file for youtube there it is, just not as bad as that DVD on a television.
Has anyone who is seeing the pixelation in 4K tried to burn a Blu-ray and view it large? I think I will try to see if I can replicate what people are complaining about and out put some test.
And is there a remedy for a setting to get a clean DVD output? and or a Youtube setting to minimize any pixelation.
It seems like the exporting is having a bit of trouble with these files.
Thanks
 
I was doing a bit of slow motion testing with the FS5 at 240fps, and was thrilled with the look. I then burned a DVD and viewed it on a samsung 55" led tv and the blocking around each moving image was awful. I was shooting geese landing on a local lake and around each bird was this horrible pixilation so I went back to the NLE and I had to really look but I could sort of see it on my apple 30" monitor. So I decided to do a bit more "testing" and I burned a blu-ray at 1920x1080 and it is as clean as a whistle. Absolutely perfect both on the LED tv and on my plasma. But when I output it to a mov file for youtube there it is, just not as bad as that DVD on a television.
Has anyone who is seeing the pixelation in 4K tried to burn a Blu-ray and view it large? I think I will try to see if I can replicate what people are complaining about and out put some test.
And is there a remedy for a setting to get a clean DVD output? and or a Youtube setting to minimize any pixelation.
It seems like the exporting is having a bit of trouble with these files.
Thanks

One explanation for the problems you saw on the DVD is that, if I remember correctly, DVD resolution is 720 x 480. Compared to 1920 x 1080 Blu Ray with a much higher data rate. Viewing it on the NLE, be sure you a viewing at full rez. Premiere for example has half and quarter rez settings for playback. Render out the file as a Prores and see how it looks on the 55".
When rendering out for Youtube, if in Premiere use the dropdown menu with default Vimeo or Youtube settings. If rendering a 1080P MP4 make sure the data rate is at least 20mbs or more (when more concerned with quality then file size).
 
Just because NLE's are capable of editing native codecs i am from the school of thought of transcoding into a less stressful, less compressed codec like ProRes. It eliminates extra stress on your computer be it CPU or GPU.

I would test transcoding to ProRes then burning a DVD as compressing a compassed coded to another highly compressed codec could be causing tour issues.

Give it a try :)
 
Also the resizing of 1920x1080 to SD has a lot to do with it. Not sure what program your using but the best of the lot (Resolve, PPC, FCPX etc) is actually Quicktime Pro. It does the BEST resizing of all.

Try exporting out of Quicktime - resize for your DVD then compress for it.
 
+1

Just what I was going to say. A DVD is no way to assess any kind of footage. I burned a BluRay in 2009 and I think my last DVD was 2007 or 2008.

Ned Soltz
 
Back
Top