Phantom LUTS

Doug Jensen said:
You can download the 4K ProRes file if you want. Do you see any banding? Seems like if banding was an issue with this 33 Grid LUT, I'd see it in the bokeh areas of these shots. What do yo think?
Click to expand...

Yes Doug, mean looking birds. Beautiful shots and no banding even when pushed hard. As one would hope from a well deigned LUT with data distribution properly distributed across the entire capture range. I would be very happy if all the footage I had coming in looked like this. Trouble is, so many of the LUTs I see have shocking data distribution and can sometimes start to band when pushed in certain areas. I guess this was shot with the 200-600? Beautiful images. :thumbsup:

Chris Young
 
cyvideo said:
I guess this was shot with the 200-600? Beautiful images. :thumbsup:
Chris Young
Click to expand...

I'm glad you liked the images and didn't see something I was overlooking. Yes, the birds were shot with the 200-600mm, and the middle two shots also used the Sony 2.0x teleconverter to make it a 1200mm. I didn't use the teleconverter too much over the summer but now I am kind of rediscovering it again.
 
Doug Jensen said:
I'm glad you liked the images and didn't see something I was overlooking. Yes, the birds were shot with the 200-600mm, and the middle two shots also used the Sony 2.0x teleconverter to make it a 1200mm. I didn't use the teleconverter too much over the summer but now I am kind of rediscovering it again.
Click to expand...

Not losing anything noticeable on that 2 x. That only works on a few of the lenses, doesn't it?

Chris Young
 
cyvideo said:
Not losing anything noticeable on that 2 x. That only works on a few of the lenses, doesn't it?

Chris Young
Click to expand...

Yes, that is a special teleconverter design that is only compatible with certain Sony telephoto lenses. It works with my 200-600 and 70-200 but none of my other lenses.
Sometimes it looks better than other times. I'll be shooting something with it, and I'lll think "hey, this looks good, I should be using the 2x more often." And then I'll shoot something else another day and be underwhelmed with the look. Sometimes I feel like it has lower contrast and is a little soft. I think it looked pretty good for the Jet Skiiing, but then I was using it for birds in flight yesterday and I wasn't too happy when I briefly reviewed the footage last night. I can't make up my mind about it or see any common denominator as to when it looks good for not.

I think whether it looks good or not may have something to do with how much fine detail is in the subject. The jury is still out.
 
Doug Jensen said:
Yes, that is a special teleconverter design that is only compatible with certain Sony telephoto lenses. It works with my 200-600 and 70-200 but none of my other lenses.
Sometimes it looks better than other times. I'll be shooting something with it, and I'lll think "hey, this looks good, I should be using the 2x more often." And then I'll shoot something else another day and be underwhelmed with the look. Sometimes I feel like it has lower contrast and is a little soft. I think it looked pretty good for the Jet Skiiing, but then I was using it for birds in flight yesterday and I wasn't too happy when I briefly reviewed the footage last night. I can't make up my mind about it or see any common denominator as to when it looks good for not.

I think whether it looks good or not may have something to do with how much fine detail is in the subject. The jury is still out.
Click to expand...

I'm glad to see you say that, Doug. I feel 100% exactly the same with my 2x converter when using it with the 200-600. Certain shots look much softer than others, and while it could be user error when on MF - when using AF with my A7siii - I sort of get more or less the same results. Fine detail in subject is a good educated guess.
 
markfpv said:
I'm glad to see you say that, Doug. I feel 100% exactly the same with my 2x converter when using it with the 200-600. Certain shots look much softer than others, and while it could be user error when on MF - when using AF with my A7siii - I sort of get more or less the same results. Fine detail in subject is a good educated guess.
Click to expand...

Misery loves company. :)
I think I'm going to grade some of the footage I shot yesterady to see if I can find any rhyme or reason to what looks good and what doesn't.
 
markfpv said:
I'm glad to see you say that, Doug. I feel 100% exactly the same with my 2x converter when using it with the 200-600. Certain shots look much softer than others, and while it could be user error when on MF - when using AF with my A7siii - I sort of get more or less the same results. Fine detail in subject is a good educated guess.
Click to expand...

Okay, after grading a bunch of footage today I think I have it figured out. And it seems so obvious that I'm kicking myself for not seeing it sooner. First of all, putting the 2.0x on the 200-600 makes the max aperture f/13. And if I'm shooting at 120 fps, my shutter speed is equivalent to 1/300 (144 degrees). So unless it is very bright outside, I have to switch to HIGH base mode (12,800) to get the exposure I need. And that creates a lethal combination:

1) The 200-600mm is a pretty good lens, but at $2K it's not exactly high-end glass, so you're already starting with one foot in the grave.
2) Add the 2.0x and you cut the light in half and soften the image just because there's more glass to degrade the image.
3) A max aperture of f/13 sucks, so you have to kick the camera into HIGH base mode and go from IS0 800 to ISO 12,800, which then degrades the image further.
4) 4K @ 120 fps is cropped, which further degrades the image quality.
5) High-contrast subjects with lots of detail start to suffer.

So, that's my take on it. I will definitely think twice before using the 2x again for wildlife at dusk on a cloudy day. It also might be time to rent or borrow a Sony FE 600mm f/4 GM OSS lens to see how it compares. But then again I'd miss having the zoom, so there's no easy solution.
 
Last edited:
I wonder how using the Sony fx30 without a teleconverter, possibly with even a crop of the sensor since it's 6K to begin with, would compare to using the fx6 with a teleconverter. The fx30 is cheaper than buying another lens anyway

I've been using the a7iv in crop mode with my Tamron 70-180 because there isn't a longer telephoto that i can comfortably fit on my gimbals. I'm generally pleased with that approach
 
ahalpert said:
I wonder how using the Sony fx30 without a teleconverter, possibly with even a crop of the sensor since it's 6K to begin with, would compare to using the fx6 with a teleconverter. The fx30 is cheaper than buying another lens anyway
Click to expand...

Yeah, the FX30 is definitely cheaper than upgrading to a better lens. I'll bet you're correct that the S35 FX30 would provide superior picture quality @ 120 fps, but then I would lose built-in ND, cache + S&Q, and other stuff that the FX6 offers. There is no solution that covers all the bases. Every choice is a compromise to one degree or another.

In the end, the wildlife footage I was grading yesterday turned out not too bad after a little noise reduction and other stuff was applied to it. I'm mostly satisfied with the results. If anyone cares, I might be able to post something from that shoot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top