F55: Re: The MOST POLARIZING camera?

And then you get called a condescending old fart.. :).. probably true.. but seriously there is a big difference in expectations and methods of working.. and that seems to be at the heart of this whole debate.. and that yes its a very cheap camera that doesn't process the image like an F5 let alone an Amira.. and a bit dodgy PR .. that has taken a few people for a ride maybe..
 
Last edited:
Sony seems desperate to undo all the good will and kudos they accrued with the FS7 with how they market stuff.

The FS5 appears to be an events camera that happens to have a large sensor and is being marketed as a jack of all trades when in fact that's what the FS7 is. For me the image quality gap between the FS5 and FS7 is far greater than between the FS7 and F55, and that latter is already pretty sizeable.
 
Last edited:
Agree with you guys. I think the marketing team is on a different planet than the engineers at Sony... or at least they certainly aren't communicating well. When the FS7 was announced and I became interested in it based on specs - I then became very confused and almost passed on it because of the "run - n gun " marketing approach that Sony took here in the US. I don't think they knew what they actually had put into the marketplace exactly.
 
Ben Scott said:
What I saw of 3200log on the FS5 was horrific.
EDIT: No idea what gamma was used for when I saw it at 2000iso
Click to expand...

Apparently you were using the wrong settings, because I've found the camera looks very, very good in low light. Much better than most people give it credit for. Even +24dB is still usable.
 
Good to hear that Doug Jenson, Sony Camcorder instructor. ;)

However, the demo I went to at CVP in London with a couple of Sony ambassadors told a different story and I'll go with my own eyes.
 
Fortunately I have a Sekonic light meter, DSC charts, and Leader WFM to confirm what my eyes tell me. The camera ain't too bad in low light. Too bad you don't have a camera to take a closer, more scientific look. That's the problem with a showroom demo.
 
Okay, if that's your attitude, I'll step away from the conversation before I tell you want I really think.
You've admitted already that you don't even know what the settings were. I could make the camera look noisy too if you'd like to see it.
 
Do what you like mate. I don't have anything else to add to my impressions and I don't have any 'dog in the fight' so to say.

It's not for me. It might be for someone else. It's not what Sony are marketing it as.

Knock yourself out.

EDIT: In response to your edit, I know what the ISO3200 settings were, not the ISO2000 ones were. I'll go out on a limb and suggest the people (both known DPs) being paid to demonstrate the camera might have an inkling how it works.
 
Last edited:
except for this issue with the 4k recordings the camera seems like evetything I expected it to be from the marketing.
 
I don't think anyone is saying it can't do a job. It just depends what that job is. In defence of the complainers a camera forum is obviously going to pick apart every camera under the sun, way more than most clients do. However all that matter is if you can get a return on your investment (if you need to) or if you can make the images that make it worth it to you.

For me or my work I don't think I could, but plenty other people out there and on here doing different sorts of work that it might be great for.
 
Well yes that is a bugbear of mine that I brought up several times on Dvxuser, along with considering the source of info or opinion given on certain subjects here.
 
I dunno, they might fix it, they might not, I don't think we should speculate what Sony will do with future updates. They will probably fix it up a little better but I think the real solution will be enabling the 4k output over the SDI so recorders like the 7Q can get the quality without the little problems.

Then we will have the option to add the recorder to the setup and get solid 4k, or go small and light weight and take the hit in quality. I am fairly certain we will see a 4k Atomos Ninja Star soon, I bet Convergent Design is listening and thinking about the FS5. Truth is, as long as the SDI is enabled with a 4k output like the FS700, you will have the option with this camera, as we do with so many others currently, to add a recorder that improves the quality of the footage.

again, i hope it improves internally because the idea that sony sold to us was cool, and it does seem the trade off Sony picked was too much noise reduction over grain. We have a fairly good idea of how this chip should act from FS700, FS7 and even the mighty F5 (which I must say are becoming quite the deal these days) so it's not crazy to think it can be fixed through firmware.

Speaking of crazy deals, I see the Fs700 with nice package going for under 2k on eBay. It's hard to justify the FS5 just in terms of size with the huge price drop on the old girl. Maybe I only feel FS700 is interesting because I already own 7Q package so the cost is very low to get better than the FS5 is offering for 6k.
 
Ben Scott said:
... People used to working with a 60D saying that a Red Raven or FS7 is overpriced quite clearly don't understand the professional market properly and don't understand what you're getting for that money. Hence a gazillion people on here saying the Blackmagic Ursa 4.6k mini, a camera none of them has used, at less than 10% the price is 99% as good as an Alexa, another camera 99% of them have never used...
Click to expand...
Let me walk back that quote. The difference isn't 10%. It's negligible. It's all in the hands of an operator.


BTW, I just watched about half hour of Assassination of Jesse James" in HD. It's gorgeous. But it's not the camera. It's the operator.
 
For some of us, there was a very pointed goal. Identify the edge tearing artifacts that were clearly visible in footage, and find out where that issue originates in order to report it to Sony so that they may evaluate it and potentially make tweaks.

Some in this community took this as an opportunity to condescend and diminish those that had a very specific and legitimate concern. Noise reduction on the FS5 has an unfortunate effect that is beyond the threshold of "typical noise reduction" for many, and we wondered if there was a way for Sony to improve it.
There were posts about how polarizing the FS5 is. No, its not. Owners love the FS5, they just noticed a flaw and wanted to get Sony’s attention to shed more light on the matter.

Yet that one simple and innocent request resulted in a deluge of personal attacks that I can only imagine were borne out of condescension, insecurity, or both. Alister’s blog took people’s concerns and roundly mocked them as “complainers” conducting “stupid and silly tests”, while tacitly admitting that there was something not ideal about the way the FS5 was applying noise reduction in the image. It escalated what was merely observations from users into a petty and at times nasty debate about who knows how to use their camera correctly. Come on people, we’re a better community than that. Rather than looking upon people who have legitimate concerns as “pixel peepers”, and sitting on your high horse, why not contribute constructively, or stay out of it if it’s not relevant to you.

Others took a “holier than thou” attitude to make a point about operator vs. camera. This misses the point completely, and is so irrelevant and obnoxious, I don’ t know where to start. Just remember, this is a very specific issue with a very specific aspect of the FS5 that we hoped for improvements on. Not saying that the FS5 is a bad camera by any stretch, or to say that we don’t know how to make a nice image with the FS5.

Meanwhile, Sony is appreciating the feedback and tests because it helps them with their jobs and is helping them make a better camera (granted their PR department may not like it). Don’t forget that Sony is made of people, who make mistakes and learn new things just like the rest of us because they aren’t able to conduct the level of testing that can only occur when a camera releases to the public. They’re not the all-knowing robots that Alister seems to suggest that they are, who were aware of every single consequence of every element of the FS5’s engineering. Cameras evolve. That’s the reality of modern videography. Firmware updates allow manufacturers to release improvements afterwards, while bringing camera to the market faster.

I sincerely hope that this community will keep a more open mind in the future, because I think this whole situation has reflected poorly on both sides, but worst on those who made this into a pissing match on ISO’s, Db’s, lighting, noise, broadcast standards, etc etc. There’s an anomaly in the FS5, an otherwise fantastic camera. That’s all there is to it. Let’s not turn this into something else that does a disservice to everyone involved.
 
Last edited:
DLD said:
Let me walk back that quote. The difference isn't 10%. It's negligible. It's all in the hands of an operator.


BTW, I just watched about half hour of Assassination of Jesse James" in HD. It's gorgeous. But it's not the camera. It's the operator.
Click to expand...


Are you saying this clip looks like it was shot on an Alexa? If so I would very strongly disagree.

I agree it's the sculptor more than the clay but there's also a reason why great sculptors use great clay.
 
maxjw said:
For some of us, there was a very pointed goal. Identify the edge tearing artifacts that were clearly visible in footage, and find out where that issue originates in order to report it to Sony so that they may evaluate it and potentially make tweaks.

Some in this community took this as an opportunity to condescend and diminish those that had a very specific and legitimate concern. Noise reduction on the FS5 has an unfortunate effect that is beyond the threshold of "typical noise reduction" for many, and we wondered if there was a way for Sony to improve it.
There were posts about how polarizing the FS5 is. No, its not. Owners love the FS5, they just noticed a flaw and wanted to get Sony’s attention to shed more light on the matter.

Yet that one simple and innocent request resulted in a deluge of personal attacks that I can only imagine were borne out of condescension, insecurity, or both. Alister’s blog took people’s concerns and roundly mocked them as “complainers” conducting “stupid and silly tests”, while tacitly admitting that there was something not ideal about the way the FS5 was applying noise reduction in the image. It escalated what was merely observations from users into a petty and at times nasty debate about who knows how to use their camera correctly. Come on people, we’re a better community than that. Rather than looking upon people who have legitimate concerns as “pixel peepers”, and sitting on your high horse, why not contribute constructively, or stay out of it if it’s not relevant to you.

Others took a “holier than thou” attitude to make a point about operator vs. camera. This misses the point completely, and is so irrelevant and obnoxious, I don’ t know where to start. Just remember, this is a very specific issue with a very specific aspect of the FS5 that we hoped for improvements on. Not saying that the FS5 is a bad camera by any stretch, or to say that we don’t know how to make a nice image with the FS5.

Meanwhile, Sony is appreciating the feedback and tests because it helps them with their jobs and is helping them make a better camera (granted their PR department may not like it). Don’t forget that Sony is made of people, who make mistakes and learn new things just like the rest of us because they aren’t able to conduct the level of testing that can only occur when a camera releases to the public. They’re not the all-knowing robots that Alister seems to suggest that they are, who were aware of every single consequence of every element of the FS5’s engineering. Cameras evolve. That’s the reality of modern videography. Firmware updates allow manufacturers to release improvements afterwards, while bringing camera to the market faster.

I sincerely hope that this community will keep a more open mind in the future, because I think this whole situation has reflected poorly on both sides, but worst on those who made this into a pissing match on ISO’s, Db’s, lighting, noise, broadcast standards, etc etc. There’s an anomaly in the FS5, an otherwise fantastic camera. That’s all there is to it. Let’s not turn this into something else that does a disservice to everyone involved.
Click to expand...


Agree completely. Certain people loudly and repeatedly going 'Well I don't have the shutter bug on my FS7 you must all be doing cameramanning wrong' is why over a year later we still don't have the shutter bug fixed on the FS7.

That said, Sony are neither all-knowing robots nor human beings who listen to their client base, and so sadly they need to be publicly bullied into addressing issues. See them 'suddenly' discovering the FS7 raw issues a year after it being brought to their attention, because Cinema 5D ran a piece on it.

And just to reiterate, any comments about the FS5 have been made based on comparing what I saw of it first hand with what Sony put it out there as. I absolutely believe it can do a job for a lot of people. At the same time I don't think someone should be encouraged to put their hard earned money into a camera or system if the thing they want it for is the thing where it falls apart most. Speaking as someone who has just offloaded their Sony extension unit and 7Q after a year of trying to get raw to play nice I hate seeing people get burnt like I did.
 
quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by Ben Scott
... People used to working with a 60D saying that a Red Raven or FS7 is overpriced quite clearly don't understand the professional market properly and don't understand what you're getting for that money. Hence a gazillion people on here saying the Blackmagic Ursa 4.6k mini, a camera none of them has used, at less than 10% the price is 99% as good as an Alexa, another camera 99% of them have never used...
Click to expand...

DLD said:
Let me walk back that quote. The difference isn't 10%. It's negligible. It's all in the hands of an operator.


BTW, I just watched about half hour of Assassination of Jesse James" in HD. It's gorgeous. But it's not the camera. It's the operator.
Click to expand...


I find it amusing too, that not only are many BM camera forum members comparing a camera they have as yet never used (4.6K Ursa), but also they are compairing it with another camera they have never used (Alexa). It's hilarious that they are thus comparing TWO cameras they have never used in fact!

The other thing I see over and over again is that funky cyan/magenta crossover in all BM videos. (The pastel effect). Am I the only one that see's this? The shadows are not blue for instance, they are cyan. No way anyone who has worked with footage from the Alexa could confuse the two. BM has a look, which comes from having to consistently pull up the saturation in an exaggerated manner in order to achieve "normal" color saturation levels. This distorts the edges of the color spectrum.
I truly hope the 4.6K version gets beyond this. But it remains to be seen. This is what I will be closely looking at in any case.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top