Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
My point was that the scene is an obvious nightmare scenario that needs a bit of thought to get a good result from and as just one factor, surely all attempts to limit extraneous light hitting the lens drastically improves your ability control said scene.
Sure, some argue this should be addressed optically (just like some argue that rolling shutter / jello is not an issue - just use static shots and there is no issue...) but it is not always solution. That's the point. It is not only wide open. Many of my lenses (admittedly not Ultra or Master primes) even when stopped down seem to trigger this fringing (yes, slight amount of spherochromatic CA is there), same lenses which never were a problem on other systems. We are talking about the specific system - not about the camera and lenses individually. Sure, we all learn how to work around limitations of a given system but does it mean the issue does not exist and should not be discussed?
How does mattebox help in a situation where ton of specular hotspots and high contrast objects are in the frame?
So the mattebox helps in controlling chromatic aberration? Or improves debayering process? Can it help with rolling shutter and other issues? What is the brand of your mattebox? I need it. Let's close this topic, the solution is the mattebox. And in this article where Art Adams describes similar, this time cyan artifact which was visible in XAVC but gone in RAW, was the mattebox the obvious solution too? http://www.dvinfo.net/article/acqui...-light-three-isos-and-many-possibilities.html
So the mattebox helps in controlling chromatic aberration? Or improves debayering process? Can it help with rolling shutter and other issues? What is the brand of your mattebox? I need it. Let's close this topic, the solution is the mattebox. And in this article where Art Adams describes similar, this time cyan artifact which was visible in XAVC but gone in RAW, was the mattebox the obvious solution too? http://www.dvinfo.net/article/acqui...-light-three-isos-and-many-possibilities.html
Art Adams said:Those cyan specks are not so much blue/green as they are minus red, as you can see on the waveform above. Directly above each cyan spec the red channel plunges. Adam Wilt tells me that he’s seen this kind of artifact before, and it’s always on the trailing edge (right side) of clipped objects. His theory is that this is an artifact of the live deBayer process required to record it in real time to the internal cards.
Please, feel free to discuss the issue. I have no problem with it being part of the conversation. But if you look back, you're the one who dismissed my points about optics, indicating they didn't belong in the conversation. Don't exclude my points, I won't exclude yours.
The rest of your post above...why always such condescending tone?
So the mattebox helps in controlling chromatic aberration? Or improves debayering process? Can it help with rolling shutter and other issues? What is the brand of your mattebox? I need it. Let's close this topic, the solution is the mattebox
How did I dismiss your point? In response to your post I said "It is not a question whether the CA is there in the first place or not, no one argues whether the CA fringes (specifically spherochromatic ones) are there." Does that dismiss your point?
The rest of your post above...why always such condescending tone? Where are all the assumptions from?
Exactly. Your own quote of yourself - you treated the CA as a known issue (implicitly, known to the OP), and that the relevant issue was the digital processing one regarding XAVC/raw. Beyond that, your consistent dismissal of tips regarding optics, lighting, and other on set solutions has clearly demonstrated your primary interest in the digital processing element of this issue, to the exclusion and disregard of the practical elements raised my myself and others.
What is it that we can actually do about Sony's highlight handling implmentation for XAVC? What does beating that horse to death accomplish?
Holy smokes, it appears around the moon too.
This looks like a huge mistake for me to buy this camera, as i intend to shoot alot of high contrast nature shots where i always have zero control of the lighting. Moon, stars, water, sun, leafs, waterfalls. Yes. Give me all of that.
But no other camera does what the FS7 does. This can drive a person mad.
Shame you got rid of your old equipment before being diligent and fully researching the FS7 then you might have discovered the FS7 is in fact a worth POS that exhibits purple fringing for fun. Sucks to be you...
Martin,
I wouldn't worry too much about various scaremongering blog and forum posts. The fact that the camera is being used on plenty of commercials and broadcast shows, including Bloom's work on the Wonder List where he had very little control over the environment in some very technically challenging locales, should tell you that if you know learn how to use the camera properly and how to shoot properly you will more likely than not be fine.
I've not once had a single frame like the ones shown here in 9 months of owning the camera.
Why so mean? Why are you pointing fingers before you know your facts?
My FS700 and Odyssey 7Q is still in my posession. This is the research i am doing.
And by looking at the response in this thread, is the FS7 part of this forum always this aggressive and anti-social? Im a little shocked over the bad behaviour here.
At any rate, there should be a fix for the purple fringing. Some say a firmware update, others say fix it in post. Is there a fix? A filter that can be applied in post? Something to alleviate this issue?
said:However, when reading up i see several posts about purple fringing. It looks like i may be doing a bad descision to sell my FS700+Odyssey7Q and go for a purple fringing box from Sony.