Other: Sony full frame unveiled, named "VENICE"

Gary T said:
The recording format are included in the screenshot Dennis included in his initial post.

I would be more of a renter vs a buyer but does look like it has a great deal of potential. The stills look great and I am looking forward to seeing footage.

I don't want to be negative but I don't think Sony aimed high enough when it comes to recording formats. Except for resolution it doesn't appear to break much new ground vs the F55 when it come to recording. I'm disappointed that we don't see a competitor to the Varicam's excellent AVC-Intra4K444 and that the ProRes is still limited to a (proxy) HD resolution. Sony is rightfully proud of their X-OCN ST and 16 bit linear RAW recording with the R7 but I would love to have seen ProRes 4444 XQ and a 444 XAVC variant. With the ProRes support the camera could have been a easier replacement for existing Alexa post production pipelines.

I also don't get the limited frame rates. It doesn't seem like much of an improvement vs the F55 given that it's the new flagship. I know it's apple and oranges but Venice doesn't beat the EVA1's frame rates. I am sure there is a great technical explanation but it's puzzling.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it doesn't have any RAW compression ratios, nor bit-rate for their compressed codecs. They probably haven't released it yet? Haven't seen it anywhere.
 
Is this still shooting the same Slog choices, and did they finally add the ability to adjust color or still sticking with 3 presets?

Still giving the choice of hypergammas and 709 recording?
 
abreu-canedo said:
Yeah, it doesn't have any RAW compression ratios, nor bit-rate for their compressed codecs. They probably haven't released it yet? Haven't seen it anywhere.
Click to expand...

The R7 records XOCN ST XOCN LT as well as the original 16 bit linear RAW so they apparently offer the same 3 raw compression ratios as the F55. My point is that they didn't break any new ground.

I have buddy who is a colorist at Technicolor who sings the praises of Sony's 16 bit linear RAW and when it came out he said he thought it would be the future. That may be true but for now we are editing with ProRes, DNxHR, DNxHD and AVC-Intra, and XAVC. Part of the Alexa's success is that it's ProRes 4444 XQ is close enough to the RAW people go with it instead of dealing with the hassle of the raw. Maybe better NLE support for XOCN is on the horizon, but if not I think Sony missed an opportunity by not providing a 444 XAVC variant or ProRes 4444 XQ.
 
LennyLevy said:
Is this still shooting the same Slog choices, and did they finally add the ability to adjust color or still sticking with 3 presets?

Still giving the choice of hypergammas and 709 recording?
Click to expand...

Ali chap say

Colour temp.. 1k increments (no mention of G-M shift)

EI only.

--------

Ref prores, compression whatever.. XAVC data rates are known.

Sony obviously have their head in a certain bucket.. they like their codecs (with good reason) and throw on HD prores for proxies.

------

HFR.. some (Dan Chung) say that reading a big chip is slower.

If it were me I would be offering windowed HFR.
 
nsoltz said:
I have been dark since getting my briefing so now I can talk. No leaks or fake news coming from me ;)

No price is specified. My UK editor was briefed at Sony Pinewood and the Europeans gave a ballpark of 37K GBP. But in all fairness, I would rather not take that as a final number.

We were told that there was a simplified menu system.

Peter Crithary also tells me that sensor resolution is 24mp as opposed to 18mp of the F65. CFA is same as F65 but sensor is otherwise all new as is the color science.

Very large photosites on the sensor.

Native ISO is still TBA.

Important to note that F5, F55, F65 remain in the line and will be continued to be updated.

Sony's goal now is not to obsolete cameras. Venice will be around for a while.

Now... let me ask readers' opinions.

Should Sony have released an 8K rather than a 6K sensor? I will not offer an opinion now as I'm curious what others of you think.

Ned Soltz
Click to expand...

I think 6K is more than fine. Larger photosites is better than more photosites.

The suggestion of ISO 500 is very interesting. This is what the F35 is too.

Specs look good. Now all that is left to see is if it will look as nice as the F35. If it does, Sony might have a big winner here.

About the F65 continuing in the line up and continuing to be updated, is it even being updated? Could have fooled me. Regardless, I think we will start seeing cheap F65 for sale on ebay soon.
 
It sounds pretty great. While I won't be able to afford this I would expect in a couple of years the newer color science will start appearing in cheaper cameras along the lines of F5/55 and the FS7 and that will be a very welcome sight.
I wonder why they chose 8 wheels of ND rather than the variably electronic ND ? Perhaps some loss of picture quality?
 
Sony RAW uses a 3:1 compression ratio. X-OCN ST and X-OCN LT reduce data by roughly 30% and 60% respectively compared to Sony RAW. I think Sony is really on to something with the new RAW variations. Comparable bitrates to ProRes but in 16-bit.
 
Eric Coughlin said:
I wonder what the weight of the body is.

Limited internal recording options and frame rates is a bit surprising.



It's got an HDMI port!
Click to expand...

Spec sheet says the body weight is Approx. 3.9kg (8lb 10oz) (without lens, handle, VF attachment expansion bottom plate and accessories).
 
Already rumors of the next Bond being shot on it.

I like their new promo hook a lot: "Emotion in every frame." This is basically what their F35 is. So maybe Venice will have mojo like the F35 and Alexa. I'm really hoping it does. Let's hope The Dig doesn't look like video as Dig did. Footage can't be here soon enough.
 
Someone want to explain how the photosites can be larger?

By my math the pixel density is identical to the F5 sensor within 1%.

The F5 has 4096 pixels over 24mm = 170.66 pixels per mm
The Venice has 6048 pixels over 36mm = 168 pixels per mm

Can we have smaller / larger photosites within the same pixel density? I guess we can, because F55 would have smaller photosites given they had to reserve some space for the electronic shutter.
 
abreu-canedo said:
Yeah, it doesn't have any RAW compression ratios, nor bit-rate for their compressed codecs. They probably haven't released it yet? Haven't seen it anywhere.
Click to expand...

Gary covered the RAW / XOCN but the compressed codecs are XAVC, 300mbps and 480Mbps at up to 30p and DOUBLE at 60p (ie. 600Mbps and 960Mbps)
 
Last edited:
I wad just thinking that in s35 crop the density is about the same as Alexa ?

--

But in ff mode equal pixel size is "bigger pixels"

Consider Kodachrome - one grain size - but 645 is "less grainy" than ff35 because the print magnification is less (get me?)
 
starcentral said:
Gary covered the RAW / XOCN but the compressed codecs are XAVC, 300mbps and 480Mbps at up to 30p and DOUBLE at 60p (ie. 600Mbps and 960Mbps)
Click to expand...

Thanks! Didn't realize they were just gonna keep it all the same.

Was hoping there might be more compression ratios, and bitrate options.
 
starcentral said:
Someone want to explain how the photosites can be larger?

By my math the pixel density is identical to the F5 sensor within 1%.

The F5 has 4096 pixels over 24mm = 170.66 pixels per mm
The Venice has 6048 pixels over 36mm = 168 pixels per mm

Can we have smaller / larger photosites within the same pixel density? I guess we can, because F55 would have smaller photosites given they had to reserve some space for the electronic shutter.
Click to expand...

There were a few comparisons vs the F65. I read something on Alister Chapman's site attempted to explain why Venice isn't an 8K camera where he said they settled on a 6K sensor to give it larger pixels. Interestingly he also said "if you use the camera as a super 35mm camera you have 4K" which suggests that the 4K isn't supersampled.

As it specifically relates to the F5 and the F55, Venice's sensors uses effective 24.4 million photosites of it's 24.7 million total photosites vs the 8.8 million effective photosite the F5 uses of it's 11.6 million total. Depending how they measure all of that the answer you are looking for could somewhere in the details of Sony's sensor math.

Isn't it interesting how many details they can give us in the documentation without actually providing the answer we are looking for.
 
ISO 500 is a bit limiting considering you'd need to close one stop to maintain the same DOF as S35. Not a big deal on a Stage, but could be when mixing with subdued Natural, or Existing, Light.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top