Test: Sony FS100 vs. BMPCC

imaj

Active member
Hi all,

Did a test with a friends BMPCC and the Sony fs100. I shot the same rose at the same time using the Nikon 35mm G 1.8 lens on both cameras. The FS100 had the MTF adaptor and the BMPCC had the Speed Booster. Here are some specs...

Sony FS100:

White Balance 3200
24fps
1920x1080
Recorded to the internal AVCHD 4.2.0 codec
Picture Profile:

- G-LOG A 2.0 -
Black Level: 0 (set per scene)
Gamma: Standard
Black Gamma High, +7
Knee 105, 0
Color Mode: Pro +8 (was “Standard” before – typo, sorry)
Color Level: -3
Colorphase: -7
Colordepth: R -6, G +2, B +2, C -2, M +1, Y +2
WB Shift: LB-CC, 0, 0
Detail: Level -2, Manual off

BMPCC:

White Balance 3200
24fps
1920x1080
Recorded to the internal ProresHQ codec


Above is the end result of the BMPCC



Above is the end result of the Sony FS100

What I find interesting is that the Rose in the BMPCC photo has more detail. Able to see the veins. But the FS100 has more detail in the green leafs. Is 8bit 4.2.0. dead? Would love to hear your feedback. Thanks!
 

Attachments

  • bmpcc_2.jpg
    bmpcc_2.jpg
    17.4 KB · Views: 0
  • fs100_2.jpg
    fs100_2.jpg
    17 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
I always found red to be the hardest color to get right when I was tweaking FS100 picture
profiles. But other than that I always thought the FS100 picture looked great. I think
AVCHD is great for what it is. Looks good and takes up very small amounts of space. Great
for lower budget and quick turnaround stuff, which to be honest, is most of what I do.
I only wish there was a switch that allowed you to pick raw, ProRes, or AVCHD recorded
internally without hooking up an external recorder. That would be neat.
 
could you post the original files for both? I have a FS100 now and I'm looking to get a Blackmagic Pocket Camera. from the look of the stills the FS100 image has an overall red tint to it judging by the background
 
Thanks guys. I should add that the FS100 is more true to the real color of the rose than the BMPCC.
 
Back
Top