The A7s "best footage straight out of the camera thread"...or something.

sparky33 said:
Bill, what does this have to do with color profiles or best out of camera settings? I don't even see a profile listed in the Vimeo comments.
Click to expand...

Sparky,

Since this is a "best footage out of camera thread" I posted some "straight outta camera" footage : )
PP off, Neutral -3,-1,-3 setting.

I figured if anyone liked the look they'd inquire about settings, it if didn't create any interest, that would be informative to me as well.
 
bill totolo said:
Sparky,

Since this is a "best footage out of camera thread" I posted some "straight outta camera" footage : )
PP off, Neutral -3,-1,-3 setting.

I figured if anyone liked the look they'd inquire about settings, it if didn't create any interest, that would be informative to me as well.
Click to expand...

In your Vimeo comments you state "Not the magic noiseless camera many claim, overall fun to use and a step forward for DSLRs, but not an Alexa/Epic/F55/C300 contender." Considering these are all 17x + more expensive cameras, what cameras have you personally used that ARE better in low light? I certainly haven't used a better camera when the lights go down, but I don't have access to any of those you mentioned.
 
sparky33 said:
In your Vimeo comments you state "Not the magic noiseless camera many claim, overall fun to use and a step forward for DSLRs, but not an Alexa/Epic/F55/C300 contender." Considering these are all 17x + more expensive cameras, what cameras have you personally used that ARE better in low light? I certainly haven't used a better camera when the lights go down, but I don't have access to any of those you mentioned.
Click to expand...

Considering all factors that go into a production's needs, low light sensitivity and price-point are only one two (albeit, important) factors that go into the decision making process.

I think you're right. It's about assessing the camera based on your needs. Factors may include the CODEC, colorimetry, rigging/cages needed for the camera, CMOS artifacting/jello, DR, resolution, bit rate and bit depth, fps, shape, weight and general usability in a particular production environment, factors like: what did the show use last season (that post has become accustomed to working with?), and a host of other considerations that I'm not even privy to at the network level go into the decision making process as well. (Usually a network hires a production company to shoot content, who in turn hires on the keys, like DP, etc. So I never interface directly with the network exec's, although, this could prove helpful in some cases).

Among my current clients, (which are all broadcast cable at the moment) I would be hard pressed to recommend this over the other cameras I listed on my Vimeo page. I could probably use it on a docu style shoot as a b-roll camera, a la Anthony Bourdain's "Parts Unknown", which has actually come up recently (different show, different network).

I am prepping a micro budget feature however, and I'm making arrangements to take A7s footage via a DCI to project on a 30 foot screen at a post house here in Hollywood to determine if this is a viable option for the film. This might be a really good place to adapt the camera where it can shine.

As far as low-light performance, my tests, and I think that's what's most important here, what the individual photographer determines for themselves, indicates that I wouldn't be comfortable shooting over 2500 iso. That's with picture profiles turned off. I'm not comfortable shooting SLog in 8 bit with a minimum iso of 3200 either. I also find shooting with Cine Gamma + lifted Black Level ineffective for me since I'm going to crush those shadows back down in grading anyway to hide the noise floor. Give me an un-effected dump straight off the sensor, then I'll shape a curve and bend the image as I want. Low-light performance is only one factor, most of my shoots allow me to have G&E so I can shoot to a desired stop on an iso 800 camera easily.

BTW, iso 2500 is impressive, and I think a lot more realistic evaluation of the noise floor of the camera. When zooming into mid tones and shadows (200-400%) at higher iso's you'll see plenty of chroma sub-sampling, and stuff that just looks ugly. This isn't going to reveal itself on Vimeo necessarily, but would merit a call from Post that I'd prefer to avoid.

At the end of the day I want to be responsible to my clients, and determine what works best for me.
​
 
Last edited:
sparky33 said:
In your Vimeo comments you state "Not the magic noiseless camera many claim, overall fun to use and a step forward for DSLRs, but not an Alexa/Epic/F55/C300 contender." Considering these are all 17x + more expensive cameras, what cameras have you personally used that ARE better in low light? I certainly haven't used a better camera when the lights go down, but I don't have access to any of those you mentioned.
Click to expand...


BTW, we have to be critical of camera manufacturers. They appreciate user feedback. I love what they're doing, but they also have to hear about our experiences when using their equipment in the field. Believe me, they want to keep improving. Talk to them, they'll respond.
 
Last edited:
bill totolo said:
BTW, we have to be critical of camera manufacturers. They appreciate user feedback. I love what they're doing, but they also have to hear about our experiences when using their equipment in the field. Believe me, they want to keep improving. Talk to them, they'll respond.
Click to expand...

IF 2500 is your ISO "ceiling" with the a7s, what is your ISO ceiling for the Alexa/Epic/F55/C300? I realize there are all the variables you mentioned when selecting a camera, but in your Vimeo link you specifically pointed out the A7s being "overhyped" when it came to noise levels. So of the four aforementioned, which are better in low light? Money / form factor / all other variables completely isolated and disregarded for the sake of this discussion.
 
sparky33 said:
...n your Vimeo link you specifically pointed out the A7s being "overhyped" when it came to noise levels.
Click to expand...

My exact words were "Not the magic noiseless camera many claim". A lot of people out there are publishing videos with claims this camera has tolerable noise levels far above the levels I would use, and if examined, have a lot of ugly stuff going on. In some instances I think these are pretty wild claims (40,000 iso anyone??). Would I use that if I didn't have to?

<<what is your ISO ceiling for the Alexa/Epic/F55/C300?...of the four aforementioned, which are better in low light? Money / form factor / all other variables completely isolated and disregarded for the sake of this discussion>>

You really have to get your hands on the tools and make these decisions for yourself. I've used all the cameras above, and each are capable of fantastic imagery, but what I used for a 3D HFR documentary at Burning Man isn't going to be the right choice for a series on Outdoor Channel where I was traveling quite a bit and shooting handheld. And so on.

I've literally used most of these camera on different projects in the same week, and based on a discussion I had with a manufacturer this week with a group of cinematographers we're learning this is not outside the norm. With so many cameras out there, and more coming, why try to force someone to make a decision as to which is best? I can rent whatever I need, when I need it, and use something else on the next production.

Some people love owning gear, and I've been there. It's great having a package you maintain yourself and trust. Right now, I'm working in broadcast cable and network television where no two production companies operate the same way. So owning is out for me right now.

I didn't invent the term but I like being "camera agnostic". Keeps me critical of any device in my hands.
At the end of the day I invest in the tools that serve me, not someone else. I may not have the skill-set of some one else.
 
bill totolo said:
My exact words were "Not the magic noiseless camera many claim". A lot of people out there are publishing videos with claims this camera has tolerable noise levels far above the levels I would use, and if examined, have a lot of ugly stuff going on. In some instances I think these are pretty wild claims (40,000 iso anyone??). Would I use that if I didn't have to?

<<what is your ISO ceiling for the Alexa/Epic/F55/C300?...of the four aforementioned, which are better in low light? Money / form factor / all other variables completely isolated and disregarded for the sake of this discussion>>

You really have to get your hands on the tools and make these decisions for yourself. I've used all the cameras above, and each are capable of fantastic imagery, but what I used for a 3D HFR documentary at Burning Man isn't going to be the right choice for a series on Outdoor Channel where I was traveling quite a bit and shooting handheld. And so on.

I've literally used most of these camera on different projects in the same week, and based on a discussion I had with a manufacturer this week with a group of cinematographers we're learning this is not outside the norm. With so many cameras out there, and more coming, why try to force someone to make a decision as to which is best? I can rent whatever I need, when I need it, and use something else on the next production.

Some people love owning gear, and I've been there. It's great having a package you maintain yourself and trust. Right now, I'm working in broadcast cable and network television where no two production companies operate the same way. So owning is out for me right now.

I didn't invent the term but I like being "camera agnostic". Keeps me critical of any device in my hands.
At the end of the day I invest in the tools that serve me, not someone else. I may not have the skill-set of some one else.
Click to expand...

Why should I have to get all the cameras in my own hands to determine which performed best in low light? Especially if you've used all of them? You sound like a politician the way you're avoiding my direct question. If I wanted to know which was fastest - the latest Porsche, Lambo, Ferrari, etc. I could certainly look up the numbers. Low light performance is measurable. I'm not asking which sports car is best for going to the grocery store, and I'm not asking which camera is the best for X job. You specifically stated the A7s wasn't the "low noise" beast everyone else claimed. So tell me - of the 4 other cameras you've used, which is better in low light? It's not a difficult question and I don't need to hear your resume for a response.
Again - I am *NOT* asking which is best. Period. Just which of those 5 are better in low light. Nothing more, nothing less.
Thanks.
Also Philip Bloom and many other people go far higher than ISO 2500 with this camera and have no problem. You must just be special.
 
I guess it's just the way I think, the are no absolutes and the world isn't black and white.
Every camera test can be manipulated and is influenced by the tester.

I don't know where you picked up this grudge. It sounds like you have a bone to pick so I'm moving on.
I'm just encouraging people to make their own decisions.

Peace.
 
Last edited:
bill totolo said:
I guess it's just the way I think, the are no absolutes and the world isn't black and white.
Every camera test can be manipulated and is influenced by the tester.

I don't know where you picked up this grudge. It sounds like you have a bone to pick so I'm moving on.
I'm just encouraging people to make their own decisions.

Peace.
Click to expand...

Sounds to me like you're just backpeddling from your comment. Look, no one ever said the a7s is a replacement for "pro" level cameras with built in ND / XLR / etc. but you have to admit for the money NOTHING beats it for low light. Including all the cameras you mentioned. Period.
 
browse with chrome. it translates for you.

conclusion:
  • if you wish to probe a high-contrast image (with an advanced type Resolve software), use the S-LOG2 association and S-GAMUT to have as much information (even if the latitude is not the expected one);
  • if you do not want to do the calibration, I advise you, in the current state of this first firmware of A7S the CINE3 curve associated with the Matrix Movie or S-Gamut settings as "cinema" alternative to the S-LOG2, without calibration;
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top