The FX6 and log exposure for commandos

JimGao said:
What did i say that was false? i’ll correct it.
Click to expand...

In post #77 of this thread you said "With the A1, for example, the low base and hi base are closer, so the difference between over the other can be negligible, and when deciding between the two, the answer is generally finding more light."

However, the A1 doesn't even have HI/LOW base modes. So your comment is false.

In post #80 you said about the A1: "For SLOG3 some say it is iso800 and iso4000, so a 2.5stop split"

However, the A1 never suddenly gets cleaner at any higher ISO level. Noise always increases progressively with every step up. So you are repeating the false comments of other people, or misunderstanind what they may have said.

If you actually used any of the cameras you talk about, rather than just parroting the comments from others who are also ignorant of the facts, you wouldn't be posting such incorrect information.
 
Doug Jensen said:
In post #77 of this thread you said "With the A1, for example, the low base and hi base are closer, so the difference between over the other can be negligible, and when deciding between the two, the answer is generally finding more light."

However, the A1 doesn't even have HI/LOW base modes. So your comment is false.

In post #80 you said about the A1: "For SLOG3 some say it is iso800 and iso4000, so a 2.5stop split"

However, the A1 never suddenly gets cleaner at any higher ISO level. Noise always increases progressively with every step up. So you are repeating the false comments of other people, or misunderstanind what they may have said.

If you actually used any of the cameras you talk about, rather than just parroting the comments from others who are also ignorant of the facts, you wouldn't be posting such incorrect information.
Click to expand...

Have you used a Sony A1 and specifically tested this aspect of the camera?
 
JimGao said:
Have you used a Sony A1 and specifically tested this aspect of the camera?
Click to expand...

I own an A1 and have specifically tested this aspect of the camera. Unlike some folks, I wouldn't be commenting something I didn't have direct knowledge of.
 
JimGao said:
And is iso4000 more noisy than iso3200?
Click to expand...

We're talking about small fraction of a stop, so the difference is so slight it is hard to see any difference at all in most tests. But if pressed, yeah, I would say the 4000 is either the same or worse than 3200. It is certainly not better. Anyone who says there is a big drop off in noise when you go from 3200 to 4000 is delusional. I'd be happy to send you copy of my test footage if you'd like to buy it.
 
Doug Jensen said:
We're talking about small fraction of a stop, so the difference is so slight it is hard to see any difference at all in most tests. But if pressed, yeah, I would say the 4000 is either the same or worse than 3200. It is certainly not better. Anyone who says there is a big drop off in noise when you go from 3200 to 4000 is delusional. I'd be happy to send you copy of my test footage if you'd like to buy it.
Click to expand...

Alright, that is all you had to say. we’ll have to have words with DPreview and Gerald Undone for the misinformation.

It would still be weird if iso4000 was any cleaner than iso3200. but in this thread, we’ll take your word for it.

thanks for the information

i’ll edit my post to say FX9 instead of A1, as my point was more about the spread of different hi/lo iso’s than trying to comment about a specific camera.
 
Well, I was joking about selling you my test footage. Here's a free download with split screen already done for you.
Why trust my judgement? Why don't you download the ProRes file and let us how you would rank each shot from best to worst.
For example: TEST1: B,C,D,A,E
Any other comments are also welcome.

I have tried to keep the exposure fairly consistent by adusting the shutter speed only.
I will tell you what you are looking at later. Right now, just take the blind test and share your analysis.

https://vortexmedia.cimediacloud.com/r/BY3WAui6PKxY
 
Doug Jensen said:
Well, I was joking about selling you my test footage. Here's a free download with split screen already done for you.
Why trust my judgement? Why don't you download the ProRes file and let us how you would rank each shot from best to worst.
For example: TEST1: B,C,D,A,E
Any other comments are also welcome.

I have tried to keep the exposure fairly consistent by adusting the shutter speed only.
I will tell you what you are looking at later. Right now, just take the blind test and share your analysis.

https://vortexmedia.cimediacloud.com/r/BY3WAui6PKxY
Click to expand...

Thanks Doug!

Which picture profile did you shoot this in?
 
Doug Jensen said:
It's noted on the video graphics.
Click to expand...

Cool

I was going to say, you would only see the clean up after iso4000 if you use S-Log3.

S-Cinetone the hi/lo happens at lower iso’s. Not sure about other profiles. like surprising different, iso 180 and 800 or something. So if you do the test on anything other than slog3, you’d not see the difference between iso3200 to iso4000 or 6400.
 
JimGao said:
S-Cinetone the hi/lo happens at lower iso’s. Not sure about other profiles. like surprising different, iso 180 and 800 or something. So if you do the test on anything other than slog3, you’d not see the difference between iso3200 to iso4000 or 6400.
Click to expand...

How do you know this? Stop posting stuff that you don't have any first-hand knowledge of. You think I've got nothing better to do that to keep correcting you?
 
Jesus Christ!! I did the test for your benefit so you could see how the noise changes at different ISO levels. What a ****ing waste of time.
 
Doug Jensen said:
Jesus Christ!! I did the test for your benefit so you could see how the noise changes at different ISO levels. What a ****ing waste of time.
Click to expand...

I’m sorry you did that, but I don’t use an A1 professionally at this time, and if i did, i’d be doing my own tests. I appreciate the thought, but there are just too many variables involved with those kinds of things. If you say it doesn’t have a second base, then i believe you are sincere. The only problem is that guys like Jordan from DP review and Gerald from Gerald Undone have already told something like a 1/4 Million or more viewers that the A1 does have two “bases”. You don’t need to convince me, i already backed off the A1. This is day 5 of this A1 discussion? i’m happy to chat, that’s why i’m here, but i’m hoping you understand i accept your opinion on the A1 for this discussion, as i was not intending to comment specifically about the A1, but rather any camera with a shorter split between hi/lo base iso’s. If you say the A1 doesn’t have a base-boost, then i have no horse in the race, and take you at your word.

There are plenty of people that appreciate your efforts and contributions and recognize when you are being generous. Hopefully the clip you posted will be seen by the right people and it will help them more than it could ever help me. Thanks Doug!
 
Last edited:
JimGao said:
I’m sorry you did that, but I don’t use an A1 professionally at this time, and if i did, i’d be doing my own tests. I appreciate the thought, but there are just too many variables involved with those kinds of things. If you say it doesn’t have a second base, then i believe you are sincere. The only problem is that guys like Jordan from DP review and Gerald from Gerald Undone have already told something like a 1/4 Million or more viewers that the A1 does have two “bases”. You don’t need to convince me, i already backed off the A1. This is day 5 of this A1 discussion? i’m happy to chat, that’s why i’m here, but i’m hoping you understand i accept your opinion on the A1 for this discussion, as i was not intending to comment specifically about the A1, but rather any camera with a shorter split between hi/lo base iso’s. If you say the A1 doesn’t have a base-boost, then i have no horse in the race, and take you at your word.

There are plenty of people that appreciate your efforts and contributions and recognize when you are being generous. Hopefully the clip you posted will be seen by the right people and it will help them more than it could ever help me. Thanks Doug!
Click to expand...

You're nothing but a troll. This proves it. You have the chance to evaluate some S-LOG footage and come to your own conclusions instead of relying on my opinion or the incorrect Youtube clowns you worship. Your ignorance about this topic is loud and clear when you say "there are just too many variables" No there aren't too many variables - that's the whole point of S-LOG. My test narrowed it down to one thing -- ISO. That's it. But you're too lazy to even take a look and provide your "expert" analysis.

I think you did look at the footage. Discovered you were wrong, and now want to weasel out of the whole thing by saying "You don’t need to convince me, i already backed off the A1". Isn't that convenient? You sure had a lot to say earlier in the week.

The next time you don't want to comment specifically about the A1, maybe you shouldn't specifially say "A1" over and over again your sentences.

Please do us all a favor and shut up and stop posting about stuff you have no clue about so that the adults can go about their business.
 
Last edited:
Doug Jensen said:
You're nothing but a troll. This proves it. You have the chance to evaluate some S-LOG footage and come to your own conclusions instead of relying on my opinion or the incorrect Youtube clowns you worship. Your ignorance about this topic is loud and clear when you say "there are just too many variables" No there aren't too many variables - that's the whole point of S-LOG. My test narrowed it down to one thing -- ISO. That's it. But you're too lazy to even take a look and provide your "expert" analysis.

I think you did look at the footage. Discovered you were wrong, and now want to weasel out of the whole thing by saying "You don’t need to convince me, i already backed off the A1". Isn't that convenient? You sure had a lot to say earlier in the week.

The next time you don't want to comment specifically about the A1, maybe you shouldn't specifially say "A1" over and over again your sentences.

Please do us all a favor and shut up and stop posting about stuff you have no clue about so that the adults can go about their business.
Click to expand...

Hmm, i’m at a loss. You are talking to me as if i asked you for proof. We have just been shooting the **** here and i’m not sure what all this proofing stuff is about. i mentioned the A1 as an example of a dual iso camera in passing. i admitted i should have used a better reference. That was it. You said you’d never heard of it and couldn’t find any reference to it online, so i provided a link for you. That was it.

As for variables, does the footage have the meta data for iso values? or do i have to trust you on that? For me, i might as well just trust you in the first place.

For me to open the files to begin with, i’d have to have some incentive, and i have none. What would i learn? What would i get? I’d get more superficial knowledge of a camera i have little to do with, fast forward three weeks, i’m talking to someone else about cameras and someone brings up the A1. What can i share with them? nothing. because it would be the same thing as watching Gerald undone. I’d watch the footage and see it, and then someone else would have another opinion.
 
on the flip side, if i were interested in the camera at this time, i probably would watch them. So i am sure someone else will be able to benefit from them, so it certainly isn’t a waste of your time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top