What are the options for large sensor cameras with clean output?

[Wesley Byram]

What's the rolling shutter like with the Nikon D800?.

Disclaimer: I have not used a D800, though I have been interested in it. Someone more knowledgeable is welcome to correct me.

That said, most reviews I have seen place the D800's rolling shutter performance as very slightly better than the 5D MkIII, which itself skews about half as much as the MkII. Another thing to note is that the D800 has a crop mode that can be likened to the GH2's ETC mode (though it's not *exactly* the same thing, but close.) The GH2 shows much less skew in ETC mode verses normal. In theory, the D800's crop mode might show a similar improvement, but I'm unaware of any tests that demonstrate that.

 

[SJX]

Wow, this thread got hijacked! :laugh:

 

[SJX]

Disclaimer: I have not used a D800, though I have been interested in it. Someone more knowledgeable is welcome to correct me.

That said, most reviews I have seen place the D800's rolling shutter performance as very slightly better than the 5D MkIII, which itself skews about half as much as the MkII. Another thing to note is that the D800 has a crop mode that can be likened to the GH2's ETC mode (though it's not *exactly* the same thing, but close.) The GH2 shows much less skew in ETC mode verses normal. In theory, the D800's crop mode might show a similar improvement, but I'm unaware of any tests that demonstrate that.

Which crop mode in the D800 is similar to the GH2? Not the DX crop I believe since that is equivalent to APS-C, which in itself is already larger than the GH2's full sensor.

But if the D800 rolling shutter is better than the 5D MKIII then it's pretty good.

Well, since there doesn't seem to be another large sensor camera with uncompressed clean HDMI under $3000 besides the D800, I guess I may have to go with the D800. To be honest, I know on paper the FS100 should be better than the D800, but from everything I have seen from both cameras I still like the D800 better. The FS100 looks more video-ish IMO for some reason. I know it's better on moire and aliasing. But still. So with the FS100 and AF100 out of the equation when compared to the D800 (IMO and for my applications) I guess the D800 is looking like the best option under $5,000 actually.

 

[Wesley Byram]

Which crop mode in the D800 is similar to the GH2? Not the DX crop I believe since that is equivalent to APS-C, which in itself is already larger than the GH2's full sensor.

Sorry, I didn't mean to be misleading. You are correct. The DX mode and ETC modes are very different in terms of physical dimentions. I only meant that the two are broadly similar technically in that they produce an image by sampling a smaller area of the sensor than in the normal, non-cropped modes. In theory, that improves rolling shutter performance because it takes less time for the electronic shutter to "roll" through the smaller crop of the sensor than it does to scan the whole chip. That's true of the GH2's ETC mode. I suspect that it's true for the DX crop on the D800, but don't know for sure. Can someone with a D800 confirm this?

But if the D800 rolling shutter is better than the 5D MKIII then it's pretty good.

From what I understand, the difference in skew between the D800 (normal, non-cropped) and 5D MKIII is fairly subtle, with the D800 just slightly edging ahead here.

Well, since there doesn't seem to be another large sensor camera with uncompressed clean HDMI under $3000 besides the D800, I guess I may have to go with the D800. To be honest, I know on paper the FS100 should be better than the D800, but from everything I have seen from both cameras I still like the D800 better. The FS100 looks more video-ish IMO for some reason. I know it's better on moire and aliasing. But still. So with the FS100 and AF100 out of the equation when compared to the D800 (IMO and for my applications) I guess the D800 is looking like the best option under $5,000 actually.

Yeah, the D800 is the only <= $3,000 large-sensor cam on the market with a clean HDMI output. Maybe the rumored D600 will have it as well, but, of course, that doesn't help if one needs a camera now.

 

[macgregor]

The D800 rolling shutter artifacts are acceptable considering it's a DSLR. I wouldn´t worry too much about it. It´s fine.

Now the difference between recording internally and externally via HDMI is very little, almost not worth it for me. I spent some time recording with the atomos ninja, and while there is a slight improvement on color sampling, and a bit more detail resolved in high detail + high ISO scenes, it wasn't worth it the hassle of carrying an external recorder, specially when the point of using a DSLR, to me, is the movility and reduced size of the camera.

What I´m waiting for though is the Mosaic AA filter, that will be a major breaktrhough on this camera.

 

[SJX]

Now the difference between recording internally and externally via HDMI is very little, almost not worth it for me.

I think this is most likely due to the 8bit. I think if it was 10bit you would see more difference. I definitely see enough difference when I record the 10bit 4:2:2 that my EX1 puts out when compared to the XDCAM footage.

I spent some time recording with the atomos ninja, and while there is a slight improvement on color sampling, and a bit more detail resolved in high detail + high ISO scenes, it wasn't worth it the hassle of carrying an external recorder, specially when the point of using a DSLR, to me, is the movility and reduced size of the camera.

See, this is where we disagree. I think any little extra quality helps in the end. Besides this recorders are so little and some of them double as a monitor anyways. Hardly any real hassle.

 

[SJX]

Yeah, the D800 is the only <= $3,000 large-sensor cam on the market with a clean HDMI output. Maybe the rumored D600 will have it as well, but, of course, that doesn't help if one needs a camera now.

Yeah, I need it now for a shoot early October.

After Barry suggested the AF100 and since there doesn't seem to be another option besides the D800 I decided to check the AF100 again. I remember checking it out when it came out and not being impressed at all. I was never a fan of the HVX200 look and it seems to be just a HVX200 with a larger chip. The HVX200 was cool, in the early 2000's.

Nevertheless, I decided to read up on the AF100 and see if there were any progresses with it since. Also because these days it seems you can probably get a good used one for the price of a new D800. People seem to be unloading AF100s in the used market pretty quickly, which drives the prices down. But after some reading I was reminded pretty quickly of why I passed on it when it came out. It looks soft (softer than the D800) and have huge problems handling highlights. After reading this PVC article I think the AF100 is not the camera for me: http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/aadams/story/panasonic_af-100_the_good_the_bad_and_the_ugly/

This quote is what really breaks the deal for me regarding the AF100:

"The mixture of sun and shade was too much for this camera to handle so we had to wait for all of the sun to go away."

​

The project I would get the camera to shoot with is mainly externals day. We can't afford to shoot only during magic hour and it's low budget, so we can't control all the lighting with silks and the like. I know the D800 has no built-in ND filters which will be a must. But I rather use a mattebox than shoot with a camera that can't handle the highlights properly. Besides during externals you need some sort of sunshade anyway.

The article also was not very impressed with the 8bit 4:2:2 output of the AF100 at all when compared to the EX1 10bit 4:2:2. Since I'm interested in using an external recorder this is also a low point. Again I know the D800 is also only 8bit. But at least it's cheaper (and brand new), sharper, seems to handle highlights better, has better or at least comparable dynamic range and has a larger chip with not only shallower DOF but also much better low light performance, which will come in handy for the very few night externals. Which brings to another bad point of the AF100. Noise!

So unless something has changed that I don't know of in the form of a new firmware or revolutionary picture profile that minimizes noise and fixes the highlight handling, the AF100 is totally the wrong camera for me. I know there are picture profile to reduce noise but it sacrifices the already low dynamic range these digital cameras have.

With all the new and better cameras being released on it's price range, I can see why AF100s are going so cheap in the 2nd hand market.

So are there any new developments for the AF100 that I'm not aware of?