FAQ XVAC480 for F5 and F55 - any chance for FS7?
- Thread starter Ben Scott
- Start date
It seems rather apparent that Sony has indeed had plans from the beginning for many of these FW updates & upgrades. Seeing the 5 / 55 get these added benefits this far down the road makes it almost worth putting up with their quirks. I'd really like to know what the deal is with certain early serial #'s having to go in to svc center to get the update is all about... that one intrigues me.
Ben Scott
Veteran
RCX is a metadata adjustment with all the information being carried in an RMD sidecar file that sits next to the r3d. Any NLE (and rcx) will read the rmd file and make it so your adjustments are to the source file in real time, unless you've transcoded your raw files to a baked format, which I never did.
I edit with the source material all the way from ingest to delivery.
There's only about 3-4 things in rcx that don't carry over into metadata and are for transcoding only.
Last edited:
Ben Scott
Veteran
Hi Paul, long time listener etc etc...
I think your hack has done Sony the world of good. Being as they are a company of engineers as opposed to operators what you did forced their hand and I think they've picked up the ball and run with it and each camera in the range now occupies a definite space and has a reason to continue to exist.
Ben Scott
Veteran
Well EI2000 is an arbitrary number that has little relationship to the reality of the rating of the camera, but it is a constant so you know you can push that rating a stop and have consistant results. It's only a big deal if using a meter or matching to other cameras who have an alternate arbitrary system of making up iso numbers
Yes maybe the F5 should join the F55.. rather than the Fs7.. it dos seem the target buyer of the Fs7 is different from the F5.. the lens mount being a big give away.. and since the F5 has 4K.. (we were going to do it anyway.. oh yeah
.. the price difference for global shutter/and a wider colour array ( that no display gamma can even show) .. seems a hell of alot.. they need to put the price of the Fs7 up and the F55 down ..
Nirv
Carbonite Member
Yes maybe the F5 should join the F55.. rather than the Fs7.. it dos seem the target buyer of the Fs7 is different from the F5.. the lens mount being a big give away.. and since the F5 has 4K.. (we were going to do it anyway.. oh yeah
Some of the slo-mo stuff Doug has shot on his F55 looks a shed load better than similar frame rates coming out of the FS7 (F5 too?) is it just global shutter and wider gamut? I suspect not.
Anyway, I'd like to hear someone make a business case for upgrading their FS7/F5. I know there is a fascination with news toys that we all have but try and fight that urge and look at a camera in purely business terms and what features would it need to positively impact on your bottom line. Obviously a new camera isn't free so what feature is worth investing in to make you more profitable that your current camera do?
Ben Scott
Veteran
My business case is that an FS7 can do 90% of what I need a camera to do. The bits where it struggles for my day to day stuff are few and far between.
But I'm really trying to push on to the next tier of production and a lot of the stuff that current clients wouldn't notice or would accept would be rejected out of hand in that next tier. Only problem is a camera better equipped to deal with that next tier might not be as cheap/run and gunny and so then you either rent when you need to, or you have two cameras.
I had an FS7 and A7sII but nobody was even vaguely interested in the A7 for video shoots so I've offloaded it and hopefully in the end the FS7 will be the B camera and something more robust can be the A camera.
Of course it's equally true to say the upgrade is to all elements of gear, not just the camera. Lighting and grip have to be getting an overhaul too.
Anyone want to buy some stuff?
But I'm really trying to push on to the next tier of production and a lot of the stuff that current clients wouldn't notice or would accept would be rejected out of hand in that next tier. Only problem is a camera better equipped to deal with that next tier might not be as cheap/run and gunny and so then you either rent when you need to, or you have two cameras.
I had an FS7 and A7sII but nobody was even vaguely interested in the A7 for video shoots so I've offloaded it and hopefully in the end the FS7 will be the B camera and something more robust can be the A camera.
Of course it's equally true to say the upgrade is to all elements of gear, not just the camera. Lighting and grip have to be getting an overhaul too.
Anyone want to buy some stuff?
Dont know if the GS has any big advantage re slo mo.. the Gamut I think no or little difference for TV/Web display.. it might be 240 fps with the RAW recorder.. I believe he has one.. that 16 bit RAW might be the difference.. or its just the better processor in camera..compared to the Fs7..
As a freelancer who is never doing my own shoots.. my business model is 100% what I being asked to supply by the people paying me.. now 100% s35 sensor and maybe 10% 4K at most.. but enough that its not worth renting to be able to "supply" that.. so it would be something big like a change in sensor that would force me buy a new camera .. I think the F5 will be ok for HDR.. if that becomes the new rage.. !
Grug
Veteran
- A Vistavision-sized sensor with enough resolution to debayer to a proper (4:4:4) 4k image (and full-height anamorphic, and conventional S35mm formats too)
- At least one extra stop of highlight latitude
- A global shutter
- Dual-native ISOs ala Panasonic (800 and 5000 seem a great combo)
- Perfect LUT support (that means it's on at ALL times, for recording or playback, but doesn't impact monitoring features like false colour or waveforms).
- A lower bitrate version of XAVC to allow for smaller proxy files when recording raw
- Independently configurable SDI outputs (so that you can send individually configured LUTs/frameguides/camera info to Video Village, the 1st AC etc. without complexity or clutter)
- Perfect variable framerates 1-240fps (or whatever crazy number it gets up to) and by 'perfect' I mean no dicking around changing to 'high-speed' modes to access different framerates
- 2,000k-10,000k adjustable white balance
- a built-in cheeseplate (ala C700) to avoid having to add extra gack just to rig accessories to the camera
- some sort of built-in wireless capabilities for sending a wireless video signal out and receiving a wireless audio signal in - WITHOUT having to cover the camera in extra gack (at least for short range transmission)
Seams a reasonable list to me.
Alpha Beta Omega
Veteran
I see the next generation of 4k cameras to get 4k 100/120fps and 2k 200/240fps with little or no image issues as this would really open up high frame rate shooting to do any kind of work. It's around the corner. Then there are many small issues to solve and frankly every new generation of cameras will have their issues, so to expect an issue free camera is foolish.
The really interesting question to ask is if Sony can hit the sweet spot as they did with the FS7 once again?
The really interesting question to ask is if Sony can hit the sweet spot as they did with the FS7 once again?
Ben Scott
Veteran
Red Raven with a rock solid EF mount shoots 4k raw at 120fps on a Dragon sensor for around the same price as an FS7 ready to shoot.
The only caveat is that it's not S35.
Considering how slow they were to embrace 4k and how quickly they got up to speed once they were there, the real question for me is how long will raw be a marketing gimmick or will Sony's X-OCN, the closest they have to compressed raw, be rolled out recording internally on all future FS and F series cameras?
The next camera I own will need to have a significant increase in image quality and 4K framerates, but hopefully without sacrificing the Super 35mm field of view.
The only caveat is that it's not S35.
Considering how slow they were to embrace 4k and how quickly they got up to speed once they were there, the real question for me is how long will raw be a marketing gimmick or will Sony's X-OCN, the closest they have to compressed raw, be rolled out recording internally on all future FS and F series cameras?
The next camera I own will need to have a significant increase in image quality and 4K framerates, but hopefully without sacrificing the Super 35mm field of view.
Currently I'm shooting with the FS5. I love the size and design of the camera so it fits my Movi M5 (only barely) and Alta6. The image is quite nice but after renting the FS7 for one job I'm missing something in the FS5 footage besides 4K 50/60p. It could be a placebo effect or lens effect since I mainly shot the FS7 in XAVC-L for storage/cards reasons.
What I really don't like on the FS5 is the monitoring (no LUTS, no waveform etc). So I was thinking about my options. I would like to have the possibility to shoot raw and a more compact internal codec for a bit more run & gun situations including the option to go higher framerate in 4K.
- FS5 with Raw option: Will get way bigger on the Movi M5 when installed on the Alta because then you can't mount the monitor/recorder on the handle bar. Played with online Raw footage and there's quite a bit of noise in the shadows.
- FS7: Too big for Movi M5 and still no in-camera RAW.
- Raven: don't like the cost of media, power and accesoires. And still a bit too large (height) for Movi M5. And no ProRes in 4K.
- URSA Mini: Too big for Movi M5.
- Kinefinity Terra: Perfect size and internal Raw and ProRes options at a lot of different resolutions and framerates. Big question is the QC from Kinefinity, how the small body is going to react to the heat, possibly bad rolling shutter.
I decided to go for the Terra and made a priority preorder, maybe keeping the FS5 besides it or selling it. If the quality of the Terra is on par with KineMax and if it functions as it's supposed too I think this will be a great option.
What I really don't like on the FS5 is the monitoring (no LUTS, no waveform etc). So I was thinking about my options. I would like to have the possibility to shoot raw and a more compact internal codec for a bit more run & gun situations including the option to go higher framerate in 4K.
- FS5 with Raw option: Will get way bigger on the Movi M5 when installed on the Alta because then you can't mount the monitor/recorder on the handle bar. Played with online Raw footage and there's quite a bit of noise in the shadows.
- FS7: Too big for Movi M5 and still no in-camera RAW.
- Raven: don't like the cost of media, power and accesoires. And still a bit too large (height) for Movi M5. And no ProRes in 4K.
- URSA Mini: Too big for Movi M5.
- Kinefinity Terra: Perfect size and internal Raw and ProRes options at a lot of different resolutions and framerates. Big question is the QC from Kinefinity, how the small body is going to react to the heat, possibly bad rolling shutter.
I decided to go for the Terra and made a priority preorder, maybe keeping the FS5 besides it or selling it. If the quality of the Terra is on par with KineMax and if it functions as it's supposed too I think this will be a great option.
Ben Scott
Veteran
I think all of that is perfectly reasonable, but I imagine you'd be paying higher than C700 prices for it.
Just like I want cleaner shadows and better rolloff in the higlights. Both those things are available and both of them have a pricetag
I've still not got my head around the whole 'dual iso' thingy of the Varicam. What's the method of achieving this?
Just like I want cleaner shadows and better rolloff in the higlights. Both those things are available and both of them have a pricetag
I've still not got my head around the whole 'dual iso' thingy of the Varicam. What's the method of achieving this?
Ben Scott
Veteran
I'd love to hear about your Terra experiences. Heard nothing but good from Kinefinity but I'm too scared to make the leap myself. 'I hope we can shoot this on Kinefinity' said nobody ever in the history of production. It's a concern for me as I need to see a ROI on my gear.
My (very brief) experience of the FS5 was it seems respectable enough with a lot of light thrown its way and degraded very quickly outside of its Goldilocks zone, to the point where I felt my A7sII yielded a far superior image (although that cam had problems of its own too).
digitalinnovations
Well-known member
I've been impressed with what the A7rII (so I'm sure the A7sII would be similar) is capable of producing as a gimbal / B-Cam to the FS7 if treated properly.
I agree. There is not one new camera of any brand that would make me sell my F5 and move to. For the clients I have, the F5 and it's extreme range of options/features has never left me needing or wanting more, nor do I see a near-future limitation. However the first request I possible see coming down the road for a very very few clients is 4K above 60p. This to me makes the R7 a great tool for expanding the capabilities and extending it's life. If... only they allowed 4K/120p for the F5 when using the R7 and not just the 55. I get they want to "reward" the 55 owners with a higher tier feature but it seams incredibly short sighted to ignore half? their potential clients. They also risk the F5 owners transitioning to a different brand in search of a higher 4K frame rate.
4K is a different aspect ratio to 1080p which why a different amount of the sensor is used.
Plus I don't think any Digital camera is accurate with its ISO ratings. It's a marketing ploy, not a fault
Agree completely about the mount, and the vf cable too. The only really weak design points.
17:9 is wider than 16:9 but when swithing to UDH or 4K you also see more in terms of "tallness".
So the camera effectively use a larger part of the sensor in general not just in relation to aspect ratio it seems to me atleast.
Last edited:
Ben Scott
Veteran
Agree completely. I just couldn't find a way to monetise it so put the money into other gear.
Nirv
Carbonite Member
I said earlier in the thread I think the F5+R7 is a cracking combination and will extend the life of the camera for years.
I suppose the F5 frame rate limitations with the R7 could actually be hardware limitations though not many people will believe that after the 4k backtracking, however, I do think Sony would've binned their ASICs such that the F55 got the A1s while the F5 and FS7s got the lower grades so it remains a possibility. If Sony are just limiting F5+R7 frame rates not for hardware limitations but because they can then they're still showing us they can make bloody stupid decisions.