Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Bruno

Sony RX100: Getting the best video out of it...

153 posts in this topic

The AdobeRGB version looks more contrasty to me, but you can also use a histogram to see the actual differences.

 

Screen%2520Shot%25202013-02-07%2520at%25

 

In case you're wondering, I'm using a browser plug-in written by a friend to show the histogram.  It works on almost every website except for Facebook, I think. Get it here for Chrome: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/image-histogram/kgefpfienchbbehcjnmbmogdigoedhaj

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras
Good idea. I feel the difference is too subtle to be the difference between sRGB and Adobe1998 though, if you look at the kind of difference it should make.
 
My testing wasn't that consistent (it was five minutes at my desk between edits) so I think you can attribute the difference to that, realistically. It's probably just Rec709 space all round.
 
One chart here shows it's very subtle though, maybe it would explain the difference in the reds? Still, for my purposes I've concluded it's not worth worrying about, so I'll leave it on sRGB!
 
chromacity-all.jpghttp://www.fxguide.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/chromacity-all.jpg]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
on the subject of DRO. it appears to work best at iso200 from some experimentation I have done.


assuming you are exposing to avoid clipping of the sky, the shadow noise on darker areas boosted by DRO seems to be more prominent at iso100 than the shadow noise caused by DRO when iso is set to 200 with the lens aperture adjusted to match exposure of the sky.

This makes me think that base ISO of nex5n is actually 200 (as it was with the original nex-5 and nex-3), but is having some type of post exposure compensation to allow for the option of iso100. The processing is naturally going to cause some type of image degradation. This is likely the case with the rx100 too.

Maybe some one can look into this. If true it might be worth avoiding iso100 and starting at iso200 to avoid banding and other nasties. It is known that this is a main cause of banding/colour issues with the Canon 1DC when used at ISO lower than the actual Base iso of the sensor. Being that the previous nex models were base iso of 200 it seems funny sony would downgrade on the newer model.. rather than just applying some processing to offer a faux lower iso of 100.

Thoughts??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Haven't tested it myself, most people seem to agree it's 125 though, also that's what's mentioned in the manual.
Some people claim that the highest DR at 200 ISO only happen when shooting JPGs with noise reduction on, which would make the improvement a post effect kind of thing, and not a real improvement, was this the case with your tests?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have NR set to minimum and am talking in movie mode terms.

 

 

I am just adjusting my aperture to compensate for the difference in ISO.  It is just a lot less grainy in the shadows/darker areas (the areas boosted by DRO) when set to iso200.  Iso100 is significantly more grainy than iso200 in the DRO boosted areas.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting!

 

I didn't realize that you can set NR in video mode. Where is that setting?

 

Menu, settings, high ISO NR, Low.  I'm unsure what is determined as 'high iso' but it seems to affect the noise levels at all iso's

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw that, but I can't seem to set it when I am in video mode. I assume it's because I am not shooting in jpg. I would assume that the NR doesn't happen in video mode based on that, but I could be wrong. I would have to do some tests. Did you notice that it was doign NR in movie mode?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am just adjusting my aperture to compensate for the difference in ISO.  It is just a lot less grainy in the shadows/darker areas (the areas boosted by DRO) when set to iso200.  Iso100 is significantly more grainy than iso200 in the DRO boosted areas.    

 

Did you try doing the same test with DRO off? Is it still noisier at 100 ISO?

 

Btw, 100 ISO (and 80 ISO) is being pushed in post, 125 ISO should be the base one, and therefore offer cleaner results, have you tried that one instead?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you try doing the same test with DRO off? Is it still noisier at 100 ISO?

 

Btw, 100 ISO (and 80 ISO) is being pushed in post, 125 ISO should be the base one, and therefore offer cleaner results, have you tried that one instead?

 

without dro there doesnt seem to be a difference in noise between 100 and 200.  it's only when you go to iso100 with dro on that noise seems more prominent than at iso200.  PS.  this is on the nex5n, not rx100.  but since they share so many similarities with processing, etc I imagine these results will be similar on the rx100

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They have different sensors though, so it's very possible that their base ISOs are different. In the RX100 ISOs 80 and 100 are not proper ISOs, they're even marked differently. It's definitely worth testing though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's an ISO test.

These are all the ISO modes available during video mode.

125 is the cleanest, it's been mentioned in a few places that it's this camera's base ISO and it does look that way.

 

The only surprise here is that 400 ISO is actually less noisy than 200 ISO.

 

But overall, unless you push it really hard, the noise is barely visible before 3200 ISO.

 

ISO%20NOISE.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd say 400 is native probably. The fact that it has so little blue-channel noise (the biggest problem with current Sony sensors in my experience) is great to know, cheers for this test!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say 400 is native probably. The fact that it has so little blue-channel noise (the biggest problem with current Sony sensors in my experience) is great to know, cheers for this test!

 

I agree.  400 seems the best noise vs gain ratio.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In that sense you could treat the RX100 like 400ISO Super 16 film, leave the ISO fixed for the most part and light to the sensitivity

 

The sensor is about that size!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a comparison between 125 and 400 ISO.

I pushed the 125 version one stop further than the 400 one, so they're equally bright when desaturated.

It's definitely a different noise structure, but I seriously don't know what to make of it.

125 does seem cleaner, and keep in mind that it's been pushed further than the 400 ISO side.

 

Looking at how good the 400 ISO version looks though, I wouldn't be surprised if it is indeed the camera's base ISO, but it does seem a bit high of an ISO for them to go with, on the other hand it could explain why this little sensor can do so well in low light. Also, if 400 ISO is in fact its base ISO, then they're doing a great job when pushing it to 125, much better than when pushing it to 200, which is somehow odd.

 

This article (and most others I found) also claims that the base ISO is 125.

 

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/sony-rx100/sony-rx100A.HTM

 

ISO%20NOISE%20%28125%20vs%20400%29.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Red and blue noise below 400, red noise only at 400, and red blue and green noise above 400. What a puzzler!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

these tests have prompted me to do some lens cap tests of the nex5n, which seems to exhibit the same varied noise colour depending on iso setting..  I'm uploading now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Similar Content

    • By Nathanael McKinley Myton
       
      Ok this is not the pinnacle of artistic videography or technical prowess, but hopefully it can get by on a bit of story and a location that can't be beat. I'm not very active on this forum but I have learned a lot of technical tips from lurking in old threads so I thought I might share my recent video that I'm actually very pleased with.
      I know you guys love the tech stuff so I'll let you know the expensive equipment I used: Olympus E-M10 with a Panasonic 14mm f2.5 and an iPhone 6. Unfortunately more than I would have liked ended up shot on the iPhone, but what can you do. It was just the two of us up there and the success (and safety!) on the climb was definitely not a sure thing, so I considered it a success to get as much footage out of it as I did. 
      The Google Earth screen capture stuff I was pleased to figure out, but it could have been executed much better. I couldn't get the application to load the full resolution images of El Capitan, so I was stuck using the web browser which was laggy (on my computer anyways) and didn't have much in the way of camera controls.
      Anyways thanks for watching and hope you enjoy.
    • By Riadnasla
      Hello! Tried to sell my F3 a while ago, but at the time wanted to get enough to buy a suitable replacement camera. This time, due to a change in work, I don't care about replacing my F3 with anything else just yet. 
      It is in mint condition with under 800hrs, comes with batteries, media, and bag/case. Imgur album here: http://imgur.com/a/smLRi
      I originally paid $3k for the F3, $1k for the Gemini, batteries for ~$300ea, plus all other accessories separately. In addition to the pics, I managed to pick up a loupe that fastens to the flip-out LCD on the F3. 
      If you or someone you know is looking for a good workhorse of a 1080 camera with uncompressed log capabilities, please fire me a message with what you think is a reasonable price. 
       
       
    • By Amro Othman
      Music (and poor vocals) will certainly not be to everybody's taste. And to be honest I did rush the mix and edit to make the deadline for a youtube competition...
      But other than that I hope you guys find it amusing nevertheless!
       
    • By Johnton91
      ISCO 16:9 VIDEO ATTACHMENT MK2 FOR SALE, LOOKING FOR ANY OFFERS AS NEED TO MOVE THIS AS A QUICK SALE AS I'M MOVING HOUSE AND NEED THE CASH.
      IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS CONTACTING ME ON      [email protected] WILL PROBABLY BE THE BEST AND FASTEST WAY. 
      WILL POST WORLDWIDE
      REGARDS
      JOHN





    • By Matt Kieley
      Here's my new short film, shot on the Sony a6000 with Canon FD Lenses.
      Harold is having a birthday party for himself. The only problem: he doesn't have any friends.
      Here's a bonus video I made with leftover footage: