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 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:
       
    • By whiler
      Hello guys, just wondering if there is a chance to shoot 4K60p over HDMI with the FS5 after RAW upgrade? Let me please know.
      What i´ve heard there might be some problems with it.
    • By TomazK
      Hi,

      I my last video i did a Star Trek transporter effect. It's pretty basic and i would like to create something like the transporter of the Franklin in Star Trek Beyond in my future videos.

      I would love to get feedback on my video quality and what would you add. Particulary the lighting is a area i need to work on.

      My video:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4QzdiSrFQU

      Franklin transporter:
      http://www.facebook.com/SaucetvAwesome/photos/a.1640382469598402.1073741830.1503065506663433/1640382479598401/?type=3&theater

      I know there are worlds between my transporter effect and the pro effect from Beyond, but i would like to be able to do it some day. Imagine all the techniques that go in a effect like this.
      I'm shooting on the GH4 whit the Panasonic Lumix G Leica DG Summilux 15mm f/1.7 ASPH Lens.
      Thanks for reading
      Tomaž
    • By Boris M
      Hi guys,
       
      A few weeks ago I bought an X-T2, mainly for stills but as a video tool too. Yesterday evening I was making my first real video test shooting : my son presenting a magic trick.
      Apart the poor choice of profile and the exposition aproximation (light was going down fast) a few of the clips shows some strange "flickering"  at the hedges of the picture  as you can see there, straight out from cam  :
       
      The majority of other clips are looking normal, there were shot with the same settings, except for focal lenght  minor apperture or Iso changes. Settings were FHD 25 P, Velvia profile with -2 in hi, low lights and sharpness (trst purposes), iso 200 to 320, 1/50s, F5.6. Good Transcend 600x SDXC card (never showing problem with lumix gh3). The X-T2 was in boost mode. The only thing that I can think of if that the battery (original np126s) was running low at this moment. I changed it a few time after, but before the camera shuted down. My other track is the OIS I forgot to turn off, I know that it 's sometimes bad when on a tripod but that bad ?
      I did not succed in reproducing the problem. Wich in a certain way is a bad thing as the reason is still unknown. For this shooting  its not a problem but it's not good for trust in gear you need to have for critical and pro aplications.
      It look like if the lens correction was going on and off... Have you experienced something similar ? What do you think of it ? I'm new to Fuji and I already know the limitations of X-T2 as a video tool  but I'm not new to video and never seen something like that.
       
      Thanks for your looks and thinks.
       
      Boris