Andrew Reid

Yep They are such bozos!! How come the Samsung NX1 can do a perfect 4K image from a 28MP Super 35mm sensor with no crop but Nikon... NIKON for heavens sake!! CANNOT!!

Way to dump thousands of sales down the drain Nikon... Note the red box.

Nice, this will be much more affordable than the D5 I expect although more than a D7200 obviously. Super 35mm video from a great Nikon sensor in 4K with nice codec and flat profile from the D750. Still waiting for the full details on video spec. CES hall full of clueless stills people

Here’s my illustration of ghosting, after-images and edge fuzzing in 4K on the Sony FS5. Shot on my camera with the latest firmware update (v1.1). Read the full article

Probably saving the launch till CP+, still no sign of the official announcement

That is in 10bit on the FS7? Oh dear! Maybe FS5 not so far off then. XAVC-L is such a disappointment. If they had some noise to dither the banding or to keep low detail areas of the image intact from too much compression, it would really help. Turn the noise reduction off Sony!

Those are so comfortable. Great ergonomics. The 5D Mark III added nothing of real note over the Mark II. The old camera is the very definition of a modern classic. So much room for the monitor in it. And it was a crap monitor They should have another go with that model. Would be wonderful second time out. Was it from the Jim Jannard puppy rescue home?

The F35 group even has the tagline "The forgotten camera"! Yep, great stuff from Ed there.

Some of my favourite images are from cinema cameras and DSLRs from which attention has long since drifted elsewhere! Rest assured some of the older cameras on this list are better than any of the latest and greatest (if not in terms of usability then in terms of having an analogue film-like feel that screams "cinema" and not "digital"). Here are my top 5. Read the full article

Awesome thanks!

I have the old VAF-5D2 (not the B version), it's good, but unless I'm shooting an architecture-heavy shot which is unusually prone to noise, I don't like to soften the image with it and it makes accurate focus tricky in the magnified assist. Also it has the softer edges on wide angle lenses, although I believe the B version is improved in that respect. I rate it highly, but the moire really is minimally noticeable most of the time on the 5D Mark II in raw and it almost in a funny way makes for a more detailed image. The VAF-5D2 brings the 5D Mark II's image in line with the 5D3's image in raw. You can barely tell them apart with the filter installed. The 5D2 is a bit noisier. That's the ONLY difference. Both a bit on the softer side though, which is why sometimes I prefer the rough and ready non-filtered image of the 5D2 in raw.

Is that in 10bit? Compression is the enemy of skies and walls isn't it! They need a WALL MODE on the camera It's really bad if the FS7 does this in 10bit 4K. I didn't think it did. They need to prioritise less detailed areas in the image, give them more of bit rate allocation. Good point about having a camera that you don't have to worry about undoing your good work in terms of lighting and setting up the shot. A camera with a limitation I can work around with good lighting (i.e. a noisy high ISO camera) is preferable in that situation to one with a severe codec retardation. Do you have any 'broken' FS7 original files you can share to give me an idea of how severe the problem is? Canon's codec expertise seems better. Doubt the C300 II has such issues. To be fair to XAVC-L though, I am able to bring the shadows / blacks up A HELL OF A LOT on my FS5, more than I remember being able to do with XAVC-S. Very little noise in them.

Yes I see what you're saying. The main reason I have so many cameras is because I run EOSHD. It would be a bit unwise to have stuck with just one, a GH2, for the past 5 years Yes, a good plan. Yes but as the recently departed great Haskell Wexler ASC said: "It’s important to be master of our devices so we don’t have to think about them,which frees up our creativity" So all this time spent focussing on operating our cameras is time very well spent in my view.

I thought I'd make a sticky thread for sharing original camera files direct off the card. Always interesting for people to try the original files without having to look at someone else's grading and compression via Vimeo or YouTube! Let's get a bunch of stuff up here and make a little vault! We have so many cameras between us on these forums. 1D C, Red One, Cinema DNG, C300 II, FS7, we can really build up a nice collection. Here's my initial contribution: XAVC-L from the FS5 in 8bit 4K and 10bit 1080p - http://we.tl/yQO2ZM4HdA Comparison with Cinema DNG raw from the 5D Mark II / Magic Lantern - http://we.tl/HOACsCROeZ Got any Red ONE files Mattias? Also we need to find a better file host than WeTransfer as that only keeps hold of stuff for a couple of weeks and after that we'd have a bunch of dead links. But if you want to share WeTransfer links anyway, please do go ahead until we find a more permanent solution and I will keep a backup of all the files on my drive.

Where the 5D is really good in 24p raw, is for faces - very soft and flattering on default Resolve Cinema DNG settings, you don't need to work at it to get that, it just IS. Same in Adobe Camera Raw, very nice. If you want instant perfection for faces and skin tones shoot 14bit raw on the 5D Mark II.

Someone really needs to prove the difference between 8bit and 10bit with images and not theories. I'm tired of putting 8bit and 10bit from the same camera, say the GH4, on the timeline in Resolve or Premiere, grading the hell out of it but having them both respond exactly the same to the grade! It's not what'd you'd expect. In Joe Simon's recent test of the FS7 it did keep the sky intact with no banding in 10bit, so XAVC-L can't suck that much. We need more examples like this. I speak highly of 8bit most of the time. There's a reason Canon's JPEGs are 8bit not 10bit... they look superb in 8bit. We keep getting promised smooth gradation with 10bit and a lack of macro blocking at high bitrates but it never really materialises in the footage. FS5 10bit and 4K 8bit, even 8bit AVCHD 1080p, they all seem to grade similarly. Same with GH4 10bit over external recorder. All very disappointing. Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera in 10bit ProRes even, in most situations grades the same as the GH4 in 4K 8bit. Most cameras have more noise than smooth roll off in their gradients. I am confident Sony will fix this in a firmware update and because Alister has suddenly decided to get nasty and personal in his blog post comments regarding my article, when that firmware update materialises and the edge fuzziness is no longer there, I will do my damnedest to remind both him and Sony of just what an unnecessarily unhelpful situation he created with THAT cover-up post - blaming the users. He should be quite frankly ashamed of himself for his behaviour and wilful ignorance to the evidence online. And some of the stuff he comes out with is just fundamentally wrong. It depends. It's not as simple as *always* going to a Cine profile in low light rather than using SLOG. It depends on the light distribution and density in that given situation. It depends on the LUT you need to use and matching shots across different cameras on the same low light scene. It depends how the Cine profile you might use respond in the grade and whether it will look consistent with your other SLOG scenes in better light. Most of all it depends on if the audience will even notice if you have 5 shades of grey instead of 3, or whether they will notice the window covering half the frame completely blown out from not having enough dynamic range in your Cine profile to render it properly!! There are no invalid techniques in filmmaking. If that's what someone wants to do and the look they want to create, just let them get on with it. It's not right or wrong creatively. Poor grading can also amplify the wrong information in the image. Yes good lighting will help you capture more higher quality information. But poor lighting is not the only reason why there's a bucketload of bad footage from SLOG cameras on Vimeo. It's all important. The whole lot. Not always practical. The most important thing is to train your eye to see the best existing lighting and composition given the limits of the available natural light you have in any given situation. For me the 10bit internal 1080p 4:2:2 on the FS5 was a nice selling point, one of the reasons I bought it. I expected that 10bit 4:2:2 to clear up the image, but instead I see no advantage over the 8bit 4K and instead a ton of macro blocking. It simply isn't good enough for Sony to market this mode as having "nuanced gradation" when it actually does not. Yes you're right the external recorder is not an ideal solution as it makes it more of a tripod based controlled set camera rather than a grab and shoot / run and gun / whatever the current politically correct term is for a handheld camera! The edge tearing doesn't go away on the HDMI or SDI via uncompressed output. The macro blocking should do in theory, let's see if that's the case. To me, uncompressed HDMI never looks uncompressed. The only truly uncompressed image is a raw one.

It's not as fuss free or as light as the OSMO, which is basically a tiny stick in a backpack. It's fantastically easy to grab shots with it on foot. You don't have to spend 10 minutes before every shot fiddling with the rigging bolts, balancing the gimbal depending on your lens, and so on. With the X5R you would stick a Micro Four Thirds 15mm F1.7 or pancake on it and just shoot instantly with a setup time measured in the seconds it takes to remove it form a bag.

Ha I know that feeling. We're all searching for a permanent camera partner in this crazy gear dating game, then just when you think you've found it boredom sets in and a new sexy blonde comes along! I want to get the amount of gear I own down, so I can appreciate what I've got more. You're right about not having one grand compromise solution but, say, 3 really good ones at specific things. For me the FS5 is good at shot getting, comfortable and reliable to shoot with, you know it is going to run and run on one charge through the day and not fill up all your cards. The 5D2 is there when I want perfect skin tones, beautiful film like rendering, a fine noise grain. I find the 5D2 with no VAF filter even more cinematic and analogue looking than the superior 5D3 which is cleaned up and therefore a bit more modern looking. The 5D2 has a life and soul to it which is very Red ONE / old school. Then I have the A7S II on low light duties. I'd like to keep it at that but I'm still in love with the others too... The 1D C, the GH4 for anamorphic, the E-M5 II for handheld shooting. If the D5 has 4K but the lovely codec / flat profile of D750 then it will be a winner... oh no here we go again!

Plus with raw you get much nicer motion cadence than with a Long GOP codec. It will really improve drone and OSMO footage. Any idea how much the media costs for the X5R?

I think it's very interesting. Like a RAW shooting GH4, but small enough to go on the OSMO, which remember offers better stabilisation than the IBIS of the E-M5 II we are all in love with. Raw + that kind of stabilisation + GH4 sensor = win! Yes it is still expensive but I think it's worth it. Definitely on my list to try out in 2016. And if you don't want raw just the 4K H.264 like the GH4 it works out around $1600 including the X5 gimbal. Not bad at all.

The thing which is most annoying about Chapman's headline is that it's basically covering up for the ripped edges bug by suggesting that our expectations are too lofty for 8bit and compression. The ripped edges bug as Alister even admits himself has nothing to do with compression or 8bit and everything to do with flawed temporal noise reduction specific to the FS5. You can't shoot a serious project at high ISOs with this being the case. You'd have to swap the camera out during a shoot for the A7R II or A7S II. Hardly an ideal situation especially when you have paid close to $6k for your A-cam. Cine gamma at base ISO 800 or 1000 doesn't have the edge ripping bug. Presumably because at low ISOs the camera uses a different NR technique or turns it off altogether? Anyway no matter how many excuses Chapman comes up with or how much advice he gives the shooter on how to get the best image out of the camera, the fact remains it's not acceptable for Sony to put out a worse performing codec and a buggy noise reduction technique on a pro camera, when their much cheaper consumer cameras work fine. I see it a bit in your 1080p clip too, though not as bad as in 4K! Thanks Cliff. Sony are aware of the problem, let's hope they respond with a solution soon. I wish they had a version of S-LOG with minimal in-camera processing for noise, etc. Then we could apply noise reduction in post instead for superior results.

Wasn't in the info they gave me, but we can sure try asking for it! Panasonic certainly listened to us!

Sometimes we can concentrate on the camera 100%, really work it like an artist's paintbrush. Sometimes we have to apply our focus to the actors instead, to the lights, the other stuff. Therefore, unless we have a crew with many people, different roles, you are going to have to split your focus. I would love to have a crew to do all the directing, lighting, carrying my 10kg camera and sticks around for me, making me breakfast, cooking me pie, slipping me a glass of wine in-between shots with my RED ONE! But the real world doesn't often work like that does it?

Sony Independent Certified Expert Alister Chapman is a freelance videographer and runs workshops on occasion for users of Sony's pro video cameras. You can check out his response to the FS5 problems widely reported by users. Its 's his blog here. Now you can read my post about why he's wrong! Read the article here

Here's the 4K and 10bit 1080p Drop it into Premiere and give it a grade. Enjoy! http://we.tl/yQO2ZM4HdA Doesn't the FS7 already use that flavour of XAVC? I remember once the GH2 shot H.264 at nearly 150 Mbit/s long GOP. What took Sony so long to bring it to a pro camera?