Mokara

On 1/12/2019 at 4:45 PM, Robert Collins said:

My 'guess' would be very little difference. Samsung has been interchanging image sensors between its own and Sony's on its Sx smartphone series for years without anyone really noticing or finding very much of a difference.

That is because those "Sony" sensors are the exact same design as the Samsung versions (Samsung designed them). All Sony are doing is manufacturing some of them under contract for Samsung in order make up the excess units required at launch. Because they are not being made by Samsung, they have a Sony part number. That is the extent of the difference.

This is common in manufacturing (it is called supply management). If your own facility normally produces X units of something per year, and you need X+Y primarily during a certain period on launch, then you pay some other manufacturer to make Y for you. You give them the design and they make it. It is exactly the same as X, it is just made by someone else.

https://www.pcmag.com/roundup/361090/the-best-pci-express-nvme-solid-state-drives-ssds

I would still stick with the Samsung though, even though the new HP version is not bad (as long as you get one of the larger capacity models).

Remember that the 970 has been out for quite some time, there will probably be a next gen model in 2019.

There is a way to get what I think you want. Go to custom key assignments (second tab, list #5, item "Custom Key (Shoot)". Click that, then select "C Button". On the list of options select "AF/MF Ctrl Toggle". 

Once that is set up, if you press the C button while shooting the camera will switch from AF to manual focus. This will have the effect of locking focus on whatever you are pointing at. To go back to AF, just press the C button again. Just keep in mind that if you have peaking switch on, those will appear on your screen.

You can also assign the left or right buttons to do this (they have fewer options).

On 1/22/2019 at 11:34 PM, aldolega said:

CDAF is software-based, nothing to do with the sensor physically.

The sensor returns information from specific pixels to the LSI for AF purposes, so it cannot be the same sensor if it has more points. 

My understanding was that anything other than Samsung (preferably the pro line) was lesser.

WD are not a memory manufacturer, they are just a generic when it comes to SSDs.

7 hours ago, MaxKitaev said:

Hello guys, I'm coming back to this subject.

I have the RX100 IV camera. There's 1 thing that I'd love to find a solution for. For some weird reason this camera not only doesn't have a single shot focus mode in video mode but it doesn't have it at all whenever you press the REC button. Anyone know the solution?

The RX100 cameras do either CAF or manual focusing in video mode, I don't think there is a focus lock function. You get more options in stills mode, but when you hit record it appears that all of the AF modes become CAF.

17 hours ago, Video Hummus said:

Consumers might have 8K TVs but how many will be playing 8K content on them?

It’s not the screen sizes it’s the cost of storage and data transfer rates that drive resolutions. They start to become quite expensive once you reach 8K. But I’m sure Samsung or LG would love to sell you that 7 foot 8K television to hang on your wall for bragging rights. 

 

Storage is cheap. Data transfer rates will be less of an issue going forward into the future since higher speed interfaces are constantly being added. The main hurdle to overcome is neither storage not data speed, it is the processor overhead required to decode encoded footage. But that will get better over time as well.

People who shoot home video with their 8K imaging devices are the ones who will play content of their 8K sets. And in any case, upscaling of current 4K footage will improve the overall experience just as upscaled FHD looks better of a 4K panel than a FHD panel. It will smooth out the aliasing effects that come from the panel itself. That may not improve resolution but it will reduce the artifacts you might otherwise see on a big 4K panel.

So the content is already out there.

On 1/16/2019 at 7:33 PM, kye said:

My goal is the best of both worlds.  I film my kid playing, so I don't have the pressure of having to get every moment or get coverage or whatever.  

I made a highlight video of his 50th game (banner, game, award, speeches), but really my brief is to get enough footage to be able to cut something together down the line as a highlights reel for the family history, and to get a few shots where we can extract a frame and hang it on the wall, as you say.  I am pretty good at anticipating the action and operating the equipment, the main challenge is that I don't know what framing or shots to try and get.  I want to capture the effort he puts in and to make him look good essentially, so studying professional sports photography and videography will help me see that.  I don't watch sports on TV or read about it, so my exposure is pretty minimal.

I tell you one thing though, using video as 24fps burst mode for photographs sure gives you a lot of options for choosing shots, and really makes you appreciate the skill in photographers who only have 5-10fps non-continuous burst-mode, let alone the film days when bursts were what happened between changing rolls of film!

Probably the biggest demand is that when the game is finished he always asks if we saw that goal / kick / or key moment, and of course, he remembers exactly what happened because he's out there putting in 110% and so you better have seen it and remember it!  He's the top tackler in his team and if the players end up in a heap then there's a good chance he's underneath most of them, so trying to get footage or stills that live up to the intensity of his experience is a tall order. 

You had multiple cameras and an assistant(s) to handle that. Sort of like the circled wagons of pioneer days when they had muskets. You would have multiple muskets and some guy who could shoot reasonably accurately would do the shooting, while those who could not shoot so well (women, children, etc) would do the reloading.

23 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

But it still has the same slow rolling shutter?

It seems like the old sensor to me, but a new cooler running LSI.

The a6400 has more CDAF points than the a6300, so it is a new sensor. Basic acquisition specs however may be similar.

On 1/21/2019 at 1:21 PM, thebrothersthre3 said:

Yeah when I said stabilization I meant like a tripod or gimbal. 

If this can do 4k without a time limit that is pretty awesome. 

Micro focus hunting (even thought the overall image itself appears to be in focus) will do the same thing, since adjusting the focus point changes perspective slightly as well. You might not be aware that focus breathing is happening if you are using stabilization such as DIS or (possibly) IBIS, and that would create distortions that don't superficially appear to be lens related. Like I said, a lot of these things have to do with the quality and nature of the lens being used rather than the camera itself. RS will make things worse of course, since it will amplify the distortions.

6 hours ago, hansel said:

Hey Guys and Kaylee,

so I am adding the finishing touches to my first "proper" coorperate image clip, man what a cluster fuck but still fun and quite a steep learning curve on every level, communication wise, shooting and editing aswell.

To get to the point. Some clips I have shot espacially ones where tripod panning it feels like I am back in Canon t2i country resolution wise. On top of that I have shot the pans in 50p and when rolling in 25p it seems fairly choppy, slowmo seems to sober it up abit. I was wondering if someone has a trick for Resolve to even out the chops? Further would the precieved resolution los (maybe just motion blur?) be less when shooting in raw as the compression can't really handle it and mushes it up?

Just in general I am trying to get to grips with how it works as pretty much all the glide cam shots i did seem to be super smooth (as in not choppy) AND sharp but they are not straight pans. Is it a sensor readout problem?

Anyway maybe so can enlighten me a bit, cheers.

What is a "cooperate image" clip?

On 1/18/2019 at 1:34 PM, thebrothersthre3 said:

I don't know at least for me the jello effect is less noticeable on wider lenses. I do get the point on barrel distortion. 

Stabilization definitely helps alleviate the issue in many circumstances but even if the camera is on a tripod say you are shooting a train passing or really anything moving, the effects of the rolling shutter will be noticeable. Not that most people are shooting trains passing by frequently. ?

The issue will be most noticeable with cheap wide angle lenses with objects relatively close to the camera and a distant background. The sort of thing people would do when vlogging. Small movements allow the camera to "see around" an object, and that causes the background to look like it is wobbling. The further away from the lens the foreground subject is, the less of an issue it will be. It is a problem with pretty much any sort of stabilization that relies on moving elements of the optical system.

You pretty much need to keep the camera steady to avoid it.

22 hours ago, tweak said:

I just don't expect Sony has changed their dated LSI or heat sinks (especially not on a budget model).

Since the camera is using the latest focusing system, and since that is a property of the LSI, it absolutely has a new LSI.

Just now, mercer said:

That’s always been my complaint with Alexa footage... definitely not detailed enough... ?

Sarcasm aside, it doesn't change the fact that it looks like HD.

17 hours ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

I really have no doubt the A7000 will be a beast(would be shocked if it wasn't better than the XT3 in terms of specs).

One of the reasons I said the sensor as I think that is where the slow readout/RS came from. I am not tech savy enough to know. If it was a processor issue it seems like the A6400 wouldn't have the issue anymore as the A9 processor should be fast enough to handle anything you can throw at it.

A lot of the distortions attributed to rolling shutter are actually optical distortions resulting from small changes in point of view and rotation of the sensor in the image plane. RS aggravates it of course, but the problem is primarily optical and people expecting too much of the limited optics usually used on cameras like this one. You will see this sort of stuff more with short focal length and cheaper lenses.

To minimize it you really need a tripod or at least a gimbal.

On 1/17/2019 at 8:30 AM, mercer said:

That does look pretty good... crazy thing is that this wasn’t shot in the experimental 4K modes... it was just the regular 14bit ML Raw and he uprezzed it to 4K for YouTube. It fooled me while I watched it. 

It looks like HD though, not 4K. Not detailed enough.

40 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

Couldn't they at least have done a pana style flippy screen so people could use mics. 

I don't mind them using an old sensor, like you said a lot of old sensors are awesome. However the A6300 sensor was shit when it came out and its still shit now. 

I agree though it will sell and thats all companies really care about. Still its a POS, I hate the A6300??

That is not really possible with a small body like the a6x00 series, at least not without a major body redesign. 

Keep in mind that margins are kept in check by minimizing development, and that means using existing technology and designs where possible. For the a6400 it uses the a6300 body for the most part, and adds the RX100 flip up screen. All tried and tested tech without the need for a lot of development, in other words they can produce the camera for a lower cost, important for the market space the camera occupies. This is quite consistent with how Sony does things and is the main reason why they can have a fast turn around with incremental upgrades to their systems. As a manufacturer what you DON'T want is to have to reinvent the wheel with every upgrade, because that makes things much more expensive than they otherwise would have been.

6 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

Who r those? Are these youtube celebrities or smthng? I opened the video for a few seconds and it was embarrassingly unwatchable. You are very brave to reach the 4:03!

That looks like iJustine and her buddy.

13 hours ago, frontfocus said:

Here in Europe the A6400 will be introduced for 1050€. You can easily get a new A6500 for around 1000€. So while the A6400 is intended to replace the A6300, it‘s competing in price with more powerful cameras. 

Because the sensor speed is the limiting factor. As @androidlad said, it looks like it‘s the same A6300 sensor

The list price is the one you compare. Other cameras might have discounts applied to them from time to time, but so will the a6400.

7 hours ago, JurijTurnsek said:

The question now is how much of this upgrading could have been done with a FW update for the A6300 (aside from the new screen hinge) and if the AF improvements are coming to the A6500 as well.

None. The focusing and basic video processing is handled by a separate processor called the LSI in Sony cameras. The a6300 has an older LSI, while the a6400 has the most recent one. That is the main internal difference.

Btw, most of the higher end Canon cameras do the same thing, in addition to the main processor (or processors in the case of cameras with dual processors) there is an older Digic processor that handles the focussing system (it is not mentioned in the specs), which is the main reason why the more expensive cameras have more capabilities than the cheaper consumer models even though the hardware might seem similar on the spec sheet.

12 hours ago, tweak said:

G85 Autofocus sucks (it sucks on GH5 as well, I have one). 
EOSm50 DPAF is a game changer for vloggers, my partner couldn't give a toss about 4K (or IQ much in general), she just wants reliable AF and a file she can edit on a regular laptop computer (same as most other vloggers out there).

For the reccord I would never buy an EOSm50 as my sole camera, but I'm not a vlogger  .

Most regular people don't vlog in 4K (even Casey doesn't anymore). EOSm50 autofocus in 1080p is amazing.

Vloggers want reliable autofocus unfortunately. I'd agree a G85 is a much nicer camera otherwise, but it's falls short in the one key feature in which most vloggers care about most.

p.s. Also if you've ever used an m50 you'd see how intuitive and helpful it is to use for people who aren't super into cameras. The scene specific timelapse modes is also a great touch.

This market segment is aimed at consumers, not vloggers. You might use them for vlogging, but that is not what drives the sales.

Modern Sony AF is very good as well. The main differences IMO likely come from how responsive the lens is, not the camera itself. 

People might not vlog much in 4K, but so what? Not everything these cameras are used for is vlogging, and I would say that most video shot with them is NOT vlogging. In a consumer camera it would be for better home video than what you otherwise might get from a cell phone, and for that the Sony is going to beat the Canon.

15 hours ago, Snowbro said:

It helps it not hunt and jump in & out of focus randomly sometimes. I found that to be preferable to manually focusing, which wasn't completely accurate with peaking anyhow. 

You probably have the peaking tolerances set incorrectly.

17 hours ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

Yeah only the M50 is $500 and probably has more usable 1080p. 


Not sure about eye AF but tracking of those skate dudes looked great.

List price is $780, with current discounts that Canon periodically has to move older products that are not selling. If you are shooting in 4K you definitely would use the Sony camera over the Canon one. 1080p footage is fairly similar I think.

55 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

IBIS would have made sense in this supposed vlogging camera. But yeah they are saving money while delivering a subpar product IMO.

It basically competes with the M50, which also has horrible RS in 4K (plus, AF in the M50 is crippled in 4K mode). It occupies the same market space.

2 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

Seems like it would make more sense to do this with a new sensor and limited features then release a higher end A7100 or something. 

Not really, it fits with Sony's long time strategy of graded products, using older tech for the sake of economy. It is very similar to what they did with the RX100 VA replacing the RX100 V while at the same time adding the VI model. These sorts of products are intended as entry level cameras, and cost of materials is critical there. So they use components they already have. In this case it is most of the a6300 with the LSI from more recent products added but without the expensive IBIS mechanisms. So, nothing really new, but it fits in the low cost entry level niche.

4 hours ago, frontfocus said:

 

The real question is, why would you buy this camera, when you can get an a6500 for less money?

a6500 body sells for $1198, while the a6400 body sells for $898. It is $100 less than the retail price of the a6300 even. It is clearly intended to replace the a6300.

3 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

This cut-price unimaginative attempt to corner the Vlogger market is a load of shit.

Oops. This will be a short blog post.

Read the full article

I think this camera is intended to replace the a6300, which was still being sold alongside the a6500 (Sony do this with a lot of their cameras, there is a range of versions at any one time). People who would normally be buying the a6300 would be buying this instead. The a6500 will be replaced by a newer higher end model and that would address a different part of the market.

Just think of it as a RX100 VA with an interchangeable lens.

On 1/9/2019 at 5:59 PM, kye said:

8K has four times the pixels of 4K, so 8K30 is equivalent to 4K120 in terms of pixels-per-second.

You might be right about less processor intensive processing but they'd have to be choosing from the options available in the marketplace which may not have a less-compression / higher bit rate option at the right price. Of course, if you were a microchip manufacturer then investing in the market for a 8K video compression chip isn't a risky proposition, and phones have been doing 4K60 with efficient power consumption and thermal loading for a few years now, so it's not like the tech is that far away.

 

Current processor technology likely could encode 8K30p, but it would require serious cooling to do so, which is not practical in consumer setups.

On 1/11/2019 at 7:50 PM, Video Hummus said:

I'd take better quality 4K, i.e better dynamic range, 10bit, HDR, compressed RAW codec over 8K any day. 5 years from now I'll take 8K standard. I think people are under estimating the burden of handling 8K video. With media costs where they are at today, 8K is just stupid in a consumer camera. There are a lot of factors that make a particular scene in a video compelling. Resolution is at the bottom. Yes, I'm aware a 480p video is worst than a 1080p, but there is the law of diminishing returns.

From most important to least.

1. Audio
1.5 Composition ?
2. Lighting
3. Dynamic Range
4. Bit rate
5. Bit depth
6. Resolution (1080p and up)
 

Not when people have 85" 8K TV panels as the consumer standard (and yes, that will happen sooner than you think). You can already tell the difference between UHD and FHD on a 65" 4K panel (when footage is actually shot with a camera that delivers properly resolved 4K). What do you suppose will happen when the consumer sweet spot hits 85" 8K? All of your FHD footage that is really only 720p resolution is going to look pretty dated on those screens.

8 hours ago, Jonesy Jones said:

Statistics are like bikinis, they don't show everything.

They tell enough.

12 hours ago, kaylee said:

we need tha guns for tha tyrannical government tho

if shit ever hits the fan with the US gov and yall find out whos really in control of things, youre going to be thanking god almighty that theres an army of 100 million gun owners in america

If it came down to a tyrannical government, two things, firstly most of the gun nuts would likely be supporting them in the first place, and secondly such a government would immediately take everyone's guns without asking. Armed rebellion is a fantasy by people who have no idea what armed rebellion actually entails, which is mostly the rebels being slaughtered (your 9mm is no match for a tank). People have lots of guns, but not the right kind of guns, so they would not stand a chance against an organized military. There is not a whole lot of romantic ideal involved, it is mostly just dying.

18 hours ago, kye said:

8K has four times the pixels of 4K, so 8K30 is equivalent to 4K120 in terms of pixels-per-second.

You might be right about less processor intensive processing but they'd have to be choosing from the options available in the marketplace which may not have a less-compression / higher bit rate option at the right price. Of course, if you were a microchip manufacturer then investing in the market for a 8K video compression chip isn't a risky proposition, and phones have been doing 4K60 with efficient power consumption and thermal loading for a few years now, so it's not like the tech is that far away.

 

Right, but they are doing compression with a lot of compromises (such as variable frame rates) that people who use dedicated cameras are likely not to accept, so whatever is going on in the cell phone world is not a good indicator.

There are no free lunches.

On 1/8/2019 at 2:50 PM, Snowbro said:

Here we were having a civilized, intelligent conversation, then you had to show up ?. 

It is clearly impossible to have a debate with someone, that enters a discussion spewing insults and taking words out of context. You are ignoring the fact that murders are still taking place (at high rates), regardless of if a gun is used or not. There are many countries with a much higher homicide rate than the US, where guns are banned.

Also, my "native" counties of Norway & Switzerland, have guns & their homicide rate is 3.3 times lower than Canada's; they are in the the top few countries for the lowest homicide/crime. See how naive cherry picking is? I already mentioned that there is much more to it, don't hyperfocus one detail so much, there are many aspects to such a complex social issue. 

Like I said a few times already, this is not a forum to debate such a thing. We do not agree, great. Let's get back to talking about cameras. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

Numbers tell it all.

There are plenty of guns in Canada. But, you can't just go and buy one. You have to be licensed and do a training course. There are also different classes of guns, unrestricted, restricted and prohibited. Automatic weapons are prohibited. Long guns (barrel longer than a certain length, such as rifles) have no restrictions. Guns with barrels shorter than a certain length are prohibited. In between that (ie most handguns) you can own them, but only if you have a valid reason. Most gun related homicides come from handguns, and since there are not that many of those legally around, the gun homicide rate in Canada is much lower. Canada has a hunting culture and have just as many rifles as Americans do.

It is all about having a sensible national gun policy, which Canada has and the US does not.