Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Scott_Warren

  1. Here's the folder of ISO 800 flickering frames of a colorchecker chart: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1YLY5ls433I-DgaLSbbzE3Lf6MtTKwjKT @Lars indeed! When I used 172.8 the flickering also occurred. I'm not certain that the behavior is affected by the designation of degrees or speed in my tests so far.
  2. I'm using 1/50th shutter specified by speed, since when I first got the camera it seemed that leaving it in shutter angle of 180 with the framerate at 23.98 still created files with 1/50th shutter speeds instead of 1/48th. Just tried the test with the colorchecker (uploading the folder now) and switched to 1/60th briefly in a separate test and the flickering still occurred.
  3. Another sample of flickering. It's subtle, but check out the left part of the frame here beginning at 17:00 It even happens in the next shot recorded in .MOV. Cue the dramatic conspiracy music.
  4. Heya Chris, Here's what I do. Capture at 4K in either 12bit/ 10bit. For every ISO starting at 100, I capture 10 seconds of a static shot. Seems like a long enough time where you'll see it happen if it's going to. Then fire it up in Resolve and add each clip to a new timeline and look for the waveform behavior seen here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kMpU9QFj92Ly-h7aOkN5Asb9ombpMolX/view You might not see it in the footage, but the waveform always tells the truth Paul, I do have a colorchecker! Are you saying to lock off a shot of the chart exposed at speed?
  5. That's crazy! I'd love to know how widespread this actually is. Most people will use it as normal (likely with .mov capture) and roll with it without doing pixel peeping so they might not see it, but surely it's not just a handful of cases.
  6. Drumroll.... 10bit has the same behavior as 12bit Though it seems like 400 is actually now stable with 1.02. No flickering with 12bit or 10bit after checking yesterday's stuff as well. 100-400 = fine 500-2000 = flicker 2500 = fine 3200-4000 = flicker 5000-6400 = fine Secondary observations: The over-exposed first frame issue happens only on 125-320. Stable for all others. Possibly related to ISO scaling down from "native" sensor values somewhere? It's interesting that ISO 100 & 400+ is stable and behaves as expected. For now, I'll just treat the camera like a 400/2500 dual gain kind of deal until I can send it to Sigma for diagnosis.
  7. Heya Paul, I'm not able to swap the body for another one (I'm the only person I know with an fp in my circle of photography friends) but I could certainly try to see if this happens at 10bit and 8bit, as I've as yet only used 12bit for capture.
  8. Here you go Paul (or anyone who's curious): https://drive.google.com/open?id=1tgJ7nNLGzTOXLvVRJkn06yr8PGBgRNcF Folder for ISO 320 with 24 frames, and a folder for ISO 800 with 24 frames. The flicker at 800 is pretty crazy so hopefully that's a treasure of information for you to dive into.
  9. I don't have those original ones from pages back, but I can post some frames from 320 (which doesn't flicker) and some from a flickering ISO if that would be useful! Edit: Uploading a 1 second DNG sequence from both 320 and 800 to google drive. It'll be ready in a moment.
  10. Looks like we're a part of a lucky few, Noli What's weird to me is that the flicker seems to affect the red and blue channels more than green. Wouldn't that indicate something happening with white balance? It makes no difference having a WB preset selected like Sunlight, or manually dialing in 5500K instead. Tried it with disabling all of the auto lens corrections, with autofocus, manual focus etc. I feel like I've tried most variables that would affect it.
  11. Heya Paul, I'd say the flickering is pretty consistent between ISOs where it occurs. It would be tough to say one is worse than another. This is with the 45mm Sigma lens, but it happens the same on the Sigma 35mm. I do have a Pentax K to L-mount adapter where I could test some "dumb" lenses to rule out the lenses, however. I did also try out adding the Deflicker node in Resolve, and that seems to make it 99.99% visually undetectable, which is nice. But the thought of using software to fix things after the fact makes me lose sleep at night https://imgur.com/2c9IcMu (In case the google drive video is acting up)
  12. Just installed 1.02, and unfortunately it seems like my black level flickering issue is alive and well at the same ISOs where it was before. On the low end, the highest I can go without flickering is 320, and on the high end, the lowest I can do without flickering is 3200. Granted, the image is clean at both of those ISOs, but at this point I may need to send in the body so they can figure out what happened to my unit since this doesn't seem to be a widespread issue. Edit: Here's what it looks like in Resolve during playback (4k screen capture). Notice the jumping black levels in the waveform. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1kMpU9QFj92Ly-h7aOkN5Asb9ombpMolX
  13. The sole reason I joined Twitter a few days ago has paid off. Mr. Yamaki replied to my question asking if lens aberration correction would apply to cDNG and .Mov:
  14. Question about the 1.02 firmware notes. "...and introduces added lens aberration correction processing." Does this mean the cDNG raw files will have an option for lens corrections like distortion and vignette removal burned in, or would this just be for .MOVs? I bought the fp for its raw capability, so I don't imagine ever recording to a video format. It's fun being able to treat video like motion stills On the other hand, programs like Resolve don't support lens correction databases or metadata that I know of like Camera Raw does. It would be great if they did!
  15. Both Sigma lenses: 35mm Art and the 45mm DG DN Fully manual mode for cine. Definitely one of the strangest cameras I've yet owned, haha.
  16. I've seen quite a few initial frames that are exposed about a stop hotter than what I've dialed in for a video, and this is on 1.01. On a call with Sigma support the tech wondered if the firmware didn't properly update from the factory somehow, since I received my camera with 1.01 pre-installed. After numerous re-installs and resets, the behaviors with exposure and flickering haven't changed. If 1.02 doesn't fix these issues, I'll send the body to Sigma NY to let them diagnose what's wrong and nuke the software if need be You know what would be handy? A sensor whitepaper written by Sigma. Just a blast of all the tech details about the sensor they're using so that we don't have to be quite so investigative. Surely that wouldn't be a big deal for the engineering team to put together.
  17. The fp has some interesting ISO behaviors, certainly! I've been using it at lower ISOs even in the dark and then pushing things 2.7 stops without major issues. It's truly a form of night vision. Shooting wide open at F1.4 helps as well, but consider this example of a quick night shot I did: First shot is at ISO 320 pushed 2.7 stops, second shot is ISO 2500 as-is, third shot is ISO 320 pushed 2.7 stops again, and the last shot is ISO 2500 as-is. The original video file straight out of Resolve can be found here to avoid seeing the recompression macro blocking artifacts from YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/redirect?q=https%3A%2F%2Fdrive.google.com%2Fopen%3Fid%3D1sEtAlhfZOjfHO7R7XmXrJJvMUiJqRAHC&event=video_description&v=vYpPZPCWo5g&redir_token=-6uwx0ZKXpomIasN7CDyU0Ps-m98MTU4NDAzNTQzNkAxNTgzOTQ5MDM2
  18. Heya Lars, is there a particular way that's best to make a report to Sigma? I've just been using their email address. Though I don't often get a reply back.
  19. I think I've experienced the exposure bug with the stills mode. Here's what happened: Yesterday, I had the camera in Stills mode in Manual. I took a reading with my incident meter and the settings were F2.8 at 1/160th. I dialed those settings in, then took a photo. Image appeared dark. Tried it again, same result. Then I checked those images with RawViewer, and it turns out instead of 1/160th, the exposure was actually 1/640th, or two full stops down from where I told it to be. After resetting the camera back to default settings then going back into Manual mode, this issue disappeared. What in the world? A camera that doesn't use the settings I dialed in for a photo is not a reliable camera
  20. I'm hoping that post is a case of focusing on the major new feature without listing all the nitty gritty of what else is included!
  21. https://www.sigma-global.com/en/news/2020/03/02/2581/ Official announcement
  22. Makes sense! Not that I see any huge need for 6K as-is for the sake of it any time soon, other than having more padding for compositional adjustments or post-stabilization in the vein of what Fincher does. I think even with Gone Girl they captured at 6K, cropped and stabilized for 5K, then delivered a 4K downsampled master from that. Resolution is definitely the one thing we have plenty of from most cameras.
  23. Stupid question: If it were possible to see the 6K before downsampling, would it look any different than a photo in still mode?
  24. I wonder if it's a case where people aren't so keen on Sigma's new entry into the cinema camera market since people associate them with slow but gorgeous "weird" cameras? Almost like if BMW were to suddenly decide to make a cell phone Every modern camera seems to be a great sensor in a box with the differentiation being software at this point, save for the obvious technical advantages of the higher-end cameras. If Sigma can make the fp platform stable, reliable, and consistent, I don't see why they couldn't continue the line well into the future.
  25. Nice find, Lars! https://www.pronews.jp/news/20200210142806.html Page should auto-translate from Japanese in Chrome.
  • Create New...