Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Andrew Reid

Sony FS5 firmware update version 2.0 - FS RAW costs $600 / 500 euros

Recommended Posts

EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs

3 years ago called - the FS700 could do all of this then.  Unless this sensor is simply light years ahead (and I don't think it is from the footage I've seen) then the advantages of the FS5 form factor are quickly mitigated.  Giant honking Odyssey 7Q+ with multiple drives probably weigh as much as the FS5 itself (with power) and now you have SDI cables hanging around.  IMO the FS700 is far better bang for buck USED (You can find the entire rig for around 5k with the O7Q+) vs $5500 + another $3k.  Short of the superior ND on the FS5 - what's the point really?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Shield3 said:

3 years ago called - the FS700 could do all of this then.  Unless this sensor is simply light years ahead (and I don't think it is from the footage I've seen) then the advantages of the FS5 form factor are quickly mitigated.  Giant honking Odyssey 7Q+ with multiple drives probably weigh as much as the FS5 itself (with power) and now you have SDI cables hanging around.  IMO the FS700 is far better bang for buck USED (You can find the entire rig for around 5k with the O7Q+) vs $5500 + another $3k.  Short of the superior ND on the FS5 - what's the point really?

Some people will think the FS5 is worth it due to the ergonomics alone. The FS700 is much worse in this regard. However, the FS700 does have a slightly better image and will last another 5 years on the market. A true classic. 

Considering the financial outlay, for the money I would be looking at the Kinefinity Terra. I'm surprised that there's been no articles in this camera yet on EOSHD. Can't wait to see footage. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Oliver Daniel said:

Some people will think the FS5 is worth it due to the ergonomics alone. The FS700 is much worse in this regard. However, the FS700 does have a slightly better image and will last another 5 years on the market. A true classic. 

Considering the financial outlay, for the money I would be looking at the Kinefinity Terra. I'm surprised that there's been no articles in this camera yet on EOSHD. Can't wait to see footage. 

5 hours ago, Shield3 said:

3 years ago called - the FS700 could do all of this then.  Unless this sensor is simply light years ahead (and I don't think it is from the footage I've seen) then the advantages of the FS5 form factor are quickly mitigated.  Giant honking Odyssey 7Q+ with multiple drives probably weigh as much as the FS5 itself (with power) and now you have SDI cables hanging around.  IMO the FS700 is far better bang for buck USED (You can find the entire rig for around 5k with the O7Q+) vs $5500 + another $3k.  Short of the superior ND on the FS5 - what's the point really?

Sony lists the FS700 as 12+ stops of DR vs 14 stops from the FS5, besides the electronic ND and much better ergonomics, some accessories being interchangeable with the FS7, having the same sensor also makes it easier to match the two, even with the similarities with the FS700 in other aspects, the FS5 still has a lot of interesting points on top of the FS700.

The RAW for that price is very welcomed regardless, I mean, I don't see a reason to complain about it, the more options the better for the consumers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, theSUBVERSIVE said:

Sony lists the FS700 as 12+ stops of DR vs 14 stops from the FS5, besides the electronic ND and much better ergonomics, some accessories being interchangeable with the FS7, having the same sensor also makes it easier to match the two, even with the similarities with the FS700 in other aspects, the FS5 still has a lot of interesting points on top of the FS700.

The RAW for that price is very welcomed regardless, I mean, I don't see a reason to complain about it, the more options the better for the consumers.

Quoted and usable DR are two very different things, and you'd find real world they're very close in terms of usable DR. FS700 for me comes close to, ergonomically, one of the worst supposedly 'pro' cameras I've ever encountered. It does have a lot of great features though. Sensitivity will be similar between the two, but the FS5 will be better at higher ISOs.

Big distinction, I think, is that the FS700 is more or less sorta a 4k-geared camera, whereas the FS5 is sorta an HD geared camera. FS5 gives you 10-bit internally @ 50Mbps which you can't get out of an FS700. FS700's SDI output is also only 8-bit, so to get more than that you're forced to shoot raw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Oliver Daniel said:

Some people will think the FS5 is worth it due to the ergonomics alone. The FS700 is much worse in this regard. However, the FS700 does have a slightly better image and will last another 5 years on the market. A true classic. 

Considering the financial outlay, for the money I would be looking at the Kinefinity Terra. I'm surprised that there's been no articles in this camera yet on EOSHD. Can't wait to see footage. 

Yeah, but the ergonomics aren't really that relevant when you add a huge recorder to the back of the thing… The FS700 is the steal right now, you can get that whole rig for probably under 5k at this point. 

I would say that the Sony FS5 probably can get much nicer color, due to the S-LOG update, etc. The colors out of the fs700 are seriously tough, they were improved a ton in the fs7.

Does this update enable 4k/120 burst? The FS700 can do this which is awesome.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BenEricson said:

Yeah, but the ergonomics aren't really that relevant when you add a huge recorder to the back of the thing… The FS700 is the steal right now, you can get that whole rig for probably under 5k at this point. 

IMO, the FS700 is a compromise. I really hated the image out of that thing (internally). I was consistently disappointed with it, especially when blown up to the big screen. It just didn't hold up. Not to mention the ergonomics. It's worth it if you need a cheap HFR camera, and are happy to have a recorder hanging off it permanently, and are happy dealing with raw all the time.

The FS5, for about the same price, gives you pretty good HD internal (10-bit 422 50Mbps), and acceptable 4k, with pretty decent frame rates. Add on a recorder when you can afford it and you've got raw. You even get 10-bit out of the SDI in HD (unlike the FS700).

FS700's not a bad camera, and certainly if it were significantly cheaper (talking F3 territory) it may be worth it. As it is, for the same price as an FS5 I don't know that it's worth it. You're better off with an F3 if you don't mind HD at a max. 60fps (but at ~ 1/2 the price of an FS700)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

● Optionally record 4K (4096x2160) RAW RAW at 23.98p, 25p, 29.97p, 50p and 59.94p, recording to the AXS-R5 external recorder attached with the HXR-IFR5 interface unit (sold separately).* It is possible to simultaneously record XAVC HD on SxS memory cards in the camcorder’s internal dual media slots. Approximately 4 seconds of cached 4K RAW can be output at 100fps or 120fps. It is also possible to output continuous 2K RAW at 100, 120, 200 or 240 fps as 23.98p, 25p, 29.97p or 59.94p.  
 

4k at 120 is possible yeah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi

I am told, It's the exact same RAW specifications of the FS700, not a single difference. WHish is great! 4K60P continuous and 4K120p 4 second bursts, and most importantly 2K240p continuous. By the way, while the image is the same and the sensor is the same, the form factor is a big differentiator between these two camera, FS700 being more suitable for studio configurations, or for people who have a strong muscle mass, really not kidding. FS700+module+Q7+ is quite different from FS5+Q7+ in terms of how you carry the thing and use it/shoot it/change settings, both lovely images! 

FS5 just got interesting to me... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3 minutes ago, Ebrahim Saadawi said:

I am told, It's the exact same RAW specifications of the FS700, not a single difference. WHish is great! 4K60P continuous and 4K120p 4 second bursts, and most importantly 2K240p continuous. By the way, while the image is the same and the sensor is the same, the form factor is a big differentiator between these two camera, FS700 being more suitable for studio configurations, or for people who have a strong muscle mass, really not kidding. FS700+module+Q7+ is quite different from FS5+Q7+ in terms of how you carry the thing and use it/shoot it/change settings, both lovely images! 

FS5 just got interesting to me... 

The FS5's sensor is the same/based on the FS7, which is the same sensor as the F5, which is different to the FS700. I would imagine the raw out of the FS5 would be closer/similar to the FS7 than the FS700.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi

Believe it or not It's the same 4096x2160 s35 sensor in all these cameras.

So when shooting in RAW they all give the same output, but are differentiated in their image quality by their internal codecs (24mbps AVCHD on the FS700, 8bit 4:2:0 XAVC-L on FS5, 10bit 4:2:2 XAVC-I on the FS7, and the F5 kind of internal raw as it integrates with the recorder. However the F5 and F55 have a 16bit colour depth output to the Sony R5 recorder while the FS700/FS5/FS7 are 12bit to note. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Ebrahim Saadawi said:

Believe it or not It's the same 4096x2160 s35 sensor in all these cameras.

So when shooting in RAW they all give the same output, but are differentiated in their image quality by their internal codecs (24mbps AVCHD on the FS700, 8bit 4:2:0 XAVC-L on FS5, 10bit 4:2:2 XAVC-I on the FS7, and the F5 kind of internal raw as it integrates with the recorder. However the F5 and F55 have a 16bit colour depth output to the Sony R5 recorder while the FS700/FS5/FS7 are 12bit to note. 

Seems like this puts the FS5 back into the "hell of a deal if you're chasing image quality" category and out of the "somewhat broken" category. Plus, good ergonomics and a good enough image for some corporate videos anyway.

I recently worked on spot shot on C500 with the Q7 and a GH4. The GH4 was actually more pleasing out of the box because it handled saturation over luma better than the RAW to prores profile on the Q7/C500 (normally one of Canon's strengths when it uses a baked in profile correctly avoiding chroma clipping).

There's a post on reduser about this... about the Alexa's mathematically perfect grasp on saturation to luminosity... which only matters if you're chasing film, which is worse than the eye anyway, and isn't that the stated goal? (I'm a hack, so I love this about the Alexa, but the poster there, a true artist, did not.) Using a better profile on the Q7 to prores... you're going to get a lot of bang for the next to no money. Sony's biggest problem is their saturation to luma curve, because it's the hardest to correct in post (I've talked with only one person here who could correct for it, I bet most people can't because even Company 3 can't); if the Q7 can be set to fix that–a different setting from the C500 setting that ended up being used–it will offer something "close enough to great" even as prores to be graded into "freaking great"–and with more flexibility than those with a better starting point at a lower bit depth (Canon... maybe even Arri, but again, my preferences are for Alexa over everything because I just like what's easy).

This is great news for people like those on this forum... those who are less concerned with awkward workflows and more adherent to the best for the least. Could be cool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Ebrahim Saadawi said:

Believe it or not It's the same 4096x2160 s35 sensor in all these cameras.

So when shooting in RAW they all give the same output, but are differentiated in their image quality by their internal codecs (24mbps AVCHD on the FS700, 8bit 4:2:0 XAVC-L on FS5, 10bit 4:2:2 XAVC-I on the FS7, and the F5 kind of internal raw as it integrates with the recorder. However the F5 and F55 have a 16bit colour depth output to the Sony R5 recorder while the FS700/FS5/FS7 are 12bit to note. 

As far as I've been told, the sensor on the F5/55/FS7/FS5 lineup may be similar to the FS700 but are not the same sensor at all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for the dumb question here but what's the max framerate the FS5 can record RAW internally to the SD cards?  And what speed of card is required?  I don't have an FS5, just curious what the future holds for recording RAW to SD on other prosumer Sony cameras.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...