Jump to content

GH5S Sample Footage and Reviews


DBounce
 Share

Recommended Posts

Well my Sony A7s is Suppose to have 15 stops of DR. But that is in Photo mode not Video mode. Most cameras drop 3 stops compared to Photo on the video side. And that 12 stops takes S Log 2 to get on the A7s. Probably Only 10 stops, 11stops at most in the normal modes.

I can't remember what it is called, but Zak knows LoL. With the Consumer Codec in these cameras you are limited to 12 stops of DR I don't care what you do. It has to do with Long, Short something like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, markr041 said:

The world is heading to FF video, and that can make a much bigger difference in visual quality than 8bit vs 10 bit. But 10bit is better than 8bit, and high bitrates are better than low bitrates.

I'm really interested to know why people think there is an inherent advantage to FF.  

I enjoyed Adam Wilt's investigation of this:

https://www.provideocoalition.com/bigger-is-better-ok-but-why/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When it comes to the current crop of mirrorless cameras, the advantages of full frame include better low light sensitivity, less noise, more detailed 4K, wider dynamic range, shallower depth of field and better autofocus than their crop sensor counterparts. Of course, some of these advantages vary from camera to camera.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Full Frame does not confer more detail, or dynamic range.  Low light sensitivity I'll go with.  And DoF - but APS-C cameras provide more than adequate DoF options. 

There are some fantastically well-featured FF cameras about - but people seem to think that some of their features are a function of Full frame itself.  This isn't the case.  If you think that Full Frame = superior dynamic range then you should take a look at how the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera performs in this regard as a starting point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There seem to be quite a few people here who are under the impression that some of the achievements of Sony's camera's, such as dynamic range, are due to the size of the sensor.  DR is inherently initially a product of the sensor (retained or reduced during compression).  That's why I pointed out the BMPCC's relatively tiny sensor's ability to produce wide dynamic range - it is not a quality inherent in full-frame sensor acquisition.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All else being equal - I’m sure you’re familiar with that term from high school - a ff sensor has less noise and greater DR. Provide proof before just spreading misinformation in the forums. Your own tests. Not Adam Wilt’s or someone else’s. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I'm quite happy to base my knowledge on industry stalwarts like Adam Wilt, thankyou.  And confident in sharing his contributions with others.  He's clearly a great deal better informed than your good self ;).

I'd love to know what you mean by 'all else' in your phrase above?  Surely you don't mean codec?  There's plenty of footage from the BMPCC for example recorded on Prores (obv. not RAW) that still displays high dynamic range.  You (and others) might have to revise your thinking a bit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Mmmbeats said:

No, I'm quite happy to base my knowledge on industry stalwarts like Adam Wilt, thankyou.  And confident in sharing his contributions with others.  He's clearly a great deal better informed than your good self ;).

I'd love to know what you mean by 'all else' in your phrase above?  Surely you don't mean codec?  There's plenty of footage from the BMPCC for example recorded on Prores (obv. not RAW) that still displays high dynamic range.  You (and others) might have to revise your thinking a bit. 

Since we evidently had different schooling, all else being equal means the codec, lighting conditions, processing and everything else remain the same, the only difference being the physical size of the sensor. And Adam Wilt does not mention dynamic range or noise in his otherwise interesting test. At this point, you are just offering anecdotal evidence, which is of little practical value. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's also based on my practical experience of using Sony, Panasonic and Blackmagic cameras over the past few years.  There are definitely areas in which the FF bodies have had an advantage, but I'm convinced that people have become seduced by the 'bigger is better' hype, and lost all sense of objectivity.  I hear and read people tying themselves in knots trying to convince that sensor size itself bestows advantages that it does not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Members

All else is rarely equal. DOF, Lowlight capability, DR, Resolution, the super vague term "image quality", none of it is dependent on sensor size.

There are 1" sensors that kick FF sensors ass at DR, ISO Noise and Resolution.
DOF is decided by the lens.

 

Link to comment
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...