Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Andrew Reid

Sony AX100 4K video camera - how much rolling shutter is too much?

Recommended Posts

That's so true for everything.  I was amazed at the amount of barrel distortion in "Nebraska"  In fact, if you watch professional shot network TV shows you'll see all kind of problems.  Every time I point something out my wife is like "Whaaa?" :)

Totally agree. Network television here in Germany still use Canon 5DMKII's for many of their more high profile weekly documentary series.

One is "Zoom" on ZDF. The footage is of course riddled with aliasing and moire - but no one seems to mind - certainly not the audience.

The story is the main factor and the "style" is of course dominated by shallow depth of field.

When I watch a movie on AppleTV with my wife, she can't tell the difference between the SD and the HD version. I think it's worth the extra Euro per rental, but I imagine many wouldn't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs

 

And definitely the worst rolling shutter I could imagine. And once you know it's there you can see it on pretty much any shot that has movement.

 

How can something be worse than you imagine. Is there some new instrument than can measure this? What are your units of measurement?

 

Why is this Canon site so interested in finding the worst shot couple of clips on the internet and rushing to judgement on a Sony camera. Oh -- I guess looking at the site ads, the answer is obvious. Canon doesn't have anything to offer but its dead line of DSLRs.

 

Even if it had no RS, no one could NOT shoot like this at 24p or even 30p. These are film frame rates. Any camera person shooting at film rates must be very careful of fast motion. It's Cinema 101. As far as pro use -- there is RS on almost every program not shot on CineAltas because today CMOS is used and CMOS has RS. And, every time a new camera comes out, those who don't own it, pounce on some youtube clip and proclaim they'll never buy it because of the RS -- when the reality is they can't afford one.

 

And therein lies the problem. Non owners commenting on stuff shot by others -- often with prototype cameras -- who clearly don't know how to shoot. When you see something shot poorly, why even watch?  And, how can someone claim to "review" a camera based upon one clip? They aren't reviewing. They need a crazy wrong headline to get clicks so they can make money.

 

Why not, "Baby run-over by Rolling Shutter."

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sam- after working with 5D3 raw, if I get a 7Q it will be to use ProRes or DNxHD 444 or 422, 10/12 bit. Raw is really only needed to perform better debayer (if using 12-bit). If the O7Q debayer is OK (looks like some purple fringing still needed to fix), then being able to edit straight from camera and save tons of time and disk space is the preferred way to go. I'd actually prefer XAVC (long GOP) to get even smaller files with high quality. If there's ever a need to go to a better camera, the ARRI Amira looks really good as a next step (vs. F5/F55). That said, going the other way to a GH4 is also looking tempting based on footage posted: 

(start around 5:52 for charts & skintones). Will be interesting to see how this 4K Sony camcorder compares.

Jcs agreed, massive files are costly in terms of hardware and time.  If cameras like the Amira at $4,500 just  to get on a waiting list are being considered as a next camera then obviously  time (which = $$$) is a big factor; disk space probably not a concern unless you are in a remote location and need to conserve.    This is a great point though.   Time in relation to cost , in my opinion, should be considered heavily as we all have a finite amount.

 

 As for the Aberrations, they at least are an easy fix compared to the alternative workflow!

 

 if 4k and ease of use are main considerations and the video from the gh4 is appealing ,  the fdr-ax1 for $4,500  could also be considered with built in nds, 35mm equiv. of 32-630mm f1.6 -3.4,   but with its sensor size, diffraction probably comes into play as evidenced by its maximum aperture of f11.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sony makes too much money to sell good cameras at affordable prices, this 4k handycam needs to be handicapped and cheap to build, Panasonic gh4 doesn't exist in charts of market share, maybe a 0.0001% or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I don't understand who this camera is supposed to appeal to. For $1199 it would make sense, with a bigger sensor it would make sense, with a faster zoom/interchangeable lens mount it might make sense, but for $2000? You've gotta really love the handycam form factor to pick this up, especially with the GH4 available for $300 less. It's nice and all, and I would take one if you gave it to me, but I don't get why you'd buy it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sam- yeah the FDR-AX1 looks decent for outdoor documentary work.

The Amira would be a major investment: starting package is around $40k. That said, for shooting commercials, docs, etc., if there's a business model that works, it's a great camera (not a camera for shooting camera tests or cats for youtube (unless somehow crazy viewcounts made enough ad money :) ).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there is no such thing as "should" in filming. Fast movements are allowed also in 24p and so are train stations ;)

OMG -- you really have this little knowledge of cinema? Why not Google so you can learn there are MANY cinema rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OMG -- you really have this little knowledge of cinema? Why not Google so you can learn there are MANY cinema rules.

There are also rules on quoting people. You broke them. If you're going to quote someone you do NOT include your own text within the quote. I think you're just a troll. Good day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's so true for everything.  I was amazed at the amount of barrel distortion in "Nebraska"  In fact, if you watch professional shot network TV shows you'll see all kind of problems.  Every time I point something out my wife is like "Whaaa?" :)

I rather suggest a Louis Vuitton bag. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OMG -- you really have this little knowledge of cinema? Why not Google so you can learn there are MANY cinema rules.


You seem to be confusing rules with conventions. To quote one example of breaking a cinema 'rule' if you want to pan faster than the ASC recommendations you are able to do so or if you want to shoot at some other frame rate than 24fps you are at liberty to do so e.g. Peter Jackson's 'Hobbit' films.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a few years time - the next generation of film makers will seek out plugins that will imitate all the video abnormalities we dislike today.

Plugins like the film grain, scratches, dust and light leaks etc (over) used by those seeking the "film look" today.

 

Looking forward to NAB to see Canon and Sony's answer to the GH4.

 

I think so too. I can see RS being a useful semiotic to indicate speed/fast motion in the future. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it just me, or is anyone else reading these comments confused as hell?

Just as an example, a poster shared a video shot with a Leica and a GoPro, saying rolling shutter could be hidden with scratches and dust specks, but I didn't see any of that in the video, which was very well done by the way. In fact, I didn't see any disturbing rolling shutter in the video at all. But it wasn't even shot with a Sony. The rest of the comments just went in every direction, talking about $40,000 cameras and so on. Has logic just gone out the window? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it just me, or is anyone else reading these comments confused as hell?

Just as an example, a poster shared a video shot with a Leica and a GoPro, saying rolling shutter could be hidden with scratches and dust specks, but I didn't see any of that in the video, which was very well done by the way. In fact, I didn't see any disturbing rolling shutter in the video at all. But it wasn't even shot with a Sony. The rest of the comments just went in every direction, talking about $40,000 cameras and so on. Has logic just gone out the window? 

Yes, I am having some trouble following this thread.

 

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi

This looks crisp - 4k on Youtube

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Totally agree. Network television here in Germany still use Canon 5DMKII's for many of their more high profile weekly documentary series.

One is "Zoom" on ZDF. The footage is of course riddled with aliasing and moire - but no one seems to mind - certainly not the audience.

 

Well part of the problem is a lot of people never see true 1080i... let alone 1080p.  I cut the cord long ago.  My over the air compressed 1080i picture blows cable compressed "HD" out of the water.

 

I come from a photography background and to us the negative is something you try and make perfect within reason.  Yes you will make some quick and dirty prints but you always know that you have a perfect negative in cold storage.  If it doesn't take too much effort and money to go out and get a good "negative" then why wouldn't you do it?  If I was shooting to feed myself and I was any good at it I would look at something like the GH4.

 

From my experience if you show someone 4K footage from the GH4 on a good screen they immediately notice the difference between that and a 5DMK II.  Heck when I showed someone my 50D RAW videos they immediatly noticed the difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well part of the problem is a lot of people never see true 1080i... let alone 1080p.  I cut the cord long ago.  My over the air compressed 1080i picture blows cable compressed "HD" out of the water.

OTA isn't what it was when HD was introduced, now that stations are splitting their bandwidth with many subchannels.

 

I can't speak for cable, but I have done A-B tests with Dish Network comparing picture quality with OTA locals.  I honestly could not find much difference with our LA locals.  If I really got close to the screen, I might be able to see that the text on news shows was just a hair sharper on the OTA 1080i signal, and we are talking "full pixel peeping".  On channels with 720p, I couldn't see any difference.

 

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think so too. I can see RS being a useful semiotic to indicate speed/fast motion in the future. 

 

In the future? It's already been used for at least 60 years. Watch old Warner Brothers cartoons. Frequently, when a character swings a club or bat, it curves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This looks crisp - 4k on Youtube  

 

Thanks, I used Sony Movie Studio Platinum with no post processing except adding music and trimming.  As long as the camera is not moving and there is not too much movement, the image quality is excellent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OTA isn't what it was when HD was introduced, now that stations are splitting their bandwidth with many subchannels.

 

I can't speak for cable, but I have done A-B tests with Dish Network comparing picture quality with OTA locals.  I honestly could not find much difference with our LA locals.  If I really got close to the screen, I might be able to see that the text on news shows was just a hair sharper on the OTA 1080i signal, and we are talking "full pixel peeping".  On channels with 720p, I couldn't see any difference.

 

Michael

 

I am sure with the capitalism race to the bottom there are many regional differences.  I was just speaking about my on personal experience.  But you confirmed my main point.  OTA 1080i is the best most people ever see unless they rent a bluray... which few people do.  I personally have never failed to wow someone when showing them 4K output.  They just don't know stuff can be that sharp and detailed.

 

So it really boils down to do you want your work to be "good enough" or do you want your work to have the "wow" factor.  No one is suggesting 4K replaces a good script.  That's a false choice.  The real choice is good script or good script+4K.  If I can swing it I think I know what my choice would be.

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...