A6700 - FX30 sensor 👀

[Michael S]

The power efficiency of one chip can be very different from the efficiency of another due to node size and to what degree it's processing is hardware accelerated. Maybe Sony uses a relatively large (= cheaper) node size or the chip has less optimized hardware for the processing it needs to do. There might also be more sample variation with Sony as the cooling efficiency can depend a lot on how well various parts are thermally connected during assembly. There is always some margin of error on soldering points, application of paste and lubricants during assembly and if this margin is larger than what the designers assumed you get clear sample variation.

[kye]

16 hours ago, Michael S said:

The power efficiency of one chip can be very different from the efficiency of another due to node size and to what degree it's processing is hardware accelerated. Maybe Sony uses a relatively large (= cheaper) node size or the chip has less optimized hardware for the processing it needs to do. There might also be more sample variation with Sony as the cooling efficiency can depend a lot on how well various parts are thermally connected during assembly. There is always some margin of error on soldering points, application of paste and lubricants during assembly and if this margin is larger than what the designers assumed you get clear sample variation.

I did wonder about that.  There's a reason that cameras like the BMPCC 4K is so huge and the iPhone camera is so tiny, when they both have a sensor that is the same resolution / frame rates and the iPhone compresses the footage and the BM doesn't, so in theory the iPhone should require far more power than the BM.

I have a vague recollection of a BM representative saying that they need to use off-the-shelf chips for their cameras because they don't have the economies of scale to make custom chips like Apple does.  One of the biggest factors is that when you join chips together into the same unit they often don't take much more power than each one of them did before, plus there's all the various circuitry that was needed to send from one chip and then receive by the other one that is no longer needed if they're on the same chip.

[Michael S]

On 8/20/2023 at 4:57 AM, kye said:

I have a vague recollection of a BM representative saying that they need to use off-the-shelf chips for their cameras because they don't have the economies of scale to make custom chips like Apple does.

Correct. I remember having read somewhere that BM uses FPGA technology while the big names use ASIC which explains a lot about the different size and performance characteristics between these products.

https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/fpga-vs-asic/

[SRV1981]

YT - Film Alliance channel noted in latest video that to avoid overheating to early to switch codec to 4:2:0 10-bit. Was able to record over 1.5 hours in 24p and 37-40 at 60p. He argues that you work really notice a difference to 4:2:2 for most. 

[ntblowz]

26 minutes ago, SRV1981 said:

YT - Film Alliance channel noted in latest video that to avoid overheating to early to switch codec to 4:2:0 10-bit. Was able to record over 1.5 hours in 24p and 37-40 at 60p. He argues that you work really notice a difference to 4:2:2 for most. 

I guess if u want 4:2:2 10bit stick with FX30 or R7 

R7 is definitely the bang for the buck as workhorse camera for both still and video.

A6700 is more for casual/hobby camera use like so many people commented on YouTube when it comes to overheating.

[Eric Calabros]

8 hours ago, SRV1981 said:

YT - Film Alliance channel noted in latest video that to avoid overheating to early to switch codec to 4:2:0 10-bit. Was able to record over 1.5 hours in 24p and 37-40 at 60p. He argues that you work really notice a difference to 4:2:2 for most. 

Just proves the processor has no "accelerator" unit for advanced h.265 profiles so the encoding is done inefficiently, hence high power consumption, hence unusual temperature.

[SRV1981]

Is there an appreciably noticeable difference in 4:22 and 4:20

[SRV1981]

To clarify - in 10-bit and *not* green screen or keying 

[newfoundmass]

6 hours ago, SRV1981 said:

Is there an appreciably noticeable difference in 4:22 and 4:20

 There are a lot of variables. 4:2:0 is good enough for a lot of stuff but it's certainly nice to have that extra information when you need it.

[SRV1981]

26 minutes ago, newfoundmass said:

 There are a lot of variables. 4:2:0 is good enough for a lot of stuff but it's certainly nice to have that extra information when you need it.

Any media I can see to notice the difference? I can’t find much difference between 10-but 422 and 420

[newfoundmass]

8 minutes ago, SRV1981 said:

Any media I can see to notice the difference? I can’t find much difference between 10-but 422 and 420

If you don't notice a difference then why are you asking? 😉

[SRV1981]

29 minutes ago, newfoundmass said:

If you don't notice a difference then why are you asking? 😉

Let me rephrase - I’ve yet to find a video demonstrating the difference so I don’t know.  You’ve made a statement in confidence and was hoping you could educate me with an example. 

[newfoundmass]

19 minutes ago, SRV1981 said:

Let me rephrase - I’ve yet to find a video demonstrating the difference so I don’t know.  You’ve made a statement in confidence and was hoping you could educate me with an example. 

I don't mean any disrespect here, truly, but I don't have a ready link to a YouTube video or anything because I've never needed one since I work with footage every day and part of my job is seeing/knowing the difference. I am sure there are YouTube videos out there that show a comparison (though I'm sure YouTube compression will be an issue) but you have access to the same available online information that I do with a simple Google or YouTube search. There really is only one person though that can answer your original question of whether or not you can see a noticeable difference and that's you.

You've been looking at getting a new camera for what feels like a year, and I feel like you are far too concerned with this stuff vs. just getting something, getting out there, and shooting. You can pick up an old camera that films in 8-bit and get awesome images. It ain't the camera that is gonna limit you. Well, except maybe if it's a Sony, I hear they have trouble filming outdoors! 😉

[SRV1981]

37 minutes ago, newfoundmass said:

I don't mean any disrespect here, truly, but I don't have a ready link to a YouTube video or anything because I've never needed one since I work with footage every day and part of my job is seeing/knowing the difference. I am sure there are YouTube videos out there that show a comparison (though I'm sure YouTube compression will be an issue) but you have access to the same available online information that I do with a simple Google or YouTube search. There really is only one person though that can answer your original question of whether or not you can see a noticeable difference and that's you.

You've been looking at getting a new camera for what feels like a year, and I feel like you are far too concerned with this stuff vs. just getting something, getting out there, and shooting. You can pick up an old camera that films in 8-bit and get awesome images. It ain't the camera that is gonna limit you. Well, except maybe if it's a Sony, I hear they have trouble filming outdoors! 😉

Ad hominem. 🥱 

[ntblowz]

1 hour ago, newfoundmass said:

 

You've been looking at getting a new camera for what feels like a year, and I feel like you are far too concerned with this stuff vs. just getting something, getting out there, and shooting. You can pick up an old camera that films in 8-bit and get awesome images. It ain't the camera that is gonna limit you. Well, except maybe if it's a Sony, I hear they have trouble filming outdoors! 😉

Lol, at same time I bought R7, R8, E1 and maybe a7c ii and whatever stacked sensor camera Canon will release afterward.. not as many as Mark041 though.

 

I should be like SRV1981 here just think don't buy, that will save you a lot of money 😁

[kye]

10 hours ago, SRV1981 said:

To clarify - in 10-bit and *not* green screen or keying 

Keying is likely to be the biggest place where you'd notice, but second to that it's probably related to contrast.  The flatter the log profile you record in and the flatter the image is (e.g. if it's cloudy, or the subject is low contrast like when in fog) and the greater the contrast / sat you want in your final look, the more that you might notice.

@newfoundmass isn't wrong when he says that it really depends on your preferences.  I hang out on the colourist forums and some of them think that Alexa footage is quite fragile and that you can't push it far before it degrades.  I don't know about you but I think you can push it miles and it still looks amazing, so there are different thresholds that people are willing to tolerate!

[newfoundmass]

2 hours ago, SRV1981 said:

Ad hominem. 🥱 

Not at all. I'm sorry that you took it that way. I am simply saying that none of this matters if you don't just pick up a camera and film. Six months ago it was "is there really that much difference between 8-bit and 10-bit" and now it's "is there really that much difference between 10-bit 4:2:2 and 10-bit 4:2:0?" Being inquisitive is good! But from my perspective it really does look like you're worrying about things that, in the big picture, won't really impact what you'll be using the camera for, especially if you're just an enthusiast or hobbyist.

 

Regardless, none of us can really answer some of your questions because it boils down to preference and what is acceptable to you. If you can't notice the difference between the two then does it really matter? Does it matter that I can? I don't think so.

[SRV1981]

I mean in all seriousness I shared that an a6700 user found 10-but 420 to not overheat. I’d that is true that could be great for those interested. My annual obsession of camera bodies is irrelevant and is as hominem. 
 

if you fell 422 is noticeably better than 420 I am merely asking for video evidence. I’m curious. 420 could be a good solution.  Just engage the content?

[Eric Calabros]

1 hour ago, SRV1981 said:

if you fell 422 is noticeably better than 420 I am merely asking for video evidence.

https://youtu.be/K4586b8iR2Y?si=rG-m8TUfkH8L0kgc

[SRV1981]

3 hours ago, Eric Calabros said:

https://youtu.be/K4586b8iR2Y?si=rG-m8TUfkH8L0kgc

I believe that’s 8-but 420 not 10 but 420?