Jump to content

A6700 - FX30 sensor 👀


SRV1981
 Share

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, SRV1981 said:

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?

I'm sorry, but I don't have the time to set up a video comparison for you. And as I (and others) have stated, whether there is a noticeable difference depends on the person's preference, what the scene is, what you're doing with the footage, etc. If you are talking about simply using footage straight out of camera or even doing a light grade, then 4:2:0 will most likely be fine for most cases. If I am filming 10 bit I'd prefer that extra information, but again, that boils down to preference. If you don't notice the difference is it really that important?

I just don't feel like I can give you the answer I feel like you want to hear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EOSHD Pro Color 5 for Sony cameras EOSHD Z LOG for Nikon CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
10 hours ago, newfoundmass said:

I'm sorry, but I don't have the time to set up a video comparison for you. And as I (and others) have stated, whether there is a noticeable difference depends on the person's preference, what the scene is, what you're doing with the footage, etc. If you are talking about simply using footage straight out of camera or even doing a light grade, then 4:2:0 will most likely be fine for most cases. If I am filming 10 bit I'd prefer that extra information, but again, that boils down to preference. If you don't notice the difference is it really that important?

I just don't feel like I can give you the answer I feel like you want to hear.

I shared info: a review on YT notes 10-bit 420 didn’t overheat but 422 did. I then noted a few comments that said you wouldn’t notice a difference between 10-but 422 or 420 outside of green screen and keying. You then ad hominem made comments that were unhelpful and inaccurate.  I just was curious if anyone knew of a video that compares 10-but 422/420. That’s all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/23/2023 at 8:16 PM, kye said:

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!

I'm using 10-bit 4:2:0 in my X-S20 because 10-bit 4:2:2 have no hardware decoders on Nvidia cards, only 10-bit 4:2:0. 
From what I've searched, keying, like you said, is the most visible difference, and contrast on the edges (hence the better keying in 4:2:2). Looks like some very pushy grades are better with 4:2:2, too.

For me (personal use), I think that 4:2:0 will be enough - never had a 10-bit camera before, I guess that 8 to 10 bit is a much more noted upgrade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Marcio Kabke Pinheiro said:

I'm using 10-bit 4:2:0 in my X-S20 because 10-bit 4:2:2 have no hardware decoders on Nvidia cards, only 10-bit 4:2:0. 
From what I've searched, keying, like you said, is the most visible difference, and contrast on the edges (hence the better keying in 4:2:2). Looks like some very pushy grades are better with 4:2:2, too.

For me (personal use), I think that 4:2:0 will be enough - never had a 10-bit camera before, I guess that 8 to 10 bit is a much more noted upgrade.

Yes, 10-bit vs 8-bit is a much larger consideration, especially if you're shooting in log.  It's rare to see issues with either 8-bit or 4:2:0 in real-world examples, but the ones I have seen appeared to have a similar impact where skin tones had larger squares of yellow/orange/pink instead of the same colours being much more granular and natural-looking.

The other consideration is resolution.  We haven't all changed to displays that are 4x the size since before 4K was released and 1080p was the standard, therefore the individual pixels are smaller today in the viewers field-of-view than they used to be.  IIRC 4:2:0 in 4K is the same as 4:4:4 in 1080p.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kye said:

Yes, 10-bit vs 8-bit is a much larger consideration, especially if you're shooting in log.  It's rare to see issues with either 8-bit or 4:2:0 in real-world examples, but the ones I have seen appeared to have a similar impact where skin tones had larger squares of yellow/orange/pink instead of the same colours being much more granular and natural-looking.

The other consideration is resolution.  We haven't all changed to displays that are 4x the size since before 4K was released and 1080p was the standard, therefore the individual pixels are smaller today in the viewers field-of-view than they used to be.  IIRC 4:2:0 in 4K is the same as 4:4:4 in 1080p.

I think that's why the C100 is so good in log despite being only 8-bit 1080p; the 4K downsampled to 1080p gives you more flexibility in grading than if the sensor was 1080p.

I helped a buddy film with three C100s a couple weeks back and the image still holds up. He upscales it and it looks really good. I wish the C70 had kept that form factor, because the C100 is possibly my favorite ever. It's such a pleasure to use. Heck, I wish more companies would copy it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ntblowz said:

Over at dpreview that Samyang lens wont work with A6700 on AFC.

I guess only Sony and Tamron lens works fine with A6700 atm.

I think we'll start seeing more of this happening with Sony, especially as they start releasing features that require more communication between the lens and the body like needed for breathing compensation, etc. 

It also wouldn't surprise me to see them start to try clamping down on third party lenses now that their lens selection has matured. When they were just trying to get people into the system those third party lenses helped a lot, but now that they've fleshed out their own offerings I imagine they're wanting people to purchase those instead. They aren't making any money when someone buys a Viltrox lens, but they do when someone buys a Sony or Tamron lens. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/26/2023 at 10:38 AM, newfoundmass said:

I think we'll start seeing more of this happening with Sony, especially as they start releasing features that require more communication between the lens and the body like needed for breathing compensation, etc. 

It also wouldn't surprise me to see them start to try clamping down on third party lenses now that their lens selection has matured. When they were just trying to get people into the system those third party lenses helped a lot, but now that they've fleshed out their own offerings I imagine they're wanting people to purchase those instead. They aren't making any money when someone buys a Viltrox lens, but they do when someone buys a Sony or Tamron lens. 

Nonsense. Sony isn't clamping down on anything. E-mount protocols are open source - its precisely the reason every 3rd party AF lens maker has E-mount lenses and why there's nothing for the RF and only recently some for X-mount and such. The poor functioning lens likely needs a FW update, much the same way Sony bodies get an incremental update when certain lenses are released or lenses get FW updates when new bodies come out. Newer bodies like the a6700 with the AI functionality will certainly require some lens updates.

Everyone outside of Sony is not openly sharing AF protocols so they have to be reverse engineered. Nikon seems to have something with Tamron and Fuji has allowed Sigma and Viltrox in, but as we know outside of Sony options are severely limited. 

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Trek of Joy said:

Nonsense. Sony isn't clamping down on anything. E-mount protocols are open source - its precisely the reason every 3rd party AF lens maker has E-mount lenses and why there's nothing for the RF and only recently some for X-mount and such. The poor functioning lens likely needs a FW update, much the same way Sony bodies get an incremental update when certain lenses are released or lenses get FW updates when new bodies come out. Newer bodies like the a6700 with the AI functionality will certainly require some lens updates.

Everyone outside of Sony is not openly sharing AF protocols so they have to be reverse engineered. Nikon seems to have something with Tamron and Fuji has allowed Sigma and Viltrox in, but as we know outside of Sony options are severely limited. 

Chris

None of that limits their ability to clamp down moving forward. Nothing can stop companies from making lenses for the mount, but it's absolutely possible for Sony to limit how well those lenses work on Sony bodies. We're already seeing it with Sony developing features like breathing correction that only work with Sony lenses. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, newfoundmass said:

None of that limits their ability to clamp down moving forward. Nothing can stop companies from making lenses for the mount, but it's absolutely possible for Sony to limit how well those lenses work on Sony bodies. We're already seeing it with Sony developing features like breathing correction that only work with Sony lenses. 

That's mostly false. Breathing comp is an in-camera computational operation like active stabilization and the new reframing. Pretty sure Sony isn't going to pay its engineers to add 3rd party lenses to that capability. Other than TC's and hitting the a1's 30fps with tracking, Sony hasn't restricted AF in any way. The E-mount is open, they don't even charge a licensing fee. Sony does specify there is a license agreement and I'm sure that contains language about features that will be exclusive to Sony, like the TC's and 30fps. If a company is going to commit resources to developing lenses, there's also likely language that says Sony isn't going to suddenly brick their lenses as well. 

Non-functional AF is a product of the lens, not the camera, since there are literally hundreds of lenses without issue. Without knowing all the details from the random game of telephone quoted above, old Samyang lenses have horseshit AF, it wouldn't surprise me if there were AFc issues without an update with some of them. And some may not work well with new bodies period. I had the original orange glow 85/1.4 and it couldn't track anything shooting video - it was useless as an AF lens with video.

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Trek of Joy said:

That's mostly false. Breathing comp is an in-camera computational operation like active stabilization and the new reframing. Pretty sure Sony isn't going to pay its engineers to add 3rd party lenses to that capability. Other than TC's and hitting the a1's 30fps with tracking, Sony hasn't restricted AF in any way. The E-mount is open, they don't even charge a licensing fee. Sony does specify there is a license agreement and I'm sure that contains language about features that will be exclusive to Sony, like the TC's and 30fps. If a company is going to commit resources to developing lenses, there's also likely language that says Sony isn't going to suddenly brick their lenses as well. 

 

Your point highlight why regardless of 3rd party only Sony lens give you the best support 

When there is new body with Sony lens I don't have to worry about is it gonna have issues whatsoever.a

Hence I still only use Sony lens.

But now the new Sony lens is getting more expensive like Nikon and Canon.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, ntblowz said:

Your point highlight why regardless of 3rd party only Sony lens give you the best support 

When there is new body with Sony lens I don't have to worry about is it gonna have issues whatsoever.a

Hence I still only use Sony lens.

But now the new Sony lens is getting more expensive like Nikon and Canon.

 

That's really not the point since I also said hundreds of lenses work fine with no issues. Some 3rd party lenses have linear focusing motors that match the best Sony has, Tamron is using them in their VXD lenses for example. But I'm mostly Sony as well because there are tons of great deals on used lenses. The newer G's and GM's are just so small and light compared to others like Sigma. I've bought dozens of Sony lenses over the last decade of shooting E-mount, always used, and always much cheaper than new.

Cheers

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Trek of Joy said:

That's really not the point since I also said hundreds of lenses work fine with no issues. Some 3rd party lenses have linear focusing motors that match the best Sony has, Tamron is using them in their VXD lenses for example. But I'm mostly Sony as well because there are tons of great deals on used lenses. The newer G's and GM's are just so small and light compared to others like Sigma. I've bought dozens of Sony lenses over the last decade of shooting E-mount, always used, and always much cheaper than new.

Cheers

Chris

That is the point

Sigma apsc 1.4 and Samyang 1.8 is pretty popular too, who cares about other obscure lens.

Those lens just don't work for Sony A6700, so sucks to people who only have those lens to find out they can't use it, that is not a really good user experience if you need it for a trip or shoot only to find out they are not compatible til who knows when Sony or Sigma or Samyang will have new firmware.

But for people have have Sony lens they knew it will work regardless cause it is 100% supported .

That why I laugh at people who think 3rd party is one the main reason for Sony, not for me cause I knew 3rd party will have problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

That's mostly false. Breathing comp is an in-camera computational operation like active stabilization and the new reframing. Pretty sure Sony isn't going to pay its engineers to add 3rd party lenses to that capability. Other than TC's and hitting the a1's 30fps with tracking, Sony hasn't restricted AF in any way. The E-mount is open, they don't even charge a licensing fee. Sony does specify there is a license agreement and I'm sure that contains language about features that will be exclusive to Sony, like the TC's and 30fps. If a company is going to commit resources to developing lenses, there's also likely language that says Sony isn't going to suddenly brick their lenses as well. 

Non-functional AF is a product of the lens, not the camera, since there are literally hundreds of lenses without issue. Without knowing all the details from the random game of telephone quoted above, old Samyang lenses have horseshit AF, it wouldn't surprise me if there were AFc issues without an update with some of them. And some may not work well with new bodies period. I had the original orange glow 85/1.4 and it couldn't track anything shooting video - it was useless as an AF lens with video.

Chris

Nothing I said was false and nothing you said proves otherwise. Sony is putting out features like breathing compensation that only work with Sony lenses. It requires specific communication between the lens and the camera to computate the correction needed. If they wanted to they could work with third party lens manufactures to make it work with them, but they won't because they want people to buy their lenses.

It's not 2016 anymore. Sony now has a large lens lineup and has become a leader in the market. They really don't need to play nice with third party companies anymore, because they really don't need them to boost the system anymore. Bless your heart for giving any of these companies the benefit of the doubt, but my original statement strands: it would not shock me at all to see Sony clamping down on third party lenses in order to try and sell more of their own. And there is absolutely nothing stopping them from doing so, as a few lines of code can make third party AF lenses useless if they so choose. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, ntblowz said:

That is the point

Sigma apsc 1.4 and Samyang 1.8 is pretty popular too, who cares about other obscure lens.

Those lens just don't work for Sony A6700, so sucks to people who only have those lens to find out they can't use it, that is not a really good user experience if you need it for a trip or shoot only to find out they are not compatible til who knows when Sony or Sigma or Samyang will have new firmware.

But for people have have Sony lens they knew it will work regardless cause it is 100% supported .

That why I laugh at people who think 3rd party is one the main reason for Sony, not for me cause I knew 3rd party will have problems.

This supposed "problem" isn't something that's widespread, and your sky is falling stuff is just silly. OMG, a user has a problem with one lens, there are still hundreds of others that work fine. 

Cheers

Chris

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

  • EOSHD Pro Color 5 for All Sony cameras
    EOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
    EOSHD Dynamic Range Enhancer for H.264/H.265
×
×
  • Create New...