Jump to content

Highlight Rolloff and DR - fx3/a7s3 sensor vs. A7iv sensor


SRV1981
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

 

Keep in mind from context (quoted below) that the OP is potentially not talking about the actual fx3 and more likely is talking about the zve1 and is comparing it to the fx3/a7s3 due to similar sensor.  The zve1 doesn't shoot raw.  Also, if it's worth mention that recording raw on any of these cameras requires an external recorder which will add $300+ to the price.
Also also, that the OP doesn't currently have a video camera or experience (so raw might be questionable choice) 😃
 

 

 

Makes sense. I think the main differences between these Sony cameras are rolling shutter and the ability or lack of ability to record RAW if that is a feature you want to use. Dynamic range is all very similiar in latitude tests and imatest measurements. 

My pick for Sony is the FX30 as it is the cheapest and has a damn good image and a lot of cheap 3rd party lenses for it too. 

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
22 hours ago, SRV1981 said:

I’m just generally curious and interested in the topic. Currently using an iPhone 14 and Ricoh GriiiX

may dip into mirrorless for video and so find the topic fascinating 

I agree with @eatstoomuchjam that either would be fine, even for the more extreme situations.

My experience has been that the GH5 (9.7 stops) often wasn't enough for people-in-front-of-sunset but that the P2K (11.2 stops) was hugely better.  I wouldn't say that it's all you'd need in that situation, but it made a HUGE difference in that situation for me.  Going up to the A7S3 (12.3 stops) would be a huge jump up again and would likely be all you'd need in that situation.

But remember, that situation is a really demanding one, and waaaay more than you need in any other lighting scenario - the P2K (11.2 stops) is enough when the sun isn't in shot.

It's fun to talk about cameras and look at the specs, but asking which is "better" involves so many variables that the situation really matters.  Even things like how you feel matters because you use the camera differently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, kye said:

It's fun to talk about cameras and look at the specs, but asking which is "better" involves so many variables that the situation really matters.

So you don’t think there’s an objective answer as to which sensor produces a better image? They’re different sensors, same manufacturer so the image is similar but it’s *not* the same. And if it’s not the same, I feel there’s both subjective and objective information within which to decide what image is more pleasing.  From there it could be determined why some feel one sensor is producing a nicer image than the other. Not once, has this been addressed or answered.  Maybe nobody here has compared or considered this but im not sure anyone’s really answered the simple question. 
 

simple: which image is better (your view)

complex: why is it better

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, SRV1981 said:

So you don’t think there’s an objective answer as to which sensor produces a better image? They’re different sensors, same manufacturer so the image is similar but it’s *not* the same. And if it’s not the same, I feel there’s both subjective and objective information within which to decide what image is more pleasing.  From there it could be determined why some feel one sensor is producing a nicer image than the other. Not once, has this been addressed or answered.  Maybe nobody here has compared or considered this but im not sure anyone’s really answered the simple question. 
 

simple: which image is better (your view)

complex: why is it better

There is no such thing as objectively better.

There was a famous blind test that included high end cameras like the ARRI Alexa and Red Epic Dragon 6K, but also much lower-end cameras like the GH4..  here's a couple of articles talking about it:

https://www.4kshooters.net/2014/08/20/12-cameras-blind-test-bmpc-4k-bmpcc-gh4-arri-alexa-red-epicdragon-6k-sony-f55-fs700-kineraw-mini-canon-c500-5d-mark-iii-1dc/

https://www.4kshooters.net/2014/08/24/12-cameras-test-part-iii-arri-alexa-red-epic-dragon-6k-blackmagic-4k-kineraw-mini-gh4-5d-mark-iii-more/

But here's the kicker - the audience was industry professionals and some of them preferred the GH4 to the ARRI or the RED.

In the end, everything is subjective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, kye said:

There is no such thing as objectively better.

For polite discourse, I’m going to disagree respectfully. 
 

Does one sensor produce better highlights? Shadows? ISO performance? Color accuracy? Absolutely yes. 
 

Which one you prefer of the two is subjective. 
 

for example, I’ve always like Fuji and canon straight out of the box standard profiles due to more pink or magenta tones. 
 

I still have yet to see anyone answer which sensor has the better numbers for objective or their preference for sensor subjectively. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, SRV1981 said:

I still have yet to see anyone answer which sensor has the better numbers for objective or their preference for sensor subjectively. 

You can respectfully disagree, but maybe there's a reason that no-one has done this yet....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kye said:

You can respectfully disagree, but maybe there's a reason that no-one has done this yet....

Agree, they don’t know - which is okay. I was just curious as per the original question. I don’t understand the technical specs of images and know some folks here are so wanted to see if anyone has investigated the original question………….

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The very question is flawed.  You're asking which sensor produces the best image, but the sensor is only a part of the image pipeline.  The same Sony sensors are sometimes used in cameras from Sony and several other vendors and the image that gets output differs radically.  Each manufacturer is applying their own denoising algorithms, color interpretation, internal debaying algorithm, etc.

I'd also say that @kye is fully correct that there's really no way to evaluate which camera produces the "best" image.  What is "best?"  Is it the most faithful reproduction of colors?  Or is it the interpretation of colors that I like more?  Is it preserving every single detail from corner to corner?  Or is it producing an image where my actors like how their skin looks?  How contrasty is best?  Is the image being color graded in post?  Or is it being given to somebody straight out of camera?  If one camera has better DR and the other has more pleasing colors, which one wins?

This kind of thing is also why, in the example above, industry professionals could end up preferring the image from a $1k GH4 to a $25k Red or a $70k Arri.  Were the images straight out of camera?  Red and Arri might not spend as much time with the SOOC image because almost any production that can afford to use their gear can also afford to have a colorist. Meanwhile, many people shooting with a GH4 don't.  If the images were graded in post, was the colorist more familiar with the GH4 than the Red or Arri?  Could be.  Did that test result in any of those Hollywood DPs choosing the Panasonic GH4 as the A camera for their next feature film? Nope.

It's not useful to obsess about the micro-differences between two cameras.  It's far better to actually get (or rent) a camera and spend some time shooting with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this entire line of thinking is a product of the online camera ecosystem - it is based on the idea that cameras can be evaluated separately to them being used.  It's designed to make you buy the latest stuff.

It makes as much sense as having forums devoted to discussing hammers, evaluating their shapes, the materials in the handle, the hardness of the metal, etc, but without talking about using them to build something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, kye said:

I think this entire line of thinking is a product of the online camera ecosystem - it is based on the idea that cameras can be evaluated separately to them being used.  It's designed to make you buy the latest stuff.

It makes as much sense as having forums devoted to discussing hammers, evaluating their shapes, the materials in the handle, the hardness of the metal, etc, but without talking about using them to build something.

Yea I get it. 
 

my brain was thinking - all things being equal, if you put the fx3 sensor in a an environment with the A7IV - which of the 2 would have 

1. better DR

2. more accurate color 

3. better ISO performance 
 

4. and which image do you prefer 

 

a blend of objective and subjective 

 

all things being equal  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SRV1981 said:

Yea I get it. 
 

my brain was thinking - all things being equal, if you put the fx3 sensor in a an environment with the A7IV - which of the 2 would have 

1. better DR

2. more accurate color 

3. better ISO performance 
 

4. and which image do you prefer 

 

a blend of objective and subjective 

 

all things being equal  

 

Perhaps the premise of the question would be interpreted differently if the two cameras were more different to each other.  For example, if I asked the same about the GH5 vs GH6, then there would be things to talk about, and spending time looking at the various specs and performance would be worthwhile.  It's also helped by the likelihood that I'd own the GH5 and be questioning an upgrade - so it's a question that would have real-world implications and would be of value to discuss, rather than a purely theoretical question.

In the case of the A7S3 vs A74, the strengths are very similar or don't really matter (both have enough DR for almost anything you might want to shoot) and the weaknesses are similar too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll answer it for you and I've used the A7s3 and FX6 but not the A7IV.

Both cameras have heavily processed shadows that ruin the image. The A7s3 and FX3 are superior because you can shoot RAW externally and bypass the processing. Dynamic range isn't useful when it's being ruined by noise reduction.

The fx30 has much less processing at the lower native ISOs and would be my choice over either of those cameras. Or get a Nikon Z8.

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...