hmcindie

Shot this with the A7s. Shot in 4k, finished in HD. Really quite silly. One LED light in the background did some flickering.

That test was from cinema5d (and they mess up stuff). For example, the a7S was recorded externally which preserves noise more. The a7S II was recorded internally compressed and that compression removes noise a lot.

I've shot with the FS700 and 5d mark III on the same shoot. Preferred the 5d image. And that was the shitty h264! Doesn't work like that. Joseph Kahn (who shoots beautiful stuff) said on a twitter post something on the lines of "FS700 sucks". And Joseph has done some great work on the 5d (mostly with way more expensive cameras though). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5BsvBR14xM&hd=1 That's shot with the 5d iii. H264. You can't do that look with an FS700. So these guys don't know what they're doing? Ok... This he shot with the 5d mark 2. So moire galore.

I almost got to the bottom of this when we shot a small explosion through a barn door last weekend. Brought the 5d raw, a7s, a7s ii, a7r ii. BUT I forgot the RX10 ii home! Imagine how stupid I felt when I reached into the camera bag and did not find the camera I most wanted to use to shoot the explosion. True the A7s ii actually looked pretty good, the RX10 ii would've been much darker & noisier. Not a fan of twixtoring unless the scene is relatively simple.

I read those "A7s is better than 5d raw" reviews when the first A7s came out. Also when the GH4 came out. They were never really true. Same with the a7s ii. I just shot with the A7s II, a7r II and the 5draw. Though I used the 5d raw myself, and the rest were b-cams so it wasn't completely fair comparison. Slowmotion was pretty nice on the A7s ii but that's about it. For short turnarounds, the A7s II like the mark I is better. For stuff where you can fiddle, the 5d raw is still nicer. No compression, no macroblocking, great looking grain etc.

I have shot with the A7s II. It's pretty much the same as the A7s mark i except low bitrate 4k mode. The slowmotion is a lower resolution center crop (a7s mark i actually crops less but is bit less detailed). RX10 ii slowmotion blows the A7s II out of the water if that's what you want. Does that mean the RX10 ii is the best camera ever? No, it's still shit.

Let's get this straight. Sony A7sii does a full 1080p picture crop allegedly. The 300ii does a full 1080p picture crop (2048x1080 so it's actually slightly better than the a7s). Yes, the crop is "bigger" because one sensor is smaller. But the technology seems to be the same. The c300 compresses the image WAY less. It won't. I recently edited a commercial shot with the A7s (mark i) and the Odyssey (or shogun?), as it was 4k prores. It still has the same amount of color information which was slightly odd to me. More data in the luminance though. It looks very processed.

Eh? The A7SII also crops into the image. 100p on the a7s ii is about a 2.2x crop.

I liked it!

There is a new firmware that should fix the HFR focus issue!

Though peaking on the a7s is quite hit&miss (mostly miss), I've turned my peaking off after the honeymoon phase.

The market is basically flooding with used a7s cameras. And no one is buying.

There's a new firmware for the RX10 ii just released. It should fix the focus shift in HFR mode!

The price difference makes me think... that it's not worth it. About the warranty, I think you need it. I have used my a7s for 14 months and it's starting to act weird (lcd has artifacts on the right side, plus auto switching between viewfinder and monitor is working 50% of the time). My 5d (which I've banged A LOT more than the a7s) is still going strong. Durable bodies are a delight.

RX10 ii is best when doing those specific looking slowmo shots. Shot this one with the A7s (totolovision profile, great stuff) and the RX10 ii for the couple of slowmo shots. Shooting explosions is quite difficult, they need a bunch of dynamic range especially when the sun goes down. When we did the last shot, I couldn't see anything off the lcd of the rx10, just had to hope the exposure was in the ballpark. In the end, it was a bit overexposed. 500fps mode used on the RX10 for the slowest one. RX10 is like a poor mans FS700, except it can do 100fps with good quality. The 2 second buffer is a shame, would love for it to be 4 or more. A7s is really nice when shooting in moonlight!

This was our video for the Sony FS5 competition. Shot with the A7s & RX10 ii (slowmo shots). Was pretty fun to make!

Shot this musicvideo with the A7s and RX10 ii. Colors are...Sony colors. I like shooting no-budget slowmo with it and 100fps is great. Don't remember the exact mix, something along 50/50. More RX10ii towards the end.

So we shot this, nothing mayor, playing with the boys. Used the totolovision profile on the a7s (surprisingly good, really recommend it!)

I think we all know what it means. It is ... wait for it... The science of color! The science of color is sometimes called chromatics, colorimetry, or simply color science.

? It doesn't have to divide evenly when slowing down material. Just play the 60fps file back at 24. Show all the frames 100%, no dividing, skipping or blending required.

Only the phone is missing...

This is a response to tugela, not VanDaven (I'm having issues with the quote system) Disagree with this one. XC10 is just as soft as non-sharpened images should be. When you compare to something that is called "sharp" 4k, you are usually looking at very much sharpened images (for example, cell phone 4k material which tends to look artificial). Just shoot with a 6k red and look at the material at 100%. It is quite soft. Sharpening should be left to post in my opinion. The bitrate is high enough to do so. I don't know what you mean by "already out there". You mean youtube videos? Ehm, ok? That's not very scientific. Also your referring to color as being the reason for softness is inherently wrong.

Holy eff those .jpg files are compressed like crazy on Hurlbuts site.

I don't know. 5d3 hacked plusses: + RAW (this is major) + less rolling shutter (you can get 16ms rolling shutter on the 5d3 hacked (4ms less than regular 5d. 1DC has too much rolling shutter, on the level of the a7s) + way better histogram, peaking etc tools. + no crop Also, my god the 50mm f1.2 looks great when shot with RAW. The bokeh is crazy awesome (oval-like, reminds me of anamorphic lenses)

Well there is a huge price difference between the Alexa and the C300II so you would hope that it gives one stop more in the highlights 8) It's hard to say. Imagine that one camera "blows out" at +5. That means everything is completely white. And the other camera blows out at +4. That means if you look at an image that's been exposed to +4.5 the A camera will look clearly better. But that is still only a "slight edge" as in normal exposures (+0) the difference will be negligible as long as the roll-off is good. Take a look at the +0 exposures. See a difference between those cameras?