Jump to content

FS5 vs A7S II vs URSA mini 4.6k


Nicolas MAILLET
 Share

Recommended Posts

Have just been having a similar discussion with my business partner... BM 4.6k, RED Raven or C300 mk II..... Such a difficult choice. Colour and DR are top of the want list.

I have been using the BMPCC alot this week and have fallen in love with their image again.

I used a Canon C300 on a shoot the other day, and now I'm back with the Sony's. It's evident how "empty" Sony colour science feels (in comparison). I think i'm getting bored of using Sony now, but er.. they have HFR. 

BMPCC has one of the best images I've worked with - what a little gem that thing is!

Still in the pre-order list for this URSA Mini 4.6k... I hope this means we get to see some footage soon!

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

Yea, I'm at a point where I just completely dislike Sony colour now and hate grading it.... Some will say that you can get the colours great with the right amount of grading on any footage, I simply don't buy it (of course, sometimes Sony footage looks amazing, but sometimes isn't enough)... I have the luxury of time, I consider myself a good colourist... Yet Sony footage just leaves me cold when shooting outdoors. Even with the raw files from the FS700, it was still a little off.

If Ursa Mini were just a little smaller and lighter, with NDs... It would be a no brainer. Seems that no matter how my camera budget rises, compromises are always there! (I think the C500 mk II might be the first compromise free camera, for my shooting, if it has HFR and internal raw).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey,

i've just tested yesterday the A7SII... and to be honest it's a bit of a shock for me... In the wrong way...

 

I took a morning in my local camera dealer to test this new baby... Weather was rainy and i couldn't go out at all. So, interior's shots, with different types of lights, some of the worse conditions ever to shoot some tests... Anyway, a good deal to see what the 5DIII compared directly with same lenses would do...

 

- How TINY it is !!!!! It is not manageable... With two hands you cover the entire thing... and to reach the buttons is a pain as you have to change your hands place...

- With a big lens in front this is even worse... ZEISS big aperture tested.

- Menus are awful... too complicated when you're not used to... Maybe with some habits...

- And the last but the not least : COLORS are awful... Maybe i made mistakes when i put the temperature but this has been terribly awful compared to a 5DIII Raw... I only took videos in Slog 3 PP9... i've reached average results with these poor light conditions on the A7SII but with some big problems on skin tones and colors themselves... Some yellow  tints in particular... Nothing too much difficult to deal with the 5DIII RAw... Normal when codec comparison but wouldn't have bet it would have been so hard with this Sony codec...

 

Overall performance doesn't feel good enough to let my 5DIII go... This A7SII looks really cheap considering colors. But in what concerns dynamic and resolution, ok the A7SII does the job well... To be honest, i don't understand why RAW 14 bits have less good highlights transitions than a 8 bits so much compressed codec... Maybe the latitude of the sensor itself combined with ultra flat gamma profile... that would also induce bad colorimetry (difficult to hold with such a flat profile...)

 

And i don't speak about the EVF that is merely unusable with poor definition... Peaking is big and not precised... Wow... This is going to be tough right here... Articulated screen that looks like a piece of plastic you can break in two fingers only...

That is looking damn cheap and not usable for paid jobs at all...

 

Then...

 

I have to think twice... let the waves of the initial shock go away and let my brain concentrate on what is good on the A7SII...

 

Mainly :

 

- Good low light performance. Axiom...

- 4K internally

and to me that's all that really kills the 5DIII... Other things are not so easy... I doubt FS5 would do a better job concerning colors...

 

I think tests on A7SII with good light conditions (daylight, unique type of light source) is ok, but when the situation becomes complicated... XAVCS 8 bits is not the way to go... Too stretched...

 

Other tests to come soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Members

Same here. I tried it out and I'm not a fan. I've tried so hard to like Sony but I guess it's just not for me.

I feel the same. I would like to like Sony so much. Specs/$ is amazing but the result isnt.

BMD, Bolex, Canon and lately Nikon delivers the footage I want. So Im done trying. Ive had 8 different Sony cameras. Feels enough :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How were you grading footage from the A7sII? If shooting any of the default slog modes that use s-gamut you must us a lut to transform it back to rec709. Using curves and boosting saturation will cause bad color shifts since the footage is not in the same color space. 

I've graded it like i did with the Andrew Reid ones... with Resolve, tweaking gain, gamma, etc etc... I think i didn't have problems with those ones. Maybe i did some wrong tests on the model i had in my hands. Maybe. I put PP9, gamma cine. Entered the color temperature and deactivated all the automatic features.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Same here. I tried it out and I'm not a fan. I've tried so hard to like Sony but I guess it's just not for me.

I've never liked Sony's image even though I've used their cams a gazillion times. (F55 is better though!).

It's cool that the A7S has great low light, however it comes with a HUGE side effect, and that's poor colour. I feel anything beyond 6400ISO on the A7S looks very sickly. That's why I haven't got an A7S. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used a Canon C300 on a shoot the other day, and now I'm back with the Sony's. It's evident how "empty" Sony colour science feels (in comparison). I think i'm getting bored of using Sony now, but er.. they have HFR. 

just curious, what profile were you shooting the c300 in?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've graded it like i did with the Andrew Reid ones... with Resolve, tweaking gain, gamma, etc etc... I think i didn't have problems with those ones. Maybe i did some wrong tests on the model i had in my hands. Maybe. I put PP9, gamma cine. Entered the color temperature and deactivated all the automatic features.

if you are using any of of the default s log profiles that use s gamut you MUST use a proper lut built for that version of slog or you can get yellow and magenta color shifts. Color in s gamut is totally different than rec709 and these profiles are not forgiving. It is not the gamma curve it is the s gamut it is a much wider color space crammed in a 8bit file . The A7s always had something a little off with the color for sure but most of the really bad color out there were from people not handling s log/s gamut properly. The slog 3 on the new Sony cameras is reported to be much better that the s log2 on the A7s.

Putting it another way s gamut and just grading in resolve is like have data in meters working with it like it is in feet and then wondering why your calculations are off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you are using any of of the default s log profiles that use s gamut you MUST use a proper lut built for that version of slog or you can get yellow and magenta color shifts. Color in s gamut is totally different than rec709 and these profiles are not forgiving. It is not the gamma curve it is the s gamut it is a much wider color space crammed in a 8bit file . The A7s always had something a little off with the color for sure but most of the really bad color out there were from people not handling s log/s gamut properly. The slog 3 on the new Sony cameras is reported to be much better that the s log2 on the A7s.

It's not quite as accurate color wise to FS7s S Log 3, but that's to be expected with a drop in file size.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is not the case right here.

 

Other stuff in SLOG3 i've dowloaded has been ok to grade with some headache sometimes but "pretty" ok with some several nodes to adjust... But in this particular case, i can reach some average equal results between 5DIII and A7SII, but i can promise with big big work on A7SII files... I think this is because lights where i shot my tests were really bad, and in these conditions 8 bits 420 is just too poor to adjust what you want as you want.

 

I think this is a good camera for the price and SLOG3 gammut profiles that come in, but this is not to consider if you want to make serious jobs. Basically it has not been made for pros i'm ok, but pros could be interested in some features like 14 steps of dynamic, flat profiles... The cold shower for me right now... but i'll test it another time... with other conditions... This kind of camera has maybe to give some great things, but it is not as smooth as a some other cameras. It is not a production camera at all... Let's wait other tests...

 

And URSA mini looks to go out soon...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have just been having a similar discussion with my business partner... BM 4.6k, RED Raven or C300 mk II..... Such a difficult choice. Colour and DR are top of the want list.

I have been using the BMPCC alot this week and have fallen in love with their image again.

If colour/DR are top of the list then the choice seems clear: BMD URSA 4.6K!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

just curious, what profile were you shooting the c300 in?

I used WideDR. 

The client requested "good sound connections" and "fresh faced" people. Even though I'm far more experienced with the FS7, I chose the C300 because of the "living" skintones. 

Peaking on the C300 is awesome, far better than Sony! 

If colour/DR are top of the list then the choice seems clear: BMD URSA 4.6K!

I've flirted with the idea of getting an FS5, but I know the image very well in XAVC-L and it's not great really. I expect the BM Ursa 4.6k to have outstanding colour. This is a massive advantage over other cameras in it's price range. My gut feeling is they have a big, big winner on their hands here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Today i've done more tests... With more accurate color temperature comparing 5DIII RAW video Vs A7SII.

 

My end results are :

 

- Better colors for Canon right out of the camera (Only 3 nodes in Resolve to tweak, 6 for the A7SII and colors are not that equal but can be tweaked to almost match)

- IBIS is a cool tool when not moving. Great extra feature.

- Resolution is better on A7SII but not so damn crazy 4K on A7SII compared to 1080P 5DIII

- Just a little more dynamic on A7SII (but maybe not exposed equally between the two). On my tests, 1 stop better.

- High frame rate on Sony (even with a crop mode).

 

If i buy this one A7SII, i think i won't put in in difficult scenarios where codec is tough to work with. I think i'll do the step even though.

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...