A7SII is it really a "niche" video only camera?

[fuzzynormal]

Look what this guy did with the imperfect colors of the original A7S:

 

Wait, Are you implying artistic imaging skill matters more than what particular sensor is used?  Because that sort of rationale isn't going to get much traction here on the 'ol interwebs.

[austinchimp]

If anyone is wondering where the 1D C comes in...

It's advantage is still colour, and the higher bitrate codec. No mud on whip pans and fast moving scenes. Cleaner fine detail when pixel peeping too.

The colour is much quicker to get to how you want it.

I fight Sony's colour a lot even with S-LOG 3 / S Gamut 3.

 

That's fascinating Andrew. Selfishly (as I don't think many people here are 1DC owners) I'd love to hear more about this comparison. I own a 1DC and an A7s mk1 as well as a RX100m4 and love all of them in different ways but the one I don't use these days is the A7s because I could never get colour right, even after spending hours tweaking it. And I tried almost every colour mode and custom setting. Now I have to credit that camera for making me a much better colourist which I benefit from with the 1DC, but Sony colours just don't hit the spot for me with as much frequency as Canon.

When I see footage from the A7s 1 or 2, or the A7R2, I always have an internal stuggle between "It's technically incredible and looks modern and 'on-trend'" and on the other hand "why doesn't it look real? Why am I even noticing the colour instead of focusing on the content?"

I liken it to modern CGI. You know it looks incredible, it can be aesthetically beautiful and you appreciate what an achievement it is - but you don't feel it in your heart because your brain instinctively doesn't feel it's real.

Whereas Canon, for all their numerous faults, do produce colours that hit you emotionally. Your mind relaxes into them and accepts them as real. Sony footage often seems like a highly accurate simulation of reality rather than reality itself. I try reallllly hard to love the Sony footage, I used my A7s heavily for a year on everything I did, but there's always that niggling feeling in the back of my mind. Shooting with the 1DC is just satisfying, even though it's large and heavy and lacks any video specific features and slow mo. Nobody is hoping for Sony to hit the bullseye as much as me btw. I'm just still waiting to be convinced.

[maxotics]

Of course all your info is technically correct,  So now will i will go back and look at my mates books and see all those errors and they will look like crap taken on a D300.. :-)   I have owned Fovean Technology and have met the owners multiple times, so I am very aware of what you are saying, but it's still pixel peeping.  Some phenomenal images have been taken on EOS 1 D's and D3/4 etc all below 20 megapixels or 5-6 MP based on your Bayer explanation.   My point is that less than 1%  of people who use these camera have an output scenario that see's this difference in real terms.  YES, i would like a higher res Still image, but I prefer a FF 4 K shooter that also shoots FF stills well and the only game in town currently is the A7SII.   Sony are making some great camera's but it is a confusing offer with no easy choice.  Ideally the best choice would be to own the A7RII for stills and have an A7SII in your bag for Video.   

Is that fair?  I think my info is artistically correct too.  Is it fair to imply I think your "mates" have errors and took images that "look like crap".  It IS NOT just pixel peeping.  I can't speak for other Fovean users, but for me I see the difference even in a web-image.  The main problem anyone ever has with Fovean (including me) is the slow read/write times of Fovean sensor data, which leads to a slow camera/post processing.  Since you have had experience, are you telling me that you would not trade any Bayer camera for a Sigma if you could get those images as fast and easily and at high ISO?  

Again, my main point is that for some photographers high megapixel counts are necessary to deliver them the kind of color fidelity they need for their work.  

Even if it's 1% of users who see the difference, does that diminish what they're trying to do?  Isn't that what we strive for anyway, in Art, to become that top 1% for someone?   

As others have posted, and unfortunately, been ridiculed because their "1%" wasn't following some party-line, the problemw ith the A7RII for stills is the floating sensor.  Sure, for hand-held work, that camera is amazing.  For tripod work, I don't see it as better than the Canon 5DS or Nikon D810.  It's technically difficult to keep gimbaled sensors aligned (slight focus errors) and dissipate heat (which creates hot pixels). 

Anyway, I was just supporting your original post that there are subtle differences in these cameras that should be considered for whatever work someone wants to do.  I had no idea you weren't really looking for knowledge, but only giving it

[richg101]

12mpx is not enough for a landscape or architectural photographer any more.  I've taken many nice photographs with my a7s, but more nice photographs with my a7r and now my a7r2.  I'm not a resolution obsessive, but processing detailed images at 36 or 42mpx is a lot more enjoyable than 12mpx ones and almost certainly provides nicer end results even when viewed at 25%.  Stick modern lenses on the front of both cameras, blow them up bigger than a4 at 300dpi and the difference is big.  It's like the difference between a photographer shooting 35mm film and a photographer shooting medium format.

 

 

[wolf33d]

Your last two posts are very helpful Andrew. 

So it seems S35 of R2 is as good as FF of S2. Definitely last problem remaining is the 120fps (but my girlfriend just ordered today the rx100 IV so it seems this problem is solved for me as long as I don't have a new GF!) 

concerning the colors, could you please do the same test as above but with a7s in cine4 pro and cinema colors , and also no PP and autumn leaves?

a lot of people like Philip bloom, Brian lee and so on made amazing video with those profiles and colors seem better than slog. 

People seem to always thune slog only but I think it is a bad reflex because it does not suit well those 8 bit codecs 

[blafarm]

To be a bit more specific, and not that he's the arbiter of good taste, but Philip Bloom shoots daytime with Cine 4 / Cinema Color -- and nighttime with Cine 2 / Cinema Color and -4 Detail.  He did that with the original A7S and he has posted recent A7SII footage which also uses those settings (although it's hard to know if his approach has changed with more time spent with the v.2 camera).

Bloom Quote:  "Picture profile wise, I shot mostly the same as the A7s. Daytime Cine 4 with Cinema colour and night Cine 2 with same colour and detail to -4."

And as for Brandon Li, he shoots with Picture Profiles set to off and Creative Style: Autumn Leaves (-3 0 -3) with the original A7S.  Again, not sure if he has migrated to the A7SII or if he has changed his approach.

Li Quote:  "I now use the Autumn Leaves Creative Style (-3,0,-3 DRO 4) instead of picture profiles. I find this setting gives me the punchiest, warmest colors straight out of the camera while still leaving plenty of room for grading".

Andrew, as most of us do not have a 1D C at our disposal (or even a Canon camera) for an 'apples-to-apples' comparison, I do think it would be a very illuminating test, if you have the time and inclination to do it.

Thanks

[TheRenaissanceMan]

But as a video camera the A7S II owns the market, it isn't a niche product.

A stills body primarily targeted at video is a niche product. Not hybrid--that's common now--but primarily meant for video, with decent stills as a side bonus. Great for guys like us, but it leaves most stills shooters scratching their heads. 

Sure, for hand-held work, that camera is amazing.  For tripod work, I don't see it as better than the Canon 5DS or Nikon D810.  It's technically difficult to keep gimbaled sensors aligned (slight focus errors) and dissipate heat (which creates hot pixels). 

Not to mention Sony's lossy RAW, abysmal battery life, and lack of tilt/shift lenses (adapted lenses are an option, but suffer from planarity issues that kill sharpness on such a pixel-dense sensor).

[BrorSvensson]

A stills body primarily targeted at video is a niche product. Not hybrid--that's common now--but primarily meant for video, with decent stills as a side bonus. Great for guys like us, but it leaves most stills shooters scratching their heads. 

Not to mention Sony's lossy RAW, abysmal battery life, and lack of tilt/shift lenses (adapted lenses are an option, but suffer from planarity issues that kill sharpness on such a pixel-dense sensor).

the samyang tilt shift lenses are really good and have native e mount.

[Triumph61]

Is that fair?  I think my info is artistically correct too.  Is it fair to imply I think your "mates" have errors and took images that "look like crap".  It IS NOT just pixel peeping.  I had no idea you weren't really looking for knowledge, but only giving it

Max?   I meant no offence,  I did put a smiley face :-) ,   and I am absolutely happy to hear an opinion,   which is an opinion just like mine, is  also just an opinion,  and not fact for everyone or every scenario.   One size does not fit all.  As I said i would love to have my cake and eat it too,  but.........  Maybe a lottery win?

[gelaxstudio]

Not to mention Sony's lossy RAW, abysmal battery life, and lack of tilt/shift lenses (adapted lenses are an option, but suffer from planarity issues that kill sharpness on such a pixel-dense sensor).

Just check the news,the A7RII and the a7sII do have 14 bit uncompressed raw right now

BTW,why adapted len will kill sharpness?

Light doesn't suffer loss when passing through the adaptor ，moreover  the A7RII and the a7sII has IBIS 

[maxotics]

Max?   I meant no offence,  I did put a smiley face :-) ,   and I am absolutely happy to hear an opinion,   which is an opinion just like mine, is  also just an opinion,  and not fact for everyone or every scenario.   One size does not fit all.  As I said i would love to have my cake and eat it too,  but.........  Maybe a lottery win?

I know.  I didn't mean any offense either!  When I'm in a bad mood about work, and haven't had much time to actually use my cameras, I get argumentative   I shouldn't have made that last dig.  Sorry!

Gelaxstudio, the problem I had with an adapter and the Canon TS 24 II was that there was a lot of light flare hitting the sensor.  I believe this is a general problem of all wide-angles on adapters with the A7.

In this photo, I dodged it out best I can, but you can see it in the right of the image

 Another problem, I've read, is that the sensor is a bit more shiny than other sensors and creates issues.  I also want to point out that though you can remove hot spots in post, the fact that you're getting them means the sensor is hotter than it should be and is actually degrading the performance of all the sensels.  All this isn't to argue against getting one of these cameras!  Just something to think about.  Consider also that most of the battery power in the BMPCC goes to peltier cooling.  The more work the sensor does, the hotter it gets.  This makes me believe there will never be RAW on the A7RII.  Again, I'd love to get that camera.  But if I get into architectural photography again I'm getting a Nikon or Canon with a native TS lens.

[Andrew Reid]

To be a bit more specific, and not that he's the arbiter of good taste, but Philip Bloom shoots daytime with Cine 4 / Cinema Color -- and nighttime with Cine 2 / Cinema Color and -4 Detail.  He did that with the original A7S and he has posted recent A7SII footage which also uses those settings (although it's hard to know if his approach has changed with more time spent with the v.2 camera).

Bloom Quote:  "Picture profile wise, I shot mostly the same as the A7s. Daytime Cine 4 with Cinema colour and night Cine 2 with same colour and detail to -4."

And as for Brandon Li, he shoots with Picture Profiles set to off and Creative Style: Autumn Leaves (-3 0 -3) with the original A7S.  Again, not sure if he has migrated to the A7SII or if he has changed his approach.

Li Quote:  "I now use the Autumn Leaves Creative Style (-3,0,-3 DRO 4) instead of picture profiles. I find this setting gives me the punchiest, warmest colors straight out of the camera while still leaving plenty of room for grading".

Andrew, as most of us do not have a 1D C at our disposal (or even a Canon camera) for an 'apples-to-apples' comparison, I do think it would be a very illuminating test, if you have the time and inclination to do it.

Thanks

The 1D C has been very useful to calibrate my LUT for the A7S II and A7R II S-LOG

I'd be lost without it as a guide really.

Cine 2, etc. certainly easy to grade when dialled down flat but I still prefer to shoot S-LOG... more dynamic range and better LUT compatibility. I like James Miller's DELUTS and they don't work as well with the other picture profiles.

[The Chris]

Not to mention Sony's lossy RAW, abysmal battery life, and lack of tilt/shift lenses (adapted lenses are an option, but suffer from planarity issues that kill sharpness on such a pixel-dense sensor).

As mentioned you can shoot uncompressed. Batteries are cheap/light, get the grip and carry 10. Fred Miranda and a number of others on Fred Miranda.com use Canon T/S lenses to shoot some pretty amazing landscapes without issue. As long as your adapter alignment is proper and you're not getting reflections, you're good to go.

[Don Kotlos]

To be a bit more specific, and not that he's the arbiter of good taste, but Philip Bloom shoots daytime with Cine 4 / Cinema Color -- and nighttime with Cine 2 / Cinema Color and -4 Detail.  He did that with the original A7S and he has posted recent A7SII footage which also uses those settings (although it's hard to know if his approach has changed with more time spent with the v.2 camera).

Bloom Quote:  "Picture profile wise, I shot mostly the same as the A7s. Daytime Cine 4 with Cinema colour and night Cine 2 with same colour and detail to -4."

And as for Brandon Li, he shoots with Picture Profiles set to off and Creative Style: Autumn Leaves (-3 0 -3) with the original A7S.  Again, not sure if he has migrated to the A7SII or if he has changed his approach.

Li Quote:  "I now use the Autumn Leaves Creative Style (-3,0,-3 DRO 4) instead of picture profiles. I find this setting gives me the punchiest, warmest colors straight out of the camera while still leaving plenty of room for grading".

Andrew, as most of us do not have a 1D C at our disposal (or even a Canon camera) for an 'apples-to-apples' comparison, I do think it would be a very illuminating test, if you have the time and inclination to do it.

Thanks

I do prefer Cine2/Cine4 over s-log2 for most shots too. I bought Benjamin's (@benymypony) LUTs that also work for rec.709 and they do a great job!

S-log works great with Pro/Cinema colors too when the extended dynamic range or grading ability is needed. 

As far as the OPs question/statement, the A7sII remains a niche camera for video hobbyists/low light junkies. A great niche camera...   A7rii video quality and plethora of megapixels are great and has enough low light sensitivity for most people, but what sets it apart from the A7sII and right into the mainstream photography is the amazing focusing abilities. Fast AF, Eye AF, tracking AF, adapted lenses AF... 

[Andrew Reid]

It took me a year to get the colours right in my LUT for S-LOG.

Judging from much of the footage on Vimeo it seems everyone else had the same problem

But now it is right... it's way better than Cine2.

The LUT is gold-dust. I should sell it!!

(It was a year's work after all!!!!)

Once the LUT corrects for Sony's shitty colour science, Lumetri is great in Premiere for applying my own contrast and curves or shot by shot tweaks, white balance, etc. It responds really well. Sometimes you can get away with adjusting temperature from 3200 to 5600 and not have it look like crap. It's not raw but it is much closer than you'd reasonably expect.

[Don Kotlos]

It took me a year to get the colours right in my LUT for S-LOG.

Judging from much of the footage on Vimeo it seems everyone else had the same problem

But now it is right... it's way better than Cine2.

The LUT is gold-dust. I should sell it!!

(It was a year's work after all!!!!)

Once the LUT corrects for Sony's shitty colour science, Lumetri is great in Premiere for applying my own contrast and curves or shot by shot tweaks, white balance, etc. It responds really well. Sometimes you can get away with adjusting temperature from 3200 to 5600 and not have it look like crap. It's not raw but it is much closer than you'd reasonably expect.

Is that with S-gammut? Have you tried s-log with other color modes? 

I might have missed the joke but is it included in your A7rII LUT pack? 

[blafarm]

Once the LUT corrects for Sony's shitty colour science ...

Have the widely reported 'color science' tweaks applied by Sony to the A7RII and AS7II not had a material effect on the ease of grading?

Or, do those tweaks not affect Slog profiles? 

[Andrew Reid]

Have the widely reported 'color science' tweaks applied by Sony to the A7RII and AS7II not had a material effect on the ease of grading?

Or, do those tweaks not affect Slog profiles? 

The sensor has been tweaked and the JPEG engine has.

It's more noticeable in the stills output.

The video profiles - Cine1,2,3,4, etc. and SLOG don't seem to have been changed.

The main addition is S-LOG 3.

That is still just as difficult to grade colour-wise.

S-Gamut 3.Cine is a tweaked S-Gamut though... and it shifts to an even wider colour gamut... but I find it also brings colour closer to clipping in 8bit. S-LOG 3 meanwhile is even flatter than S-LOG 2, it is designed to maximise dynamic range. However I find it increases banding in the highs and lows... so the question is, how much of that extra dynamic range packed in is usable?

[blafarm]

The sensor has been tweaked and the JPEG engine...

The video profiles - Cine1,2,3,4, etc. and SLOG don't seem to have been changed.

Interesting, and disappointing.

S-Gamut 3.Cine .... brings colour closer to clipping in 8bit. 

S-LOG 3 ... increases banding in the highs and lows.

 

Yeah, I've read similar reports in this lengthy thread.

Kind of wish I was hearing about a relatively straightforward and dependable camera setting (PP or not) that provided a good combination of balanced color and serviceable dynamic range, without the constraints of minimum ISOs, and without taxing the limits of the 8-bit container.

I realize this type of camera setting, if it exists, would not provide optimum performance for any one of these individual goals.

But does a jack-of-all-trades camera setting like this exist -- and if so, what precisely is it?

[Zach Ashcraft]

Related: This is probably some of the best looking footage color-wise I've seen out of the Sony A7 cameras