Administrators Andrew Reid Posted January 4, 2016 Administrators Share Posted January 4, 2016 The Sony FS5 has had a largely warm welcome from the video community but there has been one thing bugging a lot of owners and potential buyers alike - the quality of the internal codec.Just how good or bad is it?Read the full article Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Kotlos Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 Must feel cheap being screwed by codec. 200Mbps XAVC-I, com'on Sony! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted January 4, 2016 Author Administrators Share Posted January 4, 2016 Even the GH4 has an ALL-I codec at 200Mbit/s... and that's $1400.$1400 vs $5600The less you pay, the better the codec?!Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera, $1000 and under. 10bit ProRes and internal Cinema DNG raw!Indeed, c'mon Sony!! graphicnatured and Jimmy 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sp4rk Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 My A6000 is doing similar (altough not this bad) creeping-edges on handheld shots in XAVC-S, but i haven't narrowed down to picture profiles or ISO ranges. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Kotlos Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 Yeah Sony's problem is exactly what you mention in the article: "Segmenting the market by codec".If they do indeed update the codec to XAVC-I then there is little to be had extra with an FS7. So unless they charge ~$2000 for the update I am guessing they will just fix the XAVC-L. Which is still fine cause the FS5 is a great little camera. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nate Mook Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 Not to mention A7Rii overheating before the update. Seems like every one of their cameras as of late has shipped with a major defect. You can (sorta) understand why Canon takes so long to update their hardware. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KarimNassar Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 This crippling of cameras capabilities on purpose is getting really ridiculous and insulting.We know how much of a scam it really is since the 2009 mark II is 14 bit raw capable thanks to magic lantern,- The gh2 capable of much higher quality compressions thanks to the hack.- The sony F5 internal 4k capability with a simple line change edit in the config text file.I'm under the impression we have come to a point in camera technology where the entry line cameras are fully capable of producing at least 4:2:2 color, possibly at 10bit depth and definitively with higher quality compressions. Problem is with this level of image quality the enormous price jump of the high end cameras would be hard to justify even with raw formats. They just have to mess up the cheaper ones somehow.Since blackmagic strategy is to offer the most features at the best price to compete with the market, and they don't have such a crowded product line to have to apply this product segmentation garbage I believe they are a good comparison:Ursa mini $4,995 Sony fs5 $5,599.00ProRes XQ 4:4:4 - 250 MB/s XAVC Long 4:2:0 - 100Mb/s with macro blocking nightmareIt's 2016, you pay 5'600usd for macroblocked 4:2:0 8 bit. Come on now. blondini and maxmizer 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graphicnatured Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 Ursa Mini also has RAW. I really want this camera to be great, but that judgement will have to wait. Who knows what kind of problems it will have and I have seen some good stuff from the 4k, but iffy on the 4.6k. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nazdar Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 Did Philip Bloom also run in to these problems, or his last marriage with Sony as their ambassador keeps him shut his lips tight? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted January 4, 2016 Author Administrators Share Posted January 4, 2016 I'm under the impression we have come to a point in camera technology where the entry line cameras are fully capable of producing at least 4:2:2 color, possibly at 10bit depth and definitively with higher quality compressions. Problem is with this level of image quality the enormous price jump of the high end cameras would be hard to justify even with raw formats. They just have to mess up the cheaper ones somehow.I think the form factor, audio and ergonomics justify the cinema cameras for pros rather than image quality, so to cripple the FS5 is pointless of Sony, it should have had the same codec options as the FS7. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tugela Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 Since the encoding is probably done in hardware, there probably isn't much that can be done about it. I'm guessing that the FS7 has a more powerful processor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted January 4, 2016 Author Administrators Share Posted January 4, 2016 That's just speculation tugela. Also there are two separate issues.There's the bug, not just the performance limitations of the codec.With the edge ripping this isn't internal codec related at all unless Sony are doing something really strange and applying compression / H.264 encoding to the feed that hits the monitor, magnified focus assist and uncompressed SDI. I don't think so! This looks to me like a 4K image processing bug.The performance in 10bit (internal 1080p) is worse than 8bit AVCHD on the C100 II so if Sony want to beat the Canon and live up to their own marketing text they will have to upgrade the 10bit mode. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaneMc Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 This is really disappointing. I'm in the market for 3 new cameras for a broadcast program shot in different locations each week. I have been excited by so much of this camera's form factor, ND etc. - but a crippled image / codec really takes this out of the running for me. This camera could have been a huge hit. Now I'm left thinking: FS7 - bigger than I want, color takes more tweaking than canon and we've got a lot of show to edit...Ursa Mini 4.6 - No ND's, not out yet, who knows the bugs we'll haveC300 Mk1 - No slow mo, but good broadcast image & form factorC300 Mk2 - Expensive, good image but cropped slow mo... FS5 would have fit the bill. Internal broadcast codec is a must - external recorders are too bulky for my needs. I wonder how many in broadcast would have jumped on the FS5? I'm sure quite a few have been like me, waiting, watching for the reviews and footage to come forth. My guess is they'll fix the bug - but we'll be left with the weaker codec. Unless... we get an FS5ii in a couple months... (kidding, kidding) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blondini Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 I think the form factor, audio and ergonomics justify the cinema cameras for pros rather than image quality, so to cripple the FS5 is pointless of Sony, it should have had the same codec options as the FS7.Well, I've not even had good experiences with Sony's form factor and ergonomics... I found the F5 plain awful to use. It has a million pointless buttons on it that I just wanted to go away, and trying to navigate the menus for things that I actually needed was just nightmarish... nothing about that camera justifies the price. And the bottom line should be the pictures. Spend 5K on a pro camera - the pictures should look better than on a consumer camera a quarter the price. I just don't see that right now at all. This crippling of cameras capabilities on purpose is getting really ridiculous and insulting.We know how much of a scam it really is since the 2009 mark II is 14 bit raw capable thanks to magic lantern,- The gh2 capable of much higher quality compressions thanks to the hack.- The sony F5 internal 4k capability with a simple line change edit in the config text file.I'm under the impression we have come to a point in camera technology where the entry line cameras are fully capable of producing at least 4:2:2 color, possibly at 10bit depth and definitively with higher quality compressions. Problem is with this level of image quality the enormous price jump of the high end cameras would be hard to justify even with raw formats. They just have to mess up the cheaper ones somehow.Since blackmagic strategy is to offer the most features at the best price to compete with the market, and they don't have such a crowded product line to have to apply this product segmentation garbage I believe they are a good comparison:Ursa mini $4,995 Sony fs5 $5,599.00ProRes XQ 4:4:4 - 250 MB/s XAVC Long 4:2:0 - 100Mb/s with macro blocking nightmareIt's 2016, you pay 5'600usd for macroblocked 4:2:0 8 bit. Come on now.I wonder how much the recent space race for 4K+ resolutions has actually derailed absolute image quality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnymossville Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 The G7 actually looks quite good in this test. Good DR. jbCinC_12 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgharding Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 I read this with one really long sigh... Well, in my head, doing that for real would probably be dangerous.it was just so predictable, I mean I didn't want it to be true, the Sony spec sheet was, as usual, amazing; I can't remember a camera of theirs that hasn't made me eventually hate it because of bugs though.all this progress and I'm still using a bloody C100. It works, grades easy in hi-dr mode (sort of semi log) and the footage flies on a laptop. I actually WANT to find something even better... But I don't like too many compromises I hope one day Sony do bring us a camera that he no bugs, a great or even passable codec and has their usual lower-than-Canon price points, but until then... I Gotta keep using what works...so sad blondini 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamás Agócs Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 How do you find their resolution (resolved detail..) in 4K compared to each other? To my eyes, the ranking is NX1, FS5, 1DC, G7, A7SII. Since I'd like to get a A7SII, I don't quite like this situation? What's your opinion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Shoebridge Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 As an FS5 owner myself, and having made my biggest investment yet in a video camera, I'm feeling cheated. Yes Sony will produce firmware updates to address the problems that they can address in software but I am very concerned that there is only so much they can do in firmware: The FS5 is very small and extremely light and there really is not much in the way of electronics inside compared to an FS7. Many assume that Sony could simply unlock the FS5 and give it full FS7 capabilities if they chose to but is that assumption realistic? My concern is that Sony compromised one step too far in terms of hardware + processing power when they made the FS5 to be so compact. One example being that the camera is hardware limited to feeding only one external output at a time - which includes the LCD/EVF - thereby forcing you to invest in, and daisy chain, a 3rd party viewfinder if you want to record externally. At this rate, with external recorder and 3rd-party viewfinder, where is the advantage in size or cost compared to an FS7? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew berekdar Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Are there any tests available to show which issues - banding / excessive noise in reasonable conditions / macro blocking / edge tearing are completely overcome when using an external recorder? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Banham Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 I realise this is a slightly off topic, but Sony seem to have dropped the ball on other aspects of R&D as well. In this thread there are over 400!!! pages of owners complaining about the implementation of Android on their 2015 Bravia TV's: https://community.sony.co.uk/t5/televisions/2015-bravia-android-tv-issues/td-p/1949079A year or so back I read Sony intended to concentrate a major part of it's R&D budget on the PS4. I am now wondering if other Sony departments have had budget cuts as a consequence? Anyway a major theme in this TV thread is Sony has gone completely quiet on end users only breaking cover to suggest the next update will resolve current issues. If you read the whole thread (good luck) you'll see the updates have rarely cured problems only introduced new ones.I realise Sony's TV and camera depts are unlikely to be closely aligned, but if they are covered by the same philosophy, management and ethic.... I wouldn't be holding your breath re any FS5 updates! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.