Has Sony made a baby Alexa?

[hmcindie]

6 hours ago, Policar said:

But in theory, I agree. I don't have the skill to fix that kind of stuff, nor the patience. 

It's more about the tool actually. Some color correcting tools are not-so-good for white balance issues (Premiere) and some are nice (Colorista) and some are high-end and great.

[richg101]

I'd jump in and say that most of the colour problems are a combination of lack of understanding of picture profiles and wb user error.  I rarely get 'accurate' colour when I use a camera because i'm busy 'getting the shot' rather than being anal about it.  If i were to enjoy moaning about the colour of Sony cameras and be obsessed with shooting s-log when really I have no need to be doing so, to the point where I discard the sony for an vastly inferior camera that doesn't offer true Log anyway.  I'd first make sure it's not my own error.  

 

 If you're using a picture profile without understanding highlight rolloff and it's response to red, green or blue no amount of white balance accuracy will help.  TBH we're lucky Sony even gave us S-Log on the A7 range.  Canon don;t give you true log.    If you want to yield results from it you need to learn how to use it.   simply setting your WB to 3200 because your LED panels say they're 3200k ain't enough.  Setting to 5600k outdoors isn't enough either - since sky temp changes drastically and you can't do enough to 8bit footage to correct for being 1000k+ off the ture wb.  you need to shoot a grey card in the light you're shooting in, look at what's happening on the scopes and dial in a custom wb offset to suit both the light source and the response curve of the profile your're using.  Unless you;re willing to do that, either stop moaning, or shoot with canon and lose the vast lens options, dynamic range of true s-log and evf with punch in, as well as the ibis with manual lenses, speed boosters, 4k, etc.    

[Mattias Burling]

I wouldn't call getting a color that doesnt look like puke to be "anal".

"Fix it post" is for amateurs. A camera that makes you struggle at a simple task as WB is a broken camera.

If my 10 years of working, 3 years at university plus all the time as a hobby shooter isnt enough to get concistent WB. When all other cameras does it easily, blackmagic, canon, samsung, panasonic, nikon, bolex, jvc and old Sonys like the fs100. If all those do it but not the a7sii.... Sorry its not user error. No its not just me. No I havent done to little research.

And I can get nice colors in S-log, nice skin as well. But the WB still sucks.

The cameras is good at alot of things. But its color and WB is sh.t.

IMO

[richg101]

11 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

I wouldn't call getting a color that doesnt look like puke to be "anal"

"Fix it post" is for amateurs.

What I mean is that if correct colour is of utmost importance while also reaping the rewards of s-log and small file sizes then it's a necessity to be anal about setting the camera up correctly.  I'm  not talking about post.  if you;ve set your camera up correctly then a simple log to rec709 contrast conversion is all that's required if colour accuracy is important - adjust contrast so highlights aren't clipped and shadows/midtone detail remains intact.  rgb should only be touched if a stylistic grade is required, or if the camera was set up incorrectly - thus needing adjustment.   if you set the camera up wrong and don;t understand curves and how to reap the most from 8bit footage you;re doomed.  I'd say 80% of footage illustrating the so-called bad sony colour is from those not skilled enough to be making critical judgement

If you shoot with the profile set to default and skin is magenta, dial away from magenta on your wb.  When reviewing footage online remember that no one person has exactly the same colour skin.  if someone is in the sun for a long time they go a bit pink.  You don;t know how that person looks in reality.  Robert Deniro looks different in real life than he looks in Goodfellas. - because of the choice of film stock used.  They probably spent 3 weeks deciding on the stock of film they were to use to get the look, colour, contrast.  MAybe even using different stock to show the different eras portrayed in the movie 

[Jimmy]

10 hours ago, Policar said:

Don't be so snide, there are people who do just this all the time. It's just that most of them don't post about it because their clients are paying millions of dollars so no one knows what the footage used to look like before the grade.

I was a colour grader in London for 4 years... I'm not here trolling, I know what i'm talking about.

You can fix baked in white balance, you can even get it looking good....  but you will lose something doing so. That is what I said right from the start... There is no perfect solution, no matter what software you use.

[Oliver Daniel]

58 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

I wouldn't call getting a color that doesnt look like puke to be "anal".

"Fix it post" is for amateurs. A camera that makes you struggle at a simple task as WB is a broken camera.

If my 10 years of working, 3 years at university plus all the time as a hobby shooter isnt enough to get concistent WB. When all other cameras does it easily, blackmagic, canon, samsung, panasonic, nikon, bolex, jvc and old Sonys like the fs100. If all those do it but not the a7sii.... Sorry its not user error. No its not just me. No I havent done to little research.

And I can get nice colors in S-log, nice skin as well. But the WB still sucks.

The cameras is good at alot of things. But its color and WB is sh.t.

IMO

 

My opinion is that you're right. 

There's definitely something wrong with the A7 white balance. I've tinkered with it extensively using all sorts of different lights and methods. You CAN sort it out via the custom settings however what Jimmy says, something else goes missing or is affected which makes grading the images universally problematic. 

My Lupolux lights in daylight, look like daylight with the FS7. They look pale green on every picture profile on the A7 cameras. I can dial that out, but then I get a strong magenta shift in other areas. This is just one example. If your subject is a human, then there are issues.  

It is the job of the operator to set white balance correctly, however the A7 white balance function is drunk or something. I can get there consistently, even in Slog2, but getting there is like trying to get your drunk friend home. Takes a long time, but it can be sort of weirdly fun too. 

[richg101]

7 minutes ago, Oliver Daniel said:

 

 

It is the job of the operator to set white balance correctly, however the A7 white balance function is drunk or something. I can get there consistently, even in Slog2, but getting there is like trying to get your drunk friend home. Takes a long time, but it can be sort of weirdly fun too. 

And this is exactly my point.  If you have one friend who is always drunk, and you know him well you tend to learn his traits.  The same as a camera.  You take the time, then reap the rewards of an adaptable lens mount, evf, 4k internal, low cost, small files, and almost 2 stops of usable dynamic range in the highlights than c-log and canon's vastly inferior sensor tech.  Those who have adapted to the A7 range don;t need any additional evf solution and they're paying less than half of what canon charge for the c100, while also having full frame and aps-c - allowing for vastly cheaper wide angle options!

As an Fs7 user you can also stick a sub 1000£ a7s on a gimbal or drone and it'll match very well with the fs7 if you take the time to tweek it.  Compared to an fs7 the a7s is a throw away camera in price terms.  the perfect b-cam to an fs7 

[Nikkor]

Kind of offtopic question: Do raw stills from sonys also have a problem with color? I still haven't ditched my d800, but I'm going to and replace it with a a7x, for stills. I know there can be big differences between same sensor technology, the d7000 for example looked totally wrong when compared to the d800, and their sensors are the almost the same generation from sony,so any info would benappreciated.

[richg101]

7 minutes ago, Nikkor said:

Kind of offtopic question: Do raw stills from sonys also have a problem with color? I still haven't ditched my d800, but I'm going to and replace it with a a7x, for stills. I know there can be big differences between same sensor technology, the d7000 for example looked totally wrong when compared to the d800, and their sensors are the almost the same generation from sony,so any info would benappreciated.

IMO the A7R mk1 had the nicest image (arguably the same sensor as the d800).  the a7r2 is incredible in resolution and post production capabilities due to the dynamic range, but somewhat doesn't deliver as nice images as I remember from the a7r mk1.  feels a little noisier for raw stills.  The a7s mk1 makes amazing still images but I always feel 12mpx isn't enough for landscape shots where you might want to apply a little sharpening.  None have a problem with colour.  I expect if there are wb issues then the slider in camera raw allows for fine tuning.  - with 8bit 4.2.0 workarounds need to be done before you hit record.  in raw I'd say the a7r and a7r2 have such amazing capturing abilities than it's harder to get an image wrong than it is to get it right. - much like the d800 

[DayRaven]

23 hours ago, Nikkor said:

Kind of offtopic question: Do raw stills from sonys also have a problem with color?

No, remember Sony raw files don't have any colour information in them, the mosaic is interpreted by whichever raw processor you use. It hasn't been interpreted into RGB in camera, unlike the Foveon sensors, so it's your software that turns the voltage readouts into colour and luminance. The sensor image data isn't "white balanced, in the same way that if you put a voltometer across two pins of an xlr cable, the differential of voltage you read isn't in itself soprano or baritone, when you interpret it, then you decide where and how the pitch comes.

[Jimmy]

I love the colours in raw. It is the only reason I still have the A7s

[Nikkor]

14 minutes ago, DayRaven said:

No, remember Sony raw files don't have any colour information in them, the mosaic is interpreted by whichever raw processor you use. It hasn't been interpreted into RGB in camera, unlike the Foveon sensors, so it's your software that turns the voltage readouts into colour and luminance. The sensor image data isn't "white balanced, in the same way that if you put a voltometer across two pins of an xlr cable, the differential of voltage you read isn't in itself soprano or baritone, when you interpret it, then you decide where and how the pitch comes.

There can be differences between sensors, for example in the filter arrays which lead to differences in color separation and even noise performance.

I will probably get the a7ii because of ibis and cheap body. I only like to shoot at iso 100  and the ibis will let me do that 90% of the time.

[DayRaven]

22 hours ago, Nikkor said:

There can be differences between sensors, for example in the filter arrays which lead to differences in color separation and even noise performance.

There can be, in theory, but there's not.

Edited - wow, that sounded way more confrontational than I intended, sorry!!!

[Jimmy]

There is also difference in the raw file itself... Isn't the raw in the A7s something really weird like lossy 11 bit raw?

edit - https://photographylife.com/sony-will-finally-fix-the-lossy-raw-issue

[Don Kotlos]

Yes there are differences between RAW data as well. For example, the RGB filters differ depending on the manufacturer, the RGB structure (X-trans), noise reduction (yes there is noise reduction in RAW files  ) etc. 

But indeed a big part of the final colors depends on the processing of these pre-processed RGB data. You can think of it as another LUT that can depend on WB, ISO, etc.   

Now even though camera does affect color in a great extent, learning how to manipulate color (lights/WB/ color profiles/color tuning in camera/color processing in post) is by far the most important factor for the final image. 

Going back to the OP, I believe unlimited RAW  is about photographs. We should feel really lucky even if we get 10bit anytime soon in a consumer camera from Sony. 

[Oliver Daniel]

4 hours ago, richg101 said:

And this is exactly my point.  If you have one friend who is always drunk, and you know him well you tend to learn his traits.  The same as a camera.  You take the time, then reap the rewards of an adaptable lens mount, evf, 4k internal, low cost, small files, and almost 2 stops of usable dynamic range in the highlights than c-log and canon's vastly inferior sensor tech.  Those who have adapted to the A7 range don;t need any additional evf solution and they're paying less than half of what canon charge for the c100, while also having full frame and aps-c - allowing for vastly cheaper wide angle options!

That's why I'm still using Sony. They have the features I need with the compromise of doing more work with the colour. I think Sony should focus on the colour science and white balance for the next A7 cameras (and battery life!!), among the predictable other upgrades (every spec higher and a bit better). 

4 hours ago, richg101 said:

As an Fs7 user you can also stick a sub 1000£ a7s on a gimbal or drone and it'll match very well with the fs7 if you take the time to tweek it.  Compared to an fs7 the a7s is a throw away camera in price terms.  the perfect b-cam to an fs7 

I do this all the time. 

Just recently wrapped up shooting, lighting and editing this video. FS7 + A7SII. Extreme lighting that will make pixel peepers sweat with horror (the degradation of extremes is intentional). 

 

 

[Nikkor]

Some pretty crazy shots in there, very nice indeed

[kidzrevil]

still waiting for sony to give us a full frame a mount body with good video. Their answer to the 5d mark iii just with 4k and ibis and full pixel readout buttttt one can dream

[jax_rox]

16 minutes ago, kidzrevil said:

still waiting for sony to give us a full frame a mount body with good video. Their answer to the 5d mark iii just with 4k and ibis and full pixel readout buttttt one can dream

... You mean an A7smkII??

Ahh, A-mount. I don't think Sony's particularly interested in a-mount at the moment... Realistically though, the A7smkII is that with an LA-EA4. The LA-EA4 is pretty good.

[Policar]

22 hours ago, hmcindie said:

It's more about the tool actually. Some color correcting tools are not-so-good for white balance issues (Premiere) and some are nice (Colorista) and some are high-end and great.

My only experience with grading is with Resolve and Color but I have heard Premiere's tools have gotten really good. I used to grade tv movies (for tier one cable, never broadcast, though) with both before switching fields. Neither can deal with hard chroma clipping from what I can see, at least I can't figure it out.  Which is why gamuts with hard chroma clipping still scare me. But both are good for normal stuff, I actually preferred Color for its simpler interface.