DPReview moan about Sony A9 banding with 7700hz LED advertising

[hmcindie]

31 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

The article makes no mention of how every single rolling shutter system in the world even an Arri Alexa would struggle under those conditions...

Well to be fair, regular DSLR's do not suffer under those conditions because they use a mechanical shutter. The question is:"Should that banding issue be mentioned in a review or not?" Yes, it absolutely should be mentioned. Any camera that uses an electronic shutter (rolling shutter) will have artifacts with fast strobing lights. That is something that must be mentioned if you want to do a proper review.

EDIT: Jared also did put out the raw files for anyone to take a look at. Would it be better without a clickbaity headline? Who cares?

[Andrew Reid]

21 minutes ago, hmcindie said:

Well to be fair, regular DSLR's do not suffer under those conditions because they use a mechanical shutter. The question is:"Should that banding issue be mentioned in a review or not?" Yes, it absolutely should be mentioned. Any camera that uses an electronic shutter (rolling shutter) will have artifacts with fast strobing lights. That is something that must be mentioned if you want to do a proper review.

EDIT: Jared also did put out the raw files for anyone to take a look at. Would it be better without a clickbaity headline? Who cares?

Read the fucking article FFS.

[Mattias Burling]

Im not really following this. Ive read both articles and this is what I can gather:

• The camera, like all cameras, had some issues with the lights.
• A blogger makes video about it.
• DP-Review writes an article in order to protect the Sony A9's reputation explaining what happened and that its not the cameras fault.

And we are supposed to be upset that they are anti Sony? I just don't see that here.

[Andrew Reid]

For those that don't see it, it's on me to explain it better:

• DPR run sponsored content and advertorial, which is often thinly disguised by appearance aside from the tags lost at the bottom of the page
• DPR are paid by Canon for the sponsored content
• DPR are owned by Amazon, with the end goal to sell more cameras

Some people may not mind this or even see the implications but you have to appreciate that when you take money from someone you are beholden to them in terms of maintaining a good relationship. It's really that simple.

In order to maintain the good relationship and carry on going to the PR events for new camera releases, the unspoken rule is -

• Don't criticise too heavily (6D Mark II)
• Favour the manufacturer who is paying the most
• Answer to Amazon, after all they are the owners and expect results

There are two issues here, maybe some confusion as to how they relate.

Let's look at the 6D Mark II coverage on DPReview first.

For nearly every other site and blogger (including myself) the lack of 4K was big news.

This camera warrants strong criticism for lacking good video and the crowds agree - see the massive Reddit thread, forum reactions, Kai's video even and ironically Jared's video for clicks. They all criticise it for the lack of 4K.

DPR ducked it.

There is some tiny line about it and it's glossed over, but it warranted an entire article on the lack of 4K and the soft 1080p and moire.

Why? Because at least 1/3rd of the potential customer base for this camera is expecting it to shoot very good video.

Some may not care. So what? That's a moot point.

The crux of it is, DPR's editor is trying to maintain the close relationship with Canon's PR team, to keep the sponsored content onboard.

So the criticism is watered down compared to EOSHD and others.

This isn't hard to understand.

And now to the crux of what I am saying about the A9...

Did the A9 warrant a front page sticky post about banding?

A big long post warning sports shooters to be careful of the electronic shutter?

Yes it did.

But the 6D Mark II warranted one about the shit video mode, and only the A9 got it in the neck.

And that to me is deeply suspicious.

Then there is a separate issue with the A9 coverage and that it is the research is flawed clickbait and blown way out of proportion.

The problem with Jared's clickbate in the first place is that he only tested the electronic shutter at the football match and not the mechanical one.

Any talented pro would have immediately changed the settings at the first sight of banding and had the technical knowledge to understand what was going on immediately.

Had he done so he'd have got a different result and I for one would be interested to see if it fixed the problem, which would have made for an entirely different kind of article and video.

Instead we are none-the-wiser.

How is this useful?

The only take-away we have from the article on DPR is that the A9 has a serious banding problem.

... and that sports shooters who are the main target audience for the Sony camera should think very carefully about not buying it.

This is absolutely disastrous PR for Sony and a real trophy piece for Canon in persuading sports shooters, their key pro customer, to stay with the 1D X range and L lenses.

Sony's engineers and innovative technology does not deserve this kind of publicity.

Electronic shutters are the future and have huge benefits.

Sony should be rewarded for innovating.

Instead they are scolded for it and Canon get of the hook completely free for having a lazy, un-innovative product that doesn't even try. No electronic shutter. No 20fps. No 4K. No 5 axis stabilisation. No EVF.

And it doesn't end here...

The two most-read A9 pieces on DPR in the past 2 months have been about why the main target audience for the camera should think twice about buying it instead of a Canon. What's worse is both were flawed pieces of writing and research.

The article about a Canon pro making a hypothetical switch was pure tosh. They priced all the Canon gear way too low on the used market and then claimed it would cost 10's of thousands of dollars for pros to sell-up and switch lenses, even though all pros are different and not all of them need to suddenly replace $30,000 worth of telephoto lenses in order to pick up an A9.

The article was out of touch because for many pros, making the switch is as simple as buying a few lenses and the body, or using their existing Canon lenses, depending on their line of work.

And the article didn't even apply to enthusiasts... it completely forgot about them and again the main take-away from this pro-Canon propaganda was...

---

So when, dear DPR, is Canon going to get it in the neck in the same way? I'm not fucking holding my breath!

You all saw the Canon Rumors poll which is in no way a video-orientated site and very much full to the brim of photographers...

Nearly 40% of these photographers said they wanted 4K video.

So if you look at the narrative at DPR it is out of step with the people...

They're not addressing the negative side of Canon's products in the way that I and others expect them to do as reviewers.

When I tried to do it in my 5D Mark III review, it was the beginning of the end for me as a writer at DPReview...

I know it first hand! I've had account managers from retailers come up to me out of the blue at trade shows saying, we agree 100% with what you write about Canon, but in no way can give you an affiliate account because Canon are one of our biggest manufacturer accounts. With all due respect to Mattias (and I have a ton), You're not the one who has been forced out of DPReview by Barney who find my truth-bearing a bit inconvenient.

I know what I am talking about here and it's rude to suggest I don't.

So please bear with me... and try to appreciate the wider picture. It is not just about one article.

The least Jared can do is be more balanced and creative....

It's obvious that a 7700hz refresh rate light source interferes with a rolling shutter. 7700HZ!! So give us a fucking solution!

There was one right in front of him on the A9 and he chose to ignore it!

Don't dress it up for clicks and make a big attention grabbing headline out if it as if to paint the A9 as broken for all intents and purposes.

Otherwise the manufacturers won't bother innovating and everything new they introduce will be as conservative as possible so to avoid sales-killing problems like this.

Also let's see DPR readdress the balance to...

1. Test the damned mechanical shutter. Take Jared and his A9 back to that stadium and get him to do what any pro worth their salt does on encountering a problem... Use an alternative method available right in front of you! It's not hard!

2. Tell us how the mechanical and electronic shutter compare with regards to the banding so we can see how the solution stacks up!

3. Test head to head vs the Canon and Nikon pro DSLR cameras and see if they have banding too. Some pros claim they do. So let's see it!

4. Give Sony some fucking credit for being innovative... 20fps!! 4K!

Then when it comes to the 6D Mark II which underperforms by 5 years with regards to video, THAT is when the headline is warranted.

That is a proper fucking headline.

This effects each and every single person who will buy the camera, not just the ones who happen to use it at a sports ground with 7700hz ad boards without realising that maybe they should avoid using the electronic shutter! DUH!

[BTM_Pix]

Its the close season so I won't be in a stadium for a couple of weeks yet to do an exact test but I'll offer you this in the meantime which I've just done.

This is a picture of my Philips Hue LED strip light in my kitchen taken with a Fuji X-T2

One of these images is shot with the electronic shutter and the other one is shot with the mechanical shutter.

For a bit of actual real world perspective on this camera threatening scenario, also here are a random collection of shots I've taken with the X-T2 at a football stadium with LED boards around the pitch.

If you point any camera with an electronic shutter at an LED light source its likely to have more bands than a music festival.

The fact that you can clearly see it in the EVF while you are taking the shot should alert you to the fact that you need to switch to mechanical.

Did I shoot those football images on electronic shutter? 

Nope.

Not a fair test then?

It is because its do with where these boards will actually be and hence an indicator of the real world potential of this issue.. They're not exactly on top of anyone and being the only source of illumination.

But there is a much bigger reason why its a fair test of real world use of a camera with electronic shutter for sports.

The reason for that is in the third picture. If you are tracking action at 1/4000th shooting at 15fps the rolling shutter is horrendous with an electronic shutter.

Its a far bigger problem.

And a very, very real one.

Because it will be affecting far more than 2% of your shots and thats why you just wouldn't shoot with an electronic shutter in the first place.

Anyway, here is an article from Richard Butler on DPReview explaining why you should use mechanical and not electronic shutter when shooting at high shutter speeds with artificial light. It was six weeks ago though so, hey, maybe the rest of the camera industry has made some massive leap in the meantime meaning only Sony have a problem now.... 

Otherwise why would it be such a shock horror revelation when you've already wrote a piece about it being 'a thing' ?

https://***URL removed***/articles/5816661591/electronic-shutter-rolling-shutter-and-flash-what-you-need-to-know/2

[BTM_Pix]

EDIT  

Link to article

https://***URL removed***/articles/5816661591/electronic-shutter-rolling-shutter-and-flash-what-you-need-to-know/2

[Mattias Burling]

1 hour ago, Andrew Reid said:

Any talented pro would have immediately changed the settings at the first sight of banding and had the technical knowledge to understand what was going on immediately.

I don't believe that for a second. I know plenty of talented pros and I'll bet you they would all have been cought of guard. 

1 hour ago, Andrew Reid said:

Nearly 40% of these photographers said they wanted 4K video.

Not really. They said they'd rather have it than a popup flash. And you can't go by canon rumors. The canon shooters hang out and troll sonyrumors, and vice versa

[Andrew Reid]

23 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

EDIT  

Link to article

https://***URL removed***/articles/5816661591/electronic-shutter-rolling-shutter-and-flash-what-you-need-to-know/2

Richard and Lars are great on the technical side at DPReview. Much respect!

The rest of the team come across through their work as clickbait obsessed hipsters.

24 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

I don't believe that for a second. I know plenty of talented pros and I'll bet you they would all have been cought of guard. 

Not really. They said they'd rather have it than a popup flash. And you can't go by canon rumors. The canon shooters hang out and troll sonyrumors, and vice versa

Someone else I consider a friend, Mattias, is on a really negative anti-video path right now and I just hope you snap out of it.

I just bought a Leica T for stills because of your YouTube channel. You're an inspiration and a huge talent. Why do you have to sour it by being devils advocate all the time?

1 hour ago, BTM_Pix said:

Its the close season so I won't be in a stadium for a couple of weeks yet to do an exact test but I'll offer you this in the meantime which I've just done.

This is a picture of my Philips Hue LED strip light in my kitchen taken with a Fuji X-T2

A handy test subject. I have the Hue LEDs as well and they are hell for banding. Very fast pulsing refresh rate to generate colour.

So the fundamental tech is similar to the LED advertising boards.

1 hour ago, BTM_Pix said:

One of these images is shot with the electronic shutter and the other one is shot with the mechanical shutter.

For a bit of actual real world perspective on this camera threatening scenario, also here are a random collection of shots I've taken with the X-T2 at a football stadium with LED boards around the pitch.

If you point any camera with an electronic shutter at an LED light source its likely to have more bands than a music festival.

The fact that you can clearly see it in the EVF while you are taking the shot should alert you to the fact that you need to switch to mechanical.

Did I shoot those football images on electronic shutter? 

Nope.

Not a fair test then?

Exactly, you see the problem, and switch.

1 hour ago, BTM_Pix said:

It is because its do with where these boards will actually be and hence an indicator of the real world potential of this issue.. They're not exactly on top of anyone and being the only source of illumination.

But there is a much bigger reason why its a fair test of real world use of a camera with electronic shutter for sports.

The reason for that is in the third picture. If you are tracking action at 1/4000th shooting at 15fps the rolling shutter is horrendous with an electronic shutter.

Its a far bigger problem.

That's why we need global shutter to come of age... taking ages!

1 hour ago, BTM_Pix said:

And a very, very real one.

Because it will be affecting far more than 2% of your shots and thats why you just wouldn't shoot with an electronic shutter in the first place.

Anyway, here is an article from Richard Butler on DPReview explaining why you should use mechanical and not electronic shutter when shooting at high shutter speeds with artificial light. It was six weeks ago though so, hey, maybe the rest of the camera industry has made some massive leap in the meantime meaning only Sony have a problem now.... 

If on Richard had some input on the Jared-based article... It could have been a great lesson on when to shoot electronic, when to shoot mechanical, instead of a 'let's slam an innovative camera for clicks' piece.

1 hour ago, BTM_Pix said:

Otherwise why would it be such a shock horror revelation when you've already wrote a piece about it being 'a thing' ?

The only way Sony could have avoided the shock-horror coverage is to put a global shutter on there and it just isn't feasible in 2017 with the current expectations for low light performance, colour, battery economy and so on.

1 hour ago, BTM_Pix said:

https://***URL removed***/articles/5816661591/electronic-shutter-rolling-shutter-and-flash-what-you-need-to-know/2

 

[hmcindie]

6 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

They're not addressing the negative side of Canon's products in the way that I and others expect them to do as reviewers.

I for one am glad that they didn't write 3x blog posts of bashing Canon for not having 4k. Yes it doesn't have 4k. Everyone knows it. How many times can a person write a blog about it not having 4k? 

Also about that "any talented photographer would have switched...". Isn't that the point of the criticism? That people would know that there is an issue and you need to switch to the mechnical shutter?