Sony a7 III discussion

[Attila Bakos]

6 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

Great test video by the way, excellent job. Is it me, or the skin color of the Fuji is way off? I do not believe I am saying that, but color seems better on the Sony, skin tones especially. 

Does the A7iii have the same color science as the A7Riii? Are they much better than the A7 mk II series cameras? I will be working with Sony a lot this summer.

Ibis, RS and codec goes to Fuji though.

Make sure you check the article as well, it has tons of comparison images and information.

[Kisaha]

12 minutes ago, jonpais said:

You can get gorgeous skin tones with either camera. The test is really unflattering. I've never gotten such miserable colors from my X-T2, even without doing any work in post.

That is my impression also, while I have seen terrible stuff with the Sony's. This summer I will be working a lot with A7iii and A7sII and I am not sure what to expect. We will run some tests in a couple of weeks I guess, but I would like to be prepared.

Can some A7sII and A7iii guys comment on the color science, and give any tip using them together?

[Don Kotlos]

24 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

Can some A7sII and A7iii guys comment on the color science, and give any tip using them together?

The color science has improved on the latest gen Sony cameras (A7III/A7rIII/A9). 

But if you stick to the same gamma and color gamut they should be fairly close and easily matched in post. Playing with the color depth can help with getting them as close as possible in camera. What I have noticed is that the colors of A7RIII compared to A7rII are generally less greenish, more warm with a more saturated red channel. 

You can use any of the Cine gammas or the Slog2. The color gammuts that I use most often are Pro/Cinema/sgamut3.cine. 

If you intend to grade a lot in post then I would use the Slog2/sgamut3.cine on both cameras with a slight increase in saturation (~10). If you want something looking good straight out of the camera, then Cine gammas with Pro/Cinema color or a more saturation with sgamut3.cine work well. Avoid Slog3 and sgamut/3. 

Since Sony picture profiles allow for extensive manipulation of the image, it is important to get them close to what you like. So spend the time optimizing the settings in-camera, and record test footage before you shoot the main gig! 

[jonpais]

3 minutes ago, Don Kotlos said:

Since Sony picture profiles allow for extensive manipulation of the image, it is important to get them close to what you like. So spend the time optimizing the settings in-camera, and record test footage before you shoot the main gig! 

Allow - or don't allow?

[Don Kotlos]

11 minutes ago, jonpais said:

Allow - or don't allow?

Allow. More than any other consumer camera. But I still wish everyone implemented baking in 3DLUTs as the new pocket. 

[Inazuma]

1 hour ago, Attila Bakos said:

Looks like I got what I wanted

 

Hah, I guess I don't have to do any tests then! Regarding colour, I think it's pretty clear that the Fuji produces less harsh results on skin. And the balance between the colours in the nature scene, with the water, greenery and sky, is also nicer. 

[Kisaha]

6 minutes ago, Inazuma said:

Hah, I guess I don't have to do any tests then! Regarding colour, I think it's pretty clear that the Fuji produces less harsh results on skin. And the balance between the colours in the nature scene, with the water, greenery and sky, is also nicer. 

I couldn't disagree more. I agree with @jonpais big time here, I couldn't describe it better, "miserable results" he said. Certainly have seen great footage from the X-T2. 

Is X-H1 different than the X-T2? Is the A7iii that much better than the previous A7 cameras?

Especially in skin colors the Fuji is a mess here. It is also noticeably softer; look at the area under the eyes of the girl and the details of her skin (and she has a lot of them!). 

I have seen some similar results on another video posted here, with some people playing some music, can't remember exactly, but I was waiting for a more serious test to comment. Now I comment.

It can be user error, but these guys seem to know what they are doing, or they are paid by Sony to eliminate the competition, I do not know what to say.

General comment: The article in mirrorlesscomparison goes in great depths, by the way. Great stuff,

but in the crop diagram at 00:50seconds, it says "A7iii - 1.2Xcrop (4K 30p, that is pitty, by the way, but no biggy, considering the price), "A7iii - S35 mode (1.5X crop), but then it says "X-H1 1.17X crop", and it is close to full frame, isn't this 1.5X, and an additional 1.17X crop? Isn't this a bigger crop than the A7iii's S35 mode?

 

[Inazuma]

I will miss having the Fuji rendering but there are a lot of things about the Sony which I find advantageous

• Body button and dial arrangement
• Use of full frame lenses uncropped
• Eye-AF
• More natural AF and AE transitions in video
• Better DR and noise control
• Auto-WB with preference for white or ambience
• Battery life
• Less purple flaring (see the accompanying article linked in the video description)
• Better 1080p
• Less jerky IBIS in video
• Less recording limits
• Built in microphone jack

[Inazuma]

@Kisaha At the end of the day, it's subjective. But I will comment on each scene to help you understand why I feel the Fuji renders better. 

This is not the best example because the Fuji has some weird stuff going on here with the levels clipping or something (maybe due to DR400 being used) and also theres some green tones under the eyes. But overall I would choose the Fuji here due to the amount of red showing in the Sony. Even her hair looks red.

 

 

See how the highlights in the Sony are burnt here while the Fuji maintains a consistent tonal range and colour transitions smoothly.

 

 

The Fuji shows more warmth (WITHOUT looking orange, which is my complaint with Panasonics). Again note how the transitions between the different colours of her skin are quite smooth on the Fuji compared to the Sony.

 

 

This one is extra subjective. The Sony has what I believe to be a more accurate representation of the subject. However, the Fuji has quite a filmic response here. More warmth, nicer contrast, less harsh. 

 

 

 

This is actually an example of an area which bothered me about Fuji rendering. Greens are often too vibrant and if you have a lot of plants/grass in a scene, it can all end up looking like a green mush). 

 

[Kisaha]

@Inazuma it is highly subjective, of course, I am not in front of my proper monitor,  but in everyone of the above scenes I would go with the Sony (I can't even believe I am saying this!). The AF seems better also.

In the first one you agree that something's going on, and in the last one with the too much green (that is obvious in other landscape shots in the video as well, and the blue is very different in those cameras, just wasn't sure what was the optimal choice, amd didn't have more time to spend, that is why I didn't comment).

Sometimes there is a green overcast, as it is very obvious in the image that says "Face Detection" against the white background.

Anyway, thanks for trying to explain, I am more surprised with the improvement of the A7 series to be honest, wasn't trying to say anything bad about the Fuji. I like Fuji very much, since forever, and I want them to survive, but it is hard earned money, and I can't change systems every 2 years.

It seems that you realized certain shortcomings of the camera also, and you moved to the A7iii already, and that explains a lot I guess.

I am - very slightly - excited about using the A7 in a couple of weeks, something I haven't feel for a Sony since the production company I was working brought the first EX1 camcorders in my country!

[Geoff CB]

I'm very surprised about how much I prefer the Sony in those videos, though the WB of the Fuji definitely seems off for a lot of it and may be swinging the results for me. Really the fact that they are so close is what is impressive. 

[jonpais]

13 hours ago, Inazuma said:

 

The Fuji shows mor (WITHOUT looking orange, which is my complaint with Panasonics). 

I'm rather fond of Panasonic's pumpkin colored skin tones, especially around Thanksgiving.

 

[Inazuma]

The orange isn't really an issue at that saturation level, especially after grading. I'm more just talking about the SOOC standard profiles here. Sorry to have derailed this thread!

[mojo43]

19 hours ago, Kisaha said:

That is my impression also, while I have seen terrible stuff with the Sony's. This summer I will be working a lot with A7iii and A7sII and I am not sure what to expect. We will run some tests in a couple of weeks I guess, but I would like to be prepared.

Can some A7sII and A7iii guys comment on the color science, and give any tip using them together?

I did a shoot with EOSHD settings on both the a7iii and a7sii and I find they are nearly identical imo. Easy to match anyhow.

[Django]

It's a tough call depending on your priorities but to me it sounds (and looks) like Fuji has the edge in IQ.. even if Sony has the advantage in low light & AF performance:

Video – 4K comparison and analysis

Colours are similar to what we saw for the SOOC JPGs. The X-H1 has more dominant green tones with manual white balance and some profiles like Velvia produce really strong saturation, whereas Astia and Provia are more balanced.

Some Creative Styles on the Sony such as Autumn leaves and Landscape give you realistic colours with lovely tones, but keep in mind that these profiles are designed for stills and can easily clip highlights in situations with strong contrast.

Fortunately, Sony has 10 Picture Profiles that can be entirely customised with settings designed for video. They were inherited from the Cine-Alta professional camcorder series.

You can configure them to be smooth with low contrast and saturation – which gives you more leeway for colour grading in post production – or have a nice result straight out of camera. Using them definitely requires some trial and error as they are quite advanced but the results can be very nice indeed.

The X-H1 introduces Fujifilm’s first film simulation mode designed for video: Eterna. It has less contrast and saturation so that it is easier to colour grade once again. It is not too dissimilar from the Pro Neg Std profile.

For skin tones, the Fuji has a smoother and more uniform rendering whereas the Sony adds more details and subtle tones. However it can also display more highlights if there are some reflections due to sweat or lack of make-up.

 

Eterna, as well as some of the Picture Profiles on the Sony, can already give you a good amount of dynamic range to work with. On the A7 you can control settings such as Black levels and Black Pedestals, whereas the X-H1 gives you highlight and shadow parameters, as well as two dynamic range settings.

The most interesting are DR200% and DR400%: combined with ISO 400 or ISO 800 respectively, they allow you to retain more highlight information or open the shadows more significantly than when recording at ISO 200. It does introduce more noise in the dark zones however. On the Sony, the HLG3 gamma retains more highlight information but can’t match what you can obtain with the DR settings on the X-H1.

For superior dynamic range and colour grading, there are Log gamma profiles. The A7 III has two: S-Log2 and S-Log3. The latter opens the shadows more but can also produce more noise as a result. The X-H1 has one F-Log profile that gives a good latitude but doesn’t reach the same balance between shadows and highlights that the A7 does. Note that on both cameras, the minimum sensitivity is 800 ISO when using Log curves.

Keep in mind that internal recording remains compressed (4:2:0 8-bit) but you can achieve better results via the HDMI output (4:2:2 8-bit). The X-H1 can record at 200Mbps which is double the bitrate of the A7. As a result, the Sony can display more compression artefacts which are especially visible after applying some colour grading.

[jonpais]

Sony has 2X the image quality of Fuji. ?

[Django]

yup.. and by that logic roughly 3X the image quality of Panny/BMPC4K.  

[jonpais]

On 5/10/2018 at 5:09 AM, Inazuma said:

@Kisaha At the end of the day, it's subjective. But I will comment on each scene to help you understand why I feel the Fuji renders better. 

This is not the best example because the Fuji has some weird stuff going on here with the levels clipping or something (maybe due to DR400 being used) and also theres some green tones under the eyes. But overall I would choose the Fuji here due to the amount of red showing in the Sony. Even her hair looks red.

 

 

See how the highlights in the Sony are burnt here while the Fuji maintains a consistent tonal range and colour transitions smoothly.

 

 

The Fuji shows more warmth (WITHOUT looking orange, which is my complaint with Panasonics). Again note how the transitions between the different colours of her skin are quite smooth on the Fuji compared to the Sony.

 

 

This one is extra subjective. The Sony has what I believe to be a more accurate representation of the subject. However, the Fuji has quite a filmic response here. More warmth, nicer contrast, less harsh. 

 

 

 

This is actually an example of an area which bothered me about Fuji rendering. Greens are often too vibrant and if you have a lot of plants/grass in a scene, it can all end up looking like a green mush). 

 

The sample images look like they were shot by a rank amateur. I don’t know how anyone could judge anything by those shots. 

[Inazuma]

@jonpais What would you like to see in comparison shots?

[jonpais]

3 minutes ago, Inazuma said:

@jonpais What would you like to see in comparison shots?

Somebody who knows what the hell they’re doing.