Sony X70 4K - Lowest bit rate in the industry!

[Jody Eldred]

It's all about how the image looks in the medium it needs to look right in (theater, home, projection at event or house of worship, internet, smartphone, ad display, etc.)

How. It. Actually. Looks.

As for a Sony camera leaning yellow, just adjust the tint on your monitor!

FIXED!

;-)

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by Cliff Totten

My current lineup is EX1r, X70, A7s and AX100.

You do have the x70 and the ax100, why don't you place them side by side and shoot something that will stress the codec? It would just take 1 framegrab from each camera to proof what you have been trying to say here for 3 pages :)

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by Jody Eldred

In the 39 years I've worked professionally as a D.P. (with one national Emmy under my belt), I have owned the following: Sony D600 Betacam SP, Sony PD100, Sony PD150, Sony F900, Sony F900R, Sony F350 XDCAM HD, Sony Z1U, Sony V1U, Sony EX1, Sony EX3, Sony 3D1U (3D camera), Sony FS700, Sony F55, Sony PXW-X70, and a fleet of GoPros. I was Sony's primary U.S. tester for most of these cameras, plus the PDW-700 and F800, and have used them in a wide range of programs such as ABC World News Tonight, GMA, Nightline, 20/20, Dateline NBC, 48 Hours, PBS "Frontline", Oprah, National Geographic, CBS dramas "J.A.G", "NCIS", and "NCIS: Los Angeles", NBC drama "Medium", feature films, network comedies, and commercials. I was in the Iraq War with Peter Jennings and Diane Sawyer, the L.A. Riots with CNN, devastating fires with ABC News, have shot underwater for CBS News, JAG, NCIS, Nat Geo, and Sony, worked with US presidents and hundreds of celebrities such as Michael Jackson, Cher, Christie Brinkley, Cindy Crawford, Sharon Stone, Oprah, even Charles Manson... too many others to even remember. I've worked extensively on the open ocean, in jungles in Southeast Asia, in alpine environments, in Death Valley.

And yes, I've shot weddings too.

haha, that last sentence cracked me up, especially after your impressive experience summary, I bet the weddings where the hardest part of your career? :) and why do you have an emmy under your belt? Is that not very uncomfortable? (edit: don't take this comment personal, I only didn't expect that someone with your background would bother doing weddings)

I am not a specifications guy but I judge my camera's based on what I see, when the sony rx10 came out some geartech sites trashed it because the avchd codec was supposed to be useless, something Sony has address later on by adding the xavc-s codec. I honestly couldn't see an issue with the "old" 28mbs codec, it was fine for me and for my paying clients, ofcourse I could see codec break-up when took framegrabs from high detailed moving images and blow them up in photoshop but who watches a film like that anyway.

I also believe you never can win an argument based on specifications only but by shooting in real world scenarios and comparing camera's side by side.

[Cliff Totten]

Originally Posted by Jody Eldred

I truly wonder if ANYONE here has actually done the tests that I have done with this camera? Have you, Clif?

This isn't personal (it really isn't), so there's no feelings to be hurt here, and I intend no one any ill will. I just want the truth to be told and correct error.

People slam codecs and bit rates and all kinds of stuff, CMOS imagers with "rolling shutter", purporting that those are terrible, awful, horrible, unthinkable factors that render certain cameras unacceptable for professional use. They usually do this with ZERO real-world tests, and certainly not tests under rigorous and exacting conditions such as the demanding 4K color grading theater at Roush Media (with one of the best colorists in Hollywood), as well as ShapeShifter Post in Hollywood with Senior Colorist Randy Coonfield. I am fortunate to live in Los Angeles and work with VERY demanding DPs, directors, producers, and colorists (Oscar and Emmy winners) who will tear to shreds any camera system that comes their way if they dislike it for any reason. This is the crucible and I live in it.

In the 39 years I've worked professionally as a D.P. (with one national Emmy under my belt), I have owned the following: Sony D600 Betacam SP, Sony PD100, Sony PD150, Sony F900, Sony F900R, Sony F350 XDCAM HD, Sony Z1U, Sony V1U, Sony EX1, Sony EX3, Sony 3D1U (3D camera), Sony FS700, Sony F55, Sony PXW-X70, and a fleet of GoPros. I was Sony's primary U.S. tester for most of these cameras, plus the PDW-700 and F800, and have used them in a wide range of programs such as ABC World News Tonight, GMA, Nightline, 20/20, Dateline NBC, 48 Hours, PBS "Frontline", Oprah, National Geographic, CBS dramas "J.A.G", "NCIS", and "NCIS: Los Angeles", NBC drama "Medium", feature films, network comedies, and commercials. I was in the Iraq War with Peter Jennings and Diane Sawyer, the L.A. Riots with CNN, devastating fires with ABC News, have shot underwater for CBS News, JAG, NCIS, Nat Geo, and Sony, worked with US presidents and hundreds of celebrities such as Michael Jackson, Cher, Christie Brinkley, Cindy Crawford, Sharon Stone, Oprah, even Charles Manson... too many others to even remember. I've worked extensively on the open ocean, in jungles in Southeast Asia, in alpine environments, in Death Valley.

And yes, I've shot weddings too.

Many thousands have seen my presentations at events like NAB, at Sundance, at DV Expo, and SATIS in Paris. They will tell you that my sole job is to share my experiences with these different camera platforms in REAL WORLD conditions... what works and what doesn't work so well... what challenges I encountered... the mistakes I made and how I overcame them (if I did.)

I am your Crash-Test Dummy. I am your Consumer Reports. I am the guy that has used just about every camera system out there (including the first RED camera) and has made all the mistakes you can make!

When I talk about a camera system like the X70, I have a broad base of comparative analysis. It does not make me right, only experienced. I take my work seriously and am concerned ultimately about one thing, "Does this camera system deliver what I need it to in real-world conditions for my client's demands and my audience's expectations?"

Specs, numbers, codecs, algorithms, bit depth, data rates are all good starting points. But the speed at which technology advances often makes images recorded at last month's higher data rate inferior to this month's lower one. I've witnessed that firsthand for a good decade now. I've had engineers call me out in front of several hundred attendees stating that there's no way the camera can look good with a 35 mbps data rate at 4:2:0 and the networks will never air that. (Except of course the top-rated drama on television, "NCIS", which utilized some of my footage in the show's opening montage, 35 mbps, 4:2:0...)

Bottom line: use anything you like. It does not matter one whit to me. Feel free to ignore the experiences I've had, the mistakes I've made, and real-world tests under demanding conditions. Doesn't matter to me. My job is not to sell cameras or anything else. My job is simply to be the best visual storyteller I can be using the best tools for each job, and to share that with anyone who's interested. And to be a truth-teller and dispel rumors so my colleagues can be better visual storytellers too.

We stand on the shoulders of those who came before us. I've been very fortunate to have shared company with some of the greatest visual storytellers of all time. I hope a little of their magic has been imparted to me, as I hope I've been able to impart some of that to others along the way as well.

That is a fantastic resume you have, I must say!

Simple question to Jody:

If you asked your colorist; "I'm shooting some awesome stuff next week. My PXW-X70 can do 60Mbp/s or 100Mbp/s....which one do you prefer I bring it to you in?" (Let's say you were shooting a car chase/crash/explosion scene for next season's NCIS)

What would he tell you to use?....

Why?....





Simple question for all:

If Sony upgraded your X70 and it could shoot in either 60Mbp/s or 100Mbp/s (like it's AX100's baby sister does) Which bit rate would you use? (let's say you were on vacation in Yellowstone shooting a grizzly attacking a wolf.)

Why?.....


CT ;-)

[Noa Put]

Simple question for all:

If Sony upgraded your X70 and it could shoot in either 60Mbp/s or 100Mbp/s (like it's AX100's baby sister does) Which bit rate would you use? (let's say you were on vacation in Yellowstone shooting a grizzly attacking a wolf.)

Why?.....

My ax100 can do 60 and 100mbs in 4K yet I shoot 60mbs all the time, why, because I compared both and to my eye they look the same, so I save space on my cards yet still am able to deliver a IQ that surpasses that of my 1080p camera's.

My gh4 can do different high bitrates in 1080p yet I always shoot at 50mbs ipb, why, because I compared and they look the same to me so again I save space and get a IQ that suits my and my clients needs.

If I would be shooting high detail scenes with lots of motion and if I would have high IQ demands from my clients I would shoot in the highest bitrate possible, if I would have a camera like the x70 and if the 4K option would not meet my needs I simply would sell the camera and buy a camera that does.

I don't see any need to complain about something that might never change, with Sony you can only hope they might give you a firmware update but they move in mysterious ways, maybe they have a x70 mark II in mind that can do 4K50p at 100+mbs, maybe they will provide a firmware update or maybe they just leave it as is and move into another direction depending on sales.

Just get a camera that fits your needs now and start shooting instead of dreaming of that pot of gold at the end of a rainbow. :)

[Ron Evans]

To support Noa. The only difference I see between 30P at 60 or 100Mbps ( on the AX100 or the AX1 ) is if I pan then both are awful compared to 60P at 150Mbps. Fixed on a tripod I see no difference between 60Mbps and 100Mbps. As mentioned before 30P is too slow for me so only shoot at 60P anyway.

Ron Evans

[Noa Put]

I have a simple question for Cliff; have you even shot 4K with the x70 and if so, can you show us why it's a codec that doesn't deliver? So no numbers this time, just something visual that shows that the 60mbs codec from the x70 is no match against a 100mbs+ codec from any of those other 12 camera's you mentioned at the beginning of this thread.
Or maybe just the ax33, it can do 100mbs but I have read that owners have been underwhelmed by the IQ of this camera compared to a ax100, can we say that the x70 is even worse, because it only does 60mbs?

[Cliff Totten]

Noa, I'm not saying it's terrible or anything of the sort. Guys, I'm not saying the AX100 or the X70 is unusable, ungradable garbage. An yeah, the AX33 at 100Mbp/s wont look as good as the AX100/X70 at 60Mbp/s. The AX100/X70's front end is WAY better than the AX33's....no CODEC bitrate at the end of the camera can "fix" that image. Yes, we ALL know this.

Some of you are completely missing my point. When a codec gets it's image input, it discards TONS of information. The H.264 implementation that XAVC uses is about as good as the h.264 library allows it to be. Sony does a great job with it's encoders.

So with that being said,...more image data is being dis-guarded in 60Mbp/s than it is in 100Mbp/s. The compression ratio is significantly higher in 60Mbp/s. The bits per pixel count is lower than it is in 100Mbps. (Sorry Noa for using "numbers" here on you)

60 Mbp/s holds well on static scenes. I have tested 60 vs.100 on light motion testing. I have not done it of fast complex motion scenes. But, yes I will before I sell my AX100.

Here...I did this a couple of months ago. This is very low complexity scene with just tree branches moving. Yes, 60mbp/s holds up well. but this is literally as "static" as it gets so it's not stressing out the 60 very much at all.

Sony AX100 - 60Mbps vs 100Mbps in 4K - YouTube

I suppose I can do a light and dark shady scene with allot of motion to see how fast the two break. Remember, bits are always allocated to mid tones first and shadows get the least so they are usually the first areas of a CODEC to break and macro block up.

[Jody Eldred]

Clif, until you stop talking numbers and start talking real-world results, we have nowhere else to go in this conversation.

As to which codecs my colorists would prefer, that would be 16-bit 4K F55 Raw (@ 23.98) or S-Log, or 16-bit F65 Raw.

The 4K F55 would be 960 mbps and the F65 could be as high as 5 GBps.

[Jody Eldred]

BTW, we compared 4K AX100 footage @100 mbps to 4K 60 mbps from the X70 in that same 4K grading suite. Two DPs and the senior colorist all agreed that the footage recorded in the X70's XAVC-L codec was superior in most respects, and inferior in none.

Some of the footage was captured with the two cameras side-by-side shooting the exact same shots.

WHAT MATTERS: the images from both cameras looked very, very good and were more than adequate for the productions being shot with them.

(My friend who owns the AX100 loves it, but after seeing my X70 and the 4K tests he is strongly considering selling his and buying an X70. Better features, deeper menu, more advanced picture profiles, a seemingly superior recording codec, etc.)

[Cliff Totten]

Originally Posted by Jody Eldred

Clif, until you stop talking numbers and start talking real-world results, we have nowhere else to go in this conversation.

As to which codecs my colorists would prefer, that would be 16-bit 4K F55 Raw (@ 23.98) or S-Log, or 16-bit F65 Raw.

The 4K F55 would be 960 mbps and the F65 could be as high as 5 GBps.

I like those numbers you are talking there! Do you think they mean anything to a colorist? Prolly not because "numbers" like that don't matter....right?

You have S-LOG listed. What CODEC do they want their S-LOG in and does that "really" matter in your opinion?

[Cliff Totten]

Originally Posted by Jody Eldred

BTW, we compared 4K AX100 footage @100 mbps to 4K 60 mbps from the X70 in that same 4K grading suite. Two DPs and the senior colorist all agreed that the footage recorded in the X70's XAVC-L codec was superior in most respects, and inferior in none.

Some of the footage was captured with the two cameras side-by-side shooting the exact same shots.

WHAT MATTERS: the images from both cameras looked very, very good and were more than adequate for the productions being shot with them.

(My friend who owns the AX100 loves it, but after seeing my X70 and the 4K tests he is strongly considering selling his and buying an X70. Better features, deeper menu, more advanced picture profiles, a seemingly superior recording codec, etc.)

I love both my AX100 and X70 too. They both give great results. I'm selling my AX100 only because the X70 is taking that role (palm-corder) away from the AX100 now

[QUOTE=Two DPs and the senior colorist all agreed that the footage recorded in the X70's XAVC-L codec was superior in most respects, and inferior in none."[/QUOTE]

Can you clarify that a little bit?...was "superior" to what?"...."inferior to non?...non, what?

[Noa Put]

Can you clarify that a little bit?...was "superior" to what?"...."inferior to non?...non, what?

The answer is in the same sentence where you took this quote from, it was compared to the ax100 100mbs codec.

[Cliff Totten]

They are the same CODEC but two different bitrates. The CODEC is H.264 for both. XAVC-S,-L and I all use the same codec.(with different frame rates, bit rates, inter and intra modes)

[Noa Put]

So? What are you trying to say now? Jody said the x70 codec looked superior to the ax100, even if it had a lower bitrate, so can we conclude the 60mbs bitrate from the x70 is more then adequate to compete with a 100mbs codec from "other 4k" camera's?