New Sony E-mount video cam for IBC

[Glen Vandermolen]

It's not so much that I'm hung up on 4:2:2 vs 4:2:0.
It's my broadcast clients who are insisting upon at least a 50mbps, 4:2:2 in 1080/60i or 30P codec for a camera.
That's why I'm wondering if XAVC-L 50mbps, 10-bit, 4:2:2 is the same as or better than XDCAM 50mbps, 8-bit, 4:2:2. Can I sell it to my clients?
I can explain the difference between 4:2:0 in progressive and interlaced to them until I'm blue in the face, but they won't budge. The producers i deal with are rarely camera pros and only go by what they've been told by their engineers.
I have never had a broadcast client (or any client) request 1080/60P. Not once.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Glen Vandermolen

It's not so much that I'm hung up on 4:2:2 vs 4:2:0.
It's my broadcast clients who are insisting upon at least a 50mbps, 4:2:2 in 1080/60i or 30P codec for a camera.

And for HD (1080) I think the insistence on 4:2:2 is fair enough - my previous post was about UHD - 4K and QFHD, when 4:2:0 should be fine for the vast majority of work. (And when it's not, it's likely to need 4:4:4.) Even if the HD material starts off progressive, it may end up treated psf - and it's the psf/interlace factor that led broadcasters to insist on no vertical subsampling.

But all the UHD variants are progressive - end of story.

Originally Posted by Glen Vandermolen

That's why I'm wondering if XAVC-L 50mbps, 10-bit, 4:2:2 is the same as or better than XDCAM 50mbps, 8-bit, 4:2:2. Can I sell it to my clients?

I suspect in strict quality terms the answer is likely to be "better". But the question is whether it will fit into their workflow? The bigger the organisation, the more rigid their workflows may be, and the less they may want any codec or delivery method that they're not used to.

And whilst there is a lot about the FS5 to admire, then why oh why not take more account of legacy issues and include the legacy XDCAM codecs? You may not choose to use such rather than XAVC if you have full control of the production path, but what to do if your client has XDCAM as their in-house format and can't handle XAVC?

Originally Posted by Glen Vandermolen

I have never had a broadcast client (or any client) request 1080/60P. Not once.

That doesn't surprise me too much as 1080p/60 isn't a broadcast format, and now UHD is here is never likely to be - I'd expect a leapfrog to 2160p/50(60).

May be it's a case of Rome not being built in a day - but everybody expects it to be! Wanting everything all at once. Together with what Andy says about true 4K (4096x2160) likely coming to the FS5 as an upgrade, that makes me feel a lot better about the FS5. I can see it being highly popular with the low budget cinema people, and they're the ones who are most likely to want the cinema aspect ratio. For a lot of the other work, QFHD is fine.

And for the "cinema" applications, the announcement that it will gain RAW for external recording is only likely enhance it's appeal here.

[Glen Vandermolen]

Originally Posted by David Heath

And whilst there is a lot about the FS5 to admire, then why oh why not take more account of legacy issues and include the legacy XDCAM codecs? You may not choose to use such rather than XAVC if you have full control of the production path, but what to do if your client has XDCAM as their in-house format and can't handle XAVC?

.

Yeah, I'm surprised they don't have XDCAM HD. Especially when it has XDCAM written right on the side of the camera body. There are lots of broadcast clients who use this and it's integrated into their workflow.
Hopefully it can be added in a future upgrade. Is it possible, for some reason, you can't record this codec onto SD cards?

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Glen Vandermolen

Is it possible, for some reason, you can't record this codec onto SD cards?

Good point, and I think you may have got it.

Personally, I'd have been happy with XAVC and XDCAM 35Mbs - the latters pretty popular in the UK for the likes of news etc, and normally to SDHC cards via an SxS adaptor.

[Roshdi Alkadri]

4:2:0 in 4K on the FS5? Really? Still shooting certain things with PXW-X200, I will wait for more 4k offerings, I hate that darn grip on the FS7 plus that slow power zoom lens.

[Mike McKay]

I wonder if that kit lens is any good? Having a power zoom might be nice.
I might consider this, but really need to give thought to lens selection, could get carried away and get pricey. Would probably need something wide and something fast to go with it.
Since I can't find any specs on stabilization, I assume there's nothing internal and all down to lens etc. I like the 'Active' mode on my X70 for HD shooting, too bad there's nothing like that.

[Matt Sharp]

Originally Posted by Mike McKay

I wonder if that kit lens is any good? Having a power zoom might be nice.

The SELP18105G is a nice compromise. I use it on an FS100 and I don't even mind the insane distortion (which is compensated for on everything except the FS100). The zoom isn't fast when using the knob on the lens, but it's quick if you whip the dial.

[Roshdi Alkadri]

This camera might serve whatever demographic it's intended for. Not for 4K digital cinema shooting, unless you add an external recorder etc. to get 4K 10bit or RAW it seems. The DVX200, URSA Mini and the newly teased RED camera look more enticing for my purposes and probably some others. Good to wait some more.

[Nate Haustein]

I like it. Right size so I can fit into a carry on pelican case (FS7 was HUGE!), good price, codec bitrate that won't destroy my storage solution at the moment. The ND filter is cool and the modular form factor works for me. Grip looks comfortable and the LCD is in the right place for my shooting style. RAW would be a perk down the line. The EVF looks like the one from the AX100 which is small but high quality.

I was hoping for 150Mbps and I got 100Mbps. That'll work for the moment. SDXC storage is nice compared to the spendy options that are developing right now. I was looking for a 4K C100 and I think we got it. As a stopgap to the next level (RAW, 60p, etc) I'm liking what I'm seeing.

Curious about auto focus abilities and wondering if the ISO can be changed via dial without having to set individual values to the L/M/H switch.

EDIT: ISO can be adjusted via hand grip joystick.

[Jack Zhang]

There is a reason Sony is not investing the time into looking into UHS-II SD technology: 1. Panasonic is already doing it with MicroP2 2. It has potential to cannibalize XQD sales.

This camera is PERFECTLY capable of outputting 60p in 4K, they just want you to get the RAW upgrade to do so (wishful thinking here) or they just want you to stick to UHS-I cards.

Had support been added for UHS-II, 150mbps 60p would have been possible on SDXC.

As it stands right now, I'm not interested. No 60p (which is supposed to be the next broadcast standard) is a deal breaker. Also, did you notice how the XLR positioning kind of harkens to Panasonic's odd XLR positioning?

Plus, the XDCAM branding should not be on a camera which supports ZERO legacy codecs.

[Mike Watson]

What's my best bet to put my hands on one of these without flying to Amsterdam? Particularly on the left coast?

[David Peterson]

Originally Posted by Mike Watson

Excuse my ignorance.

I had assumed a larger sensor was "better". (Greater control of depth of field, greater sensitivity, etc.)

In reading this thread over the last few days, it appears that this is not necessarily so.

I personally can't see putting a smaller sensor on a more expensive camera, then putting a full frame sensor on its baby brother.

Can someone educate me?

Arguably S35 is the "optimal" size, and it is by far the most common size in Hollywood.

For many reasons such as: most cinema lenses used are designed for it, it gives shallow DoF but not so shallow it makes the focus puller's job impossible and takes get ruined, it isn't too prohibitively expensive to build sensors for (as sensor size goes up, costs rise even more sharply!), lenses are not too prohibitively expensive either (ditto the same point), and the same points apply to weight/portability too (compare the size of Pentax 645Z with a lens, a smallish medium format camera, with a Sony NEX camera with a pancake lens!).

In short, S35 can be seen by many as the current "sweet spot". Thus the bigger a sensor gets as it gets closer to S35, that is a good thing, but once it gets bigger than S35 that is bad.

Note: some of these points are inherently subjective, thus a few people will instead argue FF/VistaVision is instead the "sweet spot". A few mad folks will even argue for medium format! :-P

[David Peterson]

Originally Posted by Mike McKay

I wonder if that kit lens is any good? Having a power zoom might be nice.
I might consider this, but really need to give thought to lens selection, could get carried away and get pricey. Would probably need something wide and something fast to go with it.
Since I can't find any specs on stabilization, I assume there's nothing internal and all down to lens etc. I like the 'Active' mode on my X70 for HD shooting, too bad there's nothing like that.

I own that lens, it is a really nice run and gun lens, and far cheap/wider/lighter than the Sony 28-135mm f/4

Get a few primes with this, and a longer lens for your tale needs (plus perhaps a Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 in Nikon F Mount for your UWA uses) and then you're quite well sorted with lenses.

[Andy Wilkinson]

For those of us who have pre-ordered the FS5 or eager for news I've just seen this comment by Alister Chapman on his FB page. Sound promising…

Direct quote below:

"Spent the evening shooting with the FS5 last night. Not ideal weather as it rained, but I'm impressed. It's a very easy camera to use. The 18-105 power zoom works surprisingly well and it's almost like having a PMW-200/EX1 type camera where you can just run and gun, zoom in, zoom out with ease. The small EVF is actually pretty good, it's OLED so has really good contrast and is sharp, just a little on the small side. Variable ND is great for coping with changing light without altering the DoF. Not had a chance to closely examine the footage yet, I shot a mix of S-log3 and Cinegammas but at the first look, it appears to be very good. At 3200 ISO it is very sensitive and noise is well managed. There are LUT's for the VF and LCD but not the SDI/HDMI output. Really nice to have the same super slowmo functions as the FS700 again, appears to be less prone to aliasing."

[Andy Wilkinson]

And just to add to this…I was filming in a Boxing Club last night with my C100 in minimal kit mode (without my Ninja Blade mounted), just using the poor EVF and mostly the LCD screen for focusing/framing etc. It was fun dancing around the action trying not to get in the way/on the end of a stray punch!!!

Couldn't help think whilst I was filming it all (for HD web delivery) just how useful 1080p50 (and even 1080p240 bursts, now and again) would have been to have had as options :-)

A much better EVF than the C100's really poor one would have helped too (even with my C-Cup it's barely adequate…) although I mainly used the LCD screen as I needed to keep aware of the fast moving action in my surroundings!

The one thing I think I'll struggle with on the FS5 is the lack of Wave Form Monitor - I use it really often on my C100.