Jump to content


Photo

Sony FS5 II is Garbage


  • Please log in to reply
55 replies to this topic

#1 Samuel Berger

Samuel Berger
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1179 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Seattle

Posted 21 April 2018 - 11:07 PM

Look at this sample video with shades of "PRETTY BABY" and "BILITIS".

 

 

 

Not cinematic at all. The comments section seems to agree.

 

From B&H: The camera records internally to dual media card slots and can continuously capture HD at up to 120 fps, with 8-second long bursts at 240 fps. Raw 4K recording is available with the addition of optional external recorders that also allow 4K recording at 50 and 60p.


  • 0

#2 David Coughlan

David Coughlan
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 21 April 2018 - 11:39 PM

Hm. I disagree. The image reminds me of a cross between an EVA1 and a C200, and it's priced where the C200/EVA1 should be. Great value in comparison.

 

Really like the colors in that clip, too, which is not something I usually say where Sony is concerned. 


  • 0

#3 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7406 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 22 April 2018 - 01:03 AM

It just needs better  (or some) lighting.


  • 0

#4 Robin R Probyn

Robin R Probyn
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2288 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Tokyo

Posted 22 April 2018 - 02:06 AM

Sam.. there is no pleasing some people :).. at last Sony get serious with their color science ..rather than re producing a color chart to precise levels..  even giving the cheapest camera they make, a touch of the Venice magic.. and people complain..  reading the comments from those things is never a good use of your time sir..


  • 1

#5 Tyler Purcell

Tyler Purcell
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4156 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 22 April 2018 - 04:29 PM

Typical Sony, looks like every Sony test I've seen. The Japanese seem to favor strong whites and low saturation with lack of contrast or any dynamics. "Lets show you examples of how nobody ever shoots" lol XP
  • 0

#6 Samuel Berger

Samuel Berger
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1179 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Seattle

Posted 22 April 2018 - 04:33 PM

Typical Sony, looks like every Sony test I've seen. The Japanese seem to favor strong whites and low saturation with lack of contrast or any dynamics. "Lets show you examples of how nobody ever shoots" lol XP

 

Let's not forget the $500 additional Raw output licence....which doesn't include a way to record said Raw.


  • 0

#7 Tyler Purcell

Tyler Purcell
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4156 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 22 April 2018 - 04:48 PM

Let's not forget the $500 additional Raw output licence....which doesn't include a way to record said Raw.


Well Arri does the same thing with licensing.
  • 0

#8 Landon D. Parks

Landon D. Parks
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1919 posts
  • Producer
  • West Chester Township, Ohio

Posted 22 April 2018 - 05:04 PM

What does 'cinematic' mean, anyway?

 

People use that term like its some kind of 'standard' that everyone needs to live by - yet I have never seen a straight answer that everyone can agree on.

 

Here is a secret: 99% of 'straight from the camera' footage looks like crap. 100% of the 'cinematic' stuff you see has been touched by a really good color grader. In the case of this footage, it doesn't look 'bad' to me - or even un-cinematic. It's a little sharp for my taste, and the lighting seems rather harsh. They were clearly going for a 'look' in this clip.

Look, I have seen utter crap looking videos from Alexas, and seen amazing looking, very filmic videos from cell phones. It comes down to your ability as a cinematographer, and your color graders ability. 


  • 2

#9 Robin R Probyn

Robin R Probyn
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2288 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Tokyo

Posted 22 April 2018 - 06:44 PM

I think this "Lucent" look is not typical of Sony color science at all.. its taken a while but they are looking beyond purely "reproducing " colors accurately .. thats a Japanese camera manufacturing mind set.. which they do very well.. but that isn't always the "nicest" image ..  


  • 0

#10 Tyler Purcell

Tyler Purcell
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4156 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 22 April 2018 - 07:35 PM

I think this "Lucent" look is not typical of Sony color science at all.. its taken a while but they are looking beyond purely "reproducing " colors accurately .. thats a Japanese camera manufacturing mind set.. which they do very well.. but that isn't always the "nicest" image ..


Well it does represent the way Sony cameras are naturally, untreated.
  • 0

#11 Robin R Probyn

Robin R Probyn
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2288 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Tokyo

Posted 22 April 2018 - 08:26 PM

Well it does represent the way Sony cameras are naturally, untreated.

 

 

Sorry don't get your meaning here..? This Lucent look is Sony un treated ..? the opposite I feel.... at last they are actually looking at aesthetic,s rather than the more " engineer " mind set of purely re producing colors accurately .. which actually they do very well off a chart.. for Sony engineers this was their goal.. and fair enough.. but its not always the nicest looking picture.. Some thing Arri twigged long before .. I guess through input from DP,s from their film camera heritage ..when they started producing digital camera,s.. ?


  • 0

#12 Stuart Brereton

Stuart Brereton
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3365 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 22 April 2018 - 08:28 PM

Well it does represent the way Sony cameras are naturally, untreated.

First of all, there is no such thing as untreated, there are just different LUTs.

 

Second, how does anyone know how this clip has been graded?

 

Third, how many more times are we going to have threads comparing camera A with camera B based on Youtube clips of completely unknown provenance? I don't see anything particularly objectionable in this clip, certainly not anything that could be blamed on the camera, rather than on how it was lit or graded. Proclaiming a camera to be 'garbage' based on one You Tube video is ridiculous. If that's really the level of discussion, Samuel, maybe you should have just posted in the YouTube comments, rather than here.


  • 1

#13 Samuel Berger

Samuel Berger
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1179 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Seattle

Posted 22 April 2018 - 08:42 PM

First of all, there is no such thing as untreated, there are just different LUTs.

 

Second, how does anyone know how this clip has been graded?

 

Third, how many more times are we going to have threads comparing camera A with camera B based on Youtube clips of completely unknown provenance? I don't see anything particularly objectionable in this clip, certainly not anything that could be blamed on the camera, rather than on how it was lit or graded. Proclaiming a camera to be 'garbage' based on one You Tube video is ridiculous. If that's really the level of discussion, Samuel, maybe you should have just posted in the YouTube comments, rather than here.

 

Hi Stuart, I was addressing a number of things and image quality was really just one of them. Taking all of those things into consideration, the overall consensus among the forums and Youtube comments is that, for what it is and when it came out, "the camera is garbage". Hope that helps.


  • 0

#14 Stuart Brereton

Stuart Brereton
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3365 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 22 April 2018 - 08:49 PM

 

 Taking all of those things into consideration, the overall consensus among the forums and Youtube comments is that, for what it is and when it came out, "the camera is garbage". Hope that helps.

So rather than posting an informed opinion, based on personal experience, you decided to post other people's opinion based on who knows what.


  • 1

#15 Samuel Berger

Samuel Berger
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1179 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Seattle

Posted 22 April 2018 - 08:55 PM

So rather than posting an informed opinion, based on personal experience, you decided to post other people's opinion based on who knows what.

 

Please don't embrace Whataboutism, thank you. ;-)


  • 0

#16 Stuart Brereton

Stuart Brereton
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3365 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 22 April 2018 - 09:00 PM

Here's the thing. This forum is only useful as long as the information on it is accurate. When people start making posts critiquing cameras based on what they read in You Tube comments, those posts are not useful or accurate, and they have no place here.

 

Having an opinion is fine, let's all just make sure that our opinions are informed opinions.


  • 3

#17 Samuel Berger

Samuel Berger
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1179 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Seattle

Posted 22 April 2018 - 09:13 PM

But Stuart, why the presupposition that I've only read YouTube comments, after I clarified that I've also read about the camera on specialised forums? And it doesn't make sense to assume that all the people I've read from don't have an informed opinion.

 

As you know, I'm in a research phase and learning as much as I can so I can make an informed buying decision. We've even discussed Sony cameras even though I've never been impressed by their colour science. I spend a lot of my free time researching cameras and reviews and specs, and learning what they mean.


Edited by Samuel Berger, 22 April 2018 - 09:14 PM.

  • 0

#18 Tyler Purcell

Tyler Purcell
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4156 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 22 April 2018 - 09:17 PM

When people start making posts critiquing cameras based on what they read in You Tube comments, those posts are not useful or accurate, and they have no place here.


I've shot with the FS7, F5 and F55, with a professional crew on commercial shoots (one would assume "better" cameras than the F5) and didn't much care for the results. I've spent enough time shooting with the Dragon, Epic, Alexa XT, C100/C300MII and of course the BMD cameras to give MY opinion on the matter. No, I don't shoot that much commercial product anymore, but I still shoot stuff all the time and most importantly, I edit and color OTHER PEOPLE'S shows, so I understand how workable the image of various cameras really is.
 

Having an opinion is fine, let's all just make sure that our opinions are informed opinions.

 

I think it's ok... he gave evidence in the video and his opinion. What's the problem with that? 


  • -1

#19 Stuart Brereton

Stuart Brereton
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3365 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 22 April 2018 - 09:36 PM

But Stuart, why the presupposition that I've only read YouTube comments, after I clarified that I've also read about the camera on specialised forums? And it doesn't make sense to assume that all the people I've read from don't have an informed opinion.

And what exactly was the purpose of your post here? You weren't offering any personal experience, just reposting other people's opinion, without referencing who they were, or why they were reliable, and all under a clickbait title.

 

 

he gave evidence in the video and his opinion. What's the problem with that? 

He gave no evidence whatsoever that could be attributed to the performance of the camera, just another You Tube video that had no details of post production at all.

 

 

If the FS5 is garbage (and it very well might be) then post from experience, not hearsay.


  • 0

#20 Samuel Berger

Samuel Berger
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1179 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Seattle

Posted 22 April 2018 - 10:29 PM

And what exactly was the purpose of your post here? You weren't offering any personal experience, just reposting other people's opinion, without referencing who they were, or why they were reliable, and all under a clickbait title.

 

 

He gave no evidence whatsoever that could be attributed to the performance of the camera, just another You Tube video that had no details of post production at all.

 

 

If the FS5 is garbage (and it very well might be) then post from experience, not hearsay.

 

I explained this a couple of posts above. I didn't just repost other people's opinions, I gave mine also, and said I've researched this camera, and that based on this, I don't disagree with the people who voiced that the FS5Mk2 is garbage.


  • 0


Metropolis Post

Visual Products

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Tai Audio

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

CineTape

Willys Widgets

Glidecam

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Abel Cine

Technodolly

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Paralinx LLC

Aerial Filmworks

Rig Wheels Passport

Wooden Camera

FJS International, LLC

rebotnix Technologies

The Slider

Ritter Battery

CineLab

Tai Audio

Willys Widgets

Glidecam

FJS International, LLC

rebotnix Technologies

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

The Slider

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Aerial Filmworks

Paralinx LLC

CineTape

Rig Wheels Passport

Wooden Camera

Visual Products

Abel Cine

Metropolis Post

Technodolly

CineLab

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Ritter Battery

Broadcast Solutions Inc