B-camera for FS7: which would intercut best in DR?

I'm thinking about a small B-cam for my FS7, and am currently considering two options:

- the Sony A6500 (for price and S-log/S-Gamut compatibility with my FS7)
- the BMPC4K (for its 10 bit 4K)

Difficult choice, so I'd like to ask you guys for advise on how easy (or difficult) co-grading/inter-cutting XAVC-I from my FS7 with either XAVC-S (A6500) or Cinema DNG (BMC4K) would be in Resolve. Anyone with hands-on experience? TIA

Piotr

Hi Piotr,

did you already think about as FS5 as B-Camera to the FS7 ?

I also use the FS7 and also my old panasonic consumer-cam as B-Cam.
But I'm missing s-log and 10 Bit on that old Panasonic, so matching the colors of the two camers always is a bit difficult because the pana (AVCHD, 8 Bit 4:2:0) has to less color-information for a good grade.

I also thought about the sony A6500 as a B-Cam but XAVC-S is limited to 8 Bit and 4:2:0 (like AVCHD), so IMHO s-log3 is not very senseful with XAVC-S.

I'm looking for a small camera in the consumer-handycam-size with XAVC-I (or XAVC-L), 10 Bit, 4:2:2 and s-log3.

But yet, I couldn't find it.

So IMHO the FS5 would be the best Small-Size B-Cam in addition to the FS7, but the FS5 ist not the cheepest and it's not as small as a A6500 or a sony handycam.

Peter

Exactly my thoughts, Peter - that's why I excluded the FS5. Of the little cams I mentioned, which would you advise? Thanks,

Piotr

PS. Oh, and I think the A6500 records 4:2:2 (alas 8 bit, unfortunately - it cannot be better than the FS5 )

You can also consider A7s or A7s II, both insane in low light, full frame, and compact body. 8 bit is not always that bad

Ineresting that you got more replies in the RESOLVE forum than you did in the CINEMATOGRAPHY forum for what is, I would think, a cinematography issue.

Any time matching B-camera footage has come up, outside of minor issues around codec differences, the real challenge has been optics - which is a function of speed, and I mean the relationship of MTF to aperture.

If you can choose a body that will accept similar lenses, that might be an avenue to investigate first. If you're trying to match a multi-camera shoot for example, around a dinner party, unless the intent is to simulate different POVs with mismatched looks, then --- really-- they should all be the same. Even then, if all the operators are not on the same page with T-stop, you are going to have depth of field (among other) issues that no amount of grading will overcome. Noise, gamma/contrast profile on the exposure curve, chromatic flare emphasis...


jPo, CSI

JP, I will definitely be using similar lenses for 2-camera shots - I have several Canon EF zooms of different focal range which I can mount on both my cameras with Metabones Speed Booster adapters.

Thanks,

Piotr

My advice would be to reach out to the Sony camera user forums out there and find somebody else in your area from whom you could rent, beg, or borrow another FS7.

Any way you go, make sure you shoot color charts during the shoot to aid in matching. And also make sure the other camera shoots the exact same resolution, sizing, color temperature, and color/gamma space. Too often, I've had clients bring me B-camera footage at a wildly different size and colorspace than the A-camera footage, making matching problematic.

I had a memorable situation on a reality show some years back where one camera was a Red MX, one was a Sony F5, and one was a Canon 5D. Each one had different color temperatures and resolutions. The problem for me is that the Canon looked bad enough that I had to degrade the other two cameras in order to match it. In a mis-matched A&B camera situation, you'll always be limited by the quality of the lesser camera. If they're identical, then as long as they're set up exactly the same, there's no issues.

Hmm... Marc, I'd rather own the B-camera than hire one for each project.

Also, I guess I need some explanation to you guys. I am a one-man band right now, as - after the unsuccessful series of surgeries on my neck spine - I'm partially physically disabled and so my shooting gigs are so to speak "low profile", in that I'm unable to DP the project and operate one of several cameras like I used to do before the surgeries. Back in that time, we shot classical chamber music events; all footage would be hand over to me for grading, editing, and authoring DVDs/BDs (of which we sold quite a lot, actually). But those times are gone now unfortunately; I'm still active as a freelance lonely shooter and colorist/editor. I also managed to sell most of my rigs (including the EX1 camera), as I'm now unable to wrangle all this on set - and I replaced all this stuff with a complete UHD equipment (wanted it to be as future-proof as only possible, because at my age and health condition I realize this might as well prove to be the last set of rig I'll ever be able to afford and use in my lifetime

After rehabilitating a bit from my surgeries, I've only been shooting just about everything I found beautiful and interesting enough - and while still learning Resolve, I've been "producing" shorts and features films for my own use. But as a classical music lover, I'm entertaining the idea of returning to live chamber music concerts coverage - and to nake my movies less static, buy a B-cam so that I'd shoot soloists close-ups and just additional angles of the ensemble. But with my spine and arms still terribly weak, I am limited to walking around in search for interesting "beauty shots" only using a small, lighweight and unobtrusive camera - hence the idea of the B-cam being limited to something like those little Sony stills cameras (capable of 4K as well as S-log/S-gamut which - assuming the same color science as my FS7 - should be the best for intercutting with the latter in my 2-camera movies).

So really, it will either be the Sony A6500 (or perhaps the A7S ii, which is a full-frame little champ of low-light) - or the Black Magic Production 4K camera (because of its 10 bit capabilities).BTW I find it very symptomatic and telling a lot that - even on the BMD's own Forum - not a single person advised to go with the latter so far... Also I must admit the Sony DSLRs have this additional appeal of being capable stills cameras as well!

So I will modify slightly my original alternatives, and ask you guys which of the following two you would advise, considering all about my non-typical limitations and preferences:

- the Sony A6500 (with its APS-C sensor size identical to the FS7's; it's cheap plus I wouldn't need to invest in another Metabones Speed Booster adapter for using one of my Canon EF zooms and primes as I already have one for my FS7 - nevertheless, in order to use Canon glass on both cameras, I'd probably need to buy the second adapter in the future, anyway - but with less initial price it would still be relatively cheap)

- the Sony A7S ii (with full-frame sensor; it's twice as expensive as the A6500, but it could work perfectly with my FS7 kit lens - the Sony 28-135mm cinematic zoom; for the same Canon EF looks on both my cameras, I could buy the cheaper, non-Speed Booster, regular EF->E mount adapter; as all my lenses are only F4.0 this camera might be more appropriate than the A6500 - as with FF sensor with "only" 12 megs of large photosites, it really is the low-light champion). But - apart from being quite expensive - do you think inter-cutting its FF image with S35mm from the FS7 would be appropriate?

So - as you can see - with all those pros and cons the choice is not an easy one... For that reason, I'm still counting on more advise and comments from you guys; thanks in advance (and sorry for the lenghty post ).

Piotr

of course it's horses for courses, but i'm with marc on this one - if you want 'perfect' matching you really need to have matching cameras / glass. when i have a 'serious' talking head to do i borrow a friends ex1 and have no problems matching it with mine - as long as i remember all the variables; profile settings, etc.,

for everything else when i need a b-roll i'm using a nex5 with some of my nikon glass - it's not perfect by any means, but i've never had a complaint i'm toying with a 6300, but from what i've gathered (net, friends, etc.,) they don't seem to think it's THAT much of a step above the 5.

i have a friend shooting on the bm pocket camera and he loves it, the stuff i've seen from it is VERY good, but i hesitate simply because the necessary the cost of the camera and necessary peripherals to make it work for my situation could quickly add up tp the cost of say a sony pmw300.

i can sympathise with your predicament somewhat - i'm hitting 70 and sometimes i'm really feeling it but this looks very tempting:

https://www.videocraft.com.au/ikan-ds1-beholder-gimbal-for-dslrs

You can also consider A7s or A7s II, both insane in low light, full frame, and compact body. 8 bit is not always that bad

Frankly, this is exactly what's most tempting to me now, after I pretty much gave up on the BM Production 4K camera and decided to go for the Sony Alpha. I'm really struggling with the decision whether to stay with the APS-C A6500, or take the plunge and buy the twice as expensive, full-frame, low-light champion A7S ii...

Any time matching B-camera footage has come up, outside of minor issues around codec differences, the real challenge has been optics - which is a function of speed, and I mean the relationship of MTF to aperture.

If you can choose a body that will accept similar lenses, that might be an avenue to investigate first. If you're trying to match a multi-camera shoot for example, around a dinner party, unless the intent is to simulate different POVs with mismatched looks, then --- really-- they should all be the same.

And this is exactly the main reason for my difficulties in making up my mind between the 2 cameras. I would really appreciate advise from the more experienced pros on this Forum - and a prompt advise, too, as being a rather impatient person I'd love to buy one of them asap But please tell me which is the more important consideration for getting seamless inter-cutting between my S35mm FS7, and one of those Alphas:

- in the case of A7S ii, will the different sensor sizes (S35 vs. FF) be visible and distracting even if I use similar lenses (Canon EF - with the Speed Booster Metabones on the FS7, and just the "neutral" Mark IV adapter on the A7S ii)? My main reason for considering the FF A7S is certainly its low light performance - but also the best possible control over DOF, even with just F4.0 lenses I have; but will these advantages outweigh differing sensor size influence on the picture characteristics? I don't have enough experience to answer this question myself, so please advise!

- in the case of A6500, to use the same kind of Canon lenses I'd need to use the Speed Booster version of Metabones adapter on both my cameras (FS7 and A6500). I'd then have as similar "optical characteristics" of the two as only possible, with the similar sensor sizes and the same glass - but I'd lose the low-light capabilities of the A7s ii, and ability to catch those "beauty shots" with super-shallow DOF that only FF sensor camera can provide, which I could drop here and there in my 2-camera movies. Again - please advise about which advantages would prevail as I lack experience to kow that before I actually try...

Thanks in advance for your invaluable input, guys!

Piotr

Dear Fellow Users,

There's been some progress in my slow & painful decision making process: the only 2 candidates for my B-camera now are the A7Sii and A7Rii. Let me present my reasoning here, and once again ask you for advise...

OK, so the main pros for the A7Rii are:

- phase-detection AF
- non-compromised stills camera
- ability to use both FF (my SELP 28-135mm F4.0 will finally get the use it's been designed for, albeit only in good light due to low sensitivity/high noise in this mode)...
- ... and in crop (APS-C) mode (my Canon glass with the extra stop from Speed Booster can be used in lower-light situations)

The main advantage of the A7Sii is of course its almost noctovisor sensitivity, with the super-large pixels (just 12MP on an FF sensor)... Both cameras sensitivity and noise level are presented in this picture (note that the A7Sii does NOT offer APS-C mode):

A7Rii vs A7s ii.JPG (44.31 KiB) Viewed 15679 times

So with the A7Rii, I'm hoping the extra stop my F4.0 Canon lenses will get from Speed Booster in APS-C mode will make the middle row (A7Rii in crop) comparable to the upper row (same lenses with a non-boosting adapter (i.e. only F4.0) on A7Sii).

Now - my question to you guys is:

- Will I be disappointed with video from A7Rii, and to avoid it - should I be getting the A7Sii instead? Or, does my reasoning above make sense?

Piotr

Hmmm...I would go for 7SII if it's bought with video in mind.
Or wait for GH5, but I don't like Panasonic look.

I own both the A7S (the sensor stayed the same) and the A7R II. If you are looking for a very good photographic camera, which is only about 1 1/4 stops slower than the A7S, go for it. But be aware that it has quite strong RS in it's APS-C mode, which has the better video quality in all other aspects vs full frame.

If you want a camera for very low light and want to use it with a Speedbooster, get the older A7S, since it does very well in APS-C. While not really full UHD, it delivers an excellent picture beyond HD via HDMI, and it has the lowest RS of the bunch. Both the newer A7S II (which doesn't offer that mode any more) and the A7R II have massive RS.

Plus, if you want to grade your footage, get an external recorder.

Hi Uli,

Thanks for the answer. Two lame questions, if you don't mind:

- what exactly does "RS" stand for?
- Why is external recording that important if I want to grade the footage? I realize that using Shogun for instance, I could record to much higher quality DNxHR HQX 12-bit 4:2:2 files - but with HDMI out of those A7 cameras only being 8-bit, 4:2:2 - how will I gain anything more that better chroma subsampling (it's only 4:2:0 when recording internally)? I guess the missing bit depth will just be padded with meaningless bits, no? Please elaborate!

Thanks,

Piotr

PS. Just downloaded a number of clips straight from the A7Sii and A7Rii cameras, and tried to grade them in Resolve; here are a couple of my initial observations:

- both A7Sii in Slog-2 or Slog-3 AND A7Rii in Slog-2 are terribly noisy, so using NR is indispensable. This closes the gap between the lower-noise A7Sii and less clean A7Rii - at least when shooting Log

- applying TNR to the XAVC-S footage introduces a strange artifact I never saw with my FS7, XAVC-I footage before: for some reason, the lower right corner of the picture gets torn (it fluctuates spatially, and scopes show accompanying levels fluctuations). Is it a known phenomenon in Resolve NR, and how to avoid it? Perhaps this is what could behave better if it was externally recorded DNxHR footage?

RS stands for rolling shutter.

Yes, using S-log with these cameras is tricky, it was not really made for 8 bit. You'll need to overexpose by 1-2 stops and I'd only use it for very contrasty scenes anyway. Better use one of the "Cine" profiles, I use Cine 4 quite often.

Better chroma subsampling and less compression helps with grading, but the 8 bit limitation means you'll need to get much closer to the intended look right in camera than with higher bit depth.

These are quite capable photographic devices but by no means professional video cameras.

Guys - I was already decided to buy the Sony A7Rii camera as a B-cam for my FS7, when Panasonic published the specs of the GH5 (coming in March). On paper, it looks awesome - 10bit 4:2:2 (with up to 30p on the SD cards and 50/60p on an external recorder); unlimited recording time, future firmware upgrades including "6K" for anamorphic lenses, V-log and HDR, to name a few... BUT: it still is just a 4/3 sensor camera (even though the GH5 will NOT crop it further in 4K video mode like the GH4 does).

So now I'm back at the starting point of my painful decision-making process :

A7Rii advantages over GH5: Full Frame and/or S35mm video recording flexibility; Sony colorimetry (important for cutting with my current FS7), great stills camera with a 42 Mp, FF sensor

GH5 advantages over A7Rii: everything else (with 10bit 4:2:2, 400 Mbps codec being the most important one)

Please tell me: from the viewpoint of grading both in my 2-camera projects in Resolve, are common Sony color science of the FS7 and A7Rii and flexibility of FF/S35mm frame prevailing over 10-bit codec of the GH5? I'm grading for HDR, mind you...

Piotr

I've been casting around the web trying to find an article from a month or so ago that discussed the FS7; EI and SLog3, that I got the impression was suggesting that Sony had fudged the green/blue filter wavelengths to improve signal-to-noise. In my opinion this strategy is similar to something that Fuji did with its "fluorescent" stock about 15 years ago that made it fine to work with on its own but somewhat difficult to match into a conventional tungsten/daylight because its green-producing emulsion was wavelength-notched. It was also noteworthy that their print-ads of that era featured imagery that was almost monochromatic. And then there was that adventure with Eastman PrimeTime.

To be honest, I don't even like mixing lenses on the same body.

No matter what you do, you are going to have to develop some talent and strategy for negotiating the necessary compromise.

jPo, CSI

I second that, Sony has quite 'special' colorimetry on such cameras.
All the Sonys I tested for video overreact to specific shades of blue (like in some LEDs) and not only make them too strong, but shift them to cyan.
Found this in the F3, the FS7 and all Alphas (the F5 is better, but not free of it). It won't be easy to match some other manufacturer's camera to this behavior if any wavelength in that range is present in your shots.

So, you think the common color science & frame sizes between the FS7 and A7Rii will be more important for my 2-camera HDR grading that the 10-bit color depth of GH5 clips (vs. just 8bit from the A7Rii) - is that right? Thanks

Piotr

I'm in a similar situation right now.
But I never liked the small Sony's that much.

I also have the Fuji X-T2 on my list, too.
It has a great DR in F-Log, which unfortunately is only available via external recording until today. This might change though.
RS is also much better and I like the color science.

But it's still only 8bit, no NDs, no XLR.
Headphone jack only with additional battery grip...

I checked some ungraded footage in Resolve and liked it though.
I think this will be my next B-Cam.

the common color science & frame sizes between the FS7 and A7Rii will be more important for my 2-camera HDR grading that the 10-bit color depth of GH5 clips (vs. just 8bit from the A7Rii)

Pretty much.

Would you prefer the wrong colors described with more precision or the right colors not quite as finely sampled?

Aside from all the optic DoF, MTF, flare, vignette, aberration, and zonal differences.

jPo, CSI

I've had to match A7SII with FS7 recently and it was tricky but doable... except for when they DOP decided to switch gamma curve on the A7S half way through

I've also had to match Blackmagic Cinema with FS7 and I didn't enjoy that very much at all. The Blackmagic has a better image overall I'd say, but it's quite a different look. I didn't have charts or even consistently white balanced footage though, so my experience was rather unscientific.

So, you think the common color science & frame sizes between the FS7 and A7Rii will be more important for my 2-camera HDR grading that the 10-bit color depth of GH5 clips (vs. just 8bit from the A7Rii) - is that right? Thanks

Piotr

"The GH5’s main focus is 4K video recording, and this is supported by a wealth of functionality. Once again we get DCI 4K (3840 x 2160 pixels) and UHD 4K recording 4K DCI (4096 x 2160 pixels), although the big news is that it can record 4:2:2 10-bit 4K video internally at 30p, and 8-bit 4:2:0 footage when recording at 50/60p.

Forthcoming firmware updates, meanwhile, will also add Full HD 4:2:2 10-bit recording, as well as 4K 4:2:2 10-bit All-Intra recording at 400Mbps, in 30p, 25p and 24p options among other niceties."

First samples seams to confirm this.

10bit 50/60p may never happen on internal recording. HDMI preview for 50/60p is also seams to be 8bit only.

10bit 50/60p may never happen on internal recording. HDMI preview for 50/60p is also seams to be 8bit only.

Even if 400 Mbps codec (10bit 422 4K@60p), requiring faster SD cards than available today, never actually happens - I already have Shogun Inferno.

As to the other part - negative, Andrew. I'm previewing UHD@50p in 10bit on every day basis.

So, my real doubts only relate to the dilemma: same optics/sensor size with FS7 & A7 but in 8bit only from the latter, or different sensors (Super35mm vs. M 4/3) but 10bit from both cameras (in the case of GH5). I dare say than even with totally different color science between Sony and Panny, it will be much easier to match GH5 picture thanks to it being 10-bit. I did try to color match my FS7 with A7Sii and A7Rii sample clips (straight from camera), and my impressions were not optimistic at all for 2 reasons:

- the A7 picture is amazingly sharp, but large single color areas like the blue sky are awfully noisy and banding. Even the "low light king", the A7Sii, produces "busy pixels" - and that's in full sunshine! None of this clips could be of any use without serious NR, which kills the main picture virtue: the sharpness and resolution I mentioned

- when I tried to match those clips' colors to my FS7, the A7 picture fell apart very quickly due to only being 8bit.

So I made my decision: have bought the Shogun Inferno and the XDCA-FS7 extension adapter (required to record 50p from FS7's SDI-RAW, as HDMI out is 10bit 422 only up to 30p; Sony cramped it to just 8bit 4:2:0 with higher fps). I have time till March/April when the GH5 is due; if Sony announces A7Siii or A7Riii (or whatever they call it) with 10bit 422 at least externally, I will wait even longer to get full frame/S35mm; if not - I'm decided to go with the GH5...

Piotr

Given their mistakes with V-Log in the GH4, I doubt that Panasonic will be doing much better reading noise and banding.
But the GH5 will break the "ban" on 422 10 bit in this class, I expect others to come out with similar features from now on.

Frankly, I also hope Sony might come up with the A7R/S iii or A9, or whatever it's called capable of 60P 10-bit 422 much sooner now...

Piotr

I don't like Panasonic look- always very videoish. Their V-log seams to be also somehow strange.

A7s breaks quickly? Hmm... I have RX100 MK3 and it does allow for some adjustments (if recorded properly).
Tere is no magic. Want a decent source you need to pay at leas some money

A7s breaks quickly? Hmm...

Andrew - yes, there has been only so much I could do to the A7 picture without loosing color "density" (if this is a right word to describe what I mean; there's not enough "meat" in color information). Of course a work-around would be to work more on the FS7 picture in order to make the two match - but this denies the advantage of having the best camera as the main one... Also interesting (and discouraging towards the A7) was the fact that for whatever reason, after applying quite a strong NR (which this camera really needs, even the A7Sii as I mentioned earlier) - inevitably the picture became unusable due to the strange tearing in the lower right corner.

I have no idea whether the post-NR tearing is an 8-bit picture phenomenon, or some Resolve bug in the way it treats the A7 footage (can anyone from BMD Support comment on this?) - but frankly, this is unacceptable and has been my main reason for starting to look at the GH5. Of course, as I also sated before - should Sony wake up and announce their new A7 model with 10-bit 422 (at least externally) soon enough - I'm ready to wait for it even longer than I'd need for the GH5, as Full Frame and APS-C crop 4K recording facility that the A7Rii now has is something I'd miss the most with the GH5. Not to mention that by keeping all my rig Sony, I'd be in a much better position as far as re-using my current Sony and Canon lenses, adapters, etc. goes...

Piotr

I have read reports and seen footage in SLog3 from the A7sI/II. Something strange happens to the shadows here definitely.

Most people say use only SLog2 and try to expose as far right as possible.

I often use my old trusty FS100 without any Log as a B-roll and have to say, I'm having no trouble.
SLog and 8bit 4:2:0 will give you headaches in many circumstances.

Sometimes it's better to loose one or two stops but have better overall rendition of the scene, especially with those low bandwidth codecs.

Can you post or PM an example of the tearing you get with A7 and Neatvideo? I'd like to get to the bottom of this.

I second that you should never use Slog3 with an 8 bit camera. I'd even avoid Slog2 if the scene contrast doesn't need it desperately. Try to get as close as possible to the intended look with one of the Cine profiles. Yes, you'll need to treat an A7x camera more like a broadcast video camera than like a RAW camera, Slog is more like a marketing feature than really useful. It can shine with a good profile, but you'll need to dig deep into the combinations.

BTW, the FS100 can be found cheap on the 2nd hand market and is not that bad…

Baking up this old thread of mine, as the GH5 has been out for several weeks now so I guess some of you Resolve users have some experience with grading GH5 V-log footage already....

I'm still debating whether I should take the GH5 route (mainly for its 4K@50p, 10bit 4:2:2 capabilities), or Sony's A7 (R or S) ii. I was hoping the long awaited A9 would bring everything I like in the Sony cams (Full Frame, same color space as my FS7, ability to share lenses and other hardware) AND what's so tempting in the GH5 (10bit 422 mainly) - alas the A9 turns out to be all but video-centric

But with A9 arrival, both A7Sii and A7Rii prices dropped, so I'm again trying to make up my mind:

- A7Rii would be fine as a stills camera; my FF native E-mount 28-135mm lens would get a new life with it, apart from FF it can also record 4K video in S35 crop mode so my Canon zooms could work with Metabones Speed Booster I already have; but: even recording externally with my Shogun Inferno, I'd only be getting 8bit 4:2:2. And in the case of A7Rii, the S-log is limited to S-Log2 only - while for HDR which I'm routinely grading for it's S-log3 which is most beneficial - meaning that if I went the Sony route, it'd have to be A7Sii which does offer S-log3 as well (but I couldn't use my Canon glass Speed-Boosted as A7Sii only records 4K in FF mode, plus it's not so great for stills)

- GH5 would require purchase of some native glass and a new Speed Booster for using my Canon glass, so it's really a cheaper alternative - but it offers 4K@50p and above all, 10bit 4:2:2 color!

So please advise, those of you who have already graded GH5 footage: is V-log from this marvelous camera easily matched with Sony's S-log3? Any other suggestions re: my dilemma? I'm all ears, TIA

Piotr

I still don't like look of Panasonic V-log.

If what you do mostly is doing indoor recordings of classical music there should be less of a need for log footage.

I think you would get the best results with excellent lighting and matching exposure and white balance for all cameras. With that you could record straight 10 bit Rec709 with a proper knee (if even necessary) and you would need only minimum correction in post.

Cary - I do those concerts mostly, but not exclusively.

Also, even with the concerts, I learnt to grade for HDR - for all those many specular highlights on the instruments, or for exposing dark audience properly without blowing out the brightly lit orchestra...

So, I do need Log - believe me

Piotr

I still don't like look of Panasonic V-log.

Andrew, could you elaborate, please?

I found a downloadable clip straight from GH5, recorded with V-log, and tried it in Resolve using ACEScct - as the Input Transform I picked "Panasonic V35" (it's the only Panasonic-related entry on Resolve list), and with Rec.2020 as the output transform I got a very nice picture. Of course, this isn't enough to judge how it would match S-log3, as I'd need to have an S-log3 clip shot in the exact same location - but really, there is nothing about the GH5 normalized look that I don't like... And what I like very much are skin tones - natural, more brownish than pink-magenta tinted like with Sony. Question is: would I be able to match Sony colors (particularly skin tones) to GH5?!!

And as to GH5 being 10 bit vs. A7S/R ii being only 8bit:

banding A7Sii vs GH5.jpg (251.17 KiB) Viewed 14877 times

So, please tell me what is there to not like - perhaps I'm just missing it? Also, is the "Panasonic V35" IDT the right one for GH5's flavor of V-log, or is a specific transform needed? TIA

Piotr

...and with Rec.2020 as the output transform I got a very nice picture.

Piotr, what monitor are you using to view Rec 2020?

It's all in my sig, Cary.

Piotr

It's all in my sig, Cary.

Ah, I should have seen that!

We did a recent TV natural history hour with the GH4 (no 5 at the time) as B camera to the FS7, using both internal 4k and 10-bit Shogun recording, and we were happy with the way we were able to grade the clips to work fine with the FS7. We were not using the Panasonic log, but were using log with the Sony. We were also using a lot of footage from a DJI Phantom 3, which shot a pretty horrible 4k in my opinion, which we had to work harder on, so perhaps it was just so much easier getting the Panasonic clips to match that we didn't notice things we should have. But the GH4 was great, and worked hard without complaint. Only budget at this time keeps us from buying a 5.

Good luck!

And I can assure you that the banding comparison example I posted looks even more obvious on my 10-bit display; the screen-grab comes from one of those many Yuotube 8-bit videos comparing GH5 with AS7ii (not too mention it's just a JPG)...

My decision problem is killing me really; I would just hold even longer and wait for a next Sony announcement after the A9 turned out to not solve my dilemma - but I've a gut feeling they might have chosen to stick with 30p and 8 bit max at the video side for their stills come just in order to not cannibalize their own camcorder models (like the successful FS5, which is only 8 bit)... If this is the case, my wait would be long and futile!

Also, testing A7R/S ii footage in Resolve I've found that it's relatively easy to get rid of this sort of color banding by using NR, so - even if this would mean an extra time consuming step in grading each and every clip from one of those cameras - it's ultimately not the 8-bit banding problem that really prevents me from giving up on the GH5 and going with Sony. If someone with experience in grading both told me the DR and V-log quality from the GH5 is noticeably inferior to those of the A7Rii, I'd cut this Gordian knot and settle with the Sony. It would be cheaper, too - as all I need would be this Full Frame camera body as it could share all my lenses, adapters etc. I already have in my FS7 kit...

Pleeeease help

Piotr

And I can assure you that the banding comparison example I posted looks even more obvious on my 10-bit display; the screen-grab comes from one of those many Yuotube 8-bit videos comparing GH5 with AS7ii (not too mention it's just a JPG)...

There is an anti-banding plug-in provided with the Sapphire OFX suite, and that might help minimize the problem. But beyond that, I'm afraid you're trying to put lipstick on a pig: it's hard to save really bad footage, to a point. You can always make it better, but you can't always make it good.

Sure Marc; I need a highly mobile B-cam for my main camera, the FS7. I also would like to have a nice stills cam as an added bonus. For those purposes, I believe both the new GH5 and the (older, but proven) A7Rii provide enough IQ; my problem is just which one is the better...

Piotr

I would go with GH5 due to its overall features list and usability (even if I somehow don't like GH5 look in most cases).
There is test on youtube (I think) showing that A7sII has more dynamic range than GH5. For you the best would be Sony, but with 10bit recording.

I still don't like look of Panasonic V-log.

Andrew, could you elaborate, please?

Don't know- just in most cases it's somehow like video. Maybe a matter of grading.
I like this GH5 video though:

Look at elephant shot at 44 sec in- these highlights is what I don't like in GH5 look

Yeah... But look at the sky (02:24); with 8bit it would be banding like hell (only using NR and/or adding some grain being a remedy). And I hate "artistic decisions" being imposed on my grading by technical limitations. EDIT: just occurred to me that it's not banding in spite of being a YT movie (certainly not a 10bit pipeline)... But that's probably only thanks to the compression, acting as sorta dithering?

On the other hand - the A7Rii is FF, with 42MP makes a great stills camera, plus after the latest price reduction, and considering I'd only need the body as lenses and adapters can be shared with my FS7 - it'd be cheaper.

I've always been no good at decision making, but this dilemma is the most difficult one I've had for quite a long time

Piotr

For you the best would be Sony, but with 10bit recording.

Amen. Perhaps I should just wait for A7S(R) iii, or whatever they will call it?

This is the look which I like. Some shots are really nice.

Look at elephant shot at 44 sec in- these highlights is what I don't like in GH5 look

True, but that may be due to how it was post processed.

It's a great video with stunning subject material but I found the color having a 'luttish' feel to it.

By the way, YouTube does use 10 bit for its HDR videos.

By the way, YouTube does use 10 bit for its HDR videos.

Even if it did with this movie, I watched it on my 8bit computer monitor, so definitely not the entire pipeline was 10bit.

Piotr

Look at elephant shot at 44 sec in- these highlights is what I don't like in GH5 look

True, but that may be due to how it was post processed.

It's a great video with stunning subject material but I found the color having a 'luttish' feel to it.

By the way, YouTube does use 10 bit for its HDR videos.

It's done with LUTs- many of them. Author mentioned it in the comments.