Dave, best info I could find that might address your question specifically was Slavik's post in the Lenses for FS5 thread, quote below. Hope this helps!

Just got back from shooting docu with the FS5 for a couple days. The 24-105/Speedbooster was a pleasure to use and stayed on the camera for the majority of the time. We also used the Canon 70-200 f4 IS, the Tokina 11-16, Canon 35mm f2 IS, and even tried the Sigma 18-35 (which works but only at about 25mm and up). The Speedbooster worked flawlessly and the extra stop of light on the lenses was very useful.

The Sony kit lens is definitely lighter and maybe that is a preference for handheld-only shooters, but I find the combination of electronic zoom and electronic manual focus makes the lens frustrating to use - just takes the joy out of shooting. Especially for any kind of moving subject. The lens is always two steps behind what you want it to do. It is cheaper than the 24-105/Speedbooster combo, but it just feels like shooting with a giant point and shoot camera.

The one advantage of the kit lens is the Clear Image digital zoom kicks in seamlessly at the long end of the lens. On the 24-105 you can kick in the digital zoom anytime throughout the zoom range, and if you're not careful you'll forget it's on (the icon disappears from the screen after a few seconds).

Anyway, if you've got a 24-105 lying around already, I would skip the kit lens in a heartbeat and get the Speedbooster.

Cheers -

Also, read his 2nd Dec article on the Newsshooter website (I won't directly link it here).

But despite all of the above, I would still ALSO buy the kit lens (or at least a second adapter of some sort, maybe a cheap Commlite one?) just so I always had some kind of backup in the field...I think you might not get IS working with the Commlite one though, as per post #94 from Jody in this thread.

Just seen this FS5 video - has some lovely shots.

http://youtu.be/a7uPJiac3i4

Cheers Andy. I wonder how the adapter will stand up to the test of time. I think you're right to have a backup ... just in case.

I'm curious - are there no native E mount zoom lenses besides the terrible to use (I think) Sony lenses?

If not, and adapters are the only choice, I'd go with a Speedbooster rather than the standard Metabones. The booster I have for my Pocket Cameras is reliable compared to the EF-MFT I bought with the LS300.

The only reason I've become wary of it is because of my less-than-stellar experience with the new one, and the total lack of support from Metabones..

My mistake was not testing mine immediately (my EF lenses were on loan to a friend who had them in Australia at the time) and consequently, since 30 days had lapsed, B&H refused an exchange or refund. Maybe I just got a bad one (although it seems there are a lot of bad ones out there).

But I've not heard any complaints about the Speedbooster... Maybe that branch of Metabones has their s__t together. My guess is that if you get the Speedbooster, and work the Hell out of it the day you receive it, the probability is that it will continue to function correctly

I'm curious - are there no native E mount zoom lenses besides the terrible to use (I think) Sony lenses?


Here is a list of E-mount lenses:

'E' mount lens chart (http://kurtmunger.com/nex_lens_chartid324.html)

Thanks Olof - so, after perusing that list it seems that the Sony FE 28-135mm F/4 OSS G PZ is probably the best bet for all purpose shooting. It's big, kinda slow, and not very wide, but it's probably the closest native E mount zoom to the popular Canon 24-105, which is a similar.

It's also $2,500, which is okay if you subscribe to the "investing in glass is future proof" theory - a theory I no longer believe as I stare around my office at a pile of MFT lenses that are all dressed up with no place to go.

Depends on what you shoot, but I'm a big fan of wide shots, and 28mm on a crop sensor like the FS5 is a 45mm equivalent. Pretty tight for a wide shot.

I couldn't make it work as my main lens.

The way the focus works on Sony E mounts is a real bummer, the 50 and 35 1.8 are super lightweight, razor sharp, the way the focus ring feels is really nice... with the FS5's digital zoom would be really useful... but that focus!, turn the ring to the right 20mm and the focus point changes maybe 4 feet then move it back to the left the same 20mm and the focus point might be 40 feet off. Its sad because not only does it seem like it could be fixed (its all electronic) but it could actually be a really nice improvement over other SLR lenses by programing a nice long focus throw. I would buy a few... right now, I kept the 50 but I would re-buy the 35 and add the 18-105, 10-18

Sony makes some really odd choices especially when it comes to accessories... like they don't want to take my money or something. Why remove the tabs on the FS5 LCD? should have kept them and charged me $200 for a decent loupe, why make the cable built in to the LCD? I know I will break it and its either to long or to short... why not charge me $50 an extra cable? external monitors, iPhone screens, going for $1000 and the Gratical for $2500... you'd think SONY could make some pretty slick screens if they wanted and even offer some neat tricks with the proprietary connection (focus magnification from the grip) I really love this little camera and think thats why these little things feel more annoying than they did with my other cameras

Its sad because not only does it seem like it could be fixed (its all electronic) but it could actually be a really nice improvement over other SLR lenses by programing a nice long focus throw
This is what I've always thought. Couldn't this huge flaw be fixed with a firmware update and then be a huge selling point?

Silly question:
where can I download 2 (short) 10 bit 4:2:2 HD clips from the FS5?
I'd like to compare the performance of my hardware and compare the codec while pushing it in post.

(It may be 2 20 second shots of some street: doesn't need to be fancy at all.
It may be the dullest thing ever :-p )

Just a further quick update on my FS5/Metabones/Canon lenses post from 18th Dec (Post #96).

I have now got the Canon 10-22mm lens working as per all the other Canon lenses I tested, i.e. Iris control via the little side thumbwheel and/or controls on the handgrip in Direct and showing the Wide-Tele indicator, (Manual) focus distance etc. on the LCD. However, Push Auto Iris still does not work with this lens - you get the error message. Not sure... but I suspect I might have accidentally knocked the sliding Hold switch to the Hold position when testing with that particular lens the other day - it needs to be in the OFF position to enable the F stop adjustment.

However, and very importantly, this seems a bit flakey as sometimes I can adjust Iris and sometimes not - it's almost as if the lens goes to sleep...I'm investigating.

Andy - what you're describing is similar to what I'm experiencing with the EF-MFT Metabones on the LS300 - only my iris control works less than 50% of the time, and will stop working for no apparent reason, which really makes it useless for anything but play.

It's weird, because on the Pocket Camera with the Metabones Speedbooster everything works - (well, occasionally you do have to remount the lens to restore contact, but that's relatively rare) - including IS. The 17-55 on that camera becomes the equivalent of an f1.6 13-30 on the S16 sensor, and the IS makes the fumbly little Pocket a great cruiser.

I wonder why, if that technology is working with the Speedbooster on the cheap little Pocket, it doesn't with the standard "smart" adapter on the more sophisticated cameras.

Mike, as I said, 28 certainly isn't quite wide enough - although I'm not a big fan of wide-wide lenses, I do have a 12 that I do use on the LS300 occasionally (although I usually ramp the VSM up to 80%).

But, the point I was alluding to is why I'm really on the fence about this camera... It's mainly because of the limited lens choices. I don't care much for auto-anything, and have been really turned off by "smart" adapters, so, other than primes, that doesn't leave much.

Despite being a JVC (which admittedly has a reputation for QC issues) the LS300 is the perfect camera for my type of work (documentaries, often handheld) because of it's ability to use the quite good Olympus and Lumix zooms, as well as native and dumb adapted MFT primes. And for those interested, the AF on both the 12-40 Olympus and 35-100 Lumix work quite well, which can be a lifesaver - even for an old schooler like me when focusing wide with the Olympus in 4K.

I pre-ordered the FS5 before buying the LS300, and intended to switch to the Sony as soon as the JVC paid for itself - which it did in about three weeks! But Sony really has to do something about the amateurish functional usability of their lenses - which might be okay for the ubiquitous soccer-mom, but have no business on a camera designed for professional use... Or at least they could cave in and give a nod to Canon by making their own EF-E adapter.

Just a further quick update on my FS5/Metabones/Canon lenses post from 18th Dec (Post #96).

I have now got the Canon 10-22mm lens working as per all the other Canon lenses I tested, i.e. Iris control via the little side thumbwheel and/or controls on the handgrip in Direct and showing the Wide-Tele indicator, (Manual) focus distance etc. on the LCD. However, Push Auto Iris still does not work with this lens - you get the error message. Not sure... but I suspect I might have accidentally knocked the sliding Hold switch to the Hold position when testing with that particular lens the other day - it needs to be in the OFF position to enable the F stop adjustment.

However, and very importantly, this seems a bit flakey as sometimes I can adjust Iris and sometimes not - it's almost as if the lens goes to sleep...I'm investigating.

Just a quick update on this. So far it has worked fine every time I've tried that (and all my other) lenses - which isn't very often as I've been busy (with family/holiday stuff). So I've been unable to recreate the problem with the Canon 10-22mm and the Metabones IV - let's hope it stays that way!

On another point, I'm sure the battery I left on my FS5 had about 30% remaining when I packed it in its bag a day or so before Xmas (in this case a small, new BPU-30 rather than the BPU-60s I have loads of). Took it out of the bag this morning and the battery was completely flat. Cam was definitely switched off (unlike my old EX3 from a few years ago where the switch was so finicky that it would occasionally be left on!)

I may have remembered the remaining level wrong... but is anyone else noticing battery drain on a switched off FS5?

I just checked my (very old) BP-U60 on the FS5 and it's dead. It has been on my camera for a week or so. There is battery drain but not way as bad as on my EX3...

Anyway, it's best practice to disconnect your battery after a shoot.

Just a quick update on this. So far it has worked fine every time I've tried that (and all my other) lenses - which isn't very often as I've been busy (with family/holiday stuff). So I've been unable to recreate the problem with the Canon 10-22mm and the Metabones IV - let's hope it stays that way!

On another point, I'm sure the battery I left on my FS5 had about 30% remaining when I packed it in its bag a day or so before Xmas (in this case a small, new BPU-30 rather than the BPU-60s I have loads of). Took it out of the bag this morning and the battery was completely flat. Cam was definitely switched off (unlike my old EX3 from a few years ago where the switch was so finicky that it would occasionally be left on!)

I may have remembered the remaining level wrong... but is anyone else noticing battery drain on a switched off FS5?

I have both the FS7 and the FS5 and I definitely get battery drain on my FS7.

I'm curious what everyone's doing with the dual slots.

I'm currently only shooting on A, and swapping out when I get to the end of a card/project. But I was considering getting a big (128 or 256) SD card for slot B, and just leaving it in there - then shooting on both cards at once. The A card would be the one I would take out and edit with, and the B would just stay in the camera and act as a backup until it filled - at which time I'd either format it, or swap it out with a second big card, then go back and forth.

Thoughts?

I put my 128 in the A slot and use that most of the time.
I keep my custom camera setup on both the A and B, but the B is not reformatted nearly as often so I pretty much always have my setups. I also back up my setup to my MBP.

I can also see when I need to hand off a card at the end of a shoot, then I would dual record and sell the A or B card to the client, and still have a copy w/o any copying. Nice.

I currently have a dozen 64's and 2 128's.

I also often shoot with an Odyssey O7Q+ and then I always record that as well. It is a great directors/producer/client monitor

The camera specs (from B&H) read:
The camera has a built in Wi-Fi capabilities that enables live streaming to PCs, tablets, and smart phones. When using content Browser mobile, the user can even control the camera wirelessly
I can get my phone to control the camera, but when I do, the viewfinder is blank so you can't see what the camera's doing from the camera anymore. The way this is written, it seems like I should be able to just watch from a tablet/phone without control. Has anyone made this work?

I'm curious what everyone's doing with the dual slots.

I'm currently only shooting on A, and swapping out when I get to the end of a card/project. But I was considering getting a big (128 or 256) SD card for slot B, and just leaving it in there - then shooting on both cards at once. The A card would be the one I would take out and edit with, and the B would just stay in the camera and act as a backup until it filled - at which time I'd either format it, or swap it out with a second big card, then go back and forth.

Thoughts?

I always shoot on 2 cards simultaneously. I once had an SD card fail during an event shoot, and since then i've never shot on a single SD card. The risk of failure, while minimal, is still too high in my opinion.

+1 I have one camera that has a dual slot for sdxc cards and record to both simultaniously, with all these messages I read on this site about corrupt cards and loosing data having a second card as backup can make all the difference, there is no use of having a expensive camera if you are not able to retrieve that once in a life time moment from a bad card.

Just an update on how I'm getting on with the FS5 and Letus Helix Jr. See pictures of my set-up in posts #12 and #13 on page 1 of this thread for an idea of what it looks like (although those pics were with the Sony 18-105mm G kit lens).

Been playing around with adjusting settings with the excellent iOS Letus App on my phone for the last hour and I think I'm getting close to something that's very usable - really liking the Letus!

The set-up I'm working on at the moment is with my Metabones IV adapter and Canon 10-22mm. Just getting a bit of a kick-back sometimes with the tilt axis - so hope to be working on that tomorrow (if I get time - and also working on settings for the kit lens - and then possibly the Canon 17-55mm lens too). Anyway, once I've got this first attempt with the Canon wide angle as good as I can get I'm hoping to post all the settings on here as they might help someone with a reasonable start point to further refine to their taste.

So, I received by FS5 today. I was impressed by the build. Though the body is light, once you add lenses, a battery and a shotgun, it gets quite heavy.

I played around a bit with the clear image zoom, both with the kit lens and my own Nikon lenses with the Metabones adapter. The zoom-in function on the kit lens has a little hitch before it sequences to the clear image zoom, so the zoom is not smooth and zooming out is jerky. It can be used in a pinch, but not like a regular zoom. The light sensitivity is not substantially better at the default 1600, than my EX1r. It is ok. I can, of course crank it up. I had it to 20000 which is a lot better than I thought it would be. It is actually usable if you have to get the shot.

It reminds me a lot of the AF100, only heavier and more substantial and, of course, it does 4K, which I haven't tested out yet. Do wish it had a waveform and Vectorscope , but I do have a couple of external monitor/recorders I can use for that function, which will make it even heavier. I particularly like the focus mag function (4x and 8x). I always wished the AF100 had that function.

My newer Watson BP-60 battery does not work, but my older Sony batteries work fine as does my SWIT S-8U62 with the pigtail.

One note, I have large hands and the grip feels small to me. My fingers have to work hard to get back to the focus mag and the zoom rocker because they overshoot those buttons. Lots to learn about and get used to.

One note, I have large hands and the grip feels small to me. My fingers have to work hard to get back to the focus mag and the zoom rocker because they overshoot those buttons. Lots to learn about and get used to.
This is odd to say, but this gets better with time. I removed (and ultimately lost) the grip for my FS-100, and never really wished for it. When I got the FS5 I was disappointed to find that my hand didn't fit the grip very well, but over a week or two I notice that it's getting more second nature, and a little less of a stretch to get to all the buttons.

Also, I like clear image zoom more now than a few weeks ago. It does start/stop with a jerk, but I'm hopeful that'll get fixed in a firmware update. (How could it not?) I use manual zoom lenses and the faux servo zoom I hope will come in handy.

Re the battery issue. Not see any issues issues with Jupio brand batteries. One of our major Sony dealers spent a fair bit of time testing these with the FS5. First few runs with them 100% full off the charger and there have been no reset back to the time menu or restrictions on formatting cards.

Re the twittering / artifact edges in 4K at 3200 ISO and above we have have been able to replicate this. Obviously Sony needs to fix this.

An interesting anomaly was discovered when we were chasing this 4K artifact problem. It concerns the Sony E PZ 18-105mm f/4 G OSS kit lens. See if any of you can replicate these symptoms.

Using the handle zoom servo zoom right in and manual focus either with the push momentary focus or manually. Now zoom back quickly to somewhere around mid zoom range and stop quickly as if you were re-framing. The lens is more often than not out of focus. Push the momentary focus button and you will see the lens ease back into focus. Interestingly quickly tap, not zoom, just tap the zoom servo rocker on the handle and the lens will quickly look like it over corrects and snaps back into focus. This is repeatable time and time again if using the handle zoom servo rocker.

Now try the same exercise using the servo control on the lens itself. A quick re-frame and it holds focus. Again this is totally repeatable and the lens maintains focus every time. We thought it might be an issue with the 18-105 kit lens. So we swapped it for another 18-105 which was on the FS700. The errant re-framing loss of focus reared its head again using the handle servo but not when using the lens servo.

We tried the handle off the FS700 just in case it was Lanc control issue on the FS5 handle. Exactly the same problems so it looks like the issue is not in the FS5's handle.

Next test step, We put the Sony FE PZ 28-135mm f/4 G OSS Lens on the FS5, No zoom re-framing focus issues at all. Next step, We put on the Sony E PZ 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 OSS servo zoom lens. Again no issues at all losing focus on re-framing.

To sum up there appears to be a software comms issue between the Sony E PZ 18-105mm f/4 G OSS lens and the FS5 body when using the zoom servo on the camera's hand grip. This obviously needs to be fixed ASAP if this is considered to be 'the' kit lens that comes with the FS5.

Incidentally it made no difference with lens compensation turned to auto or off. Normally this is set to auto. The camera has v1.10 firmware and the 18-105 has v2.0. All up to date in other words.

Love to hear anyone's experiences.

Chris Young
CYV Productions
Sydney

Some great info above.

Question, have you been able to notify Sony Support on the FS5 torn edges problem?

I'm curious to know if Sony is aware of it yet.

Thanks!

CT

Good real world testing going on here. Would it maybe be a good idea to start a thread with bug-reports & feature requests that could sometime be shared with the proper reps? Things like what Chris discovered with the 18-105mm and requests like having momentary Auto-Focus mapped to the handgrip or the ability to route individual CH1/CH2 audio to headphones for monitoring. I don't think it should be a place where people are requesting (demanding) things like 10-bit 4K 4:2:2 because it's just not reasonable. Perhaps I'll start a thread and moderate it a bit to compile the thoughts.

Really good idea Nate.

I posted this at the end of the last page, and it got lost when we switched over to a new page, so I'm posting again:

I can get my phone to control the camera, but when I do, the viewfinder is blank so you can't see what the camera's doing from the camera anymore. The way this is written, it seems like I should be able to just watch from a tablet/phone without control. Has anyone made this work?

Some great info above.

Question, have you been able to notify Sony Support on the FS5 torn edges problem?

I'm curious to know if Sony is aware of it yet.

Thanks!

CT

it's Monday here today and believe me as of today down here Sony are aware of the all the issues I and others have mentioned. The lens control issue is I would suggest is a firmware fixable thing as none of the outlined weird behaviour happens with the FS700 using the 18-105. Seeing manufacturers these days are using less dedicated ASICS and more and more FPGA's I highly doubt the problem is baked in, Let's hope this is fixed quickly as its a deal breaker on shoots where you hope the lens will maintain its focus point when it's a parfocal lens, which it is. In the meantime its like using a Canon lens where you have to refocus at each re-frame point.

Chris Young
CYV Productions
Sydney

Really good idea Nate.

+1 on that idea.

Chris Young
CYV Productions
Sydney

Over at eoshd there is also an interesting review of the camera, the owner expected a perfect camera only to find the same issues as already mentioned on this forum. One thing he mentioned though about Sony's doubtful internal quality control is also my experience, I have owned several Sony camera's in the past and some of them, like a vx2000/vx2100, fx1000 where reliable workhorses. Even my cx730 camera's have proven to be very reliable camera's. It started when I got my nex-ea50 and now my rx10 which both had weird glitches, then I also read about the Sony A7S II with the 'black hole' in the sun and now the fs5 which have problems that you might question how that ever has passed Sony's QC.

Alltough most should be fixable with a firmwareupdate the apparently underwhelming 10bit codec have people asking for higher bitrate or just the same codec implementation as on the fs7 but that might be the reason why Sony makes a difference, because if the fs5 looks the same as the fs7 then there might not be a reason to get the fs7. The same tactic Canon has been applying for years to protect sales on higher end models.

When I bought a canon xh-a1 the only difference between the xh-g1 was hd-sdi/sd-dsi out, genlock, and time code but image wise they where identical and for that difference your paid 1000 euro extra but ever since the large sensor revolution started difference in models seem to be made with codec limitations.

Hi All ~

A colleague has just flicked this through to me. More issues raising their heads on the FS5. Have yet to fully understand all the ramifications in this report. Will be downloading the footage and pixel peeping it.

Sony FS5 user reports artifact issues triggered by changing exposure, ND. Visible on HDMI output (http://www.newsshooter.com/2016/01/04/sony-fs5-user-reports-artifact-issues-visible-on-hdmi-output-and-also-triggered-by-changing-exposure-nd/)

Thoughts?

Chris Young
CYV Productions
Sydney

I traded my FS5 for an FS7 and had to swallow a $1000,- loss, not considering the price difference between the two camera's.

But I am very glad I did. I don't want a camera with 4K as an afterthought. The difference between 4K on these camera's is enormous. Not surprisingly, really, but still... The FS5 is NOT a mini FS7. You cannot expect 4K shot on a consumer card to look like 4K shot on 'pro' cards. XAVC-I vs XAVC-L in 4K (or 10 bit vs 8 bit) is a massive difference.

Another major reason is that the form factor -which at first seemed an advantage- in my experience became a disadvantage. Because after you build the camera with a lens (other than the limited use 'stock lens') such as the 24-105 with SpeedBooster, BP-U90 battery, camera mic and wireless receiver, perhaps a loupe, the camera is still small but not so well balanced and heavy. And a small, heavy package is harder to shoot handheld than a larger one. Especially if you have to hold it in front of you. And if you're going to use it shoulder mounted (by adding a rig or shoulderpad), the FS7 is so much better with the arm and loupe.

And the difference, to my surprise, is not that big, neither in weight nor size. And since I don't have a gimbal, I don't need my camera to be small for that purpose. (I still have my GH4.)

The FS5 all dressed up is not at all 'stealth' like a DSLR or GH4. It's an impressive camera and obviously not a consumer product.

But most importantly- I wanted my 4K footage to look as good as my HD footage. It became quite clear to me that the FS5 could never accomplish that.

I promised a while back to update you all on where I'm at with the FS5 and Letus Helix Jr.

At last, found a little time and I've now worked out some settings to get pretty good balance and stable flying with the FS5 on this gimbal.

There is a lot of detailed information, so rather than clutter up this thread I've put together some thoughts on a page at the 'back end' of my website. This covers, firstly the FS5 and then specifically the Letus Helix Jr. I also show some settings from the Letus iOS App (Power, P.I.D etc.) plus lots of pictures showing how I balanced the FS5 with the Sony G 18-105mm kit lens on the gimbal.

Hopefully, this is useful to someone!

SonyPXWFS5 (http://www.shootingimage.co.uk/MoreInformation/SonyPXWFS5/LetusHelixJr.html)

I'll update this website page with more info soon - but in the meantime if anyone has any questions I'll try and answer them (on here) when I can.

You cannot expect 4K shot on a consumer card to look like 4K shot on 'pro' cards. XAVC-I vs XAVC-L in 4K (or 10 bit vs 8 bit) is a massive difference.

The cards don't have any impact on the image quality, I shoot 12 bit raw onto a sandisc sdxc card, these little cards can also support high bitrates, one difference in image quality between the fs5/7 is the used codec.

The cards don't have any impact on the image quality, I shoot 12 bit raw onto a sandisc sdxc card, these little cards can also support high bitrates, one difference in image quality between the fs5/7 is the used codec.

If SD can take the bandwidth then why would Sony bother using XQD cards in FS7? Just seems like they would have sold twice as many FS7 cameras with the added $2000 in media costs

Would you care to explain how the type of card has an impact on image quality? If I had to guess I'd say the XQD cards just like the P2 cards from Panasonic are build for reliability to support, in Sony's case, the very high bitrates, not to gain massive differences in IQ like Jeroen stated. The card is only carrying the data it receives but it doesn't make the image look any better.

Would you care to explain how the type of card has an impact on image quality? If I had to guess I'd say the XQD cards just like the P2 cards from Panasonic are build for reliability, not to gain massive differences in IQ like Jeroen stated.

I can't explain it, thats why I asked. I just always thought SD couldn't handle the bandwidth of the bigger codecs and found your post interesting. Never mind really doesn't matter

I have got a 95MB/s sandisc extreme pro card that can deal with 220mbs prores and CinemaDNG RAW from the bmpcc, I just checked to see that Samsung already has cards that support 280MB/s so 3 times faster then the card I"m currently using, I"m not good in doing math but my guess would be they are fast enough to keep up with the 600mbs codecs the fs7 has. It might also be they are borderline usable which made Sony design a even faster card to make sure the camera doesn't stop recording if the card can't keep up.

My understanding was that the XQD cards are much faster than SD cards. 200 MB/s for the Lexar vs 95 MB/s for the Sandisk Extreme Pro. (which were sold to me a few weeks ago as the fastest SD cards available- I believed him...)

Anyway, you get the point. Whether it's the codec, card, bitrate or some unidentified digital mindboggle- the quality of 4K on the FS5 does not come close to what's produced by the FS7.

The fastest I know of are not the 95mbs cards but the 280mbs SanDisk 64GB Extreme PRO SDXC UHS-II cards that do 280 MB/s read and 250 MB/s write but there might be faster, dunno. I do get your point about the fs7 being better then the fs5 IQ wise since you seemed to have owned both so I am not arguing about that, I was only trying to make a point that the card itself doesn't make the image better, it only captures the data.

Noa is right of course. The card itself has no impact on image quality, it simply captures the data. Video is stored digitally; 0s and 1s. Those 0s and 1s will be captured exactly the same on a $200 professional SD card or a $10 consumer SD card (assuming both can keep up with the bitrate).

Noa is right of course. The card itself has no impact on image quality, it simply captures the data. Video is stored digitally; 0s and 1s. Those 0s and 1s will be captured exactly the same on a $200 professional SD card or a $10 consumer SD card (assuming both can keep up with the bitrate).

I read this as a discussion about bandwidth of media types not that one looks better than the other with exact the same data recorded to it.

And that's of course what I meant when I talked about 'consumer' cards vs 'pro' cards: speed or bandwidth, Ray. On another note, I can' t imagine the QXD cards are so much more expensive just because they're merely ' more robust'.

They are not that more expensive, a 64gb 280mbs sandisc card is 130 dollar and a 64gb 440mbs lexar card is 203 dollar and a sony one is 260 dollar. Given the higher supported bitrate I"d say the lexar is normal priced and for the sony one you are probably paying extra for the name as well.

Hi All ~

A colleague has just flicked this through to me. More issues raising their heads on the FS5. Have yet to fully understand all the ramifications in this report. Will be downloading the footage and pixel peeping it.

Sony FS5 user reports artifact issues triggered by changing exposure, ND. Visible on HDMI output (http://www.newsshooter.com/2016/01/04/sony-fs5-user-reports-artifact-issues-visible-on-hdmi-output-and-also-triggered-by-changing-exposure-nd/)

Thoughts?

Chris Young
CYV Productions
Sydney
This certainly doesn't look good. These noise-like artifacts are even more noticeable than any edge noise/tearing samples posted online. Even more worrisome is this happens with the use of the camera's variable ND control, a headline feature of the FS5. No longer in the realm of pixel peeing geeks, anyone who has normal eyesight can see them now.

It really has nothing to do with bit rate as a 90MB write card can handle 720Mbps, likewise a 45MB card can handle 360Mbps. As Noa said any type of card if it has the capacity and write speed will be able to handle FS7 bit rates that go up to 600Mbps.

Some time back Sony outlined why they went with XQD. They stated that the algorithm used to write the data to the XQD is much more sophisticated than that used by the SD card standard. That being so Sony claim that the likelihood of a total card corruption is far less likely. In the event of a a whole of card failure or a partial data corruption Sony claim that their own propriety data recovery software algorithm is vastly more capable of recovering the data files from XQD cards than the best of SD card recovery software available for SD cards including their own. Sony also claim that the wear leveling technique used in XQD cards is way more advanced than that laid down by the SD standard.

I've also been told by a recovery outfit who recover data from HDDs, cards and various other media that the problem of recovery from Ex-Fat SDXC cards is more complex and often less successful. The reason given for this is that in the SDHC Fat 32 file system there is a 2GB file limit, such as we see in AVCHD, and each file gets closed when that 2GB limit is reached. Whereas the XAVC format be it L or I can be written in one continuous file that on long shoots can be way in excess of 2GB. What was indicated to me was that a failure for one of these large files to close properly can make its recovery pretty difficult. Whereas the in the Fat 32 system each file is closed at its 2GB limit and generally these files can be recovered. In the worst case case you may lose up to around ten minutes in AVCD if the last file is unrecoverable should it be corrupted.

Sony's latest file recovery is available at the following URL. Nothing is guaranteed but this software is optimized for Sony cards not other brands as Sony has its own proprietary way, as do SanDisk, of writing to the cards.

Sony Global - Memory Media Portal - Memory Card File Rescue Version 3.2 (http://www.sony.net/Products/memorycard/en_as/datarescue/index.html)

More of a background on the benefits claimed by Sony for XQD technology can be found here:

Sony Global - Memory Media & External Hard Drive Portal - Sony XQD™ Memory Card (http://www.sony.net/Products/memorycard/en_us/xqd/)

A point of interest, I haven't be able to confirm if this was because one card was a Sony SDXC and the other was a SanDisk SDXC but this was the situation. An unmanned X70 was recording in simultaneous mode to both cards covering a safety wide shot of a seminar. Unfortunately its battery died. Later I put a new battery on the camera and got the info screen prompting a data base recovery. I proceeded with that and the Sony card was recovered and all the data was fine. The data base recovery attempt on the SanDisk failed. All the data on that card was lost. I didn't bother trying to recover it as I already had the recovered data on the Sony card. Question? Is the data recovery mode in Sony cameras specifically optimized for Sony cards? I'm beginning to believe it is. Since then I just keep buying Sony cards. It's probably all in the mind as I have no empirical proof but I'm feeling more secure with the Sony cards. Plus Sony can't turn around and say "Ah! But you weren't using Sony cards were you." :))

Chris Young
CYV Productions
Sydney

I read this as a discussion about bandwidth of media types not that one looks better than the other with exact the same data recorded to it.

In that case I misread. Apologies.

Moving on, I see there is a web report from someone who has spoken to Sony that the FS5 V1.2 firmware will include an option for having Auto Exposure via the Variable ND.

I speculated about this possibility in the review I posted yesterday about the FS5 and Letus Helix Jr. Could be a very useful feature - having a controlled DOF in changing light could be great for some fast moving run-n-gun situations. Some other goodies coming too - GPS being enabled, improved Zebras and a mention of the raw output etc...but release date is yet to be announced.

I won't post the source here - as its not direct from Sony - at least not yet.