Sony NEX-FS100 Camera Test

[Brian Drysdale]

Yes, you'd need a box type body around the sensor like the AF100 & F3 to hold the filter system.

[Steve Kalle]

Originally Posted by Serena Steuart

You have to accommodate more than the filter glass; it must be held and moved. You could have a filter slot, but that is less convenient than a matte-box. The body is pretty packed as it is. Seems a pointless discussion topic.

So, you are trying to say that changing filters in a mattebox is easier and more convenient that built-in NDs. That is like saying that changing between 3 primes is easier than a single zoom.

Btw, this camera not having NDs built in is an important discussion topic because quite a lot of people will not buy this camera mainly for that reason including me. Sony does this on purpose which causes people like me to buy a more expensive camera - the F3, and others to buy the only other competitor, the AF100. Hopefully, someone at Sony will see or hear all the people complaining about the lack of NDs and then build a <$10,000 camera with NDs (and HD-SDI).

The kicker to all this is some have said that the F3 has the same flange depth, and yet it has NDs.

[Piotr Wozniacki]

Originally Posted by Doug Jensen

The biggest surprise to me has been the number of customers who say they are keeping their EX1 / EX1R/ EX3 and adding an FS100 instead of replacing there other camera. In my opinion, that is a very smart move.

Well, this approach is exactly how I'd personally treat the FS100 - potentially complementing, but not replacing, my EX1.

Originally Posted by Doug Jensen

The lack of ND filters has already become a non-issue for me. Its easy to work around.

Well it hasn't become a non-issue for me, but I guess those many FS100 advantages make for it, I guess.

Thanks Doug for all the first-hand info; I wish I could come and meet you at NAB!

Piotr

[Brian Drysdale]

If you use -3db, you'll reduce the sensitivity half a stop. you'd need -6db plus to get ISO 320 from 800

[Jean Daniel Villiers]

I forgot where I read that, I was surely mistaken with another camera. the abel cine test shows 500 iso for -3 bd.

[Monday Isa]

Originally Posted by Jean Daniel Villiers

I forgot where I read that, I was surely mistaken with another camera. the abel cine test shows 500 iso for -3 bd.

That is probably correct for the F3 except the FS100 does not have negative gain. The one I played with in New York did not have it nor was there talk about it being implemented.

[Jean Daniel Villiers]

It is awkward for a 800 iso camera to have no lower iso possibility, more so when they did not include built in ND filter. I am asking the question now if it is still rated at 800 iso. Perhaps it is one stop lower and that is why it can go to + 30 db compared to the +18 db of the F3?

[Monday Isa]

Originally Posted by Jean Daniel Villiers

It is awkward for a 800 iso camera to have no lower iso possibility, more so when they did not include built in ND filter. I am asking the question now if it is still rated at 800 iso. Perhaps it is one stop lower and that is why it can go to + 30 db compared to the +18 db of the F3?

That maybe the case until we can have someone do a test to rate the sensor. The 30db gain on the FS100 was not horribly noisy like any of my video cameras at all at high gains. There was noise in the image but I would have no problem shooting an event at 30db gain as it looked better than my T2i at 1600 ISO and a huge difference than ISO 3200 in terms of noise.

[Jean Daniel Villiers]

From the spec of the Fs-100 only the 8 bit output from hdmi is really disappointing. Should it have been 10 bit, even only using hdmi I would have been satisfied. Having such a good sensor as the F3 with only 8 bit is hard to swallow. I thought that the number of functionality (s-log, genlock, 3d, form factor, zoom rocker, Nd, etc.) would have been enough differentiation that they would have at least left the image pipeline intact when they have cheaper camera with 10 bit output. For me it would have been the ideal camera even with its short coming like no built in ND etc.

Now Sony put this camera at the mercy of the hdslr camera it is suppose to compete with. The gh2 has shown that it is possible to have a very high resolution HDSLR without moire and aliasing. Should a Canon 5d mark 3 come out in the next few month with all the benefit of the gh2 but with a 8 bit or even 10 bit clean hdmi output at half the price of the Sony, how many will switch. I know that the last part is speculation but it is very much a possibility. We are definitely seeing a 5d mark3 in the next six month. Canon will surely use that model to kick about an enhanced video line of Hdslr to keep the momentum as everybody has at least matched or exceeded them.

[Jean Daniel Villiers]

If you compare any S35 camera to a Canon 550D, anything will seem very overpriced. We have to be a bit realistic here. I is not because a Ferari cost 10 time more than a normal car that it will go 10 times faster. In the high-end you always have diminishing returns. It is always like this for that extra 2 or 3 stop of low light and dynamic range, you are going to pay much more for that. If you see the favorable reviews it getting from everywhere. People are calling it baby alexa (a $ 70 000 camera) even before the S-log!!!

[Brian Drysdale]

A large problem is processing the images, doing this creates heat and the DSLRs will have to solve this problem and keep the costs down for their main market, the stills photographers, without introducing compression artefacts. It's very much a balancing act.

The costs of a working 10 bit recorder rig tends to bring everything above the DSLR price range. Currently every video camera in this price range is 8 bit and I suspect enters that "good enough" spectrum for a large part of this particular market and is capable of HD broadcast results. A lot more expensive video cameras than this only record 8 bit and I suspect a Canon large sensor video camera would record 8 bit 4;2;2 at most.

The only camera on the horizon that offers more than 8 bits in this price range is the much delayed 2/3" Scarlet with its currently drifting delivery date

[Glen Vandermolen]

The Sony NX5U NXCAM delivers true 10-bit 4:2:2 through its HD/SDI port.
All the more reason to wonder why Sony didn't include this feature in the fellow NXCAM FS100.

The EX series cams also deliver 10-bit, as does the upcoming HPX250.

[Jean Daniel Villiers]

Originally Posted by Brian Drysdale

A large problem is processing the images, doing this creates heat and the DSLRs will have to solve this problem and keep the costs down for their main market, the stills photographers, without introducing compression artefacts. It's very much a balancing act.

The costs of a working 10 bit recorder rig tends to bring everything above the DSLR price range. Currently every video camera in this price range is 8 bit and I suspect enters that "good enough" spectrum for a large part of this particular market and is capable of HD broadcast results. A lot more expensive video cameras than this only record 8 bit and I suspect a Canon large sensor video camera would record 8 bit 4;2;2 at most.

The only camera on the horizon that offers more than 8 bits in this price range is the much delayed 2/3" Scarlet with its currently drifting delivery date

Dear Brian, it is not because the Canon overheat that it is the case for every DSLR. Unfortunately dslr has been associated only to Canon. The GH1 and now the GH2 don't overheat even in such small packages. The GH2 is truly for me a second, some would say, third generation DSLR. It is really high resolution, does not suffer from moire and aliasing etc. The only thing it that it rolling shutter is still at the Canon Level. The new benchmark should be the GH2 today for comparing dslr technology.

You can now buy the Atomos Ninja 10 bit recorder at less than $ 1000, better more the new 10 bit uncompressed Blackmagic shuttle for less than $ 400!!! Unimaginable 6 month ago.

[Steve Kalle]

Steve,

I don't know about you, but I don't know anyone who uses autofocus on pro cameras whether it be an EX1 or PMW350. So, I don't see any point to claiming issues about hearing the Alpha lenses. Plus, their SSM lenses are very quiet.

Also, with the Alpha adapter, you get better control over the iris/aperture compared to Nikon/Zeiss lenses which have hard stops.

Your point about the 'has the same sensor' is certainly true. For example, Sony makes most of Nikon's sensors and I believe the 24 megapixel Sony A900 has the same sensor as Nikon's 24Mp D3x, but the Nikon is slightly better in many regards such as lower noise and roughly 1-1.5 stop more sensitive.

Another example of products using identical parts but have vastly different image quality is the LCD industry. LG makes most panels and one of their 24" panels is used in a $450 HP LCD and $2400 NEC and Eizo LCDs and the HP is inferior in every aspect.

[Les Wilson]

Cabs were hard to come by today but I made my way over to NAB during lunch and found Doug Jensen on duty at Sony. It was a pleasant experience to get the tour of the fs100 and dialog about it's capabilities. I also discussed the lens adapters for nikon leica and canon (the latter with another rep).

I like that so many of the body controls are the same as the EX. Doug confirmed there's a strong affinity and operations reuse. There were some nice surprises such as last clip review and expanded focus. I noticed the familiar peaking, zebras, and histogram buttons as well as expanded focus. Doug pointed out the latter can be used while rolling.

I'm a big fan of the ex rotating handle and was pleasantly surprised that the fs100 handle is not fixed. Not as easy to rotate as the ex but better than fixed. I don't intend to used Sony glass so the the iris control on the body or complaints about plastic lenses parts is a Non issue for me. I shoot my ex using all 3 rings and would do the same with the fs100. I also like the idea of an xlr out the back instead of off the mic holder.

The image on the display was of course stunning even at 18 db but it was a trade show so only the best equipment was being used. We used a leica f1.4 85mm if I recall. The low light performance was hard to judge on the floor but in a dimly lit area, the camera produced a nicely exposed portrait on a dark skinned model.

I'm considering this camera. I appreciate the larger sensor sites enabled by the super 35 sensor that's also 1.78 aspect ratio.