New Sony E-mount video cam for IBC

[Jack Zhang]

Full frame will unfortunately not be able to scan as fast as it's Super35 counterpart due to current limitations in technology. This is partly where the 30p limitation could come from. (which would be a gigantic disappointment, but this is due to tech limits, not that they don't want to)

So it would be closer to a VG900 in terms of tech but a step up in terms it's actually super sampling the image. However, it will not have the scan rates as the FS7. At this current state of tech it would not be possible at all to scan that full frame sensor at 60p and still supersample for 4K if it is indeed a full frame sensor.

What would really suck is a lack of XLR inputs.

[Mike Watson]

The 30p thing is not a deal breaker for me.

The XLR thing is a deal breaker for me.

As goofy as it is, the loupe and handle thing might be a deal breaker. I'm tired of putting together a hundred pieces that were jerry-rigged after the release of the camera. I shot with a magnetic loupe on a 5D MkII for a year, and that thing fell off the camera a thousand times. Never again.

[Glen Vandermolen]

I seriously doubt Sony would exclude XLR inputs on an FS camera. On a VG series camera, sure. But the FS line is professional level. It fits between the FS700 and FS7.
Of course it will have XLR inputs.

[Cliff Totten]

Originally Posted by Jack Zhang

Full frame will unfortunately not be able to scan as fast as it's Super35 counterpart due to current limitations in technology. This is partly where the 30p limitation could come from. (which would be a gigantic disappointment, but this is due to tech limits, not that they don't want to)

So it would be closer to a VG900 in terms of tech but a step up in terms it's actually super sampling the image. However, it will not have the scan rates as the FS7. At this current state of tech it would not be possible at all to scan that full frame sensor at 60p and still supersample for 4K if it is indeed a full frame sensor.

What would really suck is a lack of XLR inputs.

I don't think it's so much the physical size of the sensor, it's the size of the data it dumps to the processing. The A7S with 10 megapixels in 16x9 is not allot of data throughput by today's standard. The A7R-II and the RX10-II certainly produce allot more data for each read cycle. The read clock speeds are slowed down to keep heat down. They have to drive these sensors as cool as possible to keep them clean. The A7s body with passive cooling doesn't help the heat problem much...so yeah, They are forced to give us rolling shutter jello.

SONY doesnt mind though. Rolling shutter jello helps keep the models further apart for marketing reasons.

[Jack Zhang]

The VG900 has barely any active cooling and that sensor is likely entirely passively cooled.

So we can expect really bad rolling shutter from this cam as well? It's the HPX300 all over again then.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Mike Watson

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

The point that so often gets missed is that greater dof, better sensitivity of the larger sensor is only true *IF WE TALK ABOUT THE SAME F STOP IN BOTH CASES*

And excuse my capitals, but that is often not the case, so the assumption goes out the window.

Think of a bit of basic optics. If the sensor in camera A has 4x the area of camera B, then it will follow that for equivalence (angle of view) it needs a lens of twice the focal length. It then follows that if both are to be (say) f2, the lens of camera A must be twice the diameter of camera B. Or 4x the area.

Conversely, if instead they each have the same diameter lens, then if for camera A it's f4, for camera B it will be f2.

The bigger sensor will have a higher base ISO rating for cam A than cam B (all else equal), and it should be 2 stops better. But f2 at ISO 400 should give exactly the same lowlight performance as f4 at ISO 1600, yes? So unless the diameter of the front element is larger there is no advantage in sensitivity OR dof terms in going to the bigger sensor.

Practically, what a larger sensor does is give the POSSIBILITY of using bigger diameter lenses, as it's increasingly difficult to make lenses with apertures bigger than around f2, certainly f1.4.

[Cliff Totten]

Originally Posted by Jack Zhang

The VG900 has barely any active cooling and that sensor is likely entirely passively cooled.

So we can expect really bad rolling shutter from this cam as well? It's the HPX300 all over again then.

The VG900 has a visible heat sink area around the front end of that camera. Also, it line skips, so it's not reading all the pixels on that sensor. It might only be reading 1 line out of every 5 lines on the sensor grid. Well?... only a handful of people in the world can really tell you those read out numbers. (a few Sony engineers in Japan)

The VG900 only does 1080 and not 4k. So, it only needs about 2 million pixels per read cycle. 4k requires a minimum of 8 million and today, Sony often over samples to get down to 8. So by today's 4k standards, the VG900 has a very easy job at 1080.

[Christopher Young]

FS5 HD Sydney footage

Sony PXW-FS5 Launch film "Free Spirit" on Vimeo

FS5 4K version

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BLf...ature=youtu.be

Chris Young
CYV Productions
Sydney

[Andy Wilkinson]

At $6699 body only (suggested list price including taxes) this FS5 seems priced very high relative to the FS7...but a C100MkII killer for sure as it offers 4K and a few other things that lacks. Not sure it lived up to the "missing link" hype though...my English cynicism means am I not surprised!

Love the lighter weight and smallish size compared to the FS7 plus some of the cool variable/auto ND and flexible recording features. Pity 4K codec is only 4.2.0 and 100Mbps XAVC-Long GOP but at least it has some good external connections and they needed some differentiation to protect the FS7, understandably. I also like that it has 10 bit 4.2.2 HD, and that the HFR and burst options keep this quality.

I see this as a worthy successor to my C100 and the fact it takes relatively cheap SDXC cards and the same batteries as my PMW-300 and my former EX3 is a bonus as I have loads of them!

Official Sony info page below:


http://blog.sony.com/press/sony-expa...super35-model/


As soon as one of my favoured UK dealers gets a pre-order link up I'm probably going to hit their link :-)

[Andy Wilkinson]

I've just pre-ordered a PXW-FS5 with CVP who have it (currently) listed at an opening price of £4,100 ex VAT and will price match. H Preston Media also have it (currently) listed very slightly less, £4,082 ex VAT. I've bough cameras from both of these very well respected UK dealers in the past (my C100 and PMW-300 respectively).

Now begins the waiting game...

Also, for the record, CVP currently list the C100 MkII at £3048.33 ex VAT (and I expect that might move downwards a bit after November, assuming the FS5 starts shipping on time!)

Just hoping the FS5 street price falls a bit before mine gets shipped - as the price sure does seem a bit high relative to the FS7 (which I've considered in the past but which don't want to lug around all day...). I ruled out the C100 MkII at it's launch as I'm not buying any more cams that don't have some kind of 4K capability anymore - even though I expect it will be several years before my clients want anything in 4K. Sure, the FS5 will only come with "entry level" 4K, i.e. 100Mbps 4.2.0 at 8-bit, but I think it'll be a terrific 4.2.2 10-bit XAVC 50Mbps HD cam.

[Glen Vandermolen]

B&H Photo's prices:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1185425-REG/sony_pxw_fs5k_pxw_fs5_xdcam_super_35.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1185424-REG/sony_pxw_fs5_xdcam_super_35.html

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Andy Wilkinson

I've just pre-ordered a PXW-FS5 with CVP who have it (currently) listed at an opening price of £4,100 ex VAT .............

I'm assuming that's body only, Andy?

Originally Posted by Andy Wilkinson

Sure, the FS5 will only come with "entry level" 4K, i.e. 100Mbps 4.2.0 at 8-bit, but I think it'll be a terrific 4.2.2 10-bit XAVC 50Mbps HD cam.

Fully agree with the last bit, but as far as 4K goes, I think the codec is less important than other factors. For UHD, 4K means 4096x2160, QFHD means 3840x2160 (16:9). It's worth noting the FS5 is QFHD only - not "cinema" 4K - which may or may not be important, depending on usage.

Secondly, in QFHD the max framerate is 30 fps - not 60. Does that matter to you? Worth thinking about.

As far as the codec goes, then yes, 10 bit would be nice, but may be expecting too much in a camera in this price range? But 4:2:0 for 4K progressive is no problem at all - 4:2:2 has only been insisted upon in the past because of interlace. Now we're solely talking about progressive formats, there is no problem with 4:2:0.

If you don't believe me look at the latest version of the EBU tiering document - https://tech.ebu.ch/docs/r/r118.pdf . (Table on page 12) For UHD (very highest end production) they specify a minimum bitrate for long-GOP of 200Mbs, but for colour space "4:2:0 but 4:4:4 preferred". In other words, 4:2:0 is fine, but if only the best will do, go to 4:4:4 - 4:2:2 needs to be left behind with interlace.

[Glen Vandermolen]

How does XAVC-L 10-bit, 4:2:2 50mbps compare to MPEG2 8-bit, 4:2:2, 50mbps? In 1080 30P.
The FS5 does not have MPEG2.

[Andy Wilkinson]

Hi David,

Yes, body only.

Regarding the QFHD versus 4K UHD thing - then it seems that 4096x2160 4K will be available at some point in the future (along with Raw output) as a "paid for firmware upgrade". Not bothered about that now, but maybe one day I will be. I learnt a long time ago to buy techie things on what they will do out of the box, not on what might be promised but never arrive (or arrive eventually at some unknown price point).

Regarding 4K at 50/60 FPS, sure that would be great - this thing will only do 30 FPS in QFHD, but as far as I'm aware the only "4K" cam that is offering that at anywhere near this price point is the DVX-200...another cam I thought hard about. I'm passing on the DVX-200 as I'm not convinced by some of the footage I've seen during it's long drawn out (and IMHO badly handled) "launch".

I think I'll be fine with the HFR options in Full HD for a while (1080p50 was a must for some sports work I occasionally film) and the "burst modes" in Full HD might be great for certain things.

Thanks also for the clarification around 4.2.0 and 4.2.2 regarding 4K. I've read that elsewhere by you and others so, note to self, I won't get too hung up on it anymore.

[Andy Wilkinson]

Originally Posted by Glen Vandermolen

How does XAVC-L 10-bit, 4:2:2 50mbps compare to MPEG2 8-bit, 4:2:2, 50mbps? In 1080 30P.
The FS5 does not have MPEG2.

Glen,

My Sony PMW-300 can shoot in a 4.2.2 at 50 Mbps XAVC at 10-bit (not sure what flavour of XAVC at that bit rate - off hand - but it will do higher XAVC bit rates). It will also do the XDCAM MPEG-2 in 4.2.2 at 50 Mbps. I've worked with both.

I think most would agree that, assuming your NLE can handle it (Adobe CC on my new Mac Pro can but CS6 on my old Mac Pro can't), XAVC is (generally considered) the superior, more efficient and modern codec (but is more computer intensive to edit with) whilst the XDCAM MPEG-2 codec is much easier to edit - but I'll let others such as David who have deep knowledge of these things comment.