misleading sony commercials

[Noa Put]

Commercials often tend to exaggerate and often it's intentional to highlight their strong point but go over the top with it, like everyone knows red bull doesn't make you really fly, and the viewer should easily see the joke behind it but often commercials are not that clear and then it can be misleading towards the viewers. Like Sony's cx760 commercial here. They show, what appears to be real life footage shot with the camera but look how many shallow dof shots are intercut with footage that could come from the cx760, anyone that uses these type of small sensor camera's know that this kind of footage is not from this camera but this could make a lot of potential buyers make believe it is. This type of commercials should be banned.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koUZn...ideo - YouTube

[Dave Blackhurst]

HUH? The shallow DoF shots I see are "establishing" shots of someone USING the camera, the rest look like you could achieve with many a small camera by zooming in... If fact it's a good way to show someone USING the camera on the one hand, and what results to expect on the other - not seeing anything "misleading"...

[Evan Bourcier]

I thought the most misleading part was when those guys pretended to be musicians...

In all seriousness though, I don't think any of that was purported to be real footage out the camera... The projector was CG, the stabilization and low light examples were both "simulated".. I dunno. I thought it was an underwhelming ad, but I didn't find the DOF misleading.

[Noa Put]

really, you don't see it?? That shows how careful they picked their shots, when you see someone filming they overdid the shallow dof but just look at the following shots and pause the image: 00:02, 00:12, 00:13, 00:21, 00:23, 01:05, 01:20, 01:25, 01:29, 01:35, each time you see someone is filming it, but it's not with the 760, that I can tell you.

Most obvious are the shots with the singers at the end, if the camera can get that shallow dof, I"m getting 5 of these. But all other shots I pointed out have a distinct shallow dof, it's not that much but certainly not what I can get out of this camera. It just gives the images something "extra" which makes them stand out a bit more, but that I find very misleading.

[Dave Blackhurst]

I'm not 100% sure, but I'm guessing that perhaps with an ND filter to force the aperature open, and with the right distance from talent to camera and a little zooming, you could get the camera to do a decent DoF - obviously this would require carefully controlled conditions, but that's advertising...

[Ron Evans]

I am sure that other cameras were used in the shoot but even my CX700 has amazing image stabilizer so if the new one is 13 times better then I can believe the commercial. I can walk or ski with my CX700 with very acceptable results and will be getting one of the new cameras for that very reason. When skiing or walking I don't need the full manual control !!!

Ron Evans

[Lee Mullen]

Looks fine by me. I think the OP is grasping at straws.

[Noa Put]

I have such a camera and I can tell you for sure that some of the shots in that commercial where done with a large sensor camera. If you think it looks fine it proves to me how easy people can be fooled.

[Michael Wisniewski]

Sorry Noa, the video looks fine to me. I think Sony very clearly indicates when the video comes from the camera. The rest of the footage is standard "hey check out the cool lifestyle you'll have if you own this camera". I think the average consumer will understand the video quite clearly.

[Noa Put]

If you think that the footage of that guy playing the guitar at the end is from the 760 then there is surely something wrong with my camera, but everybody can believe what they want, I just dont buy it. Also I did not say that everything was not from the cx760, just certain parts and I have noted the times when those ocur a few topics back and those are very misleading as they are clearly shot with a large sensor camera.

[Don Bloom]

No one should believe everything they see in a commerical. Having worked on some, I can tell you there is a lot of trickery used in almost every commercial made.

[Noa Put]

you are absolutely right Don, if I look at Red bull commercials I know it won't make me fly :) but those type of commercials are deliberately exaggerated and to the viewer it's clear the manufacturer only tries to show in a funny way their drink will make you feel like you have got wings.

Only in this Sony commercial there are several shots showing footage that is clearly not from the 760 but it's not clearly stated at all it's not from the camera nor given the impression it's from another camera. They can use a great set, use extra light, color correct the footage but one thing they can't fake and that's shallow dof.

You could partly by zooming in completely but that's not the case in teh shot at 00:21 where the kids run in the water, based on the cameramovement the operator was nearby yet there is a distinct shallow dof. Same at 01:05, you see the dad filming with the 760, then a kid eating, to me that says; this is what the dad was filming and look at how shallow the dof is there. And then the guitar players at the end and here I can't understand most here keep saying that's normal handicam footage, common...

There are several cx760 footage in there, especially the ones that have a very wide dof and that look like "video" but they carefully mixed some large sensor camerafootage in there and I"m not talking about the very shallow dof footage of someone holding the camera, in those shots they overdid the shallow dof, probably intentionally but in other shots which seem to be taken by the cx760 they made the shallow dof less obvious.

Smart advertising as it seems.

[Simon Wood]

Nokia had to apologize recently when footage purported to be from their new Lumia turned out to have been taken with a DSLR - some pixel peeper saw the reflection of the real camera in a glass panel when going through the footage frame by frame.

Picture too perfect: Nokia says sorry after faking new camera feature - News - Gadgets & Tech - The Independent

[Matt Sharp]

Originally Posted by Ron Evans

..even my CX700 has amazing image stabilizer so if the new one is 13 times better then I can believe the commercial. I can walk or ski with my CX700 with very acceptable results and will be getting one of the new cameras for that very reason.

The quoted 13 times better stabilization is as compared to the CX700 when in standard mode, not active, which itself was quoted to be 10 times better than standard mode when it first came out a few years back.