Is Sony Finally Listening?

In the HD-DSLR era Sony has tended to frustrate me.  Along with Panasonic they have the biggest profile in camcorders so had more to lose than Canon or Nikon.  Often quite good products would get hamstrung with what looked like marketing decisions.  The FS100 was one such product.  It always has been good value for a baby F3, closely matching its big brothers excellent image quality.  It even had a the benefit of 1080p50.  But there were downsides too.  Firstly Sony claimed to be addressing the drawbacks of HDDSLRs but they failed to include NDs like the competitor AF100.  It also wasn’t a global camera - Sony has since promised firmware but it was recently delayed.  I know a few people who own them and most love the image quality but criticise the handling. 

So when the first news of the FS700 broke I was skeptical, in fact I thought it may be an April Fool’s wind-up.  Not all the details are in yet and there is still time for Sony to stick a spanner in the works but I must say it looks really promising in the blurb: 

4K-ready

The first 4K-ready Super35mm camcorder in its class – providing an assured upgrade path to 4K acquisition and delivery - with full HD 1080p for today.The camcorder will also have the capability to produce 4K RAW 3G-SDI output via a future upgrade.

Whether you need 4K or not, its nice to have the option.  That option is going to depend when a compatible recorder turns up.  This is unlikely to be inexpensive.  If the FS100 was the baby F3 could the FS700 be the baby F65?  Of more immediate benefit is the addition of the SDI port.  The FS100 had only the much maligned HDMI port.  Thats one AF100 advantage cancelled out.

Super slow motion at 10x at full HD or 40x at lower resolutions

Incredible super slow motion capability of up to 10x slow motion at full HD resolution or up to 40x slow motion at a reduced resolution, giving you creative options that were once only available with specialist high-end equipment.

1080p high frame rates has eluded the budget sector.  The FS100 was already one of the best options.  OK, there are restrictions on shot length and super high rates bring various levels of compression but this is new and cool.  Its the closest thing to a baby Phantom.

E-mount interchangeable lenses offer a wide choice of lenses

The E-mount interchangeable lens system utilises an extremely short flange back distance allowing you to use a huge array of lenses via a range of adaptors giving you almost unlimited creative options.

Additional A-mount lenses available

The Sony LA-EA2 A-mount lens adaptor allows you to use the wide range of high quality alpha lenses and take advantage of the auto focus function for quicker, more convenient operation.

The FS100 has always been flexible in its mount options, even a few 3rd party Canon options are starting to appear.  The new adapter is probably overkill unless you have a strong need for AF.

Built-in ND filters

The NEX-FS700E features built-in, ultra-thin ND filters, offering exceptional shallow depth-of-field on highlights. It also means less accessories to manage as no external ND filters are required.

3G-SDI interface and HDMI

A 3G-SDI output enables easy integration with highest quality recording formats.

There goes the other AF100 advantage and a opens a clear advantage over HD-DSLRs.  We are starting to see HDMI output on the Nikons but its still flawed and doesn’t seem to realise the gains the FS100 does.  Presuming both these output are live simultaneously that opens a lot of new configuration and recorder options.

Exceptional ergonomics

The NEX-FS700E has a refined ergonomic design with a robust detachable handle and grip.

The key is the word “refined”.  I don’t think the FS700 will suddenly be a lot less fiddly than the FS100 and the “toilet-roll” EVF is still there, but early users say the build quality has improved and the accessories work better.

Switchable 50 Hz and 60 Hz shooting

The NEX-FS700E is switchable between 50 Hz and 60Hz to allow 24p shooting in PAL areas and no PAL/NTSC limitations.

Sony has listened, no waiting for firmware or having to buy two if you travel.

Selectable magnification and positioning of expanded focus

Expanded focus improvement allowing 4x and 8x magnification and a moveable area of expansion for easy focusing with shallow depth of field.

This should be familiar to those with Canon DSLRs, I wonder if it will work while recording?

Camera profile settings storage on memory card

Up to 99 camera profile settings can be stored, allowing rapid adaptation to multiple shooting environments without time wasted adjusting parameters. Settings are also easily shared in multi-camera productions.

Sounds sensible and opens up the possibility of easily adding new profiles.  One open question is S-Log, are Sony brave enough to bring that down to the FS700 and risk F3 sales?

Perhaps the biggest surprise is the price.  At a time when Canon seems to be determined to bump its prices up the FS700 comes in at £7200 inc VAT pre-order.  That’s more than the FS100 (£4700 inc VAT) but not a massive amount given the increase in spec.  Its a lot less than the C300EF & Sony F3 which are £12,000.  Its not significantly more that the Nikon D4 or Canon 1Dx (both about £5200 inc VAT) whose only real video advantage is being full frame.  The 5D Mk3 and D800 have a significant price advantage (sub £3,000) and are true convergent devices but the FS700 is a significantly better specified video camera which is suited to a much wider role. 

In fact its only significant weakness is the inbuilt codec.  Sony has a good track record in making the best of AVCHD with really good encoders but it is still what holds it back from being in the C300/F3/Scarlet club.  Still you can buy an encoder and a heap of nice glass for the price difference. 

My mate Den Lennie has already been shooting with one so I am guessing we will get to see the results from Den and others when NAB opens.

Isn't it bright in here?

This is an open letter to my local Vue cinema at Cheshire Oaks.  Actually that’s the polite way of saying its a rant.  I don’t want to be too harsh as the arrival of Vue vastly enhanced the viewing experience.  It was my first experience outside the US of big comfy seats with decent legroom.  Even now, with a good few years under its belt, it is still in good nick and they have invested heavily in 4K digital projection. 

I can even forgive them the cost of tickets and especially concessions because I am aware of the way Cinema economics work.  I can even forgive the chronic unreliability of the coffee machine as Starbucks and Costa are only 100m away.  What is winding me up at the moment is a bit more fundamental...turn the bleedin’ lights off!

I have recently been updating my lounge.  I know that my choice of light colours was always going to limit the quality I can expect from my projector.  However, this is a north-facing room and its my lounge...a certain degree of compromise has to be expected.  You don’t really expect compromise in a cinema where the pre-show Vue advertising is eulogising the experience.  

Vue haven’t gone as far as painting the room white but their lighting seems to be designed to trash the contrast.  I have long felt that they keep the house lights too bright.  This is washing out the contrast from the top.  For a spectacle wearer like me you tend to get unwanted reflections - worse in 3D films.  The next two problems are worst in the small theatres as they are narrower and the steps are closer to the screen. Vue have installed new blue LED safety lights to mark the steps.  There are uplighters along floor marking out the shape but there are also an array of lights across the front of the steps pointing at the screen.  Why!  These stay on during the film at the same light output.  Watching the Hunger Games and Act of Valor recently all the dark scenes had a distinct blue tint which I am pretty sure the colourist never meant to be there.  It looked like a day-to-night filter from the 1940s.  My last gripe is the fire exit signs.  These doors are close to the screen edge and are also way too bright.  I can understand why they need to be visible but do they have to be almost painfully bright during the movie.

It probably time to stop railing against safety culture before I turn into Jeremy Clarkson but, please Vue, turn down the lights so I can properly enjoy your fancy new projectors.

Just like buses ... the D800 and 5D Mark III arrive

Last year was pretty much a year of waiting in the DSLR field.  Even those cameras which showed their faces didn't start to ship till this year or we are still waiting.  Part of this was understandable given the problems in Japan and Thailand.  Into this vacuum we saw the dedicated video camera make its comeback peaking with the arrival of the C300 and Scarlet at the end of the year.  People were starting to say the video DSLR revolution is over.  This is a view which I half agree with.  It doesn't feel like a revolution anymore, DSLR is now largely mainstream and ubiquitous.  For filmmakers there are now many choices of large chip cameras which are easier to work with and easier to fit into a professional workflow.  

However, there are still a huge amount of footage being shot of DSLR all the way from the guerrilla filmmaker right up to major motion pictures.  That video function is not going away and will continue to improve. 2012 has seen the arrival of two “next generation” DSLRs from Canon and Nikon.  For Canon, it is the 5D Mark III - the replacement for the camera that has defined this whole sector for nearly three years.  For Nikon it is the D800 which brings most of the new technology recently launched on the D4 into direct competition with the 5D.

Canon 5D Mark III

With three years to wait, the blogosphere has had a long time to imagine what the 5D Mark III would be.  This probably meant that the Mark III was doomed to disappoint and I must admit I haven’t had a burning desire to upgrade.  At least part of that is due to the fact that I can’t afford it, but that doesn’t usually stop the “desire” part.  The increased price (£2999 at launch compared to £2299 for the Mark II) brings it into competition with the low-end big chip camcorders but I need a convergence device and those don’t qualify. 

I have only had the chance to play briefly with the camera so this is no review, but we can look at the spec sheet.  At the time of its launch, the video feature was the most original feature of the 5D Mark II along with its 21MP sensor.  Apart from that a lot of the tech got carried over from the 5D.  For the photographer, it was far from leading edge in the areas of AF and metering.  This didn't stop it being hugely popular with photographers as well as carving out the video niche.  The 7D which followed later did not suffer these issues.  It was more weatherproof, faster and had much better AF and metering.  In some ways the 5D Mark III is more like a 7Ds - a full frame 7D. 

Canon have improved the camera comprehensively in most areas both photographically and for the video section.  We have be starved of full res samples at the launch but all the signs are good.  I fully expect that the quality of the imagery will reduce the 5D bugbears of aliasing, moire and rolling shutter and it will be an order of magnitude better in low light.  Sound recording and monitoring have been improved but the big wish list items of clean 1080p out and faster frame rates at 1080p are not there.  There is also a lack of crop modes (like in the consumer 600D) which seems a missed opportunity to me.  Maybe Canon thinks giving you cheap, fast telephotos in camera is counterproductive for its bottom line?  All of these improvements are welcome but nothing which renders my Mark II obsolete which is why Canon will continue to sell it.

Nikon, who have had many false starts on DSLR video since they kicked the whole thing off with the D90, have put an amazing amount of new tech into the D800 to fight back.  They have managed to do this for a noticeably smaller chunk of change than Canon at £2399. 

Nikon D800

The are many remarkable things about the D800 but the most remarkable is that it so un-Nikon-like in philosophy.  Nikon had been the least enthusiastic DSLR manufacturer in the megapixel wars and now they have gone nuclear with a 36MP sensor.  The aging D700 it replaces couldn't wield half that at 15MP and it dwarfs the 5D Mark III’s 22MP.  This sensor dominates this camera for better or for worse.  For video, it sets alarm bells ringing.  That’s 34Mp to throw away to get to HD size, how will it cope in low light?  Again, we still don't have any uncompressed samples to answer those questions.  From what I have seen in the Nikon demonstration this is my own prediction.  I think the D800 will be on a par with the 5D Mark II for low-light and picture artifacts with on-board recording but will be well behind the Mark III.  I think the ability to record off-camera will narrow the gap some but not entirely close it. 

The D800 does have a lot of features which show Nikon have listened and which I think are valuable both in Photo and Video modes.  Nikon shows no fear of crop modes and this effectively gives you two cameras in one.  I can see this camera being a hit with time-lapsers and for making plates with that massive resolution.  For the photographer I think Nikon will be able to match the D700 for low light and be better at most other things apart from speed.  If you want to shoot darker and faster I expect you are going to have to save for a D4.

If you don't have the cash to hand or are not convinced by the feature set then its probably best to wait.  We still have the Canon Cinema EOS DSLR to show its colours and that is likely to have some very different tech in it.

Concept Cinema EOS DLSR

Expect to see much if not all the new video features trickle down into the rest of the rand in the next 12-18 months.  It think the upgrade for the Rebel/00D range is due soon and we will see from that how widely Canon is prepared to share its features.  With the Digic IV generation cameras they were pretty generous, so this will be a very interesting announcement.

Bear in mind that most of what I have said is still based on very incomplete information.  Its going to be a while before the blogosphere gets its hands on production models and can come to independent conclusions on the image quality and usability of these new cameras.  I am eager to see how it all pans out!

Some more in depth looks at the cameras can be found:

http://www.paulgwilliams.tv/blog/2012/03/my-thoughts-on-the-new-canon-5d-mark-iii/

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/nikon-d800/nikon-d800A.HTM

http://www.eoshd.com/content/7311/canon-5d-mark-iii-vs-nikon-d800-for-video

Making do

"Making do" - this phrase has typified a cash-strapped, post-war Britain which had, by then, lost the swagger and ambition of the Victorian era.  On a more positive note, its also about achieving the best results with what resources you have.  It is also "situation normal" for the budget filmmaker.  It's easy to fall into the trap that all that idea you have needs is some new piece of gear, or another workshop or some new software package.  Oh that's just me then is it?

Occasionally, you see a piece of work that has production values that far exceed the consumer equipment used to make it.  My friend J G Harding just posted his latest music video up on Vimeo which is just such a creation.  The track is called "Clapton Pond" by Apologies, I Have None, this is an ambitious, high concept piece which I think completely belies it's zero budget origins.

To judge for yourself here is the video

To learn more about its making go to Julian's website

What the 4K!

Every so often my twitter stream will burst into life about 4K and the 4K Jets and the HD Sharks will get ready to rumble.  It may be a new 4k product announcement or a post on Red User which will act as the catalyst.  It seems far more polarising than say, 3D, as an issue.

I think there are a lot of aspects to this battle for hearts and minds - worth a little reflection I think.  If we look at acquisition then there just a couple of systems capable of 4k (or more acquisition).  Of these RED is the poster boy for 4K as Sony's F65 is only just starting to appear.  

F65 Prototype at NAB

Now most people would agree that more resolution is better (possibly not older actresses).  I saw a demo on the Sony stand at NAB2011 and it was deeply impressive despite the screen being huge and the audience being unrealistically close.  It is also true that it gives you more flexibility in post for reframing and cropping.  It certainly true that throwing resolution away usually works better than adding resolution.  Major motion pictures shot on film (though not all) tend to be mastered at 4K and many cinemas are equipping with 4K digital projectors.  RED claims this makes them the future-proof option.  30 years in IT leads me to believe that future-proof is a myth - perhaps future-resistant is more accurate.

The challenge at the moment on the acquisition and production side is the maths.  4K has four times more area roughly then 1080p.  That means 4x the data - all other things being equal.  That data is going to be present in your entire pipeline if you are going to master in 4K.  This has obvious implications in storing, movement and computation required in post.  This will increase costs and increase time.  Over time, improving technology will reduce this but it has significant implications now.

Currently, 4K equipped cinemas are the only place the public is likely 4K footage natively.  Will this change in the near future?  There are signs that the consumer electronic industry is going to put its faith in 4k as the next big thing after 3D.  CES this year had a smattering of 4K models.  CE Manufacturers always need a next big thing, its essential to their business model to persuade you that the consumer durable they sold you 2 years ago is no longer sufficient.  Interest in 3D is waning, they need a new flag to wave.

Toshiba 55" 4K TV

I happen to have a 3D set bought recently and a 3D projector waiting for an install.  Am I a 3D evangelist? Not really, I was really making the move to 1080p and 3D was just a bonus.  Its not that I don't like 3D, I enjoy the experience when its done well, but there is hardly anything to watch.  I have 2 sources of material: Sky and Blu-ray.  Sky has one channel which is about 70% repeated material (my impression, I am not sad enough to measure it) and a few blu-rays.  Even cinema releases which were 3D don't seem guaranteed to get a blu-ray disk.  If they do its normally dearer list price and less likely to be discounted.  

What have I got plugged into my setup.  I have a Blu-ray player (1080p), PS/3 (720p/1080p), SkyHD (720p/1080i) and AppleTV (720p). My amp is theoretically capable of handling and upscaling to 4k but compatibility is always in doubt till some standards emerge.  The signal path is via HDMI1.4 which can do 4k24p.  I do expect to see a jump in quality in my new 1080p projector over the old 720p one slightly offset by a bigger screen size.  However, I see no real difference in percieved resolution at my 3.5m viewing distance between my new 47" 1080p LED LG TV and my old 1024 x 720 Pioneer 42" plasma.  The step up in resolution to 4k is more marked than that between 1080 and 720 but I am not convinced it will be obvious at TV panel size.  How big do you have to go before you notice 4k.  In the world of AV consumerism there is the much feared WAF.  This is not a technical term but stands for wife acceptance factor.  Flat screen TV has faired well in WAF because the resulting sets maybe larger but they have taken up less space.  Get over 50" though and the sets are starting to draw to much attention to themselves and the WAF plummets relegating them to dedicated media rooms and bachelor pads.  This is probably less of an issue in the US where homes are typically more spacious, but any new format has got to succeed globally. 

I am the kind of early adopter guy who would buy 4K so what would it mean to me and how would I get it?  I think we can rule out broadcast.  In the UK, only the death of analgue has freed up enough space for a few HD over-air channels.  Sky too tends to worry about how many channels not the quality or we would not still be on 1080i.  Download services could distribute a file but how long are you prepared to wait.  In metropolitan areas it may be OK but I am limited to 5mbps out here in the sticks.  A single 4K movie not compressed to mush would probably exceed the typical UK monthly download limit for most punters.  So we are looking at some kind of disk or device to deliver the movie.  Blu-ray could do it but most current players arent going to be able to cope.  Even the ubiquitous and future-tolerant PS/3 is probably going to fail as its missing HDMI1.4.  If blu-ray can be stretched to fit (and in this I include at the pressing facilities) it just might gain a foothold with a slow burn dual play approach similar to 3D.  The disruption level is similar in that case.

I can't see a brand new physical format succeeding now.  DVD had the full weight of the industry behind it and its take off was slow in the UK taking a few years to hit critical mass and oust VHS.  Most of us early adopters have a drawer full of Region 1 disk we played on hacked DVD players.  We bought them so we had a decent choice back in the day and now we cant trade them in against blu-rays.  Blu-ray had a more troubled birth as it was fighting not just against DVD but HDDVD too.  It won the format war in the end but even after all this time it still has a smaller section in HMV than DVD.  Look round the rest of the store and you see racks of CDs.  CD is 30 years old and no higher definition format has come close to unseating it as a retail format.  The threat to CDs comes from a variety of formats that are worse - an interesting lesson for video.  Even HMVs future is far from assured - condemning video sources to online or a small selection at supermarkets. 

So winding right back to where we started with acquisition, how important is 4K?  If you are filming big budget features then it seems to make sense to feed the growing number of 4k projectors.  Not that I have seen any issues with Alexa films at my 4k equipped multiplex.  For lesser budget features then its a finely balanced decision.  What is going to provide the most production value up on the screen?  Any skimping you do on other crafts to feed that 4k pipeline are only going to be more visible in your end product.  For TV, Indie Films and Commericals I think its a long time before most of the 4k benefits start paying back with time being so critical.