Sony NEX-FS700

I was just reading through DPreview & found a few people who were crapping on against each other, mainly over the AVCHD codec & the fact that it is ONLY 24mbps Yet the footage is as good as other 50mbps. One of the posters said that it will be able to record 4k internally & they were talking about the difference between 4k & 8k as this camera will be able to record 8k aswell.

Probably a load of crap but something to watch for maybe?

Cheers Pete.

Here is the link; http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/04/02/So...S700E-camcorder

Errr the only 8k sensors out there are the NHK ones that are being tested. So I call BS on whatever is being said in DPR. It could also be some poster being facetious.

I do know that there are film telecines to 8k out there. The Dark Knight had much of the visual effects done in 8k, scanned from film for IMAX. Like I said, take what is written on the internet with a bag of salt.

Will do Drew

Hi Nick, Amphibico will be making a housing for the FS-700, it will be designed along the line of our FS-100 Genesis housing.

 

Since the launch of the new FS-100 housing, we have had lots of door knocking regarding the FS-700.

Hi Joe, here Pepe, from Spain. (Mariano's friend)

I have owned 5 Amphibico housings /Dive Buddy, Navigator, PD150, Phenom, Endeavor). I was thinking about Fs100 plus Genesis, but i'm gonna wait the new Genesis for FS700, ¿it will be a long wait?

How long is that fuse????

I was thinking about Fs100 plus Genesis, but i'm gonna wait the new Genesis for FS700, ¿it will be a long wait?

I'm not even sure the Amphibico FS100 is out yet. It is listed on B&H, but there's not much about it on the Amphibico site, and almost no pictures. This blog post from May talks about the "soon to be released" Genesis FS100 housing. There's also a video there, but it's full of interlacing artifacts (or something strange), indicating less-than-ideal camera settings or post-production workflow.

Now that the FS700 is out it seems to me that it's much more attractive than the FS100 and housing manufacturers should prioritise it. I can't envision many more FS100 sales.

Edit: The Genesis is out. Dan Crowell has one and posted this, but unfortunately it's only 360p.

I'm not even sure the Amphibico FS100 is out yet. It is listed on B&H, but there's not much about it on the Amphibico site, and almost no pictures. This blog post from May talks about the "soon to be released" Genesis FS100 housing. There's also a video there, but it's full of interlacing artifacts (or something strange), indicating less-than-ideal camera settings or post-production workflow.

 

Now that the FS700 is out it seems to me that it's much more attractive than the FS100 and housing manufacturers should prioritise it. I can't envision many more FS100 sales.

 

Edit: The Genesis is out. Dan Crowell has one and posted this, but unfortunately it's only 360p.

Just a heads up that the Amphibico Genesis for the FS100 is in full production and is shipping. The FS700 will be in design stages soon.

There's a few of these in the wild now in the UK, I managed to get my hands on one for a bit of a test on Monday. Here's a few questions answered;

On board recording is to SD card (yep, SD card), including the super slow mo.

Bit rate is averaged at 24 mbps for highest quality (28 if you're running interlaced), maxed at 18 mbps for lesser quality

RAW output is via HD-SDI (i.e no onboard RAW), currently up to 2k, 4k will be with an upgrade (I didn't get the chance to test this out.

High speed on 50 Hz (i.e. 50i or 25p) runs as 50, 100, 200, 400 and 800. 60 Hz, you get a bit more, 60, 120, 240, 480 and 960

High speed is buffered internally and then written to SD card as AVCHD processed to your selected end frame rate, e.g if you are in 50Hz mode and shooting 25p the high speed will be slowed down and stored as a 25p file. So for those in PAL land, whilst you can get a bit more for your buck by shooting in 60 Hz mode, you'd end up wth a 30p or 60i file, which could make you unpopular with the edit suite! There's no way of outputting high speed to HD-SDI in RAW, or at higher quality.

Frame rates up to 200/240 are shot in 1920 x 1080 at full bit rate.

Accordig to the manual, 400/480 fps is shot in 1920 x 1080 at a reduced bit rate, although in my tests the bit rate was the same as 200, circa 21 mbps

800/960 fps is shot in 1280 x 720 at a reduced bit rate

My focus was on high speed functionality, I ran a few tests at 200, 400 and 800 fps. Setting up the camera was simple, just a few extra steps beyond a normal shoot. Getting the footage off the camera was easy as well, simply wait for it to finish processing (less than a minute in all tests), then pop the SD card into your computer and copy across, hey presto an AVCHD format file in the correct play back frame rate. Test results were also good, I couldn't see any difference between 200 and 400 fps, although there was a marked drop at 800.

I've passed the footage on to a respected UK based edit suite to get their feedback if they come back with a positive response then it will be at the top of my shopping list (well, almost anyway )

I'll try and get the test results published somewhere in the next few days

Cheers

Stuart

I'm speculating hugely here but Philip Bloom's problems with blue lights (topside) with the FS700 (and FS100) don't bode well for shooting sunballs etc.. Reminds me of that problem laz217 was getting with his GH2.

Looks like it warrants a good test in the tropics!

I'm speculating hugely here but Philip Bloom's problems with blue lights (topside) with the FS700 (and FS100) don't bode well for shooting sunballs etc.. Reminds me of that problem laz217 was getting with his GH2.

The difference between Sony and Panasonic in handling bright lights. FS700 should be able to handle these situations a little better than the consumer-grade 5n.

Thanks Worlf Eel. Was there a blog post to go with that?

Good vidicon!!!

what lens are fit it underwater? wide angle especially

I never use a vidicon under water ,i have 5D2 to have movie now but the FS700 is better i think.

Any news about any housing available, or housing project, for the FS700?

I was just reading through DPreview & found a few people who were crapping on against each other, mainly over the AVCHD codec & the fact that it is ONLY 24mbps Yet the footage is as good as other 50mbps.

I'm inclined to agree with one of those (Francis Carver) who commented in the DPreview:

"28Mb/sec recording bitrate is, for all intents and purposes, cr*p. Nor is it broadcast standard in much of the world. So.... the question arises here, why should one spend $8,000 here for a non-broadcast standard codec camcorder from Sony."

While it's true that MPEG-4 @ 28 mbps is (because of more efficient compression) comparable to MPEG-2 @ 50 mbps, there's more to it than that when one starts pixel peeping.

The difference between AVCHD/AVCDH.2 and the 50mbps of the Canon XF-codec (MPEG-2, 4:2:2, 8-bit) is that the latter is HD broadcast compliant without using an external recorder. Also, MPEG-2 handles 8-bit color much better than does MPEG-4. Same is true of the old MJPEG codec which most people don't use because of the relatively large file sizes. In fact MJPEG at high bitrates is a very nice codec in terms of color rendition and virtually eliminates the banding which is a charateristic of 8 bit AVCHD. In my hacked GH2 I'm now using MJPEG most of the time rather than AVCHD (and that's AVCHD @ 150 mbps...not the laughable 28 mbps).

From my own experience comparing image quality of low bit-rate AVCHD codec with other codecs is that the high compression of AVCHD (particularly in it's standard Long GOP form) does not go well together with 8 Bit 4:2:0 color...particularly in terms of color banding and noise ...but also with regard to motion detail rendering and fine line rendering and macro-blocking. This is clearly shown in how much the AVCHD image quality improves in a hacked GH2 when the bitrate is increased to 100mbps or so (but this still does nothing to improve the problem of color banding). It's a codec that was designed for consumer/direct TV display use and does not at all perform well at low bitrates (i.e. the default standard of 28 mbps) when it comes to NLE color grading.

At least Panasonic have accepted the stupidity of vanilla AVCHD for serious acquisition by offering several more robust codecs in the new GH3...and even "AVCHD"/H.264 I-frame is working at 70 mbps as standard. Even Leica's new $9,000 serious entry to video cameras (Leica M) records 4:2:2, MJPEG ALL-I (at much higher bitrates than AVCHD.2).

Why Sony persists in offering 8 bit 4:2:0 AVCHD/28 mbps in a semi-pro camera is a mystery...but then again maybe not.

Pro Video Coalition detailed reviews, FS700 and FS700 dynamic range test, show that this $8000 camera delivers 1080 240p and 14 stops of dynamic range from 8 bit AVCHD. Which other camera delivers both within this price range? There's always 4:2:2 HDMI out.

Looking at the big picture, Sony is smart to keep perfecting the high-compression technologies because the company will gain a sizable advantage when Super HD arrives and content storage becomes a headache for a lot of people.

With the surprise release of the NEX-VG900 full frame, it's pretty obvious that Sony has big and aggressive plans for the NEX system.

Bitrate alone doesn't mean nothing

Ha ha...Dynamic Range alone doesn't mean nothing either.

The problem with low bit rates (and 24 mbps is very low) is that the compression required to achieve this is very substantial. Futhermore...it is lossey compression, no matter how clever the algorith. No problem for average consumer home videos...but not so good for serious acquistion and editing.

"Sony is smart to keep perfecting the high-compression technologies because the company will gain a sizable advantage when Super HD arrives and content storage becomes a headache for a lot of people."

Yep...but those algorithms won't have anything to do with 8 bit AVCHD! There's already far better codecs used in many semi-pro cameras...just not from Sony.

Pro Video Coalition detailed reviews, FS700 and FS700 dynamic range test, show that this $8000 camera delivers 1080 240p and 14 stops of dynamic range from 8 bit AVCHD. Which other camera delivers both within this price range? There's always 4:2:2 HDMI out.

 

Looking at the big picture, Sony is smart to keep perfecting the high-compression technologies because the company will gain a sizable advantage when Super HD arrives and content storage becomes a headache for a lot of people.

Yep...but those algorithms won't have anything to do with 8 bit AVCHD! There's already far better codecs used in many semi-pro cameras...just not from Sony.

FANTASTIC! Please show us the articles or tests so that we can all read up on these high compression technologies that are "far better" than delivering 14 stops of dynamic range from 24mbps 8 bit AVCHD!

FANTASTIC! Please show us the articles or tests so that we can all read up on these high compression technologies that are "far better" than delivering 14 stops of dynamic range from 24mbps 8 bit AVCHD!

Image quality is the result of a complex interaction of many variables. DR is but one component (an important one) which contributes to maximizing potentially possible best image quality that a given video camera can produce. However...possible maximum DR is far more a consequence of the hardware than the codec...i.e. it's the excellent Sony sensor in FS700 that's responsible for the 14 stops of DR. Also, to a lesser extent, the other contributing variable is how the signal off the sensor is processed. The bit depth of the processor is also important, but in a more comlpex (non-linear way).

Then comes the codec...the final compression of the information from the sensor to what is recorded on to the SD card. This determines how much of the original "Raw" information is discarded/manipulated/guesstimated (in Long GOP AVCHD).

I'm not saying tha AVCHD is a bad codec. It's a potentially good variant of the H.264/mpeg4 compression algorithms. In it's best form (non-GOP/all Intra HBR) it can deliver a superb image. Particularly if its 10-bit rather than 8-bit, particularly for color quality and gamut...and post grading. The latter is often overlooked.

Another misundertanding out there is that a higher bit rate (say via HDMI/external recorder) "doesn't look any better than what I'm getting with vanilla AVCHD". I see this nonsense often in comparisons shown on Vimeo.

A HBR file might not look "better" than a 24 mbps file in it's first generation...but try doing some chroma key work or color grading in post and see which final image looks better. After all the FS700 is aimed at users who are likely to do serious post production work...for which 8-bit long GOP AVCHD 24mbps is totally inadequate. Even all-I Frame 24 mbps would be a significant improvement...

The point I'm making is that the flavor of AVCHD that Sony has put in the FS700 is very mediocre and does not do justice to the potential of the hardware. It's artifically restrictive (no doubt to protect their more expensive camera range) and relies on people simply accepting their marketing palaver rather than demanding a better implementation of H.264/AVCHD in an $8,000 camera. Which would be INCREDIBLY EASY to do. Consider what the $3500 BMC does...and the codec it uses.

http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/4504/understanding-dynamic-range-type-of-sensors-and-film./p1

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/archive/index.php/t-290857.html