Video test: A99 #2 vs EM5

Started Dec 4, 2012 | Discussions thread
OP photo chris Regular Member • Posts: 281
Re: BUSTED
1

philbot wrote:

Shield3 wrote:

Why would anyone seriously purposely sabotage a test? To what end? You see he clearly owns the camera as I did. Did he draw all the moire on the roof in Microsoft paint as well? Geesh guys. Come on now.

I actually believe there is an issue with the A99 and video, in that it could certainly be better and half believe yourself and photo chris on the matter of how terrible that is.

However,

There is clearly something very odd with the frame grabs from the books on table evidence in the OP, and it'd help if he posted the exposure/ISO settings for those clips, because the noise in the green fabric at the front of the table is terrible, if it where a normal photo, you'd think it was ISO12800..

And that's not ignoring the fact that both camera's look front focussed slightly, the OP doesn't state wnat aperture was used, but if there where the same, then obviously you'd get less DOF with the FF camera, so you'd have to be more critical with your focal plane.

When things are this bad, of course people may call foul play, but all it needs is some common sense rigour in the tests to ensure that all variabilities can be demonstrably ruled out, however it seems oddly chosen test cases are presented, and no effort put to further testing to pander to the doubters..

How hard can it be to try and characterise things? A lot of use can easily accept the issues of camera's on here, but it needs more careful proof and analysis then it seems the most vocal are remotely willing to do, which leads me to think that quite frankly no wonder you can't get people on your sides..

Inside shots - 50mm, F6.3, iso 640

Outside shots - 24mm a99, 14mm EM5 FOV=28mm, F16, ISO 100 a99, 200 EM5

As I said before, I used focus magnify and MF to get a sharp image before hitting record, they were razor sharp before I started recording.

I'll post more later today when I get the time. Its no better with the HDMI out into my TV @1080p.

I've shot thousands of hours of video over the years, plenty for broadcast, I never had issues with my former FS100 like I do with the A99, plain and simple something is off and it isn't me.

Ignoring the still life, it still doesn't account for the ridiculously soft outside shot.

And other testers that aren't on this forum are reporting the same results with the A99 and VG900.

I still haven't seen a wide shot that wasn't soft, despite what others are claiming to produce.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow