a77 video bitrate at 1080p 60fps 28mbps

[hanugro]

Sadly Sony seems to think camcorder below 10k is not for professional/broadcast material. Their F3 can support 35mbps but with MPEG2 codec. Yet the same source said that 35mbps MPEG2 codec is not necessarily better than 28mbps AVCHD codec (which use MPEG4/H.264?). NEXFS100 is a e-mount camera and even though it is higher version than VG20, it is still consumer class.

If you are planning to make a holywood movie, I think AVCHD (I am not sure it is actually a codec or a container) will not cut it. It is said to require more powerfull computer to edit than regular H.264 in MP4 codec.

But I am already satisfied with watching 1080p MKV with only less than 10-20mbps. I realized that many clips/movie that play ugly in my full HD 21.5" PC monitor turn out to play just nice on large 40" TV with media player. Maybe my 3 year old graphic card the culprit?

So bottom line is wait until Sony release FF dSLT next year (to compare with 5D mk2 which is a FF dSLR). But even then, I still think Sony will stick with AVCHD 2.0 spec to avoid it to clash with its broadcasting (pro) line of camcorder.

 

[Cy Cheze]

Sadly Sony seems to think camcorder below 10k is not for professional/broadcast material. Their F3 can support 35mbps but with MPEG2 codec. Yet the same source said that 35mbps MPEG2 codec is not necessarily better than 28mbps AVCHD codec (which use MPEG4/H.264?). NEXFS100 is a e-mount camera and even though it is higher version than VG20, it is still consumer class.

IMHO, a $50 "close-out" HD Flip shoots pretty good daylight video. For $200, you could assemble several at choice locations and shoot video that, once edited properly, would obtain more viewer appreciation than what you'd get with a single $20k rig mounted on a single $20 high-end Steadicam robo suit. But pro's often need to invest in the expensive stuff simply to convince clients they are pros.

What I don't understand about the VG20 is why anyone would prefer it to a less expensive a77 or even a NEX5n. The "ergonomics" argument does not apply, since any hand-held video will be equally prone to "amateur appearance," without a tripod or mechanical stabilizer of some sort.

If you are planning to make a holywood movie, I think AVCHD (I am not sure it is actually a codec or a container) will not cut it. It is said to require more powerfull computer to edit than regular H.264 in MP4 codec.

Were I to consider a Hollywood production, first I'd need a producer who could raise a few million dollars for set decorations, lighting, sound mixing, score, script, actors, and permits to shoot on location--plus the necessary distribution commitments to assure recovery of all those costs. The $100k to $200k portion spend to buy or rent cameras would be chump change, in that context.

But I am already satisfied with watching 1080p MKV with only less than 10-20mbps. I realized that many clips/movie that play ugly in my full HD 21.5" PC monitor turn out to play just nice on large 40" TV with media player. Maybe my 3 year old graphic card the culprit?

Raw clips? Or edited (and recoded or compressed) work?

The 1920x1080 60i AVCHD at 17mbps probably achieves 85% of what most lay viewers are able to discern as HD video. The incremental advantages of higher bitrates or 60p probably matter less than sensor size, dynamic range, or expert scene control factors exogenous to the camera itself.

Video quality depends, in the end, on the ability to keep viewer attention. That is more a function of subject, editing, and audio, than of high bitrate. Isn't the most frequent compliment paid to a video something like: "Hey, nice music. What group or CD? Next in order would be: "Really funny!" A compliment of the "barely any compression artifacts or moiré" would hardy be typical of what drives most viewer "hits."

Also remember that many people who get a YT video link will watch only the 480p default view version, since the HD version will need too much time to buffer unless they pay $$$ for premium web service.

Blu-ray disc is perhaps the "gold standard" for HD video, but it's hard for enthusiasts to compare that, without lots of trouble. 1080 60p Blu-ray players aren't likely to become widespread any time soon. It's also hard to compare results if some display screens are 60hz and others are 240hz.

So bottom line is wait until Sony release FF dSLT next year (to compare with 5D mk2 which is a FF dSLR). But even then, I still think Sony will stick with AVCHD 2.0 spec to avoid it to clash with its broadcasting (pro) line of camcorder.

Maybe Sony will launch something like that, but someone would divorce me if spent > $20k for a "toy," and cite that expenditure as proof that I could support lavish alimony.

 

[Cy Cheze]

I doubt that very many will buy an A77 with the main purpose of shooting video, ...

All sort of eccentric reasons, on the margin, motivate buyer choice. Some people pick SUVs for AWD or a moon roof they seldom need, or the location and number of cupholders, which they need quite often.

Would they buy it, over an a55 or a65, and pay the extra $$$ simply for the magnesium alloy body?

Arguably, 1080 60p video, and better sensor heat control, are a better hedge against obsolescence than the magnesium body and weather sealing are protection against an unplanned fall and dunk on the beach.

 

[Kilrah]

Sadly Sony seems to think camcorder below 10k is not for professional/broadcast material. Their F3 can support 35mbps but with MPEG2 codec. Yet the same source said that 35mbps MPEG2 codec is not necessarily better than 28mbps AVCHD codec (which use MPEG4/H.264?).

I have a PMW-EX1R and can tell you that the 35Mbps 8bit 4:2:0 MPEG-2 turns out VERY good compared to any AVCHD cam, even the semipro lines like the NX5 from Sony or the equivalents from Panasonic. It's also way lighter in terms of processing.

But today it's not much of a problem anymore, if you want higher quality you shell out $1000-1500 and get an Atomos Ninja or Samurai external recorder that you plug respectively to the HDMI or HD-SDI output of your camera, and you get 225Mbps 10bit 4:2:2 ProRes.

When I bought my EX1R I had expected to buy one straight away thinking the internal XDCAM EX would be so-so, but it's perfectly fine unless you have to do very specific or high end stuff. But then you'd most likely use a camera with better optics too anyway...

We don't know yet if the HDMI out from the A77 can be "clean", but if yes that could be used with it too. I guess there are little chances too, other manufacturers have been very careful not to let you do this and skip on buying a real camcorder. If I remember well it was Canon that on the 7D allowed turning off all OSD on the HDMI output, BUT purposedly put a little white square superimposed in the corner to ruin your recording.

--
http://kilrah.dynalias.net/gallery
http://www.rc-tech.ch/aviation

 

[hanugro]

What I don't understand about the VG20 is why anyone would prefer it to a less expensive a77 or even a NEX5n. The "ergonomics" argument does not apply, since any hand-held video will be equally prone to "amateur appearance," without a tripod or mechanical stabilizer of some sort.

I used to say that A-xx and Nex-x is a camera that has a very good video capabilities and VG-xx is a camcorder that has a very good still capabilities. If you shoot more video then you'd better go with VG20, IMHO.

Some notable differences:
1. 29min video limit on dSLT
2. better mic and maybe manual audio control on VG20?

3. if I am not mistaken VG10 don't do RAW digital still, all only JPG. And few other thing that is intended for a camera.

Raw clips? Or edited (and recoded or compressed) work?

I have to admit it is re-compress of a proper BD material. If there is not a lot of movement or busy scene with lots of detail (like sea scene or jungle), even 10mbps H.264 full HD satisfied me.

Thing is with video, when you view it in time any small imperfection in 1 frame is easy to completely ignore it. Whereas in digital still, it is easy to notice even, for example, JPEG artifacts. I won't bother unless there is major imperfection for several frames in sequence.

Blu-ray disc is perhaps the "gold standard" for HD video, but it's hard for enthusiasts to compare that, without lots of trouble. 1080 60p Blu-ray players aren't likely to become widespread any time soon. It's also hard to compare results if some display screens are 60hz and others are 240hz.

I think with a very affordable player that will happen. It all depend on the HD TV. There is no use to buy BD-player if you don't have HD TV. Within 3 years BD will be de facto standard (when ppl will replace their current SD TV). As BD player also play DVD and cost only marginally more expensive than DVD player.

 

[hanugro]

I have a PMW-EX1R and can tell you that the 35Mbps 8bit 4:2:0 MPEG-2 turns out VERY good compared to any AVCHD cam, even the semipro lines like the NX5 from Sony or the equivalents from Panasonic. It's also way lighter in terms of processing.

Well I just quote on the source (just a reply from another forum really). MPEG2 is definitely easy on the processing but MPEG4 usually can squeeze a bit more with little or no difference visibly. My understanding is you can get away with lower mbps with MPEG4 compare with MPEG2 for the same quality. How much lower I don't know. My interest in video is just converting format for convenience, like getting DVD/BD to mkv so I can play it with media player like popcorn hour.

But today it's not much of a problem anymore, if you want higher quality you shell out $1000-1500 and get an Atomos Ninja or Samurai external recorder that you plug respectively to the HDMI or HD-SDI output of your camera, and you get 225Mbps 10bit 4:2:2 ProRes.

Wouldn't it be equivalent of taking a JPEG pic and then convert it to TIFF?

 

[hanugro]

I think AVCHD 2.0 is a new update release just few months ago. AVCHD 1.0 don't support 28mbps (and 1080 50/60p?) so the software is not updated to last standard. I heard some manufacturer allows 40mbps AVCHD but that make it proprietary AVCHD standard that only their own software can decode.

Also strange that ppl say that AVCHD need more powerful computer to process compare with other MPEG4 format.

 

[HobbiesAreFun]

You must feel great concern for Sony users to come here and tell us about it - even before the "real" tests are out, i.e. tests of production hard- and firmware.

As I mentionned the camera looks great. By the way at the top of the A77 sample page for the videos, the following is stated: The video quality should be considered pre-production, but from a camera that Sony has advised is representative of final quality .

Representative. Doesn't mean much. Just wait and stop rushing things like all the people on these forums. When the real deal comes out you can say whatever you'd like.

--
-Eric (A learning photographer)

 

[imlammothion]

Hi!

I have been shooting with a TM700 for about a year and i can answer your questions

1) Is AVCHD 2.0 the same as, or different from, the 1080 60p video offered by some 2010-2011 Panasonic or Sony devices introduced prior to the recent "consacration" of the "standard?"

It´s the same. They just created the standart.

2) Why do some cameras offer 1080 60p at 28mbps or 24mbps, while the few available editing packages that export to 1080 60p seem to encode only at 24mbps?

it´s a manufacture´s choise. Probably due to hardware limitations. I use Edius and can export a lot higher than 24mbps. I think you can do the same with Primiere also. Mac´s had to be convertedto 60i before editing.

3) Are any software players optimized to support 1080 60p? Or do they convey it at 60i or 30p?

Windows Media Player or VLC can play at 1080 60p. And also if you have one the last generation graphics board with CUDA or Ati Stream, most of the decoding is done by the GPU so playing is smooth!

4) Does 1080 60p look any different than 30p or 60i appear on a 120hz display? Might a 240hz display make any video look smoother?

On a 240hz display video will look smoother not because of the video standart but because of the display itself.

5) If 1080 60p must be recoded to lower frame or bitrates to conform to existing Blu-ray or web-base sharing modes, is there really any advantage compared to shooting in 1920x1080 60i or 1280x720 60p?

The advantage is simple. You get the highest quality when filming. And in the future when needed it will still be on 60p. Imagine it´s like shooting RAW.

6) Do the sensors capture at 60hz, or do the cameras have 30hz sensors and use firmware to make the images appear as 60p? (This was the case with AVCHD Lite).

Can´t really answer this one but i belive it´s 60hz because at 60p it´s like shooting pictures at 60 fps

7) Even if Sony and Panasonic introduce 1080 60p Blu-ray players, how many consumers will buy them or create a sufficient viewer base to justify using the mode?

New consumers will probably by them. Owners will probably not upgrade. Anyway, i belive that the future of home video is not on Blu-ray players but more on online content or even flash memory!

--
Proud A100, A300 and A700 dSLR owner.
Ex. s602z, with an Fuji s9500 as backup

 

[hanugro]

http://pro.sony.com/bbsc/video/channels-cinealta/video-cinealta_f65_the_arrival_behind_scenes/

Sony announces a monstrous Cine Alta camera

Sony Electronics officially raised the curtain on its F65 CineAlta™ digital motion picture camera system, ushering in a new era of digital cinematography. Before a select audience of American Society of Cinematographers (ASC) members, press and high-profile industry professionals, Sony screened new F65 footage shot by leading DPs, demonstrated new features and announced its roll-out plan for the revolutionary camera, including availability and a surprisingly accessible price of just $65,000 (with viewfinder).

Announced here only days before the F65 will be shown to a worldwide audience at the IBC conference in Amsterdam, the new camera clearly signals Sony’s commitment to the Hollywood community and to developing the production technologies content creators need.

The F65 derives true 4K resolution – and beyond – at the point of image capture. “4K” resolution is 4096 x 2160, which is more than four times greater than the full HD (1920×1080) spec. Its unique 8K image sensor, with approximately 20 total megapixels, offers higher image fidelity than any other digital cinema production camera. With 16-bit Linear RAW File output capability, the F65 creates the gateway to an end-to-end 4K file-based mastering workflow.

“This is the camera Hollywood has asked for, designed specifically for filmmakers,” said Alec Shapiro, senior vice president of Sony’s Professional Solutions of America group. “The ability to shoot content in true native 4K resolution lets filmmakers capture more of what they’re seeing through the lens to fully realize their vision. The F65′s incredible imager captures more data, which translates to more information that can be put up on the screen. And access to an open and inclusive platform enables the integration of an F65 file-based workflow into other systems, creating truly exciting, and limitless, production opportunities.”

Sony first announced the F65 at the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) show in April, and the camera has already distinguished itself by offering superb resolution, incredible dynamic range and the truest color reproduction of any available camera.

With its latest enhancements and features, the F65′s capabilities now include:
• 14 stops High Dynamic Range with much wider color gamut

• Rotary shutter model (F65RS) to remove motion artifacts; four ND Filter built-in with rotary shutter.

• Wi-fi operation for remote control operation from tablet devices (including the Android-based Sony Tablet S and Apple iPad)
• HD-SDI output with viewing LUT for on-set monitoring with focus assist zoom

• 60 Minutes of 16 bit Linear RAW file recording onto a 1TB SRMemory card at 24FPS

Sony also introduced a dockable SRMemory recorder – model SR-R4 – which attaches to the camera to record directly to an SRMemory card of 256 GB, 512 GB or 1TB capacity with data security and sustained throughput of 5.5 Gbps.

Sony is now unveiling a powerful new capability for the F65/SR-R4 combination – the ability to switch recording between 16-bit linear RAW File and MPEG-4 SStP File modes. Users can configure the camera on a project-by-project basis, selecting either 16-bit linear RAW File for ultimate quality acquisition or high speed operation at up to 120FPS, or MPEG-4 SStP File (HDCAM SR native) for exceptional quality HD recording. MPEG-4 SStP File also provides full compatibility for viewing, offline and post production using either the free Sony PC or MAC viewer or products using the new Sony Software Development Kit.

The F65 is in high demand by the motion picture production industry, and Sony is now taking orders for the new camera. The first rental company in Hollywood to take delivery will be Otto Nemenz International.

“The F65 is more than just a new camera; it’s a complete system and a revolutionary approach to the digital production workflow,” said company president Otto Nemenz. “My customers are looking for the latest and greatest, and this technology more than fits the bill. I’m proud to be the first to carry this camera.”

 

[Spazmedia]

I have a PMW-EX1R and can tell you that the 35Mbps 8bit 4:2:0 MPEG-2 turns out VERY good compared to any AVCHD cam, even the semipro lines like the NX5 from Sony or the equivalents from Panasonic. It's also way lighter in terms of processing.

But today it's not much of a problem anymore, if you want higher quality you shell out $1000-1500 and get an Atomos Ninja or Samurai external recorder that you plug respectively to the HDMI or HD-SDI output of your camera, and you get 225Mbps 10bit 4:2:2 ProRes.

Thank you! I have been looking for a field recorder. Btw do you know of any forums more knowledgeable than here for video, especially for independent producers? (think low cost digital production)

When I bought my EX1R I had expected to buy one straight away thinking the internal XDCAM EX would be so-so, but it's perfectly fine unless you have to do very specific or high end stuff.

Like compositing. I can't image with all the artefact in the samples seen so far from the a77 it would be very easy to pull a clean key.

We don't know yet if the HDMI out from the A77 can be "clean", but if yes that could be used with it too. I guess there are little chances too, other manufacturers have been very careful not to let you do this and skip on buying a real camcorder. If I remember well it was Canon that on the 7D allowed turning off all OSD on the HDMI output, BUT purposedly put a little white square superimposed in the corner to ruin your recording.

--

That's REALLY cheeky on Canon's part...

 

[Kenneth Daves]

To put it into perspective at the maximum bitrate for the a77, each frame has a size of approx 60 KB while an uncompressed 1080p frame with 8 bits per channel is about 6 MB ...

Those looking to new line of Sony cameras to do 1080p at 60fps I fear will be a bit dissapointed. Even their new large sensor pro video camera, the NEXFS100,
uses the same codec.

How did you arrive at an "average" frame size of 60KB? Did you divide the megabits per second data rate by the frames per second? As I am sure you know, neither Mpeg 4 nor AVCHD work that way. Instead they compress video by creating a series of I frames (the entire frame is highly compressed) each of which is followed by a series of B (bi-directional) and P (predictive) frames that essentially record only changes from frame to frame. The claim is that AVCHD compression algorithms are more "efficient" than mpeg 4 so that the data rate can be lower and still result in comparable video quality when decompressed for playback or editing. I haven't seen any tests that prove otherwise.

--
Ken Daves