Sony's RX100-series has always been a capable machine for video as well as stills, and the Mark V version is no exception. With the addition of phase-detection autofocus and oversampled 4K footage, we've been impressed with what we've seen so far. In this video, you'll be able to check out 4K footage, 1080p footage (scaled to 4K), high frame rate footage, and more. Note that for the image stabilization demo, no attempt was made to smooth the camera motion - just normal walking with a camera out in front.
The only adjustments applied in post were to conform the higher frame rate clips to 30p, and to upscale as necessary to fill the frame (there is no change in crop-factor when going to 1080p as long as you haven't enabled active or intelligent active IS, the shift in the fountain shot was just a reframing of the camera on our tripod). Otherwise, all clips are straight-out-of-camera.
There are some amazingly naive comments regarding the camera not being suitable for broadcast video. In the overall scheme of broadcast and cable news today, failing EBU or BBC standards means nothing. Anyone who watches television news on a daily basis will see camera phone video of news events, scenes shot vertically, etc. In the US, quality is additionally compromised by cost squeezing networks (sending an on the air person out to do a live shot who has to do his/her own technical set up).
Broadcast delivery systems are still pretty much 1080i, not even 1080P. The compromises along the entire chain from acquisition to over the air, including the damage cable and satellite providers inflict, make the nit picks irrelevant.
Here's the weakness i see, the AF tracking (at least in video). When the last shot used face tracking and when you guys used single point on Sam's face, it was the same both times. It starts in focus, then the camera is moved towards or away and the camera doesn't get the face back in focus till the movement stops.
You could almost get the same results just using S-AF at the beginning and then after movement stops at the end. There wasn't anything "continuous" about it. I know it's harder to do in video but we have seen how many generations of OSPDAF? Canon is on their 2nd gen of DPAF and they do much better at actual continuous tracking for video.
Maybe not a deal breaker for people who want this cam but C-AF in video just isn't there yet in anybody but Canon. Reason i bring this up is i assume DPR are implying it's good and i just didn't see that.
Did you even read my post? I specifically compared on sensor PDAF to canon's Dual pixel. I don't know anything about Canon's 1" models other than i wasn't aware they had DPAF. This had nothing to do with differing formats, it was about differing on sensor AF designs and how they work in video.
I already shared my opinion, that the video C-AF didn't seem very good. I thought my post was pretty clear.
Thematic, I posted earlier on in these comments that people are for some reason comparing this camera to much larger cameras. That they do it with a straight face and zero self awareness is remarkable.
In this form factor, this camera's real competition are the four models that preceded it.
Umm no you don't get to tell me what to compare. The M5 is actually close in price to the RX100 (lenses aside), and again, im comparing on sensor AF performance. I will compare medium format to a phone if i want to, in this case the AF of the Sony was the point so comparing Canon's LV performance is relevant. Don't like it, don't respond.
@fater it doesn't matter what the form factor is, bc Canon will likely put DPAF in their next smaller ML bodies, including 1" compacts. At one point Sony only had on sensor PDAF in one camera (there has to be a first), at one point Panasonic only had DFD in one camera. Canon is up to 4 cameras so far, more will come.
If you think it's pointless to compare on sensor AF performance just bc the formats are different size then you have no self awareness. If anything, the RX100 has an advantage bc the DOF isn't as thin as what apsc and FF are capable of (with the RX's lens).
Again, for those who don't read well, im not comparing camera "models", im comparing sensor tech. Why are you guys running from this comparison?
Rx100 and EOS-M5 are the same price, the 80D is only a little more. Focus performance comparison is perfectly valid. The Canon DPAF system is the gold standard for video right now, and it's available in cameras at the rx100 price range.... bonus: the Canons have larger sensors! RX100 wins in other areas, but not focus in video.
@Max Iso Thank You for your observation and comment. It is a valid comment as it compares technologies in wide-spread use. PDAF sensors are in phones now, as is Dual Pixel AF (Galaxy S7). DPAF was first shown by Canon, but the corresponding patent is a joke and won't stop Sony if they only liked. Yes, Sony has to amp up their AF game if they want to stay competitive in the AF area.
Stabilization is a major weak point of the camera it seems. Would love to see it compared against 1" cameras from Canon, Panasonic side by side (i.e. on the same mount) while walking.
I don't think this can be concluded from the video. The camera was shaken too much to give stabilization a chance. The opening sequence looks pretty stable though (handheld too).
So they are scaling 5,472 to 4k (well 3840 across, 4096 isn't present, which is fine for pretty much everybody I assume), how does that work for aliasing and moire, as their previous efforts at small amounts of down-scaling haven't been great?
I did, in 4k, it didn't contain anything useful to make a decision, hence I'm asking. It did convince me the 240fps mode is a lot of fun and the stabilisation not so hot, but that was it. Did you see anything useful in the movie that's relevant to my question?
@Dr_Jon, you may be confusing things here. Downsampling (if supersampling) helps with moiré, rather than what you seem to assume. The A7s you linked to doesn't do downsampling 4k. But it is already better with its full sensor readout than line skipping cameras like many DSLRs.
EDIT Your a6300 link is misleading too. The aliasing 4k sample chart does look pretty good, just not perfect. And the a6300 may not do any supersampling at all, so your comment may not even be applicable. Did you check any facts before posting?
Downsampling can easily make things worse if it's done in a simple "easy to do in hardware" way. I spent a chunk of my life getting annoyed with hardware scaling solutions that were just bundles of problems. Generally the more pixels you start with the more you can get away with (if you don't skip any of them). You can do a pretty nice downscale of 5k to 4k in a fast CPU, with plenty of memory, in a modest amount of time, but scalers in processing pipelines can have access to limited amounts of both data and time. They may also do X and Y scaling as separate steps.
If you look at the EBU test poor scaling is explicitly blamed.
(Edit) I forgot to add, as down-scaling adds blur people often throw in a sharpening step, which can cause a bunch more problems.
It's certainly going to be much better than the A7S, going by the improvements made since. Especially the A6300 (the most recent in the list above) shows promise for the current product releases: most detail, least amount of moiré and least amount of aliasing.
Defaults. The default sharpening on the A6300 4K and A7SII output is still too high, the A7RII shows much less moiré still (less default sharpening) in APS-C 4K mode than those 2. It uses about 1.2X oversampling in this mode.
Whoaa, 2GB file. I wonder, why do we have to reduce the frame rate to 30 fps, as though our monitors cannot handle such frame rate. 60 fps adds a lot to the realism of a video, whether if it is just shot on a smartphone. It adds more to the IQ than 4K if you ask me.
This device seems to be an impressive compact video camera. I would like to experience those high fps modes but I just recall that the Samsung S7 or iPhone7 can do the same. For stills, I'd save the money for an APS-C camera while getting better IQ.
There are action cams that they can do 4k video. But no all 4k videos are the same. So, the same with high fps. You have the fps, but you dont have the détails. I hope you have the money to be updated with the last technology to have the best IQ. Even if it looks your iPhone is enough for you.
The benefits of 30p vs 60p (and lets add 24p to the list too) are subjective. There are many who maintain 24p looks 'better'. And recent cinema experiments with 60p have drawn criticism.
Recording at 60p can also introduce compression artifacts, compared to recording 24p/30p at the same bit-rate. This may be a reason not to use 60p unless you really need to.
@great Javier I don't know how much detail you need as you might be the one needing money to be updated since there is no such thing as best IQ right now as we are far from it unlike audio. Video compression kills IQ already. The video capability should least closely match the intended medium. So yeah, iPhone video taking matches the capability of its screen.
Let's see multiply 1920 by 1080, that is just about 2 megapixels. Pretty overkill for the RX100 or larger systems but just fine for action cameras or smartphones.
Going back, even if I had a 4K screen. It won't impress unless it has at least 60 fps.
If I recall, the rule of thumb is that the effective exposure for video is double the fps. That means you'd be shooting 60p with each frame exposed at 1/120s.
1/120 is a pretty short shutter speed by video standards and will result in sharp detail and very little movement blur. In many situations this is not desirable. Video often looks better with plenty of motion blur in each frame.
But, again, that's subjective. Fast shutter speeds have been used for certain stylistic effects in film. But usually only sparingly. See: The beach scene of Saving Private Ryan; That bit on the bridge in MI:3.
Well, optical stabilisation has his limits. It will delete vibrations. But big movements like steps is another business. For that the camera need to delete a pat of the picture to analyse the whole movement. I suppose it makes an everage of the movement.
Point being, since Digital Photography Review is devoting a significant portion of their attention to video, it would be beneficial to present the side my side features of and reviews of video cameras as well.
Because Sony wants to sell you 4k TV sets. They have purposely pulled back on the quality of 1080 (1080 was much better on the A6000) to make you THINK you need 4K, so you are more likely to now go out and buy a better TV to view your videos.
I noticed the softer-look aswell but it's probably related to scaling to 1080p. You get alot more details when shooting video at 4K and downscaling to 1080p instead of just shooting in 1080p. I get the same results with my iPhoneSE, my 4K videos looks very nice downscaled to 1080p instead of directly shooting in 1080p.
If you are going to go through the effort of external mics, a $100 digital audio recorder is probably not too much extra trouble. I agree it would be nice to have a jack on the camera, though.
Additional recorder makes the whole system unpocketable. Plus the additional work for audio syn in post. I mean, this thing with a lav mic combination would be a total badass on the fly video shooter.
@PocketOrigin: If you need pocketable, You can use your smartphone as the audio recorder with a lav mic. Or you can put camera in one jacket pocket and recorder/mic in the other.
I know it's an extra step, just stating there are ways to make it work if you want it to.
I hear you. Which is why if you buy a Sony camera, make sure it has all the features which you really want, otherwise their likely to come out with the next version with those features 6 months to a year later. However, despite careful thought, Sony will still likely come up with new awesomeness that you didn't see coming. Then the value of your relatively new but previous version Sony camera suffers. So, you take the hit to buy new awesomeness and gulp while someone else gets a killer deal as you sell your previous version camera, because no one wants it at it's true value. Your elated when to unbox your new version of the camera, take some pics, and go to bed feeling good. Life gets busy, you snag a few photos and videos here and there, but not enough to justify the price, but swear your going to make great use of it next summer. Next summer comes, the new new version of the camera is released. You think "F my life. I should have just kept my old version and took photos."
I doubt I'll ever buy another fixed focal camera again after buying the Leica Typ 109 for $1300. I never use it. I'll still probably rent this new Sony though to try the cool video modes 👍🏻 #HipsterCamera
I'm not sure why this has 5 Likes. Either people are sarcastically Liking comments or there are more complete idiots on here than originally thought. :D
Reading all the comments on all the stories here about this camera I'm under the impression the comment and votes are NOT sarcasm. Sarcasm is reserved for 100 megapixel cameras.
....didn't know we had shareholders of SNE on here, apologies to you sir/ma'am, I hope I didn't cause you any prejudice, it's still a waste of money though.
I was at a 11 v 11 soccer game (big field) today. I watched a guy set up a tripod with a special phone mount on it. He used an iPhone to record the game, I wonder how good/bad the quality was. He had to be at least a little serious because he knew where to stand in regards to the sun.
You need to calm down. You are spamming the comment section. But I will help you out since you don't seem to understand anything about photography.
a 20 megapixel still image taken at 24fps is 8k video when imported to a video editor (huge file sizes and not exactly practical). But its VERY impressive.
Vimeo and Youtube will soon fill up with people sharing stunning clips (5 to 6 seconds each) at massive resolutions taken with this camera.
Make sense? Please stop spamming the comments section or I will have your account banned. Post questions in the forums when you don't understand something.
Nobby, the other Sony basher and comment spammer speaks up. It's ironic that users of inferior cameras can't take it when the competition blows away their products with incredible new innovation. You might as well just give up and figure out how to enjoy what you have.
How is a 20MP still equal to 8K video. 8K video requires a minimum of 32MP. At best you can do 6K with 20MP, but due to the different aspect ratio of the sensor you need a lot more pixels than the minimum.
'ROTFL.. the pot calling the kettle black!" Thanks for the chuckle Nobby2016 hilarious for such a well known troll such as thematic to say such a thing. Claims to be a canon user but gives the 5D MKIII like a 1 star rating? My gosh if you hate it that much move on.....
The sensor is 5,472 pixels across so it's not 6k either (which is 6144 in Cinema terms or 5940 as three lots of FHD, i.e. 1920x1080, across). If you want 8k get a 5Dsr which is over 8k across so there's room for image stabilisation in post and still a full 8k output, just stick to time-lapses...
@princecody Has it occurred to you that Sony may not be aware how large your hands are? Perhaps you could cast one of them in plaster and send it to them?
In the meantime you could try putting the camera in an underwater housing. That might make it easier to grip. Just an idea.
Wow, Thematic how on earth did you come up with that conclusion .. Is it before or after the Sony overheating after a few min of recording... Oh I forgot your just one of those guys...
DPR did nice work in running these samples. The camera's performance was good and if anyone was satisfied with a 70mm reach, it might be a handy piece of equipment.
In fact, 2K video would have been quite enough to give improved images and it could have been in 60p, in these earlier models, with less overheating. Lower bit-rates and much more compatibility with existing computers, would also have been a benefit.
I was stating that mostly about the other 98% of the people who shoot video, who have ordinary and not expensive editing equipment and programs. I wouldn't have commented on the adequacy of 2K video, on a professional video forum. My AVS video-editing program cost me $60., when I bought it 8 years ago. It's probably better than what the majority of non-commercial video shooters have.
About 60 Mbps would be good for 2K/30p and 80 Mbps for 2K/60p. You'd probably need around 140 Mbps for 4K/60p.
"I was stating that mostly about the other 98% of the people who shoot video, who have ordinary and not expensive editing equipment and programs."
Why are you so concerned with this mythical 98% of other people?
"My AVS video-editing program cost me $60., when I bought it 8 years ago. It's probably better than what the majority of non-commercial video shooters have."
Wrong
"About 60 Mbps would be good for 2K/30p and 80 Mbps for 2K/60p. You'd probably need around 140 Mbps for 4K/60p."
Wrong again.
At this point you are just making stuff up and rambling about what "you" think other people might want or expect.
Don't speak on behalf of other people - either post from your own experiences backed up by fact or don't post at all. You help nobody when you post misinformation.
"Nice try" - wrong. It was a perfect try that ran straight home. Stephen, don't feed the troll ;) Those bitrates sound just about right, just like the diagnosis for non-professionals; doubtful that a significant percentage would ever buy any software for videoediting, and even then it'll be mostly an app or two for .99 to 2.99 greenies. With 60$ you're surely in the 2% of the non-professionals...
No, I've never been a prospect for an RX100, having handled one and disliked it, but I am committed to APS-C. My choice therefore was for an M5 (I have lots of Canon lenses) or for another brand that offers 4K. Now I know.
I don't need a camera that fits in my pocket. I already have an iPhone. I prefer to walk around with a camera attached to my wrist, or sometimes around my neck. Then it's ready in an instant. Cameras in pockets aren't.
My RX100IV actually fits in the palm of my hand or any pant pocket, takes stunningly great stills and video and is ALWAYS with me. I'm a professional videographer and am constantly amazed at its capabilities. Probably won't upgrade to the newest model (willing to wait for touchscreen and longer 4K recording), but am in awe of what Sony has done with such a small package. Bravo!
I love the comments section. Some people are even comparing this camera to full size cameras. I don't particularly like Sony as a company -- and shoot Nikon -- so I don't feel a fanboi need to explain to folks what this camera is all about. But it is clear -- to me personally anyway -- that some people just don't get it.
What they're able to squeeze into this form factor is simply amazing. And the upgrade chain they're surely projecting will likely keep sales coming in for years. Next will be a touch screen, then sensor upgrade, and so forth. And Sony can use the help I'm sure. It bled money for quite a few years and today I think 75% of its profits come from PlayStation.
It looks like they're positioning themselves well to turn a buck with a photography division focused on well heeled serious shooters. I know a lot of people complain they want more models targeting smaller budgets, but that strikes me as a dead end market for camera companies as most consumers in that segment are probably turning to their phone, not a cheap pocket camera.
Sony's clear about their profitability targets: 10% sustained minimum return on equity (ROE) for each division. This has been the goal for a couple years. The earthquake won't help this year but their targets long term are impressive.
lol. 2GB! My browser is saying it will take an hour to download with my horrible internet connection. Thanks for pointing out why 4K is impractical for most folks.......
Here in the U of K, we have crap weather, crap food (unless you're at a country pub, and even then it's getting pricey), our women are (sorry, has to be said) - fat, covered in tats and accompanied by their noisy brats, our roads are at a standstill, the railways don't work, there's trash on TV (like 'merica) and we still think we own - and rule - the world! Rule Britannia!
HOWEVER...
Thanks to OFCOM (only public agency that achieves anything useful over here), we now have 50MB Broadband at home for the same or LESS money than the 7MB we had only a year or so ago.
And now we have Virtual Reality, so the men will get fat too playing addictive immersive games over their speedy broadband. Oh dear, cannot win eh?
Crap food? London has as many Michelin stars as Paris. I'm not even going to go into the other points. But sure, w/e, you clearly dislike you're country, may I suggest you move?
And simply saying he needs a better connection doesn't really solve the problem that the majority of the world doesn't have the bandwidth to stream 4k. This therefore, whether you like it or not, does make it impractical for "most folks"
Go back 10 years, replace 4K with 'Full HD', replace your fibre internet connection with copper. The problem is, if it didn't have 4k we'd have 200 comments saying "I can't believe it's not got 4k", maybe if they'd done 3k everyone would be happy?
@MrTaikitso I'm nearly 50 and when I was growing up, food choices in the UK were indeed limited. I'm glad to say that now it is quite the opposite.
You can of course find terrible food anywhere (I mean in any country) but now due to education, and a growth in foodie culture, the UK really doesn't deserve the reputation it seems to hang on to. Just saying.
Unfortunately for many of us who live in the UK, that fast 50Mb broadband doesn't generally extend outside of big cities.
Personally I'd be happy to consistently get a tenth of that. Where I live in rural Wales 2-4Mb is normal and speed hasn't really improved in years. Obviously I don't do a lot of 4K streaming...
Yeah, London has Michelin stars restaurants, but that doesn't make up for a national cuisine. Food in the UK is still despicable, despite many expensive exceptions or international eateries in some cities. A national cuisine is made by what normal families cook at home plus what's cooked in their cheap and popular places. By the way, I appreciate Taikitso point of irony, that somehow shows that commendable british ability to make fun of oneself.
British cuisine by your definition doesn't exist any more, and if you really want a good example of the "meat and two veg" type of cooking most people think of, it's really not hard to find in my local city.
I was not trolling I literally did "laugh out load" when I saw the time it would take to download the clip.
And yeah I have the fastest internet that money can buy at my location. Fact is, outside of big cities/urban areas most of the world does not have enough internet bandwidth to support 4K.
Of course it "has" to have 4K but most of the world can't stream it or view it and even fewer folks can actually process it so yeah it may be the future but right now it ain't quite there yet. At this time for many folks 4K is just too impractical to be of any use.
Thanks for the discussion on british cuisine MrTaikitso et-al. It's odd but our favorite cooking shows are all from england (Master Chef, esp Master Chef pro, Bake off etc).
I'm not saying there isn't still a lot of poor stuff around, but finding great food across a variety of styles and fusion types is a whole lot easier than it used to be, and it's shows like that, that have largely changed things.
10min download for me BTW. Fibre to the cabinet technology is broadly available in the UK now, but still not for rural areas. If you're within shooting distance of even a modest town you can (largely) get it, and even small villages are now doing their own here. My friend and his neighbours are the local ISP company :-)
The question is how long 4k can record. RX 100 V 5 minutes cannot compete against Panasonic LX 10 more practical 15 minutes 4k and capable of extracting still images from 4k video.
That's a good point. But for short bursts, I doubt if it matters. If you're shooting long scenes let's say a conference, switch to 1080. Also, the Sony has a eye level digital viewfinder and slow-mo speeds such as 1080p 120 frames per second and ultra high slo-mo.
Not to mention that the ergonomic of RX100 is so poor that you can't really hold it too long for video. I have a RX100 IV. If I try to shoot video one-handed, If I care to see what I am shooting, then at best I can manage is about 30 second to a minute of continues shooting. For any longer duration, I usually ended up palming it. Don't get me wrong, I love my little RX100. I don't consider it as a camera, but rather to me, It's a great electronic gadget that can create amazing picture and video.
The 4K downsized to 1080 is sharper than just shooting 1080. I see that on my model IV as well as this sample video. It's particularly noticeable if there are letters in the scene to check sharpness, something I tried with mine.
It would be nice if you could get 60 frame rate. But that's not available in the camera or in my Adobe Photoshop Premiere Elements video processing program. Unless you're outputting 1080 where you can get 30f or 60f (or 24 f for that matter), 4K limit is 30p.
On my 4K UHDTV (Sony 75"), you really have to pixel peep to see the difference between 1080 (upscaled by the TV to 4K) vs. 4K original. 95% of the people won't notice the difference. Or care.
Of course it's nice to have the 4K to allow for cropping.
One other thing. The IS modes above optical, (Sony calls them Active and Intelligent), do provide some additional steadiness, but you lose some of the angle of the picture as Sony uses the edges to eliminate the motion effect. If you look at the test video, you'll see the wide angle decrease on these modes.
One other thing. You cannot publish 4K to a disk with menus etc. You can copy 4K stream to a DVD or B-R disk however but you'll need a 4K BluRay player to see it. Otherwise, you copy the 4K stream to a memory card that you can plug into a 4k UHDTV. The earlier BluRay players are HD 1080 only.
Unless you are playing the unedited 4K captured video, the video processing program will reduce the bit rate and overall pixels of the 4K so it won't be as good as the camera captured video, but more resolution than captured 1080.
Interesting. I have a 2.5k monitor and usually there's very little difference between 1080p and 4k video, but in this sample it's very obvious.
Makes me think it's rather the 1080p not being at its best rather than anything else. In other words it probably wouldn't take that much to make 1080p better, but this works as a selling point for 4k I guess.
The slo-mo is pretty though and generally still more useful than 4k methinks.
(I'm looking forward to 4k future but at this point it's still quite a pain IMO.)
...go for an UHD TV and you will see that everything below an oversampled UHD recording is pain, especially when you compare to native stuff from the a6300 which is even better than the RX100V!
I haven't had a chance to do proper comparisons on a 4k monitor/tV, but I find it hard to believe. When I view a 1280*720 picture stretched to my 2560*1440 display and compare it to the same pic with actual 2560*1440 resolution - then pretty much the same amount of difference should be between 1080p and 4k video, unless one of them is cheated in some way. And that difference is not that huge. Noticeable but not earth-shattering (not for me anyway, I'm not an image quality buff).
Does this overheat like the other Sony's? I find it very useful that I don't need to use gloves in the winter in Scandinavia when using a Sony. Great feature!
It's all a marketing purposed thing: you make it small, so it's bad if you wear gloves because of the form factor. Solution, make it small, make it so it heats like an oven and then you don't need to wear gloves and then you solve the form factor problem
I'm not sure what's going on here. Even viewing on an HD (1920x1200) display, the amount of extra detail in the 4K shot is unbelievable. It's not just youtube - I downloaded the clip and it's the same thing. So the player is downscaling the video but I wouldn't have expected that much difference. To those saying you don't need 4K - well you're wrong (and even if you couldn't see any difference, you'd still want it; to suggest otherwise is to be shortsighted).
4K footage viewed on a 1080p screen is sharper than native 1080p because high frequencies are not impacted by the same Nyquist frequency limit. Actually, downsampling from 4K is the only way to get the most out of 1080p as 4K would be at its best when downsampled from 8K.
Canon does the same, the 1080p on the 1DX II is basically not worth using, well it's rubbish truth be told; you have to resample 4K down to 1080p for good quality. It's the same on the 5D4 too.
There are several companies that intrudes special heat sinkers. Ive tried on several Sony cameras and can state that the result is OK. Recording is thermally unlimited😄
Having fun trolling? Of course you can still get video from it, but having no reliable means of choosing focus during shooting makes it useless for many creative purposes as anything but a b-cam.
No troll. I personally wouldn't attempt to use a camera in any serious video shooting that didn't either have the option of a decent manual focus, or touch to focus.
So, in your scenario, someone is trying to hook an RX100 up to a rig to get pull focus, XLR, and the like? Is that what you mean by "serious video shooting"? In your first post you said it was not usable without a touch screen. Professional video cameras do not have touch screens. Neither of those markets are what this camera is designed for. You, Sir, are wearing clown shoes.
Professional video cameras by and large have either the ability to attach a decent manual focus lens or a touch screen. And since when does "serious"=professional? Sure, for a quick holiday snap style video neither is needed, but then again neither is S-Log and 4k.
"Sure, for a quick holiday snap style video neither is needed..." Now you are getting it. Look at this camera as a way to preserve those high quality moments for the future.
Then why market it with zebras and s-log and any number of other video features that aren't needed for quick holiday snaps? And why on earth pay for such an expensive camera if all you're doing is holiday snaps?
I give up. You guys enjoy shooting whatever random little holiday snaps with an overpriced camera that you want. I'll stick to buying cameras that have the features I deem necessary for my work.
There's just no having a reasonable conversation with some people.
It's an easy problem to solve, if you have a television that can utilize frame interpolation.
Most modern day 4K sets have a circuit that can smooth out 4K 30p.
On Samsung sets, it's called "Auto Motion Plus", which works by generating the "missing" frame, smoothing out the video like glass, if you choose to do so.
On other sets, the circuit has its own proprietary name.
LG's circuit, on their OLED 4K sets, works spectacularly well.
I'm far from an AV "purist", nor am I a professional cinematographer who can employ the best techniques using the best available equipment to achieve somewhat "smooth" looking film-like digital video, using 24p, which they do all of the time.
However, the OP asked about 4K 30p being "smooth" enough, implying that 4K at 60p was necessary to achieve the effect.
It's not necessarily, when using a television with the frame interpolation circuit, to have to shoot at 60p to at least see a smoother video effect.
It's a personal preference, of course, and having a television with the capability, in my view, would be advantageous to those at least wanting to have that option available.
Ive tried several cams and to my mind Sony'BOSS helps to solve the problem. The fps discretness became quite usable. But unhappy it is slightly not concerning RXs. Sorry
So I assume you have a pre production unit and know it overheats ? (note : I am genuinely interested in if it does as I am just about to put a deposit on one)
It is good to see how Sony has been pushing new features and trying new things with relatively quick iterations of this camera (and also the RX 100 series). While not everyone may be interested in 4K capabilities, it is a big step for those interested in it. The stabilization in 'active' mode has visible improvement.
Better dynamic range straight from the camera would be nice. Video from Sony's RX series has a very distinct look...a sort of action-cam harshness, but that's obviously subjective. Stabilization, etc., is nice, but I keep hoping they'll tweak the sensor a bit to produce something more pleasing. (Panasonic & Olympus seem to have the edge on that in this price range.)
What for? Canon is not looking to expand the customer base, they just want to keep their current ones. So if you are a canon user, just go and buy the 5D4.
It's OK if you don't need it, but if you can't see the difference on 1920x1200 screen you are either blind or there's something wrong with your screen. Since 4K contains more data to work with at higher bit rate, it remains way sharper after it is encoded (and especially after YouTube compression is applied). That's also why many content creators downsample 4K to 1080p instead of filming straight to 1080p. And that's even without mentioning the stabilization or cropping possibilities of 4K.
The only way there wouldn't be any benefit of 4K on FullHD screen is if the camera filmed pixel-perfect raw bitmap video without applying any encoding whatsoever, which won't happen, so it is kind of silly when people say there's no difference on lower res screens.
As Melchiorum already explained, even if your hardware and internet connection is not able to handle the original 4K video, you can easily see that the video which is available in YouTube 1080p mode (downsampled from 4K) is much sharper than video which is originally shot in 1080p resolution.
For the past few weeks we've been running a series of polls to find out what you - our readers - think of the major product releases of 2016. It's time to announce the winners of the first round of voting! Read more
It's the most wonderful time of the year – time to vote for your favorite cameras and lenses in our year-end Readers' Choice Awards. First up: high-end compact cameras. Vote now
The Sony RX100 V is the world's most advanced pocketable camera with a 1"-type sensor, and it's also the most expensive. For some photographers it'll be just what the doctor ordered, while it may not be the best choice for others. Read more
Since the RX100 first came out, Sony has introduced a total of four updated models to market and hasn't discontinued any of them. Should you save a few bucks and go with less than the latest-and-greatest? Find out which one is the right fit. Read more
No Nikon camera we've tested to date balances stills and video capture as well as the Nikon Z7. Though autofocus is less reliable than the D850, Nikon's first full-frame mirrorless gets enough right to earn our recommendation.
Nikon's Coolpix P1000 has moved the zoom needle from 'absurd' to 'ludicrous,' with an equivalent focal length of 24-3000mm. While it's great for lunar and still wildlife photography, we found that it's not suited for much else.
As a stills camera the Fujifilm X-T3 is a pleasant update to one of our favorite APS-C cameras, significantly improving the autofocus. If you're interested in stills and video, though, it's knockout.
The Nikon Z7 is slated as a mirrorless equivalent to the D850, but it can't subject track with the same reliability as its DSLR counterpart. AF performance is otherwise good, except in low light where hunting can lead to missed shots.
The Canon EOS R is the first full frame mirrorless camera to use the new RF mount. We're well underway putting it through our range of standard tests – take a look at how it compares to the competition and our thoughts on using it so far.
What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.
Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Sony mirrorlses cameras in several categories to make your decisions easier.
Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Canon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.
Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Nikon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.
What’s the best camera for less than $1000? The best cameras for under $1000 should have good ergonomics and controls, great image quality and be capture high-quality video. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing under $1000 and recommended the best.
Nikon's D3500 may be an inexpensive DSLR, but the company didn't cut corners when it comes to image quality. See how it handled fall colors and tropical seas in our sample gallery.
Nikon has released firmware version 1.02 that resolves a flickering issue when scrolling through images, an ISO limitation problem, and an occasional crash that could occur when displaying certain Raw files.
DxO announces the latest update to Nik Collection (version 1.1) that brings better compatibility, fewer bugs to the plugin suite it acquired from Google a year ago
Nikon USA has announced that its Z6 full-frame mirrorless camera will be shipping Friday, November 16th at a price of $1999 body-only and $2599 with the Nikkor Z 24-70 F4 S lens.
The Insta360 One X is the company's latest consumer 360-degree camera, supporting 5.7K video, including excellent image stabilization, as well as 18MP photos. And, in our experience, it's a really fun camera to use.
ON1 Photo RAW 2019 brings an updated interface, more powerful Lightroom migration, better camera/lens support, and more to ON1's flagship editing program.
Experiencing life through the lens of a camera might mean you miss out on special moments, warns Casey Cavanaugh as he shoots a short film through the viewfinder of his Hasselblad 500CM
The New York Times has teamed up with Google to start the process of digitizing more than five million photos stored in a vault nicknamed "the morgue."
Ambitious goals, new challenges and looking ahead to 100 years of the Z mount – we spoke with senior executives and engineers at Nikon about what lies ahead.
After years focused primarily on landscapes, Erez Marom leapt on an opportunity to return to his roots in wildlife photography. A trip to the mountains of Uganda photographing endangered mountain gorillas yielded some stunning photos – and an experience of a lifetime.
Digital cameras have made it incredibly easy to do time-lapse photography, thanks to the ability to take hundreds—or even thousands—of photos without interruption. This week, Chris and Jordan walk us through the process of planning and shooting compelling time-lapse videos.
The Nikon Z6 is the lower-resolution, faster sibling to the Z7, and has already shown impressive results in our preliminary testing. Take a look at how it performs outside of the studio.
Comments