Category Archives: Uncategorized

A Tale of Two Cameras – The PMW-300 and PXW-Z100 reviewed.

Which do you choose, PXW-Z100 or PMW-300?
Which do you choose, PXW-Z100 or PMW-300?

I decided to review both of these cameras together. Why? Well because many of the people I have met recently have been looking at both of these cameras as possible options. The price of both of these cameras is very similar, yet both cameras are actually quite different. On the one hand the Z100 offers 4K and a 20x zoom lens while the PMW-300 offers broadcast quality HD in a sort of shoulder mount design. Which to choose?

Sony PMW-300
Sony PMW-300

To start with both cameras are well built. They both feel very solid and well put together. I didn’t notice any creaks or flexing of either camera body. They both feel like professional pieces of kit that will withstand the bumps and knocks that they will almost certainly get. They are finished with a nice matt black finish. The Z100 appears to have a primarily plastic shell while the PMW-300 has a magnesium alloy shell. One small criticism here is that this has a slightly rough finish and is prone to marking from finger nails etc. But the marks can simply be wiped off. Of the two the PMW-300 feels just a little more substantial. Compared to the Sony PMW-200 I feel that both of these cameras feel more substantial and better built.

Sony PXW-Z100 4K/HD Camcorder.
Sony PXW-Z100 4K/HD Camcorder.

The PXW-Z100 design is very conventional. A handheld camera with a flip out LCD on the top of the handle and a second small drumstick style view finder on the rear of the handle.

 

The PMW-300 is rather different. It’s a little larger than most handycam’s, a little heavier too at almost 4kg (9lbs) and instead of a flip out LCD display features a large colour monocular viewfinder. The viewfinder is on an articulated arm that slides fore and aft on a sliding rail. The rail can be adjusted left right by about 30mm to give a small degree of left/right adjustment.

The hard to get at release for the left/right viewfinder adjustment.
The hard to get at release for the left/right viewfinder adjustment.

However I found it really fiddly and tricky to get at the release leaver for the left right adjustment. The viewfinder can easily be detached for travel or storage. The plug for the viewfinder goes into a recess in the cameras body and is then covered by a plastic plate that stops it pulling out.

Broken plastic cover for the viewfinder connector socket.
Broken plastic cover for the viewfinder connector socket.

I used the camera for a dealer event. By the end of the day at the dealer event the little plastic cover had been broken off. It’s attached to the camera via a thumb screw and a very thin piece of plastic. I suspect a lot of these will get broken. It doesn’t really affect the operation of the camera, but without the cover there is nothing to prevent the viewfinder plug from being pulled out.

The other major design feature of the PMW-300 is that the lens in interchangeable. There are two kit lenses to choose from plus adapters that will allow the use of conventional 1/2″ and 2/3″ ENG style zoom lenses. More on the lenses in a bit.

THE VIEWFINDERS:

Te PXW-Z100 LCD screen.
Te PXW-Z100 LCD screen.

The flip out viewfinder on the PXW-Z100 is sharp and clear. It’s a 3.5″ 852 x 480 pixel screen and the colour and contrast appears pretty accurate. In common with most cameras like this however it struggles in bright sunlight. On the back of the camera there is a small 0.45″ 852 x 480 pixel EVF. Now although both of the screens are supposed to be the same resolution, I felt that I could see more detail on the bigger flip out LCD. In addition if I blinked my eyes when looking at the EVF, I would see a rainbow colour effect. This is because the EVF display is shown one colour after the other, rather than all three RGB colours together. I also found that when I got the center of the EVF in focus using the diopter adjustment, the left side of the screen was out of focus. I don’t know whether this is a fault on the demo sample I had or whether they are all like this. To assist with focusing the camera has a coloured peaking system and via a button on the hand grip (Focus Mag) the ability to zoom into the image to check focus without effecting the recordings. The peaking also works in the Focus Mag mode, so you can both zoom in and have peaking at the same time. This is just as well as when shooting in 4K, focus is super critical.

The PMW-300 flipped up.
The PMW-300 flipped up.

The viewfinder on the PMW-300 is a delight! It is a little bulky and this does tend to make the camera slightly lop-sided from a weight and balance point of view, but with it’s large 3.5″ high resolution 960 x 540 screen behind a monocular eyepiece it is sharp, accurate and very nice to use. It’s very similar to the viewfinder available for the F5 and F55 cameras. The monocular itself flips up to allow the LCD to be viewed easily from behind or above the camera and mirror assembly flip up so that you can view the LCD from the side. In addition you can remove the lens and mirror assemblies if you choose. There is a mirror switch on the finder so you can reverse the LCD image when using the mirror or have a normal image without the mirror. As well as the mirror switch there are controls for the brightness contrast and peaking as well as switches to turn the zebra and display overlays on and off. Like the Z100 there is a Focus Mag button on the hand grip that enlarges the viewfinder image to help with focus, but on the PMW-300 the peaking is disabled when Focus Mag is engaged which is a shame.

THE LENSES.

The Z100 has a 20x zoom lens and the PMW-300 is available with a choice of two lenses, a 14x and a 16x. Both lenses being very similar, the 16x having a little more telephoto reach (available early 2014).

The 20x zoom lens on the PXW-Z100
The 20x zoom lens on the PXW-Z100

On the Z100 lens there are three rings, one each for focus, zoom and iris. All of these are of the electronic round and round, uncalibrated servo variety. I’m not a fan of these and this camera reminded me of why. The focus and iris control is a little sluggish so snap focus changes are almost impossible. When using the ring to change the aperture you have to go slowly to make sure you don’t overshoot. The zoom ring seemed pretty responsive and I found I could use the zoom ring to re-frame shots more accurately than the zoom rocker. The zoom rocker has quite a large dead band area where you push the rocker and nothing happens. Then you suddenly find the point when the zoom starts to move and if you’re not careful the zoom will start quite suddenly. It is possible to do slow creeping zooms, but finding the “bite” point where the zoom starts to move is tricky. Press the rocker further and you can have quite a quick zoom.

The PXW-Z100 fully wide and zoomed all the way in.
The PXW-Z100 fully wide and zoomed all the way in.

The big plus point of the lens though is the zoom range. Having been shooting with large sensor cameras and restricted zoom ranges for a few months it really was quite a revelation to get back to a camera with a big zoom range. I think I had forgotten how nice it is to be able to get a wide shot and a very long shot without changing lenses. In addition the lens is optically stabilised and this really helps with long shots on wobbly tripods or when using the camera hand held.

One thing I did note that was a little disappointing is that the aperture ramps as you zoom. If you start wide open at f1.6 as you zoom in the aperture slowly decreases to f3.2 when fully zoomed in. You can see this one stop exposure change in your shots. If you start at f3.2 or smaller then this does not happen, it only if you have the lens wide open.

The 14x lens on the PMW-300
The 14x lens on the PMW-300

The PMW-300’s lens is just like the lens on the PMW-200 and the EX1R before that. Except on the 300 the lens in removable, just like the EX3. There are two different lenses available. The one I tested was a 14x zoom and the other coming in early 2014 is a very similar 16x zoom with a slightly longer telephoto end. Again we have three rings, one for focus zoom and iris. Unlike the Z100 though these are all calibrated and have end stops. The focus ring has two distinct modes. Slide it forward and it’s a round and round servo controlled focus system. But in the forward mode the lens can be set to either manual or auto focus. Slide the ring back and it locks in to the calibrated focus scale and it is a responsive, accurate and snappy focus ring, just like a much more expensive broadcast lens. The zoom ring appears to act directly on the mechanics of the zoom lens and as a result in manual mode is beautifully fast making crash zooms really easy. In servo mode the zoom rocker has only the smallest of dead areas so finding the bite point and starting a slow zoom is easy. You can do a slow creeping zoom or a fast zoom and the control is easy. The iris ring is also fast, accurate and repeatable. For the money these are great lenses.

The PMW-300's zoom range.
The PMW-300’s zoom range.

The lenses on both cameras exhibited similar amounts of chromatic aberration. This isn’t particularly bad, but it is there none the less. One issue when trying to make a lens sharper or higher resolution, then CA becomes harder to control. The Z100 lens is a good example of this. Remarkably sharp, but with some CA, especially out at the edges of the frame.

Image Quality.

Lets start by saying that the laws of physics and optics will almost always mean that a small sensor with small pixels will be less sensitive than a larger sensor with larger pixels. The PXW-Z100 is at quite a disadvantage here. For a start it has a single fairly small 1/2.3″ sensor (that’s smaller than 1/2″ but a little bigger than 1/3″). Packed in to this area are 8 million active pixels. That’s a lot of pixels in a small space, so they are very small. To help make up for the small pixel size Sony have used a back illuminated sensor. Back illuminated sensors have fewer obstructions in front of the pixels so are more efficient than conventional sensors, but this advantage only goes a small way towards making up for the very small pixel size.

On the other hand the PMW-300 has three 1/2″ sensors. Sony’s EX and now PMW range of half inch cameras have always performed well in low light thanks to the larger than average sensors used, most handycams use 1/3″ sensors. The PMW-300 is no exception, not only does it have the same 1/2″ sensors as the PMW-200, EX1 and EX3, but it also has a new and improved noise reduction system. As a result the PMW-300 tends to show a little less noise than it’s predecessors. Even with +9db of gain added the pictures are still pretty good.

So just what is the PXW-Z100 like in low light? First of all let’s look at what it’s like in good light. Below I’ve included two frame grabs. One from the PXW-Z100 and one from the PMW-300. The shots were done within a few minutes of each other in good daylight. The Z100 was set to HD. Both cameras were at 0db gain. Click on the images to see them larger or at the original resolution.

PXW-Z100. HD, 25p, 1/50th, 0db, f6.8, ND1 (1/16).
PXW-Z100. HD, 25p, 1/50th, 0db, f6.8, ND1 (1/4).
PMW-300, HD, 25p, 1/50th, 0db, f8, ND2 (1/16).
PMW-300, HD, 25p, 1/50th, 0db, f8, ND2 (1/16).

So what do I see in these images? Well first of all there is a saturation difference between the two camera. The PMW-300 looks richer because it has more colour saturation. This is easy to adjust with either camera via the paint or picture profile adjustments. The next is the difference in dynamic range. The PMW-300 has better dynamic range than the Z100. Look at the highlight on the back of the blue car, the top of the street lamp on the left and the widows of the distant houses. The PMW-300 is holding these highlights much better than the Z100. Also look at the deep shadow across the grass, both cameras are handling this similarly, so the PMW-300 has better dynamic range. This isn’t really a big surprise as the bigger the pixels the better the dynamic range and the 300 has significantly bigger pixels.

Colours: The Z100 produces some very pleasing and natural looking colours straight out of the box. The PMW-300 has that slight yellow/green look that most Sony cameras have. This can be corrected or altered with a few matrix tweaks in a picture profile if you don’t like it, but as it has this typical Sony look it will match quite closely with most other Sony broadcast cameras.

Both cameras show low noise levels at 0db. The z100 is marginally noisier than the PMW-300, you can see a little more noise in the sky in the Z100 shot but it’s not in my opinion a significant difference. Sony claim 60db for the PMW-300 but don’t give a noise figure for the Z100. The Z100’s noise is a little blotch when the camera is set to HD, I suspect the blotchy nature is a side effect of the cameras built in noise reduction. But, again, I don’t have an issue with the noise levels of either camera at 0db. The Z100 is using quite a bit of noise reduction at all gain levels. As a result there can be a little bit of a difference in noise levels from shot to shot.

Noise comparison between PMW-300 and PXW-Z100 at 0db.
Noise comparison between PMW-300 and PXW-Z100 at 0db.

So while the noise is not bad, just refer back to the settings noted in the full size frame grabs. The PMW-300 is at f8 with 1/16th(4 stops) of ND and the Z100 is f6.8 with 1/4 (2 stops) of ND. Even allowing for the Z100 possibly being fractionally over exposed compared to the PMW-300, that’s a not insignificant 2 stop sensitivity difference between the cameras. This difference becomes even more apparent when the light starts to fall off. I rate the PMW-300 at approx 340 ISO and the PXW-Z100 at about 75 ISO.

So I did some further tests to evaluate the low light performance of both cameras. The first test you can see below. This was shot in my living room using a ceiling light fixture with 3 x 40w household light bulbs. I would suggest this is a fairly typical light level for a lot of living rooms at night and the type of situation that might be encountered when shooting an observational or fly on the wall type documentary.

PXW-Z100 at 0db, f1.6 in a typical living room.
PXW-Z100 at 0db, f1.6 in a typical living room.
PMW-300 at 0db, f1.9 in the same room as above.
PMW-300 at 0db, f1.9 in the same room as above.

As you can see the difference is quite striking. Just to be sure of my results I repeated the test using a chart as you can see below, both cameras at 0db and wide open.

PXW-Z100 at 0db, low light test.
PXW-Z100 at 0db, low light test.
PMW-300 at 0db with same lighting as above.
PMW-300 at 0db with same lighting as above.

So the Z100 is obviously around 2 stops less sensitive than the PMW-300. Can we make up for this lack of sensitivity by adding some gain? Take a look at the results below, the Z100 with +9db and +18db of gain:

PXW-Z100 with +9db gain.
PXW-Z100 with +9db gain.
PXW-Z100 with +18db gain.
PXW-Z100 with +18db gain.

This test confirms the slightly over two stop sensitivity difference between the PMW-300 and PXW-Z100. You can see that at +18db the Z100 is marginally more sensitive than the PMW-300 at 0db. 18db is the equivalent to 3 stops. AT +12db the Z100 is less sensitive than the PMW-300 and 12db is two stops.

The key thing here is to note that in a low light situation where the PMW-300 is just about producing an acceptable image at 0db, your going to need 12 to 18db of gain to get the same brightness image out of the Z100. Looking closely at the noise levels from the Z100, I would be reasonably comfortable using +9db gain if I had to, but +12db from the Z100 is too noisy for me and 18db is getting pretty grim. In addition there is some loss of contrast at the higher gain settings.

Low light is where the PMW-200 and EX1 etc have always been good performers and the PMW-300 continues this. I also decided to take a look at how well the 300’s new noise reduction circuits work, so here are frame grabs from the PMW-300 at +9db and +18db.

PMW-300 at +9db.
PMW-300 at +9db.
PMW-300 at +18db.
PMW-300 at +18db.

The noise reduction on the 300 is quite effective at +9db and if I had to, I wouldn’t be too uncomfortable using +9db of gain (I never want to use gain, but sometimes you just have to). Above about 12db however the noise reduction is less effective and also starts to reduce the contrast in the image quite noticeably.

So, the PXW-Z100 struggles a bit in low light compared to a camera with a larger sensor and fewer pixels. But then the Z100 is a 4K camera and can produce a much higher resolution image. Just how good is this 4K image as in many cases the Z100 will be used alongside cameras like the PMW-F5 or F55, both of which are capable of stunning 4K.

Well I think it does very well considering the small size sensor. The 4K images have nice contrast and plenty of detail. The deep depth of field that the small sensor provides really helps when you have street scenes like the ones below which were shot in Austin, Texas. Sometime’s you don’t want a shallow depth of field and for the kinds of applications I can see this camera being used for, I think a deeper DoF will be good.

6th Street, Austin Texas. HXR-Z100 frame grab. Click on the image to enlarge.
6th Street, Austin Texas. HXR-Z100 frame grab. Click on the image to enlarge.

 

Shop signs, 6th Street, Austin. HXR-Z100 frame grab.
Shop signs, 6th Street, Austin. HXR-Z100 frame grab.

Picture Profiles and Scene Settings.

Both cameras have the ability to customise the way the pictures look. On the PMW-300 you have 6 picture profile memories that you can use to save 6 different camera setups. There are adjustments for the matrix, detail, white balance and gamma settings. As well as standard gammas including Rec-709 (STD 5) you have the same 4 Hypergammas as used by the PMW-200, 400, 500, 700 and also used in the F5 and F55. The Hypergammas extend the cameras dynamic range and provide a very pleasing highlight roll off that is closer to film and less video like (Hypergammas should be exposed a little lower than standard gammas for best results). The PMW-300 appears to have a very respectable 11.5 stops of dynamic range.

The Z100 only has a single set of paint settings. Most are very similar to the 300, but instead of Hypergammas the Z100 has two gamma curves called Cinematone 1 and Cinematone 2. It’s important to note that unlike the Cinegammas found in the EX series cameras or the Hypergammas in the PMW’s the Cinematone gammas do not extend the dynamic range. The Z100 appears to have around 10 stops of dynamic range when using the standard gamma and knee settings.

PXW-Z100 gamma choices.
PXW-Z100 gamma choices.

The Cinematone gamma curves both tend to pull down the black and shadow areas of the picture increasing contrast. There is almost no change to the highlight handling. Personally I would not use these curves. I would rather shoot with the standard 709 gamma curve and then adjust my black levels in post production where I have more control. Having said that if you do want a contrasty look straight from the camera then the Cinematone gammas may prove useful.

Recording Codecs and Media.

The PMW-300's SxS slots and output connections.
The PMW-300’s SxS slots and output connections.

The PMW-300 like every other PMW camcorder is based around Sony’s SxS solid state recording media. This very robust professional media has been around for over 6 years now and is widely accepted in the pro video world. The cards are expensive when compared to consumer media, but they are very fast and very reliable. I’ve been using them for 6 years and never had any issues. The camera has two SxS slots and it will automatically switch from one card to the other as the cards fill up without any interruption to the recordings.

The 300 currently comes with Sony’s XDCAM HD codec as standard. Next year there will be a firmware update that will add the new XAVC codec to the camera. As it stands right now the 300 has two distinct modes. FAT mode and UDF mode. In FAT mode the camera records in standard definition DV, HDV and 35Mb/s 1920 x 1080 4:2:0 XDCAM. The XDCAM footage is wrapped in the .mp4 wrapper. The key benefit of FAT mode is the ability to use cheap SD cards via an equally low cost SxS to SD card adapter. The BBC use SD cards via adapters for some TV news applications. For those on a tight budget the SD cards are certainly an option, or they can be used as a backup for those times when perhaps you run out of the more expensive SxS cards. Just remember that SD cards are mass produced consumer products. In addition there is a lot of sub-standard fake media out there, so do be careful where you buy your media.

An SxS card and XQD card side by side.
An SxS card and XQD card side by side.

To get the very best from the PMW-300 you want to use UDF mode. In UDF mode you cannot use SD cards, only SxS cards or via an adapter XQD cards (more about those in a bit). In UDF mode the camera can record XDCAM HD422. This is wrapped in the broadcast industry standard MXF wrapper, is 4:2:2 and has a bit rate of up to 50Mb/s so offers better image quality than the FAT modes and fully complies with most TV broadcast standards. One limitation however of the Mpeg 2 encoding used by XDCAM is that the maximum frame rate that can be recorded at 1920 x 1080 is 30fps. So if you want to shoot at 50p or 60p with the 300 you have to drop the resolution of the internal recordings to 720p.

At the moment (December 2014) it is unclear exactly what frame rates or modes will be available when the XAVC codec gets added to the PMW-300. I would hope that one of the things that will be added is the ability to shoot at 1920 x 1080 at 50p and 60p, but at the moment Sony are being quite tight lipped as to what will come.

The PXW-Z100's card slots.
The PXW-Z100’s card slots.

The PXW-Z100 records on to XQD cards. XQD is a new high end, very fast consumer flash media. At the moment only Sony and Nikon use them and you will only them in the Nikon D4 camera as well as the Z100, plus via adapters in most other PMW cameras. Cards are available from Sony and Lexar and to add to the confusion they come in different speed ratings with 3 different classes of card from Sony, N, H and S.

The entry level “N” series cards have a maximum write speed of 80MB/s (640Mb/s). The H series cards have a maximum write speed of 125MB/s (1Gb/s) while the faster (and more expensive) “S” series cards have a significantly  maximum write speed of 180MB/s (1.4Gb/s).  There are both USB3 and Thunderbolt card readers for the cards so read speeds are also very fast. To record all of the various modes that the PXW-Z100 is capable of you need the more expensive “S” series cards. If your only going to shoot in HD then you will be OK with the cheaper “N” series. In December 2014 amazon were selling a 32GB “S” series XQD card for £220 GBP ($350 USD). That’s about half the price of a similar SxS card.

The playback and menu buttons on the handle of the Z100
The playback and menu buttons on the handle of the Z100

The Z100 comes with Sony’s XAVC codec. This is a 10 bit, 4:2:2 “I” frame only codec. In the future there will be a firmware update to add the more compact 4:2:0, long GOP XAVC-S codec. A further update will also add the ability to record AVCHD on to an SD card into the currently un-used SD card slot next to the two XQD slots.

XAVC is a great codec. It offers very high quality 10 bit recording at different resolutions and different frame rates. Unlike Mpeg 2 it is not restricted to 30fps and HD. It is the same codec as used in the PMW-F5 and F55 cinema cameras. It is almost certainly going to become standard on most Sony pro camcorders in the future. For post production it is already supported in FCP-X, Adobe Premiere, Avid, Edius, Resolve and of course Sony Vegas.

One thing to be aware of though is the data rates. These are higher than XDCAM. In HD the data rate, depending on frame rate is around 100Mb/s, that double the amount of data compared to XDCAM HD422 and almost 3 times as much data as XDCAM EX. So a 32GB XQD card will only last a around 30 minutes (depending on frame rate 24/25/30fps, 15 mins at 50/60p). If you want to shoot in 4K things get even worse, a 32GB card lasting between 12 and 14 minutes at 24/25/30fps and a mere 6 to 8 minutes at 50/50p. For most people a 32GB card will not be big enough and your going to need a couple of 64GB cards as a minimum. Once the XAVC-S codec becomes available as an option you will be back to similar data rates and storage requirements to XDCAM HD, but without the image quality benefits that the full XAVC codec brings.

The Z100 has two slots for the XQD cards and as one card fills up the camera will automatically switch to the next card without any interruption to the recording. As XAVC can shoot at full HD when you enter into the cameras S&Q mode you can choose any frame rate up to 60fps and the recording will be in full HD. The PMW-300’s S&Q mode is only full HD up to 30fps, above 30fps it is 720p.

Ergonomics:

The right side of the PXW-Z100.
The right side of the PXW-Z100.

The PXW-Z100 is pretty conventional in it’s layout. It’s comfortable to hold and the record button and Image Mag buttons are easy to access while shooting. In addition at the front of the hand grip there is a one push button to quickly set the auto iris, very useful when shooting run and gun. It has 6 assignable buttons on the top of the left side of the main body. Out of the factory 3 of these buttons are set to quickly turn on and off the zebras, peaking and thumbnail viewer for playback.

Focus Mag button on the handgrip of the PXW-Z100.
Focus Mag button on the handgrip of the PXW-Z100.

There are conventional 3 position switches for gain and white balance controls. The gain levels can be set in the cameras menus and the preset white balance can be selected between indoor and outdoor in the cameras single set of paint settings. Incidentally the menu look and structure in the Z100 is very similar to that of the PMW-F5/F55 and F65 cameras. Once you have made any changes to the cameras settings you can save an “all file” to an SD card in the utility SD card slot.

The right side of the PMW-300.
The right side of the PMW-300.

The PMW-300 is an interesting design. It isn’t a full size shoulder camera where the center of the camera sits over the top of your shoulder. Neither is it like most hand held handycam cameras. It’s designed to be used on your shoulder, but it isn’t a full shoulder camera. At the rear of the camera there is an extending shoulder pad that sits on your shoulder. As well as extending the pad has an additional flip out pad.

The release catch for the shoulder pad on the underside of the PMW-300 camera.
The release catch for the shoulder pad on the underside of the PMW-300 camera.

This is just as well because the release catch for the extending shoulder pad is on the underside of the camera. If you attach a tripod plate to the bottom of the camera you can no longer release the catch to extend or retract the shoulder pad. Not the cleverest bit of design! When I used the camera, I extended the shoulder pad before attaching my tripod plate and then used the flip out section when needed. Depending on how you adjust the viewfinder you’ll probably find that most of the time you don’t need the flip out part of the shoulder pad.

The PMW-300 tends to sit well back on your shoulder.
The PMW-300 tends to sit well back on your shoulder.

When using the 300 on your shoulder most of the weight is still carried through your arms. It’s not a heavy camera, so it’s not hard to hold for long periods. The big benefit of having it on your shoulder is stability. With your eye up against the eyepiece, you right hand though the hand grip and left hand on the lens it can be very stable. Shoulder hight is also better for interviews, I don’t like looking up at people from cameras held at chest hight. The 300 is still light enough to be used handycam style if you wish, although with the hand grip being quite well forward on the camera it’s not quite as easy to use as a handycam where the hand grip tends to be close to the cameras center of gravity.

The menu and playback controls on the handle of the PMW-300.
The menu and playback controls on the handle of the PMW-300.

Like the EX and PMW-200 the 300 has Sony’s direct menu system where you can use the arrow keys on the handle to directly navigate around commonly used functions like gain, exposure offset, white balance and shutter speed, as displayed in the viewfinder, without having to enter into the cameras main menus. There are also 7 assignable buttons on the left side of the camera that can be used to control various functions. Don’t forget that peaking and zebra controls are on the viewfinder with this camera so there is an abundance of buttons for you to use.

Connectivity:

The output, remote and timecode connectors on the PMW-300.
The output, remote and timecode connectors on the PMW-300.

Both cameras have HDSDI and HDMI. Both cameras two XLR connectors with phantom power for external audio sources and both have timecode in/out connectors (nice to see this on the Z100). They can both be connected to a computer via USB2 to off load media and they also have USB host connectors for connecting WiFi adapters and other similar accesories. In addition the PMW-300 has i-Link (firewire), genlock and an 8 pin remote control  port for lens control (same as EX1/PMW-200) plus an 8 pin remote port for connection to an RMB type remote control panel.

One note about the pxw-z100. The HDSDI is HD only. The HDMI can do both SD and HD, but currently the HDMI support is only at HDMI 1.4, so there are some limitations over the frame rates that can be passed over the HDMI at 4K. There will be a firmware update in the future to bring the HDMI up to the 2.0 specifications that will allow 4K at up to 60fps. In addition the camera cannot output both 4K HDMI and HD HDSDI at the same time. You can have 4K over HDMI on it’s own or 4K down converted to HD over HDSDI and HDMI together.

Power and Batteries.

The PXW-Z100 is a 7.2V camera and uses the very common Sony NPF style batteries. An NPF970 will run the camera for a little over 2 hours. This is a lot less than many of Sonys 7.2V cameras. The XAVC codec and 4K image processing require more power and the Z100 consumes around 15W. More power means more heat and there as a fan inside the camera to aid cooling. The vent is at the rear of the camera and there are intakes at the bottom of the camera. The fan is barely audible.

The PMW-300 is a 12V camera and like most of the PMW range it requires Sony’s BP-U type batteries. A BP-U60 battery will run the camera for a little under 2 hours. Many of the third party batteries designed for the EX1, EX3 and PMW-200 will not work with this camera. I did find that the DSM U84 worked OK and this ran the camera for 2.5 hours.  Once the XAVC codec gets activated it is possible that the power consumption may increase a little. One improvement over the PMW-200 is the placement of the external DC socket on the rear of the camera rather than inside the battery compartment.

Conclusions:

I like both of these cameras and would be pleased to own either. But of the two cameras, I think the PMW-300 is the better all round camera. I really like the 300, I think that Sony have really got this one right (with perhaps the exception of the release catch for the shoulder pad). The picture quality is once again best in class and rivals many much more expensive and larger cameras. It’s going to be a good all round camera that will find a home on corporate shoots, news and documentary shoots as well as in low budget studios. The new viewfinder is really delightful and is a big part of what makes this camera so good.

The PXW-Z100 is a bit of a mixed bag. There is nothing wrong with it as a camera, it is what it is… a small 4K camcorder. It does produce a pleasing image with good colours and the zoom range is impressive. But.. and it’s a big “but”, the fact that it is 4K and only has a small sensor hurts this cameras sensitivity quite significantly compared to a camera like the PMW-300. This isn’t a design fault, that’s just the laws of physics and optics at work. In addition the current limitation of XAVC only (XAVC-S will come later) means that your going to need two to three as much media for HD and six to ten times as much media for 4K compared to a 50Mb/s XDCAM camera. Even though XQD cards are cheaper than SxS that’s still a considerable investment in media that’s needed. If you’re coming from cameras with AVCHD and SD cards the media cost are probably quite frightening. If you are considering this camera you might want to hold off until the updates for AVCHD and XAVC-S become available. Having said that, if you need 4K in a small camera this is almost certainly the best there is at the moment (not that there is a great deal of choice). It will be a good run and gun companion camera to an F55 or F5 shooting 4K, provided you have enough light.

 

 

 

 

 

 

PXW-Z100 Frame Grabs

I got a chance to go and shoot with Omega Broadcasts demo unit PXW-Z100 today. I really forgot how nice it is to have a 20x zoom lens on a camera.

Anyway attached are a couple of 4K frame grabs for you to take a look at. Click on the thumbnails to go to the full size image. But do remember these are 8 bit jpegs, so not quite as good as the original image. I’ll be writing a full review of the camera very soon. Overall I really like it. Solid build, good pictures, 20x zoom and 4K.

Man on the street in Austin Texas. HXR-Z100 frame grab.
Man on the street in Austin Texas. HXR-Z100 frame grab.
Shop signs, 6th Street, Austin. HXR-Z100 frame grab.
Shop signs, 6th Street, Austin. HXR-Z100 frame grab.
6th Street. HXR-Z100 frame grab.
6th Street. HXR-Z100 frame grab.

 

 

Want to know more?

Have you read something here that you don’t fully understand. are you looking at getting in to the tough world of professional video production? Need to improve you green screen or chroma key skills. I’m running a range of workshops for all skill levels in Austin, Texas next week at Omega Broadcast. Click here for more details.

If you can’t get to Austin, how about Toronto Canada. I’m working with Vistek Toronto and will be holding workshops at SIRT Pinewood Studios on the 12 and 13th of December. Click here for full details.

Come and join me. I’m really good at teaching stuff that can be difficult to get your head around in a straight forward way.

Understanding Log and Exposure Levels (also other gammas). PLEASE READ and understand.

Please, please read this and try to understand how shooting with a high range gamma curve such as a cinegamma or hypergamma or log recording works. The principles are not well understood by many, even highly experienced DP’s and DIT’s get this so horribly wrong.

Why do so many get it all wrong? Because we are brought up used to looking at a monitor or viewfinder and seeing a picture that looks correct.

Why doesn’t the picture look right when we shoot log (or other extended range gamma)? It’s simply because the monitor does not have the right gamma curve (unless you have a log monitor), so there is a miss-match between the camera and monitor.

So what does this mean? DO NOT USE THE MONITOR TO JUDGE YOUR EXPOSURE unless you have a well calibrated Look Up Table between the camera and monitor!

For many people this takes a huge leap of faith. To shoot with a picture that looks wrong goes against everything most camera people are taught. Directors and producers will look at the monitor and not like what they see, perhaps encouraging you to adjust your exposure, because it looks wrong. In the end many give in and instead of exposing the Log or other gamma correctly they will adjust the exposure to something they are more comfortable with, something that is a bit brighter. But this is a mistake, an easy one to make but one that may mean your pictures just won’t look as good as they should. Please see this article on exposure with extended range gamma curves.

Some more things to consider before I go further:

Most TV and film production monitors are based on the REC-709 standard. The input into these monitors will normally be digital, either HDSDI or HDMI.

A digital signal contains a range of data values. For 10 bit video we have a total range of data bits from 0 to 1023. Our monitor will show data bit 64 as black (the values below this used for super blacks and sync) and data bit 1019 will make the monitor show the brightest level that it can. Normally data bit 940 is considered “white” and anything above this is brighter than white. It may be 8 bit not 10 bit, 8 bit uses values from 0 to 255. For this article I will use 10 bit values, but the principles are exactly the same whether 10 bit or 8 bit. Also I’m only considering brightness here, not colour.

A typical LCD monitor or TV set has a very limited contrast range and can only display about a 6 or 7 stop dynamic range. OLED’s are a bit better.

Thanks to the Rec-709 gamma curve in the monitor, when we send data bit 940 to the monitor we see what appears to be white. Send bit 64 and we see black, send bit 440 (approx) and we see a shade of grey that appears to be half way between black and white, also known as middle grey.

Middle grey is approx 2.5 stops darker than white (as in a piece of white paper or similar) and if we go around 2.5 stops darker than middle grey we will see something very close to black. So we can see that using bits 64 to 940 we will get around a 5 stop dynamic range on the monitor with a bit of extra range from bit 940 to 1019, so overall there’s our typical 6 stop monitor range.

Now, what happens then if we have a camera with a much greater dynamic range than 6 stops? Well, the monitor can never show the cameras bigger range accurately as it can only ever show 6 stops, if we feed say 14 stops into the monitor the brightness range on the monitor will still only be 6 stops. So now the contrast of the picture is reduced as we are squeezing the cameras large contrast range into the monitors much smaller contrast range.

Now lets consider the camera.

Lets consider a Rec-709 camera. If I shoot a white card, I record it using bit 940, if I shoot a grey card I record it using bit 440, that way the white card looks white and the grey card looks grey on my monitor which uses those same levels for those same shades, then I have a little bit of extra space above 940 for a little extra dynamic range. Remember, near black to white is approx 5 stops of dynamic range.

But what if I want to extend my range beyond 5 stops? If white is bit 940 and my top limit is bit 1019, I really don’t have a lot of data space to record a load of extra range, so I have to do something else.

What do the camera manufacturers do to record a bigger dynamic range? They shift the data values used down. Taking SLog2 as an example, instead of using bit value 940 to represent white, they now use bit 600 (approx) and for middle grey, instead of bit 440 we now use bit 347. This now gives us a large amount of spare data from bit 600 to 1019 to record a greatly extended range beyond our original 5 stops.

This shift downwards of our data levels does not just happen with log recording it also happens when you use almost any non-standard gamma curve. For example Sony’s Hypergammas and Cinegammas also lower the bit value for white down to between bit 700 and 800 and middle grey can go as low as bit 320 (depending on the curve used). Again this then frees off extra data above bit 800 to extend the dynamic range beyond our Rec-709 6 stops.

But this now gives us a problem. If I am using SLog2 and expose CORRECTLY and as a result record middle grey at bit 347 (32%), when I send bit 347 to my Rec-709 monitor it will look dark because a rec-709 monitor will show bit 347 as darker than bit 440 so darker than the normal middle grey displayed by the monitor.

It’s very, very important to understand that just because the picture looks dark, you are NOT under exposed in any way. It is just the miss-match between the camera an monitor that is making the picture LOOK dark. IT IS THE MONITOR THAT IS WRONG NOT YOUR EXPOSURE.

Now the next common mistake is the thought that: “OK, my picture looks dark, so when I take it in to post production and raise the levels, it’s going to get noisy”. Well, this is to small degree true but it is not nearly as bad as many assume. The reason it’s not as bad as many assume is that you must remember that YOU WERE CORRECTLY EXPOSED. You are not trying to lift an under-exposed image. Remember what I said at the beginning: “The noise in a digital camera comes almost entirely from the sensor”.

So, with the same camera, if we expose any given gamma correctly then as the amount of light falling on the sensor is the same, the ratio of sensor noise to signal coming from the sensor does not change. So taking a face as an example, exposed correctly (ie. with middle grey at the correct level for the gamma curve in use) the amount of noise on that face will remain constant across all the different gamma curves. Do note however that some cameras may have different ISO ratings for different gammas and this might have a small impact on noise levels (but that’s the subject for a different article).

Now consider what happens when we go into the edit suite. If the gamma you are shooting with is quite close to the gamma curve of your target display device, which in most cases will be Rec-709 for TV or the Web. Then a small level change in post will bring middle grey and your whites up to the level the monitor is expecting and won’t add any significant noise, after all we are working with digital images and digital processing and don’t forget – you were not underexposed, just using different data bits to represent different brightness levels.

But what about a more aggressive gamma curve like SLog2 or any other log gamma. This is going to need some big level changes, surely this is going to get noisy. Again, no, not if you handle it correctly. You really should be using a dedicated grading tool for any log material as this will apply corrections that are designed for log and this will minimise any added noise. But the other thing to consider is that this is where you should be using a LUT or Look Up Table on your output to convert you data values from Log values to Rec-709 values.

By placing a LUT on the output of your project you shift your data levels from one range to another. Your grading is done to the original material in it’s original range so that you can retain that full range and then your LUT is used at the end of your grade (on the last node) to then convert your data values from log values to 709 values. When you do this you are simply moving your data values. So if the original input value for a part of the image is is bit 347, SLog2 middle grey for example. On your output you just use bit value 440 (709 middle grey) instead. Your just transposing data from one range to another and this does not add noise in the same way as adding gain does.

Now, looking at Log and the way it works. You should note that in order to squeeze 14 stops of dynamic range into our normal recording codec you use a lot of compression in the brighter stops. Remember, every time you add a stop of exposure, to record everything in that additional stop you should be recording the new stop with twice as much data as the previous. But that’s impossible with conventional recording, the amount of data required is simply too big. So log records every stop using roughly the same amount of data. This means that the brighter stops are very highly compressed, so it’s very important not to over expose log to get the best results.

So in summary: When you shoot and expose correctly with a gamma curve with a large dynamic range (cinegamma, hypergamma, log etc) it will look darker on your conventional monitor or viewfinder. That is how it should be, that is correct exposure, you are not underexposed, so the picture will not be noisy. The dark looking picture is because your monitor gamma does not match the cameras, it is the monitor that is wrong, not your exposure. The picture will not be noisier than any other correctly exposed picture, even though it looks dark because of the monitor miss-match. So have the confidence to shoot with these slightly dark looking images. Especially if your shooting log where over exposure can seriously compromise your end results.

Alphatron ProPull mini follow focus.

Alphatron MiniPull follow focus.
Alphatron MiniPull follow focus.

Over the years I’ve used many different follow focus units. Some better than others, but the majority of them a similar size. I recently got one of the new compact Alphatron Pro-Pull follow focusses to play with. The first and most obvious thing about the Pro-Pull is it’s size. It is very compact. At first I thought this might be an issue as the smaller knob requires more effort to turn than a more conventional larger knob, but in reality it’s not a problem. If you need more torque you can use either a whip or slot in hand grip.

IMG_1724
MiniPull on an F5 working with a Samyang/Rokinon Cine lens.

The Mini-Pull has some really cool features. For a start you can reverse the focus direction by swapping the gear drive from one side of the unit to the other. But the one I really like is the adjustable, locking end stops. This makes it really easy to pull focus from one distance to another. You simply set the stops at your near and far focus positions and then turn the focus wheel between the two stops. If you then need to focus beyond the end stops you simply flip up the latching stop pin and you can focus beyond the end stops. Want to return back to the end stops then simply flip the stop pin back down again. Very clever, very simple and very effective.

The focus marking ring is magnetic so if you need to change or replace this it pulls off easily, yet is very secure when in place. The MiniPull is attached using a simple bracket that attaches to a single 15mm rail. This makes it very easy to adjust the MiniPulls position if your changing lenses and going between different sized lenses. This bracket also makes the MiniPull very compact, which for me as a very frequent traveller is a real bonus.

I used the MiniPull extensively on my recent shoot for the short film “Inviolate” to easily execute a large number of focus pulls. I rate it very highly if you need a compact and easy to use follow focus. It’s supplied with everything you need to get going including a nice flexible lens gear ring and the screw driver needed to attach it. Also included as well as the 0.8 pitch gear drive is a drive wheel with a rubber edge that can be used with lenses without a pitch gear.

What’s the difference between Latitude and Dynamic Range?

These two words, latitude and dynamic range are often confused and are often used interchangeably.  Sometimes they can be the same thing (although rare), sometimes they may be completely different. So what is the difference and why do you have to be careful to use the right term.

Lets start with dynamic range as this is the simplest to understand. When talking about a digital camera the dynamic range is quite simply the total range from the darkest shadow to the brightest highlight that the camera can resolve in a single shot. To be included in the dynamic range you must be able to discern visually or measure with a scope a brightness change at both ends of the range. So a camera that can resolve 14 stops will be able to shoot a scene with a 14 stop brightness range and show some information from stop 0 to stop 14. It is not just a measure of the cameras highlight handling, it includes both highlights and shadows. One camera may be very low noise, so see very far into the shadows but not be so good with highlights. While another may be noisy, so not able to see so far into the shadows but have excellent highlight handling. Despite these differences both might have the same dynamic range as it is the range we are looking at, not just one end or the other.

One note of caution with published dynamic range figures or measurements is that while you may be able to discern some picture information in those deepest shadows or brightest highlights, just how useable both ends of the range are will depend on just how the camera performs at it’s extremes. It is not uncommon for the darkest stop to be so close to the cameras noise floor that in reality it’s barely useable, but as it can be measured it will be included in the manufacturers dynamic range figures.

This brings us on to latitude because latitude is a measure of just how flexible you can be with your exposure without significantly compromising the finished picture. The latitude will always be less than the cameras dynamic range. With a film camera, the film stock would have a sensitivity value or ISO. You would then use an exposure meter to determine the optimum exposure. The latitude would then be how much can you over expose or under expose and still have an acceptable result. But what is “an acceptable result”? Here is one of the key problems with determining latitude, what some people may find unacceptable others may be happy with so it can be difficult to quantify the exact latitude of a film stock or video camera precisely. However what you can do is determine which cameras have bigger ranges for example camera “A” has a stop more latitude than camera “B” provide you use a consistent “acceptable quality” assesment.

Anyone that’s shot with a traditional ENG or home video camera will know that you really need to get your exposure right to get a decent looking picture. Take a simple interview shot, expose it right and it looks fine. Overexpose by 1 stop and it looks bad, even if you try to grade it it will still look bad. So in this example the camera would have less than 1 stop of over exposure latitude. But if you underexpose a video camera, the picture gets darker, but after a bit of work in post production it may well still look OK. It will depend in most cases on how noisy the picture becomes when you boost the levels in post to brighten the picture. But typically you might be able to go 1 to 1.5 stops under exposed and still have a useable image. So in this case the camera would have 1.5 stops of underexposure latitude. This then gives a total latitude for our hypothetical camera of around 2 to 2.5 stops.

But what of we increase the dynamic range of the camera or have a camera with a very big dynamic range. Does my latitude increase?

Well the answer is maybe. In some cases the latitude may actually decrease. How can that be possible, surely with a bigger dynamic range my latitude must be greater?

Well, unless your shooting linear raw (more on that in a bit) you will be using some kind of gamma curve. The gamma curve is there to allow you to squeeze a large dynamic range into a small amount of data. It does this by mimicking the way we perceive light in a non linear manner and uses less data in highlights which are perceptually less important to us humans. Even uncompressed video normally has a gamma curve. Without a gamma curve the amount of data needed to record a decent looking picture would be huge as every additional stop of dynamic range actually needs twice as much data as the previous to be recorded faithfully.

With cameras with larger dynamic ranges then things such as knee compression or special gamma curves like Hypergamma, Cinegamma or Log are used. The critical thing with all of these is that the only way to squeeze that greater dynamic range into the same size recording bucket is by adding extra compression to the recorded image.

exposure1This compression is normally restricted to the highlights (which are perceptually less important). Highlight compression now presents us with an exposure problem, because if we over expose the shot then the picture won’t look good due to the compression. This means that even though we might have increased the cameras dynamic range (by squeezing and compressing more information into the highlight range) we may have reduced the exposure latitude as any over exposure places important mid range information into the highly compressed part of the gamma curve. So bigger dynamic range does not mean greater latitude, in fact in many cases it means less latitude.

Here’s the thing. Unless you make the recording data bucket significantly bigger (better codec and more bits, 10 bit 12 bit etc), you can’t put more data (dynamic range or stops) into that bucket without it overflowing or without squashing it. Given that most cameras used fixed 8 bit or 10 bit recording there is a finite limit to what can be squeezed into the codec without making some pretty big compromises.

Compression point with Hypergamma/Cinegamma.
Compression point with Hypergamma/Cinegamma.

With a standard gamma curve white is exposed around 90% to 95%, remember a white card only reflects 90% of the light falling on it not 100%. Middle grey perceptually appears half way between black and white so it’s around 40%-45%. Above 90% is where the knee normally acts to compress highlights to squeeze quite a large dynamic range into a very small recording range, so anything above 90% will be very highly compressed, but below 90% we are OK and we can safely use the full range up to 90%. Expose a face below 90% and it will look natural, above 90% it will look washed out, low contrast and generally nasty due to the squeezing together of the contrast and dynamic range.

But what about a Hypergamma or Cinegamma (or any other high dynamic range gamma curve)? Well these don’t have a knee, instead they start to gradually introduce compression much lower down the gamma curve. A little bit at first and then ever increasing amounts as we go up the exposure range. This allows them to squeeze in a much greater dynamic range in a pleasing way (provided you expose right). But this means that we can’t afford to let faces etc go as high as with the standard gamma because if we do they will start to creep in to the highly compressed part of the curve. So this means that even the slightest over exposure will hurt our image.  So even thought they have greater dynamic range, these curves have less exposure latitude because we really really can’t afford to over expose them. Sony compensate for this to some degree by recommending a lower middle grey point between 32 and 40% depending on the curve you use. This then brings your overall exposure lower so your less likely to over expose, but that now means you have less under exposure range as your already shooting a bit darker (White with the hypergammas tends to fall lower, around 80%, so faces and skin tones that would normally be around 70% will be around 60%).

More highlight compression means exposure is still critical despite greater dynamic range
More highlight compression means exposure is still critical despite greater dynamic range

But what about Log?

Now lets look at S-Log2, S-log3. Most  log curves are also similar, very highly compressed gamma curves with huge amounts of highlight compression to squeeze in an exceptionally large dynamic range. With Slog2 White is designed to be at 59% and middle grey at 32% and with S-log3 middle grey is 41% and white 61%. So faces will need to sit between around 40% and 50% to look their best. Now log is a little bit different. Log shooting is designed to be done in conjunction with LUT’s (Look Up Tables) in post production. These LUT’s convert the signal from Log gamma to conventional gamma. When you apply the correct LUT to correctly exposed Log everything comes out looking good. What about over exposed Log? This is where it can get tricky. If you have a good exposure correction LUT or really know how to grade log properly (which can be tricky) then you can expose Log by one or 2 stops, but no more (in my opinion at least, 2 stops is a lot of over exposure for Log, I would try to stay less than 2 stops over). Over expose too much and the image gets really hard to grade and may start to lack contrast. One thing to note is when I say over-exposed with respect to log, I’m not talking about about a clipped picture, but simply an image much brighter than it should be. For example with Slog3 faces will be around 52%. If you expose faces at 70% your actually just over 2 stops over exposed and grading is going to start to get tricky and you may find it hard to get your skin tones just right. So, when shooting log make sure you know what the recommended levels are for the curve you are using. I’m not saying you can’t over expose a bit, just be aware of what is correct and that level shifts of just a 7 or 8% may represent a whole stop of exposure change.

It’s only when you stop shooting with conventional gamma curves and start shooting linear that the latitude really starts to open up. Cameras like the Sony F5/F55 use linear raw recording that does not have a gamma curve. When you have no gamma curve then there is no highlight compression. So for example you could expose a face anywhere between in conventional terms between say 45% (the point where perhaps it becomes too noisy if you expose any darker) and 100% it will look just fine after grading because at no point does it become compressed. This is a massive latitude increase over a camera using a gamma curve. It gets even better if the camera is very low noise as you can afford to expose at an even lower level and bring it up in post. This is why raw is such a big deal. I find it much easier to work with and grade raw than log because raw just behaves nicely.

In Conclusion:

Dynamic range is the range the camera can see from the deepest darkest shadows to the brightest highlights in the same shot. Latitude is the range within the dynamic range where we can expose and still get a useable image.

A camera with lower noise will allow you to expose darker and bring your levels up in post, this gives an increase in under exposure range.

Most video cameras have a very limited over exposure latitude due to aggressive highlight compression. This is the opposite to a film camera.

Bigger dynamic range does not always mean greater latitude.

Cameras that shoot raw typically have a much greater latitude than a camera shooting with a gamma curve. For example an F5 shooting SLog2/3 has a much smaller exposure latitude than when shooting raw even though the dynamic range is the same in both cases.

 

Convergent Design Odyssey 7Q has landed.

The 7Q arrives.
The 7Q arrives.

This is not a review, just my first impressions. Let me start by saying I have a very good relationship with the team at Convergent Design, so maybe I’m biased. But then I’ve always liked their products and thats really just because that make really good, innovative gear at prices that shake up the competition.

I was going to hold off and writing about the 7Q until I could put together a more in depth review and a video to explain the key features and camera setup, I’m still going to do that, but I’m just so impressed by the 7Q that I wanted to share my first impressions.

First of all it is light for it’s size, it’s also low power. I’ve been running it off a single NP-F970 battery and I get at least a couple of hours from that small battery.

There are a few very small things that are not perhaps obvious in the setup and workflow, but those are very minor. For example when you want to switch from normal recording modes to recording raw from the FS700 you must first load the software from a storage memory area in the unit into the operating area and that takes around 3 minutes. Also before you can view your rushes on a computer you have to run a routine on the Odyssey that closes any open files and makes the clips visible to the computers software. This is part of the safe eject process and takes a few moments, you can’t just pull the SSD’s out and play the footage back, you must eject them correctly.

That screen, oh what a screen. Forget the recording capability for a moment, this is one of the best (if not the best) monitors I’ve ever had. Being able to turn all the key monitor functions like focus assist, zebras, LUT’s etc. on and off without having to go into a menu is wonderful and the display is crystal clear even outside on a sunny day (although a hood will be needed for the very best results). I van see the Odyssey becoming a “go to” monitor for many people, it’s very impressive.

The Raw workflow with FS700 is straight forward once you have your settings correct. VERY important to set the FS700 to SLog2 in a picture profile (the 7Q will flash a message to do this on the screen if you don’t) and even more important to make sure you are at 0db gain as changing the gain on the camera effects the raw recording level and if your not at 0db you will have reduced dynamic range. The 2K raw pictures look stunning, 95% of what I get with my F5/R5, there are some differences and I’ll cover those in the longer review and the differences are more to do with the camera than the 7Q. This is so much better ergonomically than an IFR5/R5 and I think that for FS700 owners in the future 4K compressed will make more sense than 4K raw. Way to go Convergent Design!

The copyright minefield, who owns the rights in a commissioned work?

This is not legal guidance, it is not a replacement for advice from a solicitor etc. It’s based on my experience as a cameraman that has been in these situations many times. Read it, understand it, but please take proper legal advice if you ever run into copyright issues!

First of all what is a commission? Well it’s basically anything where you have been asked to shoot or produce something (normally ahead of shooting) and then been paid for doing so.

In respect of who can do what with the footage there are 3 different things to take into account.

1: Copyright,

2: Rights Assignment,

3: Licensing.

Unless the contract between you and the commissioner includes an assignment of rights the copyright almost always remains with the originator. However the originator can through a contract assign the copyright in the original to a 3rd party, in doing so giving up all rights and claims to the original. Most TV commissions will involve an assignment of rights, but it must be written into the contract to be valid and everybody involved in the production should be under a similar contract, because for example if the cameraman does not assign his rights, he keeps them, so the production company cannot then re-assign them because they don’t own them, the cameraman still does.

In all cases you must consider who is the originator of the material. If you are a production company that would be the cameraman, not the production company unless the cameraman’s contract includes rights assignment. The production company would have the copyright in the edit or finished production but not necessarily in the original footage.

A copyright owner can sell a licence to use material that they own the copyright in and this is what you do if you shoot stock footage etc. You do still retain the copyright, you are just selling a licence to use the footage and you can sell multiple licences for the same footage. But you must be sure that you are the copyright owner before you do this.

Where it gets particularly grey, normally because people don’t bother to draw up proper contracts is over the rights in a commissioned work. If there is no contract then all rights remain with the originator by default. However when there is no contract, that can easily be challenged in a court of law, and generally the courts will award the commissioner with a licence to use the footage as they see fit, based on the fact that they paid to have the material created.  The court may also place restrictions on the originator as to what they can do with the footage, for example preventing it from being licensed to anyone other than the original commissioner. So it is vital that whenever you are paid to produce a work for someone that you have a contract that clearly sets out who owns what, otherwise, in reality, the moment you receive payment no matter how large or small, you are giving all your rights away (although it may take a court order for this to happen). Licensing footage you have shot while working on a commissioned project is a dangerous thing to do unless you have a contract that that specifically states that you are retaining your rights in the material.

For a commissioned project where I want to retain the right to use or later licence the footage to someone else I will normally include a statement in the contract that the rights in the material remain with me and that I am providing a licence for the commissioner to use the footage within their production for a specified period and geographical area. Depending on the client this will often be an indefinite period and include the entire known universe. Sometimes I have to give them a licence to do whatever they want with the footage, even sub licensing. But I do still try to retain my right to do what I wish with the footage, perhaps after a blackout period. Sometimes this just isn’t possible, many times I have to assign all my rights to the commissioner.

The main thing is to have a contract and a clear understanding of who owns what as more often than not if you’ve been paid and it goes to court, no contract = no right to use or licence, even if you do still own the copyright.

PMW-F5, F55 and FS700 workshop in Toronto Canada in association with Vistek.

Want to know more about the Sony PMW-F5, F55 or FS700. Do you want to learn which codec or gamma to use? How to expose S-log2 correctly or how to make the most of the amazing 4K raw capabilities? Why not join me for a full day seminar and workshop in Toronto, Canada on December the 13th. The workshop will be hosted by Vistek and full details will be provided in the coming days, so keep the date free in your diary and come learn about these cool cameras and the workflows that really makes them sing. I’ll post further details in due course.