Thank you for this. As someone who shoots content nearly everyday, I opt for 1080p. So knowing what cameras yield the best results with color, dynamic range and sharpness at 1080p is something I always have to investigate when deciding what camera to travel with. It's kind of annoying that you have to really comb through the internet to learn what is oversampled vs line skipped. I ran into a situation with the a7c II where I shot a video at 1080p and it looked awful to my eye. Then I realized I was using the wrong tool for the job. Swapped it out for the ZV-E1 and the 1080p was immensely cleaner. Using an Ulanzi fan with the ZV-E1 allows me to record for long stretches. In the studios we actually use Canon R5c's as those check off all the boxes for our needs.
Just got the Sony ZV-E1ii Camera and still debating if I did the right choice, it gets pretty hot at time, so was looking to maybe switch to a fx30 since its mainly for longform videos, hours recorded throught a 4k elgato camlink so idk what would be the best option after seeing this video
@@TimotheeReacts You should at least test it out, it might work out just fine without needing to spend more. People say that powering via USB-C causes the camera to heat up faster, so if you need long run times, it may be worth looking for a dummy battery. Make sure you flip out the screen and set the camera to high temp threshold.
Thanks for this. This is my main complaint about Sony. They might as well not even put HD 1080 as an option because they ASSUME everyone wants to shoot in 4K. I’m still using my LUMIX S5ii for this very reason. S5ii is still great in HD 1080 and with much smaller file sizes. I don’t want to deal with 4k file sizes all the time.
Wow, what a revelation! Valuable advice here, though I've always marveled at the old-skool/corporate video/camcorder-boutique-vet types who'd use lower resolutions and shoot in REC.709, believing that -- in our era of endlessly cheap storage space and bandwidth -- it's somehow smartly frugal for their clients. The instinct is as old as music on cassette tapes: makes no sense.
but meanwhile, most web streaming platforms stream 1080 like its 720, and 4k like its 1080...That's why recording in 1080 (on machines optimized for that resolution) and uploading in 4k actually makes a difference when compared to just uploading in FHD, which is so stupid.
I agree 100%. My FX3, FX6 and a6400 are tack sharp in 4K but noticeably soft in HD. Whereas my FS5 has identical detail in 4K or HD. It’s disappointing the newer cameras are soft in HD, but like you mentioned, at smaller viewing sizes it’s not noticeable. I have contacted Sony about this, sending them samples of vision, they could not explain why!
This turned out to be a great primer for me personally on understanding/learning more about downsampling, screen size considerations and how it affects your content production, the shimmering and artifacts!
Wierdly enough, I did some tests and it appears that the 1080p on the FX30 and ZVe10 is awful in Log ONLY. If you switch to other PP or S-Cinetone the image is actually really clean.
Eh, I think it looks pretty mushy. Maybe the noise isn't as apparent because you can shoot at a lower ISO...? But hey, if it works for you then that's all that matters
Finally, a video broaching a topic that is hard to find info on! Please make a detailed follow up re line skipping or pixel binning. The Pocket 3 would be of interest to me for such a video. I do not think you do 360 cameras but that is where I first started questioning this issue. Since 360 cameras shoot the exact FOV regardless of which recording resolution is chosen, how does the captured light become dispersed over the sensor for each resolution? Since 360 cameras (and action cameras) do not have any mechanical adjustments, I have been guessing that the sensor grid just ignores alternating rows and columns (probably what you call 'line skipping'). I have not found much info on this. if this is correct, then I began wondering what type of blur or distortion is caused by this method. Example, if a camera's full sensor resolution is 6K and I choose to record in 5K then the new relative ratio of rows/grids would be 'odd' and maybe cause every fifth line to be 'abrupt'? {Kind of like when converting a 24p to a 30p by padding a duplicate frame or 30p to 24p by dropping a unique frame (i am saying 'sort of like' [i.e. apples/oranges]} (granted, many may not notice such abruptness) When non-360 action cameras change resolution, what the heck are they actually doing to accomplish this? Questions I would love answers to. BTW the QooCam 8k (30p) is one camera that I am confidently guessing that does 'line skipping'. I am guessing that when optionally recording in 4k 120p, the QooCam 8k simply records using every other row/column (i.e. half as many as 8K) thus allowing the camera processor to divert the saved energy towards doubling the speed (frame rate). I would really love to know for the many action cameras that I have, what each camera's true native sensor resolution is (for the maximum capture quality). GoPro and Osmo Action (& Pockt) and Instat360 all do some type of 'digital' manipulation to change their various resolutions (because they do not have mechanics for such). I have messed around to tediously compare with confusing results. I would love top see an in depth video about all this (i.e. I cannot yet find such a video). What I am ultimately trying to achieve is a quick reference to the best quality resolution (for the myriad of cameras), so that I can pick up camera XYZ, look at my chart, select the best resolution quality and start shooting the best image that camera can do. And since each cameras best quality (i.e. native sensor resolution & fixed lens) will be at a specific FOV for that camera, I can then quickly choose the FOV I want for a scene and then grab/choose the camera that will give me the best quality for the FOV. Instead of having to manipulate digital cropping/zoom/etc. to get my desired FOV and still hoping it looks good enough (vs blur/warping/fisheye/etc). The Pocket 3 (and a few more) do have optional lens attachments that will alter the FOV physically while still using the best quality (native) sensor setting, so that does help (if only I had a quick reference chart). note: all the above is referring to fixed lens cameras that cannot (mechanically/physically) adjust the area of the light as it is spread over the sensor) note2: I have also been assuming that the native sensor resolution in conjunction with the fixed lens of action/360 cameras would be the combination that would give the best quality output for each of these cameras; and any other setting would be a quality degradation (at varying degrees). Sorry for the length and meandering, but you started it ... I will bribe you with an offer to additionally subscribe to your from my other accounts if you make such a detailed video. Thanks for the great and informative and unique video this was. side note: I also use Nikon P1000 (bridge) & Panasonic Lumix G85 & etc. But I always use these at maximum resolution (storage is now so cheap) and make adjustments in post. I also pretty much use my 360's always at maximum resolution (vs higher frame rate at lower fps) since I can use optical flow now days with better results when I need faux fps increase. So it those action cameras that have me the most befuddled.
Wow, that's a lot... 🤔 I'm really not that technically adept or good with math, so I don't think I'm the one who can really dive into this for you. I don't mess with action cams or 360 cams very much although I do have a GoPro Hero 10 and an Insta 360. In my experience, the Hero 10 definitely looks the best in its full 5k whatever full resolution. If you film in 4K, it's definitely throwing away pixels. I don't know much about 360, but my understanding is that they are such high resolution because they're filming in 360 degrees. So when you crop out a 16:9 portion of that, then you get a much smaller resolution. Since it's being done in editing software, I'd assume you'd get a much higher quality down sample but it's still being taking from a portion of an already tiny sensor, so how good can the resulting image really be? I'll be on the lookout for some good technical information on these subjects and link them here if I find anything. It's definitely interesting to me, but again, I'm not a very technical person so I don't think I'll be the one to shine too much light for you
I don't know what to say about your experience, but I have a particular type of recurring job filming speakers at various conferences and have always recorded them in 1080p and have found the quality to be very high-getting better results from the FX30 than I did from my Canon 80D or Sony a7. For other types of work I shoot 4k because I want the very best possible image, but when played back from Vimeo the two are virtually indistinguishable.
nice advice man. SUBSCRIBED! but what if I use a6700 for live streaming at 1080p using black magic atem mini? or maybe record it from there to PC. is it going to be better than internal recording straight 1080p? thank you
Hi, thank you for the sub. Yes, if you set the camera to 4K and send out to ATEM over HDMI, the ATEM is doing the conversion from 4K to 1080 and it will look much cleaner than internal 1080 from the camera. I'm not sure that it even matters what you set the HDMI output signal to in the camera: Auto, 4K, or 1080, but you might want to verify that on your part
One that do it fine is the ZVE1 that is a kind of mini A7SIII, 12mp sensor, and very good 1080p. I have one and I'm using 1080p for vertical shots that goes to Instagram.
Interesting. I find the 4K footage out of my A7RV good enough and I believe that is pixel binned as well. Perhaps it's because it's still 4K with lots of detail. If you are buying a 4K camera, it's best to shoot at 4K I suppose.
Yeah, I thought about mentioning cameras like that as well. I bet it's like you say, it's still maintaining a lot more resolution at 4K, as opposed to 1080p. Plus some algorithms and processing are better than others. Maybe Sony is putting more effort into making sure the 4K looks good on a camera like that rather than 1080p
Ah, no! I have to disagree with that logic. Most people are shooting for social media and the industry standard is 1080p, only a few apps render in 4k, and even then, it is compressed to around 25mbps. So why shoot 4k? Your better off with a high-quality 1080p or 720p with a higher bit rate per frame. It also reduced the in app compression. I know this sounds backwards as how can a low standard be better. It all has to do with the in app compression. The less the in app compresses, the better the image looks as your editor compression is far better. I did a test on TH-cam with 1080p and 4k, you can't see any difference. And FB, IG compress all uploads to 1080p Max.
I almost never post to IG and 100% never post to FB or X, so I guess I tend to overlook those use cases. I did mention how the differences start to become less pronounced as you switch to smaller screens and smaller windows, though. So, I'd say the 1080 in the FX30 is fine for those platforms as well. Even so, I'd rather shoot everything in 4K and then downscale in my editing software to get the best result. I also think TH-cam compression is better if you upload a 4K video as opposed to a 1080p video. So, even if my project is 1080, I'd render it in 4K to upload. IDK, there are so many variables to consider...
@PhillipRPeck you can shoot in any resolution you like, but I can tell you 1000% out of my camera, canon R3 shooting in ALL-i you can't tell the difference on TH-cam between 4k and 1080p.
Agreed, this has always been an issue with Sony hybrid cameras that had more than 24 mpx, the workaround I have found (at least with the A7IV) is to shoot APS-C crop mode. That way, the camera gives you an oversample 4.6K instead of the linespkipped/pixel binned video you are showing here. Why would anyone shoot 1080p nowadays? Space! Sometimes I have to shoot events that lasts for hours, and you would only need a 1080p deliver anyway. Something really funny I have found, is that the OG A6000 has a much better 1080p than modern flagship APS-C cameras.
It's not just a Sony problem, I think all the manufacturers do this. I think the space and editing difficulty concerns are less and less a problem and therefore there really isn't a need to shoot in 1080p
The cost of storage and editing is higher for 4K. It makes sense to record a boring long meeting with 1080P. Shooting in 1080P sacrifices the high iso capability of a FF camera though. Used my a6700 to shoot in 1080p. Shxt, the quality is worse than my iphone se...
@@TienChoihk With the XAVC-HS codec, you can shoot in 4K at 30mbps compared to XAVC-S 1080p at 25mbps... If you're on a relatively new computer, you shouldn't have much trouble editing. I really don't see any reason to choose 1080
@@PhillipRPeck Just checked my A7iv and A6700, it seems to me that the relative advantage of "bit rate to resolution" is not obvious, if any. A6700 forces me to use 50 frames in XAVC-HS codec
Is it a good option to use the Superscale feature from DaVinci Resolve Studio? I recorded a couple of shots in 1080 in my ZV-E10 bc I needed 60 FPS for B-roll
Yes, it can really help. But using this will really put a hurting on your computer, so you have to keep that in mind depending how many clips you want to apply it to and how much editing and effects you want to add. The problem with superscale is that it has to be applied to the source media, rather than to a clip on your timeline. I was messing around with the Soften and Sharpen effect in the color page. The results look pretty good and it allows you finer control over where and how much you want to sharpen and also means you can apply it to the edited clips on your timeline rather than to source media However, neither is a magic bullet, it can't add in texture and information that is not there, only sharpen the sort of soft and blended image that comes from 1080 on the FX30
No wonder my a6700 1080p look way terrible than my A74 at the same resolution and bitrate. The only counter measure to this is to shoot at 4K 100 mpbs with AVC-HS codec if you want to keep up with quality of A74 at 1080p. This is also the one and only option to: 1) Keep shooting at 10-bit 422 for the best SLOG grading 2) To keep the size relative small while maintaining a comparable quality to A74 Full HD quality
Hey dude, what is in your opinion the best way to transform the log footage from the fx30 to rec.709? I was looking for the conversion lut on their website but i cant find it...
I use Resolve Color Management 95% of the time. Otherwise, I use a conversion LUT, either the Sony provided LUTs that I linked to above or the Phantom LUTs which I purchased. You can install the LUTs into whatever video editing software you use. You can also load in LUTs into the FX30 to use to monitor your shots and also automatically convert the shots in camera if you want
1080p on a7iv is really soft. Also, I can attest that if you want the worst possible quality from your a7iv, film in 1080p, apsc mode, with active image stabilization. If you are using image stabilization, 4k is pretty much required, regardless of APSC mode. I never film in 1080p because of the loss of quality, even though my final renders are always 1080p.
@@PadPoet I found Mark Bennett's video on this subject and you're correct. APSC mode in 1080 looks better than full frame 1080p. he doesn't test image stabilization to show its effects, but he does test clear image zoom which is maybe a similar process to the stabilization crop and it once again lowers the quality. I had some very disappointing footage in 1080p from my a7iv that made me question why I upgraded from a zve-10. I believe that footage was 1080p, apsc, with image stabilization. It did not meet my standards even for social clips. But thank you for the heads up on apsc 1080p. I might try it some time.
@@PadPoetthere is a secret on the Sony A7iv shoot in HS 4k and shoot 4:2:0 10bit 30mb. It’s sharper than the 1080p and also smaller file size! 😅 happy shooting 😊.
Exactly the same here in terms of resolution. 1080 is awful in the FX30. There's also some difference in the noise. The 1080 footage is much noisier or the noise is much more apparent than the 4K footage.
this also happens in a7 iv unless i shoot in crop mode, this is very annoying for me a because i do weddings and 4k is overkill for me but the full frame 1080p out of the a7 iv looks very bad, i wish they fix it with a firmware update because having a full frame camera and using it in crop mode is very annoying
I'm pretty sure it's not an issue that can be fixed with a firmware update. I think it's a limitation of processing power and heat management. At least you can shoot in 4K and edit a 1080p timeline. That will give you the best image quality and have a ton of flexibility to reframe shots
@@PhillipRPeck i dont know, how is it possible for the camera to use the whole sensor at 4k 30 and not at 1080p, i wish at least it could shoot full-frame 4k 50 so i could downscale it afterwords
@@asvestomixZ I'm not an engineer but I think it's the process of squeezing somewhere close to 7008 x 4672 pixels down to 1920 x 1080. Apparently, a clean down scale or down sample from that many pixels to that few pixels is too computationally demanding for the camera's processor to handle. So it has to do something less demanding to get rid of all the extra pixels. Cameras do it by line skipping or pixel binning. It's not uncommon even though it's frustrating for us
another way would be to batch transcode these 4K files into 1080 before editing.. using software like Handbrake.. and delete the original 4K files to free up space on your hard disk.. just double check before deleting the original 4K files
That makes sense since I think it's down to around 4.6K in the crop mode. I never tried 1080 in that mode when I had the a7IV. Thanks for the info and look out for more Pocket 3 stuff
That is really poor of Sony to do this on the FX30. I have a Canon R3, 1080p is just as good as 4k once upload on social media. I thought these modern cameras all down sampled from the full sensor, not line binning.
It's common across all the major manufacturers. Canon does it on the R5 and many other cameras. There are always tradeoffs in processing power, heat management, and price. The R3 is huge and almost three times the cost of the FX30 so it makes sense it would have fewer compromises (and yet it doesn't have full size HDMI, so again, there's always tradeoffs)
@PhillipRPeck Yes, it doesn't have a full-size HDMI (instead a cable support housing), but the image and black recover is excellent 👌. The camera has very few flaws. Yes, it is more expensive, but you don't need to build it out, I specifically wanted this, as I like gimbals and a lot of camera movement. So, I never need to add on to the camera. I am surprised this camera is not talked about more for video as its framerates, and shooting versatility is excellent. It even has 240fps in 1080p, and the image is amazing. I know this sounds like a rant, but a camera that line bins in 1080p, I wouldn't buy period.
2024 I'm still shooting in 1080p, based in China, most people here don't what videos on PC, so what about a6700? I had 6400 and zv1, and have zve10, 6400 and zve10's 1080p are crap... zv1 is ok, been looking at 6700 these days, not sure if its 1080p is good or not...a7s3 is good, but can't afford it for now.....
I'm not an engineer but I have to imagine it's a processing limitation. I'm sure they would like for all the video modes to be as high quality as possible, but there are always trade offs
This is extremely annoying from Sony, a classic case of assuming you know better than your customer how they should use the gear. I use 1080p a lot, for good reasons. The fact Sony puts this garbage in expensive cameras is infuriating. People are going to want good 1080 for years to come! Fix it.
It's not a Sony issue, it's just an issue of a high megapixel sensor for video. It happens across all brands. There isn't enough processing power and heat dissipation for the camera to down sample all that resolution into 1080p. It throws away or combines pixels because it's less processor intensive
Thank you for this. As someone who shoots content nearly everyday, I opt for 1080p. So knowing what cameras yield the best results with color, dynamic range and sharpness at 1080p is something I always have to investigate when deciding what camera to travel with. It's kind of annoying that you have to really comb through the internet to learn what is oversampled vs line skipped. I ran into a situation with the a7c II where I shot a video at 1080p and it looked awful to my eye. Then I realized I was using the wrong tool for the job. Swapped it out for the ZV-E1 and the 1080p was immensely cleaner. Using an Ulanzi fan with the ZV-E1 allows me to record for long stretches.
In the studios we actually use Canon R5c's as those check off all the boxes for our needs.
Just got the Sony ZV-E1ii Camera and still debating if I did the right choice, it gets pretty hot at time, so was looking to maybe switch to a fx30 since its mainly for longform videos, hours recorded throught a 4k elgato camlink so idk what would be the best option after seeing this video
@@TimotheeReacts You should at least test it out, it might work out just fine without needing to spend more. People say that powering via USB-C causes the camera to heat up faster, so if you need long run times, it may be worth looking for a dummy battery. Make sure you flip out the screen and set the camera to high temp threshold.
Thanks for this. This is my main complaint about Sony. They might as well not even put HD 1080 as an option because they ASSUME everyone wants to shoot in 4K. I’m still using my LUMIX S5ii for this very reason. S5ii is still great in HD 1080 and with much smaller file sizes. I don’t want to deal with 4k file sizes all the time.
Wow, what a revelation! Valuable advice here, though I've always marveled at the old-skool/corporate video/camcorder-boutique-vet types who'd use lower resolutions and shoot in REC.709, believing that -- in our era of endlessly cheap storage space and bandwidth -- it's somehow smartly frugal for their clients. The instinct is as old as music on cassette tapes: makes no sense.
but meanwhile, most web streaming platforms stream 1080 like its 720, and 4k like its 1080...That's why recording in 1080 (on machines optimized for that resolution) and uploading in 4k actually makes a difference when compared to just uploading in FHD, which is so stupid.
I agree 100%. My FX3, FX6 and a6400 are tack sharp in 4K but noticeably soft in HD. Whereas my FS5 has identical detail in 4K or HD. It’s disappointing the newer cameras are soft in HD, but like you mentioned, at smaller viewing sizes it’s not noticeable. I have contacted Sony about this, sending them samples of vision, they could not explain why!
This turned out to be a great primer for me personally on understanding/learning more about downsampling, screen size considerations and how it affects your content production, the shimmering and artifacts!
Wierdly enough, I did some tests and it appears that the 1080p on the FX30 and ZVe10 is awful in Log ONLY. If you switch to other PP or S-Cinetone the image is actually really clean.
Eh, I think it looks pretty mushy. Maybe the noise isn't as apparent because you can shoot at a lower ISO...? But hey, if it works for you then that's all that matters
@@PhillipRPeck Don't get me wrong, I always shoot in 4k. Except for small videos of my cat for personal use :)
I have been learning this the hard way. I will certainly always shoot in 4K from here on out. I wish there was a way to just turn off the HD option.
Sorry for asking a stupid question. But would shooting in 4K, but exporting in 1080p fix that problem?
Not a stupid question. Yes, shooting in 4K and exporting in 1080 would be much better than shooting in 1080p on the FX30
yea I'm pretty sure those are line-skipping, while a7S3 FX3 are oversampling (or downsampling) to create 1080p
Finally, a video broaching a topic that is hard to find info on! Please make a detailed follow up re line skipping or pixel binning.
The Pocket 3 would be of interest to me for such a video.
I do not think you do 360 cameras but that is where I first started questioning this issue. Since 360 cameras shoot the exact FOV regardless of which recording resolution is chosen, how does the captured light become dispersed over the sensor for each resolution? Since 360 cameras (and action cameras) do not have any mechanical adjustments, I have been guessing that the sensor grid just ignores alternating rows and columns (probably what you call 'line skipping'). I have not found much info on this. if this is correct, then I began wondering what type of blur or distortion is caused by this method. Example, if a camera's full sensor resolution is 6K and I choose to record in 5K then the new relative ratio of rows/grids would be 'odd' and maybe cause every fifth line to be 'abrupt'? {Kind of like when converting a 24p to a 30p by padding a duplicate frame or 30p to 24p by dropping a unique frame (i am saying 'sort of like' [i.e. apples/oranges]} (granted, many may not notice such abruptness) When non-360 action cameras change resolution, what the heck are they actually doing to accomplish this? Questions I would love answers to.
BTW the QooCam 8k (30p) is one camera that I am confidently guessing that does 'line skipping'. I am guessing that when optionally recording in 4k 120p, the QooCam 8k simply records using every other row/column (i.e. half as many as 8K) thus allowing the camera processor to divert the saved energy towards doubling the speed (frame rate).
I would really love to know for the many action cameras that I have, what each camera's true native sensor resolution is (for the maximum capture quality). GoPro and Osmo Action (& Pockt) and Instat360 all do some type of 'digital' manipulation to change their various resolutions (because they do not have mechanics for such). I have messed around to tediously compare with confusing results. I would love top see an in depth video about all this (i.e. I cannot yet find such a video).
What I am ultimately trying to achieve is a quick reference to the best quality resolution (for the myriad of cameras), so that I can pick up camera XYZ, look at my chart, select the best resolution quality and start shooting the best image that camera can do. And since each cameras best quality (i.e. native sensor resolution & fixed lens) will be at a specific FOV for that camera, I can then quickly choose the FOV I want for a scene and then grab/choose the camera that will give me the best quality for the FOV. Instead of having to manipulate digital cropping/zoom/etc. to get my desired FOV and still hoping it looks good enough (vs blur/warping/fisheye/etc).
The Pocket 3 (and a few more) do have optional lens attachments that will alter the FOV physically while still using the best quality (native) sensor setting, so that does help (if only I had a quick reference chart).
note: all the above is referring to fixed lens cameras that cannot (mechanically/physically) adjust the area of the light as it is spread over the sensor)
note2: I have also been assuming that the native sensor resolution in conjunction with the fixed lens of action/360 cameras would be the combination that would give the best quality output for each of these cameras; and any other setting would be a quality degradation (at varying degrees).
Sorry for the length and meandering, but you started it ...
I will bribe you with an offer to additionally subscribe to your from my other accounts if you make such a detailed video.
Thanks for the great and informative and unique video this was.
side note: I also use Nikon P1000 (bridge) & Panasonic Lumix G85 & etc. But I always use these at maximum resolution (storage is now so cheap) and make adjustments in post. I also pretty much use my 360's always at maximum resolution (vs higher frame rate at lower fps) since I can use optical flow now days with better results when I need faux fps increase.
So it those action cameras that have me the most befuddled.
Wow, that's a lot... 🤔
I'm really not that technically adept or good with math, so I don't think I'm the one who can really dive into this for you.
I don't mess with action cams or 360 cams very much although I do have a GoPro Hero 10 and an Insta 360. In my experience, the Hero 10 definitely looks the best in its full 5k whatever full resolution. If you film in 4K, it's definitely throwing away pixels.
I don't know much about 360, but my understanding is that they are such high resolution because they're filming in 360 degrees. So when you crop out a 16:9 portion of that, then you get a much smaller resolution. Since it's being done in editing software, I'd assume you'd get a much higher quality down sample but it's still being taking from a portion of an already tiny sensor, so how good can the resulting image really be?
I'll be on the lookout for some good technical information on these subjects and link them here if I find anything. It's definitely interesting to me, but again, I'm not a very technical person so I don't think I'll be the one to shine too much light for you
I don't know what to say about your experience, but I have a particular type of recurring job filming speakers at various conferences and have always recorded them in 1080p and have found the quality to be very high-getting better results from the FX30 than I did from my Canon 80D or Sony a7. For other types of work I shoot 4k because I want the very best possible image, but when played back from Vimeo the two are virtually indistinguishable.
If it's working for you then that's all that matters
The crop mode 1080p on the A7iv is downsampling to.
Gonna grab my FX30 right away, test and get back to tell ya.... Brb!
Opinion? I also have fx30 and it's the first time I'll record a wedding in 1080p and I'm afraid it will look bad
@@israelrocha780 Why don’t you record in 4K?
nice advice man. SUBSCRIBED! but what if I use a6700 for live streaming at 1080p using black magic atem mini? or maybe record it from there to PC. is it going to be better than internal recording straight 1080p? thank you
Hi, thank you for the sub. Yes, if you set the camera to 4K and send out to ATEM over HDMI, the ATEM is doing the conversion from 4K to 1080 and it will look much cleaner than internal 1080 from the camera. I'm not sure that it even matters what you set the HDMI output signal to in the camera: Auto, 4K, or 1080, but you might want to verify that on your part
Great info, thanks. I think it same thing happens to Sony ZV-E10, which has bad 1080p videos.
One that do it fine is the ZVE1 that is a kind of mini A7SIII, 12mp sensor, and very good 1080p. I have one and I'm using 1080p for vertical shots that goes to Instagram.
Interesting. I find the 4K footage out of my A7RV good enough and I believe that is pixel binned as well. Perhaps it's because it's still 4K with lots of detail. If you are buying a 4K camera, it's best to shoot at 4K I suppose.
Yeah, I thought about mentioning cameras like that as well. I bet it's like you say, it's still maintaining a lot more resolution at 4K, as opposed to 1080p. Plus some algorithms and processing are better than others. Maybe Sony is putting more effort into making sure the 4K looks good on a camera like that rather than 1080p
Ah, no! I have to disagree with that logic. Most people are shooting for social media and the industry standard is 1080p, only a few apps render in 4k, and even then, it is compressed to around 25mbps. So why shoot 4k? Your better off with a high-quality 1080p or 720p with a higher bit rate per frame. It also reduced the in app compression. I know this sounds backwards as how can a low standard be better. It all has to do with the in app compression. The less the in app compresses, the better the image looks as your editor compression is far better. I did a test on TH-cam with 1080p and 4k, you can't see any difference. And FB, IG compress all uploads to 1080p Max.
I almost never post to IG and 100% never post to FB or X, so I guess I tend to overlook those use cases. I did mention how the differences start to become less pronounced as you switch to smaller screens and smaller windows, though. So, I'd say the 1080 in the FX30 is fine for those platforms as well. Even so, I'd rather shoot everything in 4K and then downscale in my editing software to get the best result. I also think TH-cam compression is better if you upload a 4K video as opposed to a 1080p video. So, even if my project is 1080, I'd render it in 4K to upload. IDK, there are so many variables to consider...
@PhillipRPeck you can shoot in any resolution you like, but I can tell you 1000% out of my camera, canon R3 shooting in ALL-i you can't tell the difference on TH-cam between 4k and 1080p.
You should check out this video at 13:13 th-cam.com/video/8VSZk1tyAgY/w-d-xo.html
They should be forced to disclose if skipping or binning is being used.
Wow, good info. I’ve never shot 1080p on my FX30, that’s wild
Agreed, this has always been an issue with Sony hybrid cameras that had more than 24 mpx, the workaround I have found (at least with the A7IV) is to shoot APS-C crop mode. That way, the camera gives you an oversample 4.6K instead of the linespkipped/pixel binned video you are showing here. Why would anyone shoot 1080p nowadays? Space! Sometimes I have to shoot events that lasts for hours, and you would only need a 1080p deliver anyway. Something really funny I have found, is that the OG A6000 has a much better 1080p than modern flagship APS-C cameras.
It's not just a Sony problem, I think all the manufacturers do this. I think the space and editing difficulty concerns are less and less a problem and therefore there really isn't a need to shoot in 1080p
The cost of storage and editing is higher for 4K. It makes sense to record a boring long meeting with 1080P. Shooting in 1080P sacrifices the high iso capability of a FF camera though. Used my a6700 to shoot in 1080p. Shxt, the quality is worse than my iphone se...
@@TienChoihk With the XAVC-HS codec, you can shoot in 4K at 30mbps compared to XAVC-S 1080p at 25mbps... If you're on a relatively new computer, you shouldn't have much trouble editing. I really don't see any reason to choose 1080
@@PhillipRPeck Just checked my A7iv and A6700, it seems to me that the relative advantage of "bit rate to resolution" is not obvious, if any. A6700 forces me to use 50 frames in XAVC-HS codec
@@TienChoihk I forgot that there are weird frame rate limitations with HS. Are you in PAL? You should be able to shoot 25, right?
Is it a good option to use the Superscale feature from DaVinci Resolve Studio? I recorded a couple of shots in 1080 in my ZV-E10 bc I needed 60 FPS for B-roll
Yes, it can really help. But using this will really put a hurting on your computer, so you have to keep that in mind depending how many clips you want to apply it to and how much editing and effects you want to add. The problem with superscale is that it has to be applied to the source media, rather than to a clip on your timeline. I was messing around with the Soften and Sharpen effect in the color page. The results look pretty good and it allows you finer control over where and how much you want to sharpen and also means you can apply it to the edited clips on your timeline rather than to source media
However, neither is a magic bullet, it can't add in texture and information that is not there, only sharpen the sort of soft and blended image that comes from 1080 on the FX30
I've been messing with it a bit more and I think Soften and Sharpen is the way to go if you have time to dial it in
@@PhillipRPeck I'll keep in mind, thanks for taking the time to reply
No wonder my a6700 1080p look way terrible than my A74 at the same resolution and bitrate. The only counter measure to this is to shoot at 4K 100 mpbs with AVC-HS codec if you want to keep up with quality of A74 at 1080p.
This is also the one and only option to:
1) Keep shooting at 10-bit 422 for the best SLOG grading
2) To keep the size relative small while maintaining a comparable quality to A74 Full HD quality
Hey dude, what is in your opinion the best way to transform the log footage from the fx30 to rec.709? I was looking for the conversion lut on their website but i cant find it...
You can find Sony's LUTs here: pro.sony/ue_US/technology/professional-video-lut-look-up-table
I use Resolve Color Management 95% of the time. Otherwise, I use a conversion LUT, either the Sony provided LUTs that I linked to above or the Phantom LUTs which I purchased.
You can install the LUTs into whatever video editing software you use. You can also load in LUTs into the FX30 to use to monitor your shots and also automatically convert the shots in camera if you want
1080p on a7iv is really soft. Also, I can attest that if you want the worst possible quality from your a7iv, film in 1080p, apsc mode, with active image stabilization. If you are using image stabilization, 4k is pretty much required, regardless of APSC mode. I never film in 1080p because of the loss of quality, even though my final renders are always 1080p.
I’ve heard the 1080p on the A7IV is sharp on APSC mode and that it’s soft in FF mode. Are you sure about this?
@@PadPoet I found Mark Bennett's video on this subject and you're correct. APSC mode in 1080 looks better than full frame 1080p. he doesn't test image stabilization to show its effects, but he does test clear image zoom which is maybe a similar process to the stabilization crop and it once again lowers the quality. I had some very disappointing footage in 1080p from my a7iv that made me question why I upgraded from a zve-10. I believe that footage was 1080p, apsc, with image stabilization. It did not meet my standards even for social clips. But thank you for the heads up on apsc 1080p. I might try it some time.
@@PadPoetthere is a secret on the Sony A7iv shoot in HS 4k and shoot 4:2:0 10bit 30mb. It’s sharper than the 1080p and also smaller file size! 😅 happy shooting 😊.
Exactly the same here in terms of resolution. 1080 is awful in the FX30. There's also some difference in the noise. The 1080 footage is much noisier or the noise is much more apparent than the 4K footage.
You didn't believe me... 🙃 Lol. Yeah, it looks terrible. I literally thought my video was out of focus.
@@PhillipRPeck For sure I did believe you... I Just did what you have encouraged us to do!🤣
And now I can confirm your point!
Great video btw!
I meant if you had a different camera! lol, I’m just messing with you. Thanks for the support
@@PhillipRPeck 👍🏻😄
Also, 1:1 4K is very easy and clean 2:1 reduction if skipping or binning is used.
Would downsampling in OBS from 4k to 1080p for streaming overcome this? I'm a complete noob
Yes. If you output 4K from the camera over HDMI, you'll get much higher quality
Was that 10bit in 1080?
Yessir
this also happens in a7 iv unless i shoot in crop mode, this is very annoying for me a because i do weddings and 4k is overkill for me but the full frame 1080p out of the a7 iv looks very bad, i wish they fix it with a firmware update because having a full frame camera and using it in crop mode is very annoying
I'm pretty sure it's not an issue that can be fixed with a firmware update. I think it's a limitation of processing power and heat management. At least you can shoot in 4K and edit a 1080p timeline. That will give you the best image quality and have a ton of flexibility to reframe shots
@@PhillipRPeck i dont know, how is it possible for the camera to use the whole sensor at 4k 30 and not at 1080p, i wish at least it could shoot full-frame 4k 50 so i could downscale it afterwords
@@asvestomixZ I'm not an engineer but I think it's the process of squeezing somewhere close to 7008 x 4672 pixels down to 1920 x 1080. Apparently, a clean down scale or down sample from that many pixels to that few pixels is too computationally demanding for the camera's processor to handle. So it has to do something less demanding to get rid of all the extra pixels. Cameras do it by line skipping or pixel binning. It's not uncommon even though it's frustrating for us
another way would be to batch transcode these 4K files into 1080 before editing.. using software like Handbrake.. and delete the original 4K files to free up space on your hard disk.. just double check before deleting the original 4K files
its the same story on A7 3... sadly :(( what about fx3 and fx6 thought?
Yeah, a7III goes in the NO GO 1080 zone as well. I think the FX3 and the FX6 are the same as the a7SIII in terms of how they handle 1080
The Sony A7IV 1080p in aps-c mode is downsampled. Thanks for testing it on the pocket 3 to find out it is ok :) im a 1080p kind a Old Guy. Cheers
That makes sense since I think it's down to around 4.6K in the crop mode. I never tried 1080 in that mode when I had the a7IV. Thanks for the info and look out for more Pocket 3 stuff
I’ll need to research this more. It could be a show stopper for the fx30 for me
or... and hear me out ... shoot in 4k?
@@adventurepromo yes 4k30
Oh, strange! It's visible even in small size video...
That is really poor of Sony to do this on the FX30. I have a Canon R3, 1080p is just as good as 4k once upload on social media. I thought these modern cameras all down sampled from the full sensor, not line binning.
It's common across all the major manufacturers. Canon does it on the R5 and many other cameras. There are always tradeoffs in processing power, heat management, and price. The R3 is huge and almost three times the cost of the FX30 so it makes sense it would have fewer compromises (and yet it doesn't have full size HDMI, so again, there's always tradeoffs)
@PhillipRPeck Yes, it doesn't have a full-size HDMI (instead a cable support housing), but the image and black recover is excellent 👌. The camera has very few flaws. Yes, it is more expensive, but you don't need to build it out, I specifically wanted this, as I like gimbals and a lot of camera movement. So, I never need to add on to the camera. I am surprised this camera is not talked about more for video as its framerates, and shooting versatility is excellent. It even has 240fps in 1080p, and the image is amazing. I know this sounds like a rant, but a camera that line bins in 1080p, I wouldn't buy period.
I imagine this is the same case when using the FX30 for streaming? That's a bummer 💀
Not if you stream over HDMI with a capture card. You can keep the camera in 4K and let the capture card scale down
2024 I'm still shooting in 1080p, based in China, most people here don't what videos on PC, so what about a6700? I had 6400 and zv1, and have zve10, 6400 and zve10's 1080p are crap... zv1 is ok, been looking at 6700 these days, not sure if its 1080p is good or not...a7s3 is good, but can't afford it for now.....
The a6700 is the same as the FX30
Same story on ZV1. 1080 is soft and crap. Can’t trust any camera to downsample properly.
I'm not an engineer but I have to imagine it's a processing limitation. I'm sure they would like for all the video modes to be as high quality as possible, but there are always trade offs
The best camera for 1080p is Sigma fp
i feel like everyone should just film 4k dont buy cameras if your pc cant push it biggest creators problem
Unless you need to hook it up to a 1080i Satellite for live international news crosses! Then what?
This is extremely annoying from Sony, a classic case of assuming you know better than your customer how they should use the gear. I use 1080p a lot, for good reasons. The fact Sony puts this garbage in expensive cameras is infuriating. People are going to want good 1080 for years to come! Fix it.
It's not a Sony issue, it's just an issue of a high megapixel sensor for video. It happens across all brands. There isn't enough processing power and heat dissipation for the camera to down sample all that resolution into 1080p. It throws away or combines pixels because it's less processor intensive
TENER FX30 CON 4K Y GRABAR EN FHD ES IGUAL QUE TENER UNA FERRARI Y USAR GASOLINA COMUN
A pretty good metaphor except the FX30 is more like a Camaro V6 😎
Noticed that on my fx30 doing a client work and the footage turned really bad
Uh oh
Same! haha. Biggest mistake i will never do