a6300 disappointment

[Photon]

The tests over at cinema5d.com regarding Rolling Shutter on the a6300, to me it's a deal-breaker. I was so hyped to get this camera and willing to overlook most of it's shortcomings, but with such bad rolling shutter it would be money down the drain if I purchased the a6300. I do lot's of panning shots in my vids, and this sort of problem on the a6300 would make my vids totally unacceptable to me. Even the Sony a7S II has got shockingly bad rolling shutter but the a6300 is even worse! The Samsung NX1 was bad enough, but the Sony a6300 is just terrible


Quote from the review at cinema5d... "As mentioned in our*initial review, unfortunately the rolling shutter effect (also referred to as “jello”) is quite terrible on the*Sony a6300. In fact, with a readout speed of about 34 milliseconds from top to bottom, it is the most severe rolling shutter we have ever measured*on a camera! Even worse than the*Samsung NX1’s 30ms. In comparison, the Sony a7S II*has about 25 milliseconds and the*Sony FS7*has 14. Less is better."

[Lucille]

Well hopefully you find something that works for you and your needs.

[Jay]

Clearly if you need a camera with no rolling shutter, the much more expensive dedicated video cameras will be required still... That sucks, but does make some sense from the perspective of Sony Pro video gear sales and all.

Thanks for the comments!!

Jay

[Obelix]

You have two options. Smaller sensor, like m4/3 in Panasonic cameras, or more expensive Super 35 video camera.

[OldNoob]

I wound suggest that if one were truly serious about Video (especially action scenes where the camera is panning) to consider a dedicated video camera and not a camera whose chief design strengths are in capturing quality stills.
Sony does have some products that im sure will meet your needs and allow your creative side to shine in video.

http://www.sony.com/electronics/camc...ert-capability
https://pro.sony.com/bbsc/ssr/cat-br...ras/cat-nxcam/
http://www.sony.com/electronics/hand...nex-vg30-vg30h

[Steve]

If after no rolling shutter then go for more expensive gear...with faster screen refresh and higher clock cpu speeds.

[Photon]

Clearly if you need a camera with no rolling shutter, the much more expensive dedicated video cameras will be required still... That sucks, but does make some sense from the perspective of Sony Pro video gear sales and all.

Thanks for the comments!!

Jay

I saw a documentary by developers of the new Virtual Reality game systems, and they mentioned how one of their biggest hurdles was to overcome 'latency' (which essentially equates to "rolling Shutter" in these cameras). The VR developers said that 20ms latency was undetectable to the human eye, so that was what they were aiming for, and they've achieved it.
Sony has already announced pre-orders for its new VR system. Really it's all about sensor readout speed at the end of the day, very doable, today's CPUs can easily achieve ultra-low latency, but it's not in Sony's interest to provide us with ideal recording conditions in a consumer camera since that would cannibalize there overpriced so-called pro gear. It sounds cynical from me but it's true if we be honest.

It also explains why the Sony FS7 only has 14ms latency, thus satisfying the need for no rolling shutter. I'm also an avid photographer, so my aim is still to seek an all-in-one photography/video hybrid camera. The Olympus is my next best option at this stage (especially with it's ultra quality 5 Axis Image Stabilization and 77mbps video bitrate), that might have to do me, but it might be worth waiting for the Panasonic GH5 too, I think that's gonna be a giant killer, and Panasonic knows that it has a lot to live up to and will need to improve on the well-received GH4 on all fronts, so i'm expecting good things from the GH5 when it's announced, thus I guess it's not all bad, but I was ultimately wanting the APS/C sensor for the 35mm aspect ratio. Oh well, can't have everything I suppose.

[Jay]

Yes, that is all correct in my opinion. It is actually Pro grade gear though... Business's need to make money, so they will never re-lease the latest and greatest gear. It's always a trickle down effect for the regular consumers like us. The Military gets first dibs at the latest and greatest technology always, because they have crazy money, then years later, the Pro's get dibs on that same stuff. A few years later we get a chance to get some of that awesome technology. It has to do with costs and the business making money I believe. Frustrating for sure, don't get me wrong!

The smaller sensor cameras have a much easier time with the latency issue, so they are clearly the better option for minimal rolling shutter effect at lower costs

Great thoughts and thanks for the fallow-up comments!

Jay

[Steve]

I work with Technology and am avid online gamer.Screen refresh and latency is the biggest issue for online games .So the screens are very similar in technolofy to the view finders and screenbacks on cameras like a6300

The things that affect screen refresh are
Cpu
Gpu
how fast the screen can actually refresh
vsync

CPU and gpu go hand in hand and the chips on cameras are basic gpus. But gpus are not great at math calculations and other tasks so in pc's cpus do that lifting.
Screen refresh based on the actual creen and what its built off has a big impact.

Vsync - this is the screen refresh rate based on gpu and cpu cycles gamers turn this off as with it on it slows screen refresh.
Vsync basically means it draws the next screen completely before sawping it to the viewable screen you see.
You can by turning this off on a pc go from 20 to 30 ms refresh to 10 to 15ms refresh or even faster.

The more you spend on a camera and the bigger sensor means it has to have a far faster calculation speed and better screens to reflect the higher rate of calculations being done to stop u seeing the lag.

I hope this helps a bit but you can see why there are a number of things required to get good refresh rates......but they are doable with todays techs in cameras the size of a6300 it might be a decision based on price of unit they want to sell it at.

[Photon]

Simply an observation... when we see that a simple smartphone avoids rolling shutter in the video (most of them, not all), and that these phones have relatively cheap CPUs in them, that is proof enough that Sony 'deliberately' allows rolling shutter (even on such expensive cameras as the A7s etc), because it ensures that their so-called cinema pro cameras will retain sales. It is all about the dollar at the end of the day, I understand that, and it's Sony's (and any company's) prerogative to do things how they wish for their bottom-line, but smartphones such as the new Samsung Galaxy S7 can record at 4K resolution with no rolling shutter whatsoever. The physical size of the sensor has nothing to do with determining rolling shutter, whether a 4/3rds sensor or a full-frame sensor, the determining factor is the resolution and megapixels of the sensor that need to be processed, not the physical size of the sensor, thus my earlier point in this reply. Smartphones recording at 4K exhibit no rolling shutter only because these phones are no threat to $25,000-$50,000 pro cameras. When we see Sony, for example, giving only 8bit 4:2:0 in the spec, this fact combined with rolling shutter is enough to make sure that movie companies will avoid these cameras and just pony-up the $50,000 or whatever for the cinema cameras. That's my opinion on the matter. So yes, i'm saying it's a type of conspiracy to guard, for example, Sony's sales of higher-end cameras. Imagine this... if Sony allowed the A7S II to record at 4:2:2 10bit < which costs them nothing extra to allow) and in H.265 with options of different compression-ratios to choose from, and if Sony used a CPU fast enough to avoid rolling shutter, that would effectively mean the end of hundreds of millions of dollars in Cinema camera sales worldwide, feel me?

[Jay]

The size of the sensor is a very significant factor Photon. It's easy to make a cell phone camera sensor have a lower re-fresh rate, because it's super small. You are correct though in the fact that the manufacturers hold back what the cameras can actually do. We have seen this with Magic Lantern and the Canon cameras for example and also in firmware updates. Some features were there all along and instead of coming out with a new camera, they will offer a firmware update that adds faster af and much better video with the same exact processor and other hardware.

I totally understand what you are saying and agree for the most part. The Pro grade cameras have a lot more features and physical hardware ports/ options as well no rolling shutter. It's not just the software in other words, as the hardware does play a part as well. The A7s II is a good example not having the features it is actually capable of in the video department. It could totally have the 4.2.2 10bit, but Sony will not allow for that I totally agree. It's a money thing for sure!

Jay

[Photon]

I hear ya brother Jay. Remember, it's merely my opinion, not dissing you... The refresh rate you see on the external LCD doesn't necessarily represent the actual performance of the video, but many times the external LCD will represent accurately whether there's rolling shutter or not. And remember, even a smartphone camera still has to deal with 60fps at 4K resolution, there's no trick to this, the data has to be processed, no two ways about it, the tiny sensor doesn't change the fact that all that data needs to be processed, that's data, nothing to do with the sensor-size. For example, if you take a look at the Samsung S7 smartphone, you can easily record in 60fps at FHD with no rolling shutter whatsoever. It's all about providing enough CPU cycles fast enough to shunt the information through with latency under 20ms. So, we see on the Sony FS7 that it has a 35mm sensor, same as the A7S sensor-size, the only real difference is the speed of the CPU to avoid rolling shutter.

We know these manufacturers could unlock the codec to 10bit 4:2:2, no argument there, but they're shutting it down, so that's an obvious sign of their tactics, but with rolling shutter, a simple cpu upgrade would cost a measly $50 (not even that) more, max, and wallah, no rolling shutter, feel me? But it's not in their interest as we've already discussed.

Regarding physical connections and ports etc, this is a simple matter of minor cost. Such things are cheap, total $100 all-up, but then apparently that justifies 'pro camera' status and means they can charge another $20,000?? lol. We know what's going on.

The bottom-line is that the retail cost of products is often not associated with production cost. I can tell you definitely (i've verified this with manufacturers) that the total cost to Apple to manufacture and ship the iPhone is $245, that's a fact, but it sells outright in Australia for $1100, probably $750 in America, feel me? We know it's all about market demographic and perceived value, so they do only what the market allows them to, what we keep paying for. Nike shoes are made in China for $8, they sell here in Australia for $220. See what i'm sayin? But with these cameras, they just need to stifle/restrict the codec, then deliberately avoid a cpu powerful enough to prevent rolling shutter, thus we have what is effectively a crippled product, most of the real pros won't be able to use it... thus Sony's overpriced so-called pro cameras retain sales. Strategy dear Watson, manufacturer strategy, let's call a spade a spade

[Jay]

Fair enough Great points!

Jay

[Photon]

Just remember, people like me are on a budget, we have to do research to get best value for money, even while needing good results; so, by way of comparison, just as an example, here's one scenario just to show you my way of thinking, obtaining maximum bang for buck (all Aussie prices quoted below)...

The new Canon "80D" costs $1700, and a decent no-compromise lens the Canon "EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM" costs $2400, a total of $4100.

My other option, an Olympus "OM-D E-M5 MKII" costs $1000, and a Panasonic lens "Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm < 24-70) f/2.8 Asph." costs $800. A total of $1800.

The Panasonic lens performs on-par with the Canon lens in benchmark tests, so I will have great results there, and the Olympus camera offers superior image stabilization, plus great video, plus it's a weather-sealed camera. Thus, for $2300 less than the Canon package, I get top-notch performance, as good video with next to no rolling shutter, as good lens results all around, and more than acceptable photos, and as a bonus, the whole package is much lighter and more portable.

I wish Sony would've taken care of the rolling shutter on the a6300, because as I said in the OP, that's a deal-breaker. No point in having great quality video if it's slipping-&-sliding all over the shop.

I'm talking to you Sony.



The Canon "EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM Lens" costs $210 to manufacture, it sells in Australia for $2400. Outrageous profit margins if we be honest.

[SPtheALIEN]

I could be reading this wrong, but it looks like you are attributing a faster CPU with getting rid of the rolling shutter. If that is the case, I would respectfully disagree. Even cameras that cost several times more can have issues with rolling shutter as the physics behind a rolling shutter (a large chunk of today's digital cameras and camcorders) are different than those with a global (or hybrid) shutter--the more expensive to implement solution used on higher end cameras like Red and Blackmagic. I am not sure that implementing a $50 more expensive CPU is going to fix that solution.

Also, keep in mind that much of the issue stems from 4K capture. I am not sure if you are arguing that angle. It improves slightly when you go to regular HD.

[Photon]

I have a smartphone which records video at 1280x720p, the rolling shutter is so bad it's laughable, but the Samsung Galaxy S7, for example, records 4K video with no rolling shutter whatsoever. The big difference is that it uses a Snapdragon 820 cpu, which is fast enough to shunt the data through. The sensor size on my smartphone and the Galaxy S7 are the same, the codec is the same, one has severe rolling shutter, the other doesn't, the only difference? The CPU.

[SPtheALIEN]

It's much easier to handle rolling shutter when you have a smaller sensor. If you are looking for something that gives great bang for the buck and does well with the rolling shutter, you might want to check out today's announcement (RX10iii).

[Photon]

But the Sony FS7 has no rolling shutter, and it has a large sensor! So what you're saying makes no sense. My phone camera has a tiny sensor, and it's riddled with rolling shutter, so what you're saying makes no sense! The bottom-line is the CPU power to shunt the data through quick enough to avoid the rolling shutter heebie-jeebies, that's really the decider, the CPU. Let's be real about it.

Anyway, the head-honcho over at EOSHD.com has done some tests filming with the Sony a6300, so for those who might be curious, here's some statements from his review as follows...

"Doing a video shoot, I shared the burden between 3 cameras including the X Pro2 and FS5 but even then the*A6300 had to sit on the sidelines a few times*to cool down*after around 1 hour of 3-5 minute*continuous takes with gaps in-between of varying lengths – sometimes a few seconds, sometimes a few minutes. That’s simply not good enough, Sony!
With the new cooler running copper sensor Sony had the chance to fix this since the A6000*suffered from it too – in 1080p – but instead the 1080p of the A6300 is pretty mediocre*and the*6K to 4K pushes the camera too hard with inadequate cooling. Very very questionable decision! Might a 2.8K mode with less rolling shutter and a better heat sink been preferable?
Sadly pros can’t*even*rely on the*A6300 as a B-camera due to the overheating, especially not for any kind of live*filming or interview work*at all.

Rolling shutter is the next thing to be aware of, it’s the most*unsuitable camera yet for action or fast handheld movements. The good news here is that the*1080/120fps mode minimises the rolling shutter and the slightly cropped 4K 30p modes lessens it a tiny*bit although you won’t find me shooting 30p!
Finally, my*advice to is pack 3-4 extra batteries, it’s a pretty hungry camera, also invest in a really good tripod and wide angle Batis 25mm F2 to avoid the rolling shutter issues.

For stills it’s also a huge step forward. With most Canon lenses and the Metabones adapter with latest firmware, it’s incredibly fast – better than the A7R II and completely on par with a 5D Mark III in good light, even a 1D X. It does still get a bit hit and miss in low light though."