Sony a6400

[RAZKY]

Quite a conversation you've had with yourself the past two years!

 

[VidThreeNorth]

"Slog in 8-bit APS-C"

Looking at the latest APS-C cameras by Sony, the a6400 is closely related to the ZV-E10, but not the latest FX30. Put simply, everything I have posted so far about the a6400 applies directly to the ZV-E10 because what I have written is related to the sensor and the 8-bit image processing chain which are still used by the ZV-E10. The FX30 has a new slightly higher resolution sensor, which Sony has never used before in a "consumer" camera, and that sensor is used with a 10-bit capable processing chain.

While the FX30 can replicate what can be done with a camera like the a6400 or the ZV-E10 (though not perfectly), it is also capable of doing more. In terms of replicating the a6400 / ZV-E10, the problem with the FX30 comes from the slightly higher resolution of the new sensor which means that the crop factors will not quite match up in some situations, and that where crop factors do match up, detail levels might be measurably different from the older tech to the newer tech, generally favoring the FX30.

However, Sony's designs and implimentations are deliberately similar, so that specifically, knowledge and experience with the Picture Profiles carry forward from 8-bit to 10-bit.


The "S-Logs"

The big leap forward is that "S-Log3" is practically usable for general use video on the FX30 whereas it was generally a waste of time on the 8-bit APS-C cameras. "S-Log2" on the other hand, was actually more than just useable on the 8-bit cameras, there were situations where the added dynamic range might even be the only way to get something done. So the "S-Logs" are the big dividing line between these 8-bit to 10-bit cameras.

I have not used a Full-Frame camera yet, but from what I have seen, the difference is still there, but the added dynamic range moves the "borerline" a bit. The "Full-Frame" sensor noise in the shadows is less, so that one might decide that even "S-Log3" is useable despite an 8-bit image chain. In the case of the later 10-bit Full Frame cameras, "S-Log3" seems to be well liked.

Anyway, I have been using the S-Logs for a while now and I will eventually post samples and analysis of "S-Log2". I might also post some samples of "S-Log3", but I might just skip it. As I wrote above, for APS-C, it is just a waste of time.

 

[VidThreeNorth]

"S&Q" Time Lapse: Full Length Sunrise


This video was made using what I would call "sub-optimal" settings on my Sony a6400 with Sony's SEL20F28 (20mm F2.8) lens. I used "S&Q" at 1 fps. The a6400 S&Q does not support frame rates slower than 1 fps., so the resulting clip runs slower and longer than I would like. If you have seen my previous sunrise, it was made using another camera at 2 fps, which is a better frame rate for sunrise captures. If Sony asked me for recommendations, I would suggest adding frame rates of 1.5 and 2.0 frames per second. I believe that the 1.5 fps rate would also be useful, and it can be difficult to find a way to do this in post. The 20mm lens does "focus breath", so be sure to set it to manual for a time lapse.

Also S&Q on the a6400 only supports time lapse up to 1080p resolution, and there is no real reason for this limit. So I would suggest Sony should add UHD (4K) S&Q time-lapse support, for 1/2 second frame rates and longer.

Why is it Resized?

A long time ago when UHD support was new on YouTube, I was told that if you resize a Full HD file to UHD then more detail can be seen by the viewer even when viewing the file at 1080P. I have never confirmed that this is true, but I resized some Full HD files before uploading before in case it is true. If data cost is an issue, I would suggest that you view it at Full HD.


To cover the dynamic range for the overnight capture the camera mode was S-Log2 with exposure +1.7. I have been experimenting with S-Log2 for still pictures and so I had some idea what the result might be like for video. Recording video was the point in using S-Log2 for stills in the first place. I was aware that when being pushed to record video, the sensor might react differently, which was one of the first things I looked for. So far, I think that the a6400 reacts to S-Log2 closely enough that my tests and practice usages have been valuable.

Why is it Silent?

I did look for some background music, but I did not find something that I liked, so I left it this way. If I understand correctly, if I find a royalty free clip that YouTube provides, there is a "tool" to attach it later. If not, then I will have to work on it again and add the music in Magix or Pinnacle.

"[UHD-Silent]20221127 Sony a6400 S-Log2 Sun Rise"
posted Dec 5, 2022, [length 9:15]
""

I am including some frame captures of one of the two original clips used in this video. The file names include a rough time where the frames occur in the original clip. If I have the time, I will try to find out the offset from the start of the video to where the frames occur.

 

[VidThreeNorth]

Various Settings for the previous "Sunrise":

As indicated it was "S-Log2", with "ITU709 Matrix", "Daylight" colour balance

The Magix adjustments were: Brightness 54, Contrast 56, Saturation 24
- these were supposed to be applied at 11 sec, but I think they turned out to be global adjustments

 

[VidThreeNorth]

This is the final version of the time-lapse in the previous comment. I will probably remove the "old" version eventually. I am just leaving it right now for people curious about how much difference there is.

Magix Movie Edit Pro 16+ had a bug. I was able to remove every 2nd frame to effectively doubt the playback speed resulting in a playback time of 4:38. However, Magix failed to adjust the playback speed for the file resulting in a +9 min file with the last 4:38 being black (empty) screen). I could not find a way to correct this in my editing software, but it turned out that YouTube had the ability to make the adjustment after I uploaded it.

All music was YouTube Royalty free from Asher Fulero. The first was "Ceremonial Library" and the second was "Snowfall Butterflies".

" 221127 [UHD] Sunrise time lapse, Sony a6400 v1.0 with music",

posted Feb 23, 2023 by VidThreeNorth, [length 4:40]
""

Update: 2023-03-11 14:56

A couple of weeks ago I posted my S&Q time-lapse video to YouTube. This turned out differently from the usual. I received a message informing me that YouTube had "recommended" the video. I have never heard of this before. The view count has grown significantly from what I would expect for this type of video. No, I did not get hundreds of views. In a couple of weeks I got about 80 views. But considering the subject matter, it was a surprise. The sun comes up. Clouds blow around. Interesting if you like climatology, but not earth shaking stuff. Still, it was a nice surprise.

 

[VidThreeNorth]

I have posted a few time-lapses made with various cameras. As I have mentioned, the a6400 is not the best camera I have for this application (particularly since it only has internal time laps in Full HD), but I thought that I would post a couple of helpful conversion tables "here"

These are a couple of tables to help you estimate how much "recorded time" takes to play back:

Record 1 fame per second, Playback at 30 fps:

[Recorded Time -> Playback]
1 min = 2 sec
30 min = 1 min
1 hr = 2 min
1.5 hr = 3 min
2 hr = 4 min

Record 1 fame per second, Playback at 24 fps:
1 min = 2.5 sec
2 min = 5 sec
4 min = 10 sec
24 min = 1 min
2 hr (120 min) = 5 min

 

[VidThreeNorth]

More About Time Lapse on Sony a6400

These latest Time-Lapses were made with version 2.0 firmware, which is not very new, but looking at my previous posts, I did not make it clear what firmware version(s) were being used. Sorry about that.

I have now posted 2 overnight Time-Lapse files from the Sony a6400. The second file was a Time-Lapse using Slog2 and an exposure of +1/1.7. This seems to be a better approach, but my settings were not quite right. The exposure was a bit on the dark side overall. I think that an exposure of around +2.0 would be better. While this +1.7 would be "gradeable", shadow detail is probably fairly poor.

Actually, while discussing these files, I should say that my original hope was to have an overnight video with at least a few stars in the sky. Due to the 1/30 sec max. exposure time forced by the camera, stars did not show up in my test files.

11:05 On close inspection, I did get some stars in the Aug 13 file, but they were few and very small. I really need to get it to use exposures longer than 1/30th sec. to do better.

2024-08-13 Toronto Time-Lapse on Variably Cloudy Night
""

 

[VidThreeNorth]

This clip is from the 14th. Essentially i uses the same setup (20mm F2.8), Slog2 but at EV=+2. I picked up something rising on left half of the frame. It might be one of the bigger planets (Saturn? Jupiter?), or maybe a communications satellite in this test. But that was about all. Unless I can find a way to use exposures longer than 1/30th sec., I cannot do better much better than this.

At about X=521,Y=314, there is a light pixel. If you track it through the clip, it is slowly rising up and to the right. It might be a star or planet, but I think I have seen it in other time lapses I have made, and since it seems consistent, I currently expect that it is a man-made object. It might be a communications satellite or something like that. Though since it is visible when nothing else is, it makes me wonder if this might be the space station?

​

 

[Ronaldalli]

Sony a6400, Firmware version 2.00 w/SELP1650 Lens
[2020-11-08 23:08 added above subtitle.]

In the early part of the year I decided that for video, I would buy a Panasonic G95 and a Sony a6400, and a couple of expensive lenses. The was going to be the core, around which I would add accessories like a good tripod and microphone, and other accessories. Not much went as planned. I got the G85 instead of the G95, and a couple of good mics and a good tripod with a powered pan and tilt head, and that was good.

Then things went badly wrong with a particular store, which failed to honor a sale price. Months after I was supposed to have my a6400, I still had all the my money -- I was not ripped off in that sense, but the opportunity to get a good price (the Sony Spring sale) was over. The situation put me in a generally bad mood, and I looked around for alternatives. A good price on the Sony FDR-AX53 camcorder came up and I settled on buying that instead. It was a major change in plans. I still set aside money for a good lens or two for the G85, but I was re-thinking my kit.
[2020-10-17 18:16 slight re-write.]

The AX53 camcorder is weak on the wide-angle end. I was already "adequately" covered on the wide angle end, with the Panasonic 12-60mm 3.5-5.6 kit lens effectively covering down to a full-frame camera 24mm equivalent view. I also had my 8mm SLR Magic lens that, actually, for video really does work well enough within its limits (essentially limited to F8.0 and optically "ok" but not great). I could still get something nice to improve that coverage.

Then the "semi-unexpected" happened. I found an a6400 at a slightly better price than the Spring Sony sale. It was the camera I had planned, and the better price was nice, but despite its advantages -- even over my current setup with the G85 and the AX53, I simply did not really need it now. The main advantage now is the better auto-focus system. Beyond that, it has better stills resolution, better dynamic range, the flip up screen, better mic placement, weather resistance (not generally as good as the G85, but definitely better than the AX53) and the Sony "Picture Profiles", including Log gammas. But none of that is really critical. And buying it meant using up the money I had left for the better lenses and further accessories for this year.

So I was not enthusiastic about buying the a6400 at this point. But thinking about it, I could see that someday later, I would might find its advantages useful. And now, with less chances to work on my preferred projects, I have time to start learning how to use the "Picture Profiles" -- which is not going to be an easy topic for me.

That is what I have done. For now, I am still busy learning to use the AX53 and the G85 for video, so I have decided to use the a6400 mainly as a stills camera. As such, I will not be posting much about my (almost non-existent) experiences using it for video. Occasionally, I might have something to post here. But if there are questions about this camera, I might have a better chance of answering than otherwise.

Hey VidThreeNorth,

Thanks for sharing your experience! It’s interesting how plans can change when it comes to building a camera kit. I can definitely relate to the feeling of finding gear that is technically great but doesn’t quite fit the needs you thought you had at first. I’m curious to hear how your experience with the a6400 evolves, especially since you're focusing more on stills now. Have you had a chance to play around with the real-time eye autofocus much? I’ve found it to be a real game-changer for both portraits and candid shots.

Happy shooting, and good luck with your projects!

Ad removed by a moderator

 

[VidThreeNorth]

Hey VidThreeNorth,

Thanks for sharing your experience! It’s interesting how plans can change when it comes to building a camera kit. I can definitely relate to the feeling of finding gear that is technically great but doesn’t quite fit the needs you thought you had at first. I’m curious to hear how your experience with the a6400 evolves, especially since you're focusing more on stills now. Have you had a chance to play around with the real-time eye autofocus much? I’ve found it to be a real game-changer for both portraits and candid shots.

Happy shooting, and good luck with your projects!

Ad removed by a moderator

Ironically, I have not been taking still pictures with people as central subjects. In fact, mostly I am recording video. Moreover, after a number of 4K projects, I have dropped back to 1080p, and that move has gone together with using a "pocket sized" Nikon 1 S2 for most of the video recording. I have been using camcorders more because I can get Full HD with 50x zoom range in a small camcorder. I have heard that some people are targeting "2K" videos. I could probably use my 4K cameras for that, but it's wasteful and I don't know how YouTube is handling that. Does YouTube re-code it down to Full HD? If they are supporting 2K, then I can see it being worthwhile. Viewing the result on a good cellphone seems like it might be pretty good.