I think your rant(s) for the most part were balanced Gerald. It's definitely not the camera for most people and it really is for a specific type of shooter. I think that it's probably more of an upgrade for those shooting on FX9's that want a move up but don't want a Venice 1. Especially considering that it does do X-OCN RAW internal (without the AXS-R7 external recorder). It still has better RS than an FX9, etc. There is also a lot to be said for the IQ that can be pulled from 16-bit linear RAW that the A1 will never be able to match, outside of shooting RAW to the Ninja V (but then you're comparing 8k vs 4k, since the A1 can't do 8K raw output). Where you'll really see the difference here is in Sgamut3 (not Sgamut3.cine) for HDR productions in Dolby Vision or even Rec2020. Where there is a massive color space. Then having 12-bits+ of data to play with for beautiful color will make a big difference. If you're comparing SDR on both, there is likely not enough of a difference to matter. SDR, even DCI-P3 is tiny in comparison with any HDR format. Those doing commercial work or doc work will appreciate the greatly reduced size vs FX9 or Venice. And consequently the increased amount of rigging options there are (eg car mounting is a lot easier on Burano than either FX9 or Venice 1/2). Still, like you say, it is definitely NOT the master of all cameras. Unfortunately. I think firmware will fix it a bit, it always does. But it does feel bad that it's in such an "unfinished" state. Especially in regards to those HDMI/SDI output modes that shouldn't switch all the time. There are a lot of teething issues that you're absolutely right to point out shouldn't be problems on a $25k camera. And having a binned mode as you say would fix a lot of people's problems. Finally on IR, that is unfortunate, but in that case it's not a super high cost to put on a circular IR filter onto all of your lenses (I do for the protection aspect), which theoretically should make this "not an issue" while also not necessitating a matte box. However the counter to that is if you're using the A1 or FX3, and PL glass, you could be using a Mofage Poco instead as your "internal" vND and also not need a mattebox either. There is a quality difference of course, but then there is still a massive cost difference (as noted a bunch of times). Certainly RAW output on an FX3 with a Mofage Poco gets close. And exceeds in a lot of areas, especially regarding speed. It doesn't do RAW 120 unfortunately (though I really feel that Sony should allow this via firmware, it's artificial segmentation), but in every other regard, from an IQ perspective, size, and speed it's all there. It wasn't used on "The Creator" for nothing.
What TANGIBLE benefit is there to the X-OCN though? This is not a new format, of course, and a few years back I was finding it hard to find samples or anything talking about the true, real world benefit of the linear 16 bit image. It's the same thing now with the Burano - there's barely any samples of X-OCN footage, and none of the ones I've seen make me think it's worth it. There's just a lot of people hyping it up as if it's worth it
You do not need S-Gamut3 for HDR production nor do you want Rec.2020. All commercial content is mastered to P3-D65. The goal of Rec.2020 was to standardize interchange or container primaries. It was never intended as native device primaries. To master Rec.2020 would be to seriously compromise the image for the viewer, as no display is Rec.2020 compliant. Colorists also find colors outside P3 objectionable, which is one of the reasons the DCI opted to retain DCI-P3 as the color gamut for the D-Cinema HDR specification/standard. Nearly all Netflix shows shot with Sony cameras use S-Gamut3.cine and virtually every custom LUT developed for Sony S-Log3 is for S-Gamut3.Cine, including those created by Technicolor and Picture Shop in collaboration with Sony for their flagship cinema cameras, the Venice and Venice 2. The key mastering engineers at Sony Pictures in Culver City also recommend S-Log3/S-Gamut3.cine.
@@SamEmilio2 There are several things I would say to respond: 1.) Look into Rec2020. It, by requirement requires an increase of 1 bit per channel to have equal or exceed precision to Rec709. In practical terms, this means full fat HDR, requires a 12 bit signal. While they did make an HEVC 10-bit version for broadcast, if you want to master anything you always want to have more data that you truncate into less data. And you never want to be in a situation where you try to take smaller amounts of bit-depth and try to stretch it over higher bit-depth. So immediately having at least 12-bits is immediately useful. 2.) For SDR, the difference is less noticeable because it's likely that you're mastering on a 10-bit display. By the very nature of the display you (and most people) aren't capable of seeing the difference. But just because a difference cannot be seen, it doesn't mean it isn't there. When taking 12+ bits down to 10-bit there are things like color variation that can still be seen. Most critically in skin-tones. If you want a reference outside of me, you can hear Cam Mackey talk about this in his FX6 vs Komodo-X head to head here: ruclips.net/video/VEkJxqoiczY/видео.htmlfeature=shared Otherwise the next step would be to obtain a 12-bit display and master on it. Especially one capable of at least TruBlack400 or HDR1000. I'm certain that if you spoke with any color technician at Technicolor or Dolby they would tell you they can see plenty of difference between a 10-bit and 12-bit file on a 12-bit display. Especially when working in a 12-bit timeline doing any "heavy" grade. "Heavy" as being defined as a Hollywood grade where everything is getting pushed and pulled around. 12-bit files simply will not fall apart as easily and will have more tonal variety. 3.) Finally I would say that 16-bit RAW perhaps isn't necessary either, and perhaps neither is RAW period. However I would argue that a 12-bit codec is incredibly beneficial. EG: I don't necessarily think ARRIRAW is "necessary" in comparison to 12-bit ProRES XQ 4444. In fact in that particular case as they are both pulled down from either a 16-bit or in the case of the Alexa35 18-bit signal into a 12-bit or 13-bit log format, virtually all of the data is there while using novel compression to minimize the file size. TL;DR: I think all next gen cameras should have a 12-bit option, and that is more important to me and I would say a majority of productions over specifically having a linear 12-bit linear RAW or 16-bit linear RAW option. Especially if the 12-bit option is in log and is pulled down from a 14+ bit sensor. However, X-OCN is full fat 16-bit RAW, and for productions that want maximum quality then it does check all the boxes without even thinking about compression, log, or gamuts, etc. It's everything in a single, smaller than 12-bit ProRes file. So the tangible benefit for X-OCN given the above is that productions know they're getting the absolute best file that the camera offers and even if the difference is "negligible" there will never be a question about it. And I would say that peace of mind does have value, even if you don't think it's tangible. And of course they can in post decode it however they want and also doing VFX work with all of that data is as I understand it much easier.
@@JonPais Hey Jon, I will first off the top say that you likely know significantly more than me about specifically color spaces and industry practices, but I will say that I'm coming from a place where data preservation matters and I generally strongly dislike when gamuts are introduced that affect the cameras original white point, black point, and color primaries. And this is very specifically what s-gamut3.cine does. I'm also aware of the organizations you mentioned that recommend shooting in s-gamut3.cine. As best as I can see, even with the objections you raised, it is mostly that it's faster and easier to deal with colors and tonalities inside of a specific range. But anyone could easily use a CST in Resolve to remap s-gamut3 to s-gamut3.cine in post or a 65x lut for that purpose. With the argument being that should the data be desired for any reason they have access to it. But if the primaries are remapped in camera, there isn't a way to re-expand the gamut. Sony themselves in their document regarding S-gamut3/s-gamut3.cine, agree with this premise. As they state that S-Gamut3 is much better for archival and is recommended for ACES workflow. Whereas S-Gamut3.cine is recommended for DCI-P3 workflow. Both statements found here: pro.sony/s3/cms-static-content/uploadfile/06/1237494271406.pdf (I paraphrased their statements, but I promise I did not skew their intent). Which again to reiterate reflects my data-preservationist and wanting as much of the original values as possible. I understand other people don't think like me, and they perhaps would rather use the tools that make their jobs more expedient, which is exactly what s-gamut3.cine was designed for. All this to say, I would state humbly that it isn't cut and dry that s-gamut3.cine should simply be used for everything. Though also the reverse can also be argued for anything in which preserving data is not required.
My thoughts exactly! :D I’m so happy I don’t want a Burano, even though I never wanted one in the first place because I’m just a dude who is happy with his A7C II. :D In a way, I shouldn’t even really be watching reviews on professional cinema cameras because I’m totally not the target audience for a camera like that.
I will never ever use a Burano, but I watched this entire video without ever taking my eyes off the screen. Such a well put together review. Thanks man.
You had me at hello. Unscripted flowstate review. Fantastic. This had all the personality and expertise that made mr undone required viewing and a must see. Value proposition returns. Absolutely perfectly entertaining honest and informative. This is what RUclips should be all about. Just perfect. Thank you so much.
My constant thought when mentioning the "Built to do it all" Idea is that this is precisely what the A1 is, and it seems to do it better. The A1 was sold as a Jack of all trades camera. Sony can get it right sometimes - just that the Burano with this firmware is a bit of a disappointment.
People talk about “Sony fanboys”, but honestly what I see more of is people who are fanboys of hating Sony, and accusing others of being fans when they are just using what they feel is the best tool for the job.. so odd lol
That's true, I (haven't even made my first camera purchase) am seeing a lot of these hate comments on RUclips but reddit says otherwise@@RustyShackleford9000
Bro it’s a good camera, at about 6,000 bucks. Rolling shutter is Not acceptable. Colors are good, the eye piece is amazing, ND is great. It honestly should be an fx7. But the fx6 kinda kicks its ass in 8/10 areas
This is perhaps your best video ever. Your observation at the beginning that "we forgot that a machine purpose built to do one thing will always out-perform a machine that is built to do it all" was revolutionary for me when it comes to cameras. That's why you'll never have the perfect camera, but you can find a fantastic camera for YOU. Find the 2-3 specs that matter most to you and get a camera that is the master of that! Also, the way you closed was spot on: I love that this exists because it paves the way for future innovation that wouldn't have been possible if this didn't exist. This opens the door for a fantastic future. Your tests and insight were really helpful all around. Well done Gerald!
The HEVC as a every highly compressed codec behaves as a noise-reducer by principle. It wont / wont be able, to encode to all the fine details - the noise. So that is why you get better DR score from such cameras. Eg. on CineD you can see the trend that true raw cams are rated actually lower, because imatest result is actually based on SNR. And the SNR gets compromised with lossy codecs.
It’s so crazy that it’s a cinema camera and they didn’t consider rolling shutter to be a priority. I really thought this was the first one that would have the global shutter for Sony. And they went to complete opposite direction.
🤞🏿🤞🏿 Hard to even wrap my head around that patent, and this video shows how delicate and hard camera hardware is, but if the compromises make it a better camera than it already? Generational camera.
I hope so, but at what cost? Will it have an OLPF (Panasonic has been removing those, introducing more moire, which should be dead, back into video), or a decently fast rolling shutter (the performance on the S5IIX is horrible.) Internal NDs would be awesome and i agree, but not if image quality suffers.
There's a parallel here: as cell phones put compact cameras out of business, it seems mirrorless is starting to put cinema cameras out of business. The technology and user functions need to trickle up.
Not really, this is only a Sony issue, since Sony mirrorless and cinema camera uses mostly same tech, and share same sensor tech. Sony dont make delicated high power and high performance CMOS sensors that only designed to be used on large Cinema cameras, such as the sensors used on ARRI and RED cameras, those sensors has significantly better dynamic range than the CMOS used on mirrorless cameras. For example, the V Raptor has better dynamic range, much lower rolling shutter effect, and can shoot 8k at 120fps raw, and that camera is still cheaper than this Sony Buranos...
I've been using this for a while, the thing that I love about it is the 6k 50fps Raw. The rolling shutter is better, but the latitude in the edit suit is amazing as long you don't over expose. The color from the images is awesome . It's no Venice, but it's closer.
I am working as an editor on a project using the burano this weekend. From what I have been told they are using it because it offers an upgrade in meage quality from the FX9 without stepping all the way up to the Venice and they got a good deal on rentals. I think this may be more of a rent than buy camera for the cheaper day rate than the Venice. I hope this x-ocn codec is good and easy to work with to be worth the large file sizes I will need to work with!
I'm so curious to see what Sony will say about your review and what impact it will have. I love your honesty and professionalism! I hope Sony honours your thoughts and criticism.
@@miniatureface Sales matter more than opinions. All these camera companies can do so much more but they rather save money and make more profit by leaving things out or doing dumb things, or so they think...
@@miniatureface But I wonder how many people who have $25k to drop on a camera will be swayed by his review. If it was a $500, then yeah. For sure. That's not to say that there won't be someone convinced not to buy it by this video. But I think the market for this is so different that we have to consider the implications of that.
I love how most of these things actually doesn’t matter in the real world and people who gonna buy this hardly gonna notice the small details, but still we all are here watching this like nerds! And I love it!!!
@@jassirhere9631 yeah its pretty stupid. wtf?? i spend this much and then my internal NDs give my footage a cringe 2010 youtube ass color grade edit?? bruh
Gerald, This my first comment in the 5 plus years Ive watched you. Love your stuff. Have you considered making a compilation video reviewing all the best dynamic tanges specifically for Sony cameras> It would be awesome to be able to look at all the info you collect around sony cameras and be able to break them down from best to worst in one video. Just an idea. Keep getting after it!
As is usual with technlogy, this is a clear case of diminishing returns. Compared to an FX6 or an A1, this camera might not seem as enticing, but I believe this camera was developed to compete with the excellent and far more expensive Alexa Mini LF. And on that comparison, it IS the value option, offering most of the performance at a steeply reduced price. Another point to consider would be that, in my experience, professional camera sensors simply cannot be compared with consumer ones. Subtle things, like color accuracy, spectral response, and even microcontrast vastly improve with better, more expensive sensors. The results of comparing, say, HD footage from an old Sony F3 against UHD from a Sony A6500 would probably surprise many of you. Besides, 16bit AD conversion will get you extra stops that your sensor can capture, but a 12bit one simply cant give you. That said, the comparison against the A1 seems to produce quite a similar result! Whether or not the difference is worth the price, can be subjective A serious, well engineered cooling system is also more of an issue that it might seem on a short test. This is quite noticeable when using hybrid cameras, as noise levels visibly rise as the camera gets hotter. Anyone remembers the Red One? Another approach to heat management is to reduce processing power, and run less power-intensive computations. So cheaper cameras end up using simpler debayering and scaling schemes or a less discerning noise reduction. While I frankly prefer the FS7 body style instead of this "sensor in a box" trend, this camera is quite nimble and very easy to rig, without having to deal with with messy contraptions like the (admittedly quite ingenious) Rialto. And frankly, having those two mounts available, without the need for swapping mount plates, is a stroke of pure genius. Give it time. It will inevitably drop in price when new toys with shiny new specs come along, and become a TRUE value proposition. Just as an example, a used Sony F55 can be bought today for a pittance, and it is still a MONSTER of a camera (Global shutter, low noise, AMAZING color, 16bit linear raw, etc). The prices today were unthinkable five or six years ago... but here we are.
Excellent rant :D In a world where the Red Raptor exists (not even the X version but the normal rolling shutter one), this camera is not worth it for people who really want a cinema camera over a documentary or corporate camera. And the IR pollution is unforgivable in a camera where you can't remove it! That is camera manufacturing 101 for crying out loud!
@@tunnellightstudios5183 It's been opined in the Burano facebook group that this is a consequence of having to make the ND filter thinner so that there's space for it and IBIS, and would therefore be unfixable. Of course, Sony corporate would never give their engineers permission to speak freely about something like that.
Yeah - cancelled my Burano order and got a VV-Raptor. Would have loved the internal ND, but there are way fewer limits especially as far as high frame rates and raw recording. 120FPS at 8k FF in Compressed Raw ...
@@geraldundone yup! And I can’t help but to agree with a majority of your points after testing it myself during that filming process and again on 2 other projects. Great video! Accurate points.
0:41 this is such a humble stance that really separates you from most RUclipsrs. As a filmmaker im looking at you corridor digital (green screen spill ruins shots my ass, it’s 2024). Thank you for not pretending you are a presumptuous god with a broadcast channel.
@@charliecooper3030 they literally said the “green screen spill ruins shots”. Exactly in these words, in a video uploaded today. This is about being aware of your knowledge and experience vs not trully knowing what they talk about but present it as fact.
Yeah, I had just finished the video before reading your comment. They're hyping the rediscovered technique by pointing out some of the tedium of using green screen. The connection to this video's intro is tenuous at best and you're purposefully misinterpreting their complaints about a technique when you know they're just giving background knowledge for the audience. @@unspecialist
Great job on the video Gerald! Thanks for making it. I bet we get a global shutter version of this camera (call it the Maranello. because Ferrari) at $30k and the price on the Burano drops to $15K. I would love to see an APS-C version (Palermo)of it at around $10K.
The number of features you can print on the box has always been more important to Sony than the usability of any of them. But it's honestly unbelievable that a professional cinema camera has become one of the worst examples of that now. Great video!
Price issues aside, I think it was marketed all wrong. It was pushed as a mini-Venice, so we instinctively thought that's what we were getting. What we got isn't even an FX9/6 m2 - it's just weird. As an FX6 owner, I often hire other Sony shooters for various projects, doc/content/corporate etc. If someone had a Burano, not only would I not be paying them a premium rate to come along with it, I'd have pause for thought. When I DP commercials, I hire in a Raptor, V1/2 or an Arri. I cannot think of any situation where I'd go with this.
Great rant! Your frustration here Gerald reflects my general frustration with Sony's inflated pricing (on top of actual real-world inflation) and why I ultimately moved away from them. Amazing cameras and lenses that are all generally too expensive! I can understand why Sony created the Burano, as a sort of middle ground between the FX9 and the Venice, and there are many productions that will benefit from it. And pricing-wise, it is competitive with the RED V-Raptor, which has many similar features and specs. But at the same time, Sony could have also made the FX9 II, which people have been asking for. Use the same sensor as the A1, keep the general body and features of the FX9, include internal raw, and price it at around $10-15K. Instead, they had to go for a complete redesign and price it between the cost of the Venice and FX9. Sony's always been kind of greedy, and that sentiment is only reinforced with the Burano.
Great vid! I’ll also mention the ninja setup lets you change the temperature and iso in post as if you shot it at that setting in camera. I shoot long performances where it goes from dark to bright in an instant and no one in my area can touch me when I’m shooting prores raw from my A1. At least not without them spending three times what I’d charge them.
The one comment I would make is about the media the Burano requires - it wants a minimum sustained write speed of 400MBS, and it will throw up a warning if the media is not certified according to the new VPG400 tag, but it won't refuse to record on it. Reports in the Burano facebook group say that Prograde and Angelbird cards do work in this camera.
Looks like this camera will be incredible after two years of firmware updates. It's got a huge cooling fan. You would think they have the thermal overhead to crank that sensor read clock and still have plenty to keep it cool?
The Venice had 3 firmware updates in it's first18 months. Hopefully some of the "easier" fixes like surround view, LT playback thumbnails, clip renaming, false color, and display outputs can be addressed sooner rather then later.
That's a relief. I hope never fall for a 25k cinema camera. I sold my A7Siii for a new ZVE1. I got a smaller camera with amazing AI autofocus for less money. I hope Sony keep doing this. Others can buy the expensive stuff and watch those who don't film professionally enjoy the best tech.
After saw this vdeo about the Burano, I'm gonna stick with my Sony FX6 because for the type of content I make I think it's more than enough for me, I think that Sony makes new products and removes certain elements such as 120fps instantly option where the Burano does a restart to configure itself while the FX6, Veince, FX9, does not, with just assigning a button you make the change from 60 to 120 fps instantly. The ND of the burano disappointed me when I saw Robchardo's video, I see that the ND filter of the FX6 is very good and has never given me problems in the blacks changing the real color. Once again Sony makes mistakes in its CineAlta cameras products and many times we have to wait for them to make an update to correct it. As always, Gerald teaches us that not everything that is more expensive is better, many times by having what is necessary we can make masterpieces.
I had such a great time listening to you rant… I’ve never seen you so frustrated… I love it! And even if I could afford a Burano, I would not buy one… Thanks to you. My only question to you is… If you could only own the A1 or the A7S 3 (where the hell is the four.) which one would you buy?
Really appreciate this level-set on the Burano.I typically get caught up in hype and balanced reviews like this help me avoid making a very expensive mistake for my use case! Side note: The main camera shot looks really noisy this time, but just on the background for some reason. Is that Resolve qualifier/masking noise?? Just something I noticed for the first time.
Wow THANK YOU for your brutal honesty. I think this is what some of us needed to hear. It’s a great proof of concept camera but just has too many flaws to be priced at 25k. I’m sure the fx6ii will be what everyone is looking for, fingers crossed 🤞🏼
I have a similar opinion on the Ronin 4D, it does so many things, and it does them incredibly well, but it doesn't do each thing as well as a dedicated camera would. That said, it's gotta be the best camera I've ever used for my purposes.
nah, Ronin 4d is quite different than I thought. its actually quite unique tool. You virtually don't need to build up the camera and it can immediately begin to work if you need some stabilized shot its such fast tool and you can get everything(wireless video/wireless video feed) also you can go to the Rialto setup in very very tight space like put inside a car it used to only been done in probe lens.
What everyone really wonders, is the IBIS frame that mounts the sensor block all metal or is it just plastic? (that shatters when the camara is dropped, like the entire A7/A9/A1 lineup)
The thing is that films and docs are using the Fx3 now anyway and rigging it out. So it makes sense. Cinema people like the price because they can charge more. Fx3 rents for 80€ a day burano for 300€
@@frankbregulla564 did you forget low light, autofocus, xlr, 4k 120? Documentary films and high end reality shows for streaming and platforms are going to love the burano.
I've been looking forward to your review. I've decided to pick up a used Venice 1. It's not a solo shooter camera and it's big and heavy, but I doesn't have all of the Burano's compromises. The Burano could have been great, particularly with a faster sensor, pollution control, and a better EVF. It reminds me of that saying that a camel is a horse designed by committee. Burano feels like that. I do look forward to a Burano 2
This is giving me a flashback to when our chief engineer told us we were switching to EVA-01's when we were already shooting on GH5's. There are advantages but they're just so hard to justify. Every now and then there's a release that's just an engineer's camera that makes no sense to people using cameras with boots on the ground. Conversely every few years there's a really great photographer's camera that is just reliable and checks all the boxes for people using it in the field (think the gh5, the a7s3, or even on the way back machine the 5d mk2) that makes no sense to the engineers.
I don't know the extent of the IR pollution on the Burano but if it's similar to what happened in the older days of the Sony's very popular PMW EX1 then whoever is going to use it has got to be careful. The brownish/magenta cast on a range of black fabrics is certainly no joke.
Just wanted to note that when you compared it with the FX6 (unfavorably), you said that the FX6 was only half the price. In reality, it's even starker, as the FX6 is only _one quarter_ of the price.
I was so excited for the Burano, I was considering buying one... but the flaws, price, and image being nearly identical to Sony's lower end camera's is an absolute deal breaker. It's such a bummer. 6k would have been more than enough if it increased the DR and reduced the rolling shutter. IBIS is nice, but the internal ND's being good was essential. I can't figure out what Sony was thinking.
I'll take an FX1 with the A1 sensor with proper controls like shutter angle and waveforms + internal ND, maybe more screw holes or cold shoe mounts - $7k I'd be fine with it
Gerald! Love your videos and reviews. But I feel you've missed something on this one. Which is real life situations. The Burano is meant for mid - high budget production work like documentary series, reality and dramas. Especially when needing multi cam and internal 8k raw. Yes building up an A1 can get you a similar image in ideal situations but the realities of high budget filmmaking is situations are never ideal and the more robust and internal components for your camera package the better. Thank you for this great review though, good too know how close the A1 is in image quality for b cam options and larger shoots.
The side of the camera buttons are for when there are 2 camera operators and one is holding the camera up to their eye, the other can adjust settings while he is framing. But he’s right, just get an fx6 or 9
In some ways, I agree, in some ways I disagree. The IR polution is something I don't really see as a huge issue. Most of the lenses I use have a protection filter on them for the sake of the front element, it would be an easy thing to switch them for a circular IR cut filter. That doesn't in any way negate or cheapen the inclusion of the internal ND, coz I'm not gonna be changing the IR filter all the time like I would with an ND. I think the size vs feature set is also massive. I was at a launch event for it and the first thing out of everyone's mouths was "holy shit it's tiny". Like sure it looks big next to a mirrorless, but in a room full of people used to shooting with Alexa and Venice systems it's absolutely minuscule, while still having a lot of the IQ and pro features. I mean its right there in the name, Burano is a small island nesr Venice, this is meant to be a smaller version of their top end cameras, which it is. And yes you can mimic some of the features with a rigged up mirrorless, but then you're adding a whole lot of unacceptable failure points to the system that just can't be justified when you're on a shoot where a lot of people are relying on the rig working perfectly. An XLR adapter is great until it gets snapped off of the hot shoe, an external recorder is great until you break the HDMI cable or the port. As well, you gotta keep in mind that a lot of these things aren't gonna be bought by individuals, they're gonna end up in rental houses (all the rental places in my area have got them now), so the price/performance equation isn't as important as it seems on the surface. Is this a camera you should go out and buy? The answer, like it always is for 95% of video shooting when it comes to high end production gear, is fuck no. Are you a rental house? Do you want a B-Cam for your Venice 2? Are you a documentarian shooting in difficult circumstances (not gonna pretend that a lot of doccos these days aren't just archive footage and static headshots), well it might be worth your consideration. Or you're doing VP work. For the rest of everyone just go buy an FX 6 or something idk
SDI + HDMI out is disabled unless you record to XOCN is another gotcha. Otherwise, you need to choose either SDI or HDMI, but not both. The EVF also shows up in the shot when in the EVF mode.
I have two C100 Mark II, no plans on upgrading. Technology is evolving way too fast, I feel like if I buy brand new in 2024, I might feel stuck with an old tech anyway within a year or two and regret that I’ve spent so much money on the new old thing 😂 I don’t need 4K/8K/12K or whatever, you know, I don’t do Netflix movies… SD cards are affordable, files from the C100M2 are small, great workflow… it’s cost effective! It has internal NDs!!! The box is such a small detail… if you don’t have good lens, good lighting, good sound, etc, and if you don’t know how to operate the camera, the brand new box won’t do better than the old one.
Gerald, when you say "I am also not a filmmaker... take my opinion with a pinch of salt", I feel almost like some of the comments in the past have gotten to you. To be fair, we do not expect you to be a filmmaker... you are the person to go to for a deep, technical discussion, and that is what we expect from your videos. We are looking for objectivity in what is, otherwise, a very subjective field of work. We watch your videos for what you are, and not for what you are not.
This was suppose to replace the 2012 pmw-f55 $34,900 msrp + AXR-R5 $6,300. Other then rolling shutter the Burrito is defiantly a nearly complete replacement.
@@frankbregulla564 i saw where the A7IV has enough dynamic range in slog-3 at 24fps to rival the best cinema cameras in the world including the arri Alexa. It doesn’t have to be a cinema camera to get professional footage
@@frankbregulla564 Depends on what you would define as "Professional" Everything comes down to budget, we shoot a lot with a huge range of clients. To be honest the gap between high-end and "Prosumer" is tightening. Lots of tools for Rigging, Atmos Recorders and general quality have dramatically improved in the last ten years. If you're across lighting and sound most clients can't even tell the difference between a 5k and 25k Camera
@@frankbregulla564 that's not true. I know people in the news industry who run a1s as run and gun news camera man operator cameras. a1s to run their entire wedding filmmaking businesses.
I'm still fairly new to cameras, but I've seen a lot of disappointment with "cinema" cameras as of late and I think the reason for that is that things like the FX3 exist. There are very affordable cameras (relatively) that get most people most of the way to a legit cine rig. Once we get into this price range, it seems its just a lot of creature comforts for people who are actually on set all day doing real cinematography stuff. I'm with you though, if they made like an FX7 or FX8 with basically the A1 in an FX3 body with the noise reduction and such, it would be a killer camera.
Totally agree. If the ND filters are a problem, why not just pick up a Z9 and have 8k raw internally for 1/5 of the price? Or a S5iix that offers 6k prores HQ to ssd along with raw and Braw for less than 1/10 of the price. I get that the sony is a pro level piece of kit and is built like a tank, and made for harsh environments etc, but boy did they leave it looking underwhelming for the money.
I'm kinda shocked you said you never had the A1 overheat with a Ninja at downsampled 8K, because this has happened to me on the regular (also af 4K120). Yes I moved the display away from the body and used a dummy battery. But on warm summer days and even in slightly warm studio settings I've had it overheat many times. My workaround nowadays is literally blowing some air over the back of the body whenever I can, that seems to help quite a bit just removing the hot air from the body. But I'm planning to rig a tiny fan to the cage in the future, as it's kinda weird to keep blowing at the camera lol
I'm sad to see slow rolling shutter in expensive cameras. Modern sensors are so much worse for the latency / rolling shutter than a CCD sensors from two decades ago!
I have been waiting, hoping, dreaming, asking and almost crying for a FX version of the A1 for 18 months. Sony if you are watching, please do a direct competitor to the Canon R5 C🙏
I think the cinema camera button/menu systems are designed for committee based decision making. Mirrorless cameras are generally being operated by a single entity with all decision power.
This camera confirms what I've believed since 2010 with the 5D and what Gareth Edwards truly made mainstream with 'The Creator' last year. These small cameras of ours are compact, more fun to shoot with, simpler to work with for those of us that operate and especially with Sony's own FX3, stand shoulder to shoulder with the 'cinema' cameras. I'd take an FX3 over a Burano every day. They've made the little guy so good, there's no 'voila cinema' that the big cameras give me any more that make the extra money and size worth it. It's a great time to be a filmmaker.
I ordered the Burano after I have seen your review :) I agree in many parts and I feel your disappointment ( and expectation in this price range ). I have A1 and FX6 as well. Sony Burano is the most complete cinema camera body on the market at the moment. For me the largest selling point was XOCN LT internal rec. 16 bit colour depth. More I use it, more I love it. Burano is better then we think... for example: CineD test result for dynamic range and latitude second place behind ALEXA 35.
Awesome review! Thank you. I have an a7siii and save my setups in memory. That camera sounds far more tedious to use. I’d probably make a lot of mistakes
Remember, when comparing raw to compressed codecs, your NLE will have 'debayer quality' and pre-encode processing controls that the camera will also be doing when encoding the compressed codec from the raw sensor signal. If you don't know how to control these parameters well you will actually lose quality available to you in the signal.
Nice rant. I think, with all of those caveats and fiddly workarounds to function, that the Burano cannot compete in a market so full of truly fantastic mid-price cinema and mirrorless cameras that can be kitted out to solve every Burano shortcoming, and at a fraction of its cost. To me, seeing how obvious the problems are that you have found, it's mystifying that more vetting didn't take place in R and D.
Hello, Gerald I see you from a lot of videos being thinking that h.265 handles noise weirdly, making much dynamic range range thn you hink it should but that is the all point of h.265 and also why it tends to work better with gop types of image compression, I suggest you just dig a bit oin the genesis of that "codec" made to be much efficient at file compression the preditive algorithm is better than h.264 resulting on much dynamic range on snr2 that seems outdated type of notation because a well recorded H.265 does result in better image quality that the well appriciated prores which works on h.264, well it is much the H.264 mpeg 4 that is based on apple format. So that's why your readings seems strange, as a sort of very efficient but source(output) depending format, from one device to an other the H.265 can look good or to much processed!
I think your rant(s) for the most part were balanced Gerald. It's definitely not the camera for most people and it really is for a specific type of shooter.
I think that it's probably more of an upgrade for those shooting on FX9's that want a move up but don't want a Venice 1. Especially considering that it does do X-OCN RAW internal (without the AXS-R7 external recorder). It still has better RS than an FX9, etc.
There is also a lot to be said for the IQ that can be pulled from 16-bit linear RAW that the A1 will never be able to match, outside of shooting RAW to the Ninja V (but then you're comparing 8k vs 4k, since the A1 can't do 8K raw output). Where you'll really see the difference here is in Sgamut3 (not Sgamut3.cine) for HDR productions in Dolby Vision or even Rec2020. Where there is a massive color space. Then having 12-bits+ of data to play with for beautiful color will make a big difference. If you're comparing SDR on both, there is likely not enough of a difference to matter. SDR, even DCI-P3 is tiny in comparison with any HDR format.
Those doing commercial work or doc work will appreciate the greatly reduced size vs FX9 or Venice. And consequently the increased amount of rigging options there are (eg car mounting is a lot easier on Burano than either FX9 or Venice 1/2).
Still, like you say, it is definitely NOT the master of all cameras. Unfortunately. I think firmware will fix it a bit, it always does. But it does feel bad that it's in such an "unfinished" state. Especially in regards to those HDMI/SDI output modes that shouldn't switch all the time. There are a lot of teething issues that you're absolutely right to point out shouldn't be problems on a $25k camera. And having a binned mode as you say would fix a lot of people's problems.
Finally on IR, that is unfortunate, but in that case it's not a super high cost to put on a circular IR filter onto all of your lenses (I do for the protection aspect), which theoretically should make this "not an issue" while also not necessitating a matte box. However the counter to that is if you're using the A1 or FX3, and PL glass, you could be using a Mofage Poco instead as your "internal" vND and also not need a mattebox either. There is a quality difference of course, but then there is still a massive cost difference (as noted a bunch of times).
Certainly RAW output on an FX3 with a Mofage Poco gets close. And exceeds in a lot of areas, especially regarding speed. It doesn't do RAW 120 unfortunately (though I really feel that Sony should allow this via firmware, it's artificial segmentation), but in every other regard, from an IQ perspective, size, and speed it's all there. It wasn't used on "The Creator" for nothing.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Some great points here. 👍
What TANGIBLE benefit is there to the X-OCN though? This is not a new format, of course, and a few years back I was finding it hard to find samples or anything talking about the true, real world benefit of the linear 16 bit image. It's the same thing now with the Burano - there's barely any samples of X-OCN footage, and none of the ones I've seen make me think it's worth it. There's just a lot of people hyping it up as if it's worth it
You do not need S-Gamut3 for HDR production nor do you want Rec.2020. All commercial content is mastered to P3-D65. The goal of Rec.2020 was to standardize interchange or container primaries. It was never intended as native device primaries. To master Rec.2020 would be to seriously compromise the image for the viewer, as no display is Rec.2020 compliant. Colorists also find colors outside P3 objectionable, which is one of the reasons the DCI opted to retain DCI-P3 as the color gamut for the D-Cinema HDR specification/standard. Nearly all Netflix shows shot with Sony cameras use S-Gamut3.cine and virtually every custom LUT developed for Sony S-Log3 is for S-Gamut3.Cine, including those created by Technicolor and Picture Shop in collaboration with Sony for their flagship cinema cameras, the Venice and Venice 2. The key mastering engineers at Sony Pictures in Culver City also recommend S-Log3/S-Gamut3.cine.
@@SamEmilio2 There are several things I would say to respond:
1.) Look into Rec2020. It, by requirement requires an increase of 1 bit per channel to have equal or exceed precision to Rec709. In practical terms, this means full fat HDR, requires a 12 bit signal. While they did make an HEVC 10-bit version for broadcast, if you want to master anything you always want to have more data that you truncate into less data. And you never want to be in a situation where you try to take smaller amounts of bit-depth and try to stretch it over higher bit-depth. So immediately having at least 12-bits is immediately useful.
2.) For SDR, the difference is less noticeable because it's likely that you're mastering on a 10-bit display. By the very nature of the display you (and most people) aren't capable of seeing the difference. But just because a difference cannot be seen, it doesn't mean it isn't there. When taking 12+ bits down to 10-bit there are things like color variation that can still be seen. Most critically in skin-tones. If you want a reference outside of me, you can hear Cam Mackey talk about this in his FX6 vs Komodo-X head to head here:
ruclips.net/video/VEkJxqoiczY/видео.htmlfeature=shared
Otherwise the next step would be to obtain a 12-bit display and master on it. Especially one capable of at least TruBlack400 or HDR1000. I'm certain that if you spoke with any color technician at Technicolor or Dolby they would tell you they can see plenty of difference between a 10-bit and 12-bit file on a 12-bit display. Especially when working in a 12-bit timeline doing any "heavy" grade. "Heavy" as being defined as a Hollywood grade where everything is getting pushed and pulled around. 12-bit files simply will not fall apart as easily and will have more tonal variety.
3.) Finally I would say that 16-bit RAW perhaps isn't necessary either, and perhaps neither is RAW period. However I would argue that a 12-bit codec is incredibly beneficial. EG: I don't necessarily think ARRIRAW is "necessary" in comparison to 12-bit ProRES XQ 4444. In fact in that particular case as they are both pulled down from either a 16-bit or in the case of the Alexa35 18-bit signal into a 12-bit or 13-bit log format, virtually all of the data is there while using novel compression to minimize the file size.
TL;DR: I think all next gen cameras should have a 12-bit option, and that is more important to me and I would say a majority of productions over specifically having a linear 12-bit linear RAW or 16-bit linear RAW option. Especially if the 12-bit option is in log and is pulled down from a 14+ bit sensor.
However, X-OCN is full fat 16-bit RAW, and for productions that want maximum quality then it does check all the boxes without even thinking about compression, log, or gamuts, etc. It's everything in a single, smaller than 12-bit ProRes file. So the tangible benefit for X-OCN given the above is that productions know they're getting the absolute best file that the camera offers and even if the difference is "negligible" there will never be a question about it. And I would say that peace of mind does have value, even if you don't think it's tangible. And of course they can in post decode it however they want and also doing VFX work with all of that data is as I understand it much easier.
@@JonPais Hey Jon, I will first off the top say that you likely know significantly more than me about specifically color spaces and industry practices, but I will say that I'm coming from a place where data preservation matters and I generally strongly dislike when gamuts are introduced that affect the cameras original white point, black point, and color primaries. And this is very specifically what s-gamut3.cine does.
I'm also aware of the organizations you mentioned that recommend shooting in s-gamut3.cine. As best as I can see, even with the objections you raised, it is mostly that it's faster and easier to deal with colors and tonalities inside of a specific range. But anyone could easily use a CST in Resolve to remap s-gamut3 to s-gamut3.cine in post or a 65x lut for that purpose. With the argument being that should the data be desired for any reason they have access to it. But if the primaries are remapped in camera, there isn't a way to re-expand the gamut.
Sony themselves in their document regarding S-gamut3/s-gamut3.cine, agree with this premise. As they state that S-Gamut3 is much better for archival and is recommended for ACES workflow. Whereas S-Gamut3.cine is recommended for DCI-P3 workflow. Both statements found here:
pro.sony/s3/cms-static-content/uploadfile/06/1237494271406.pdf
(I paraphrased their statements, but I promise I did not skew their intent).
Which again to reiterate reflects my data-preservationist and wanting as much of the original values as possible. I understand other people don't think like me, and they perhaps would rather use the tools that make their jobs more expedient, which is exactly what s-gamut3.cine was designed for. All this to say, I would state humbly that it isn't cut and dry that s-gamut3.cine should simply be used for everything. Though also the reverse can also be argued for anything in which preserving data is not required.
I do love that people have made me not want this camera even though I’d never need one.
My thoughts exactly! :D I’m so happy I don’t want a Burano, even though I never wanted one in the first place because I’m just a dude who is happy with his A7C II. :D In a way, I shouldn’t even really be watching reviews on professional cinema cameras because I’m totally not the target audience for a camera like that.
I will never ever use a Burano, but I watched this entire video without ever taking my eyes off the screen. Such a well put together review. Thanks man.
Never say never. You get what you wish for.
You had me at hello. Unscripted flowstate review. Fantastic. This had all the personality and expertise that made mr undone required viewing and a must see. Value proposition returns. Absolutely perfectly entertaining honest and informative. This is what RUclips should be all about. Just perfect. Thank you so much.
"A machine that's purpose-built to do one thing will always outperform a machine that's built to do it all" fantastic
If using state of the art technology yes, but not if we compare different generations.
My constant thought when mentioning the "Built to do it all" Idea is that this is precisely what the A1 is, and it seems to do it better. The A1 was sold as a Jack of all trades camera. Sony can get it right sometimes - just that the Burano with this firmware is a bit of a disappointment.
Splash of cold water 💦
Waiting for A1 mark 2
I'm so excited for the MK II!! 😅
🤣
Hahaha!!! Me too!
Gerald disliking a new Sony camera? the world is about to end...
Let's not pretend it's the first time. Just add it to the list ZV-1M2, a7C, ZV-1F, a6500, etc.
People talk about “Sony fanboys”, but honestly what I see more of is people who are fanboys of hating Sony, and accusing others of being fans when they are just using what they feel is the best tool for the job.. so odd lol
That's true, I (haven't even made my first camera purchase) am seeing a lot of these hate comments on RUclips but reddit says otherwise@@RustyShackleford9000
Bro it’s a good camera, at about 6,000 bucks. Rolling shutter is Not acceptable. Colors are good, the eye piece is amazing, ND is great. It honestly should be an fx7. But the fx6 kinda kicks its ass in 8/10 areas
Maybe its because Nikon is about to steal some of their market. E to Z mount mixes it up
Gerald sums up perfectly the phenomena know in every tech industry as "Version One-Point-Oh-No."
This is perhaps your best video ever. Your observation at the beginning that "we forgot that a machine purpose built to do one thing will always out-perform a machine that is built to do it all" was revolutionary for me when it comes to cameras. That's why you'll never have the perfect camera, but you can find a fantastic camera for YOU. Find the 2-3 specs that matter most to you and get a camera that is the master of that! Also, the way you closed was spot on: I love that this exists because it paves the way for future innovation that wouldn't have been possible if this didn't exist. This opens the door for a fantastic future. Your tests and insight were really helpful all around. Well done Gerald!
The HEVC as a every highly compressed codec behaves as a noise-reducer by principle. It wont / wont be able, to encode to all the fine details - the noise. So that is why you get better DR score from such cameras. Eg. on CineD you can see the trend that true raw cams are rated actually lower, because imatest result is actually based on SNR. And the SNR gets compromised with lossy codecs.
Well put!
It’s so crazy that it’s a cinema camera and they didn’t consider rolling shutter to be a priority. I really thought this was the first one that would have the global shutter for Sony. And they went to complete opposite direction.
Wonder if Panasonic's S1H mk2 will incorporate a ND
🤞🏿🤞🏿 Hard to even wrap my head around that patent, and this video shows how delicate and hard camera hardware is, but if the compromises make it a better camera than it already? Generational camera.
I hope so, but at what cost? Will it have an OLPF (Panasonic has been removing those, introducing more moire, which should be dead, back into video), or a decently fast rolling shutter (the performance on the S5IIX is horrible.) Internal NDs would be awesome and i agree, but not if image quality suffers.
I sure hope so
There's a parallel here: as cell phones put compact cameras out of business, it seems mirrorless is starting to put cinema cameras out of business.
The technology and user functions need to trickle up.
Not really, this is only a Sony issue, since Sony mirrorless and cinema camera uses mostly same tech, and share same sensor tech. Sony dont make delicated high power and high performance CMOS sensors that only designed to be used on large Cinema cameras, such as the sensors used on ARRI and RED cameras, those sensors has significantly better dynamic range than the CMOS used on mirrorless cameras. For example, the V Raptor has better dynamic range, much lower rolling shutter effect, and can shoot 8k at 120fps raw, and that camera is still cheaper than this Sony Buranos...
@@qiyuxuan9437 Bear in mind that the A7siii and A1 have had far less frequent firmware upgrades than their FX series cameras.
There's a lot of truth in that statement
You are a Gem. Only youtuber that would rather be honest and risk not getting another camera from sony, than fake praising sony to get more cams
I've been using this for a while, the thing that I love about it is the 6k 50fps Raw. The rolling shutter is better, but the latitude in the edit suit is amazing as long you don't over expose. The color from the images is awesome . It's no Venice, but it's closer.
I am working as an editor on a project using the burano this weekend. From what I have been told they are using it because it offers an upgrade in meage quality from the FX9 without stepping all the way up to the Venice and they got a good deal on rentals. I think this may be more of a rent than buy camera for the cheaper day rate than the Venice. I hope this x-ocn codec is good and easy to work with to be worth the large file sizes I will need to work with!
I'm so curious to see what Sony will say about your review and what impact it will have. I love your honesty and professionalism! I hope Sony honours your thoughts and criticism.
Honestly, they don't care
WHy does it matter. If a big company is hurt over a criticism, that's on them.
@@miniatureface Sales matter more than opinions. All these camera companies can do so much more but they rather save money and make more profit by leaving things out or doing dumb things, or so they think...
@@miniatureface But I wonder how many people who have $25k to drop on a camera will be swayed by his review. If it was a $500, then yeah. For sure.
That's not to say that there won't be someone convinced not to buy it by this video. But I think the market for this is so different that we have to consider the implications of that.
I love how most of these things actually doesn’t matter in the real world and people who gonna buy this hardly gonna notice the small details, but still we all are here watching this like nerds! And I love it!!!
🤓
IR pollution is pretty big If you're doing docs.
@@jassirhere9631 yeah its pretty stupid. wtf?? i spend this much and then my internal NDs give my footage a cringe 2010 youtube ass color grade edit?? bruh
Gerald, This my first comment in the 5 plus years Ive watched you. Love your stuff. Have you considered making a compilation video reviewing all the best dynamic tanges specifically for Sony cameras> It would be awesome to be able to look at all the info you collect around sony cameras and be able to break them down from best to worst in one video. Just an idea. Keep getting after it!
As is usual with technlogy, this is a clear case of diminishing returns. Compared to an FX6 or an A1, this camera might not seem as enticing, but I believe this camera was developed to compete with the excellent and far more expensive Alexa Mini LF. And on that comparison, it IS the value option, offering most of the performance at a steeply reduced price.
Another point to consider would be that, in my experience, professional camera sensors simply cannot be compared with consumer ones. Subtle things, like color accuracy, spectral response, and even microcontrast vastly improve with better, more expensive sensors. The results of comparing, say, HD footage from an old Sony F3 against UHD from a Sony A6500 would probably surprise many of you. Besides, 16bit AD conversion will get you extra stops that your sensor can capture, but a 12bit one simply cant give you.
That said, the comparison against the A1 seems to produce quite a similar result! Whether or not the difference is worth the price, can be subjective
A serious, well engineered cooling system is also more of an issue that it might seem on a short test. This is quite noticeable when using hybrid cameras, as noise levels visibly rise as the camera gets hotter. Anyone remembers the Red One?
Another approach to heat management is to reduce processing power, and run less power-intensive computations. So cheaper cameras end up using simpler debayering and scaling schemes or a less discerning noise reduction.
While I frankly prefer the FS7 body style instead of this "sensor in a box" trend, this camera is quite nimble and very easy to rig, without having to deal with with messy contraptions like the (admittedly quite ingenious) Rialto. And frankly, having those two mounts available, without the need for swapping mount plates, is a stroke of pure genius.
Give it time. It will inevitably drop in price when new toys with shiny new specs come along, and become a TRUE value proposition.
Just as an example, a used Sony F55 can be bought today for a pittance, and it is still a MONSTER of a camera (Global shutter, low noise, AMAZING color, 16bit linear raw, etc). The prices today were unthinkable five or six years ago... but here we are.
Value proposition defined here. RESULT: Not worth the money they are asking . Thanks Gerald A+
only a good value proposition for some BUT paved the road for better tech in the future.
Been waiting on this review forever ! Great to see it finally 🎉❤
I'm glad you brought up the cropping facts about this camera. It's what annoyed me when I looked at reviews about the camera.
Excellent rant :D In a world where the Red Raptor exists (not even the X version but the normal rolling shutter one), this camera is not worth it for people who really want a cinema camera over a documentary or corporate camera. And the IR pollution is unforgivable in a camera where you can't remove it! That is camera manufacturing 101 for crying out loud!
Sony should offer to fix the IR Pollution issue at no extra cost. Like a warranty replacement.
@@tunnellightstudios5183 It's been opined in the Burano facebook group that this is a consequence of having to make the ND filter thinner so that there's space for it and IBIS, and would therefore be unfixable. Of course, Sony corporate would never give their engineers permission to speak freely about something like that.
Yeah - cancelled my Burano order and got a VV-Raptor. Would have loved the internal ND, but there are way fewer limits especially as far as high frame rates and raw recording. 120FPS at 8k FF in Compressed Raw ...
@@mattuhry Hey Matt! Cheers from Japan! 😊
Kondor Blue makes amazing cages. It was so hard for me to tell on a lot of videos, but when I held one in my hands, I was blown away.
Don't know how is Gerald doing this but somehow I manage to understand his ultrafast speech..
and interesting
helpful either.
your no-nonsense and frank review is a refreshing and beautiful thing.
Always the best from Gerald Undone!
Thanks for featuring my Burano B roll! 🙏🎥🤝
Oh, did you shoot the Kondor Blue stuff? Nicely done! 👍
@@geraldundone yup! And I can’t help but to agree with a majority of your points after testing it myself during that filming process and again on 2 other projects. Great video! Accurate points.
Soumds like quite a sttess-test for Sony, great you're telling them, all valid and important arguments. Thanks for sharing, Mr. Undone!
0:41 this is such a humble stance that really separates you from most RUclipsrs. As a filmmaker im looking at you corridor digital (green screen spill ruins shots my ass, it’s 2024). Thank you for not pretending you are a presumptuous god with a broadcast channel.
Their video wasn't about green screen spill so I don't grasp why you think it's somehow relevant to a gear reviewer being humble about their niche.
@@charliecooper3030 they literally said the “green screen spill ruins shots”. Exactly in these words, in a video uploaded today. This is about being aware of your knowledge and experience vs not trully knowing what they talk about but present it as fact.
Yeah, I had just finished the video before reading your comment. They're hyping the rediscovered technique by pointing out some of the tedium of using green screen. The connection to this video's intro is tenuous at best and you're purposefully misinterpreting their complaints about a technique when you know they're just giving background knowledge for the audience. @@unspecialist
Great job on the video Gerald! Thanks for making it. I bet we get a global shutter version of this camera (call it the Maranello. because Ferrari) at $30k and the price on the Burano drops to $15K. I would love to see an APS-C version (Palermo)of it at around $10K.
The number of features you can print on the box has always been more important to Sony than the usability of any of them. But it's honestly unbelievable that a professional cinema camera has become one of the worst examples of that now.
Great video!
Thank you so much for the honesty of stating a perspective disclaimer at the beginning. A lot of RUclipsrs don’t mention this.
Price issues aside, I think it was marketed all wrong. It was pushed as a mini-Venice, so we instinctively thought that's what we were getting. What we got isn't even an FX9/6 m2 - it's just weird. As an FX6 owner, I often hire other Sony shooters for various projects, doc/content/corporate etc. If someone had a Burano, not only would I not be paying them a premium rate to come along with it, I'd have pause for thought. When I DP commercials, I hire in a Raptor, V1/2 or an Arri. I cannot think of any situation where I'd go with this.
Great rant! Your frustration here Gerald reflects my general frustration with Sony's inflated pricing (on top of actual real-world inflation) and why I ultimately moved away from them. Amazing cameras and lenses that are all generally too expensive! I can understand why Sony created the Burano, as a sort of middle ground between the FX9 and the Venice, and there are many productions that will benefit from it. And pricing-wise, it is competitive with the RED V-Raptor, which has many similar features and specs. But at the same time, Sony could have also made the FX9 II, which people have been asking for. Use the same sensor as the A1, keep the general body and features of the FX9, include internal raw, and price it at around $10-15K. Instead, they had to go for a complete redesign and price it between the cost of the Venice and FX9. Sony's always been kind of greedy, and that sentiment is only reinforced with the Burano.
Great review! One note: I believe all the buttons on the side are meant to be used by an AC not the DP.
Great vid! I’ll also mention the ninja setup lets you change the temperature and iso in post as if you shot it at that setting in camera. I shoot long performances where it goes from dark to bright in an instant and no one in my area can touch me when I’m shooting prores raw from my A1. At least not without them spending three times what I’d charge them.
The one comment I would make is about the media the Burano requires - it wants a minimum sustained write speed of 400MBS, and it will throw up a warning if the media is not certified according to the new VPG400 tag, but it won't refuse to record on it. Reports in the Burano facebook group say that Prograde and Angelbird cards do work in this camera.
Looks like this camera will be incredible after two years of firmware updates. It's got a huge cooling fan. You would think they have the thermal overhead to crank that sensor read clock and still have plenty to keep it cool?
The Venice had 3 firmware updates in it's first18 months. Hopefully some of the "easier" fixes like surround view, LT playback thumbnails, clip renaming, false color, and display outputs can be addressed sooner rather then later.
Can't wait till that burrano depreciation kicks in 🎥
That's a relief. I hope never fall for a 25k cinema camera. I sold my A7Siii for a new ZVE1. I got a smaller camera with amazing AI autofocus for less money. I hope Sony keep doing this. Others can buy the expensive stuff and watch those who don't film professionally enjoy the best tech.
@@cnxghost thanks, never knew that. I'll cancel my Venice order too. :)
After saw this vdeo about the Burano, I'm gonna stick with my Sony FX6 because for the type of content I make I think it's more than enough for me, I think that Sony makes new products and removes certain elements such as 120fps instantly option where the Burano does a restart to configure itself while the FX6, Veince, FX9, does not, with just assigning a button you make the change from 60 to 120 fps instantly. The ND of the burano disappointed me when I saw Robchardo's video, I see that the ND filter of the FX6 is very good and has never given me problems in the blacks changing the real color. Once again Sony makes mistakes in its CineAlta cameras products and many times we have to wait for them to make an update to correct it. As always, Gerald teaches us that not everything that is more expensive is better, many times by having what is necessary we can make masterpieces.
I had such a great time listening to you rant… I’ve never seen you so frustrated… I love it! And even if I could afford a Burano, I would not buy one… Thanks to you. My only question to you is… If you could only own the A1 or the A7S 3 (where the hell is the four.) which one would you buy?
Really appreciate this level-set on the Burano.I typically get caught up in hype and balanced reviews like this help me avoid making a very expensive mistake for my use case!
Side note: The main camera shot looks really noisy this time, but just on the background for some reason. Is that Resolve qualifier/masking noise?? Just something I noticed for the first time.
MK III of this camera might be pretty good.
how about the A7S3 firmware update though
Wow THANK YOU for your brutal honesty. I think this is what some of us needed to hear. It’s a great proof of concept camera but just has too many flaws to be priced at 25k. I’m sure the fx6ii will be what everyone is looking for, fingers crossed 🤞🏼
I have a similar opinion on the Ronin 4D, it does so many things, and it does them incredibly well, but it doesn't do each thing as well as a dedicated camera would.
That said, it's gotta be the best camera I've ever used for my purposes.
can't wait for the mark ii of the 4D (if that will be made)
nah, Ronin 4d is quite different than I thought. its actually quite unique tool. You virtually don't need to build up the camera and it can immediately begin to work
if you need some stabilized shot its such fast tool and you can get everything(wireless video/wireless video feed) also you can go to the Rialto setup in very very tight
space like put inside a car it used to only been done in probe lens.
What everyone really wonders, is the IBIS frame that mounts the sensor block all metal or is it just plastic? (that shatters when the camara is dropped, like the entire A7/A9/A1 lineup)
The thing is that films and docs are using the Fx3 now anyway and rigging it out. So it makes sense. Cinema people like the price because they can charge more. Fx3 rents for 80€ a day burano for 300€
no one use fx3 when size does not matter. operators want physical buttons etc..
@@frankbregulla564 did you forget low light, autofocus, xlr, 4k 120? Documentary films and high end reality shows for streaming and platforms are going to love the burano.
I've been looking forward to your review. I've decided to pick up a used Venice 1. It's not a solo shooter camera and it's big and heavy, but I doesn't have all of the Burano's compromises. The Burano could have been great, particularly with a faster sensor, pollution control, and a better EVF. It reminds me of that saying that a camel is a horse designed by committee. Burano feels like that. I do look forward to a Burano 2
Meanwhile the Nikon Z9 can shoot 8.3K RAW and 4K 120p Full Frame RAW internally as well as Pro Res HQ for $5k..
„I just don‘t think for the average person, it‘s the definitive answer that we were hoping for.“ G. Undone, 2024, about a 25K Cinecam. ❤
Your perspectives seem super balanced, and I think thats worth a lot, considering the fanbase response for anything that costs a nice chunk of change.
that makes me kinda glad to have the A1 :D
You’ve sold me - on the Sony Alpha One!
In some ways this is the best sony a1 promotion I've seen.
It has its own issues… Firmware fury
@@righthererightnowproductio9525 Yes, alas.
This is giving me a flashback to when our chief engineer told us we were switching to EVA-01's when we were already shooting on GH5's. There are advantages but they're just so hard to justify. Every now and then there's a release that's just an engineer's camera that makes no sense to people using cameras with boots on the ground. Conversely every few years there's a really great photographer's camera that is just reliable and checks all the boxes for people using it in the field (think the gh5, the a7s3, or even on the way back machine the 5d mk2) that makes no sense to the engineers.
Truly excellent review, thank you Gerald!
I don't know the extent of the IR pollution on the Burano but if it's similar to what happened in the older days of the Sony's very popular PMW EX1 then whoever is going to use it has got to be careful. The brownish/magenta cast on a range of black fabrics is certainly no joke.
Just wanted to note that when you compared it with the FX6 (unfavorably), you said that the FX6 was only half the price.
In reality, it's even starker, as the FX6 is only _one quarter_ of the price.
I think that was the FX9 I was calling half the price, which is also a tricky value prop when considering the FX6, yeah.
The Fx6 looks so affordable for hobby shooters after this video. I'm mostly a photographer, but I'd like and fx6 for fun
Thank you Gerald, you saved me $25k 😅
That’s why I mess with Gerald. Honest AF
You’re killing me! Give us a BMCC6KFF review pleeeeeeaase!
Also the Blazar Remus lenses.
I was so excited for the Burano, I was considering buying one... but the flaws, price, and image being nearly identical to Sony's lower end camera's is an absolute deal breaker. It's such a bummer. 6k would have been more than enough if it increased the DR and reduced the rolling shutter. IBIS is nice, but the internal ND's being good was essential. I can't figure out what Sony was thinking.
I'll take an FX1 with the A1 sensor with proper controls like shutter angle and waveforms + internal ND, maybe more screw holes or cold shoe mounts - $7k I'd be fine with it
Gerald! Love your videos and reviews. But I feel you've missed something on this one. Which is real life situations. The Burano is meant for mid - high budget production work like documentary series, reality and dramas. Especially when needing multi cam and internal 8k raw. Yes building up an A1 can get you a similar image in ideal situations but the realities of high budget filmmaking is situations are never ideal and the more robust and internal components for your camera package the better. Thank you for this great review though, good too know how close the A1 is in image quality for b cam options and larger shoots.
The side of the camera buttons are for when there are 2 camera operators and one is holding the camera up to their eye, the other can adjust settings while he is framing. But he’s right, just get an fx6 or 9
Somebody is going to take one of the things Gerald said, out of context. "I do believe this is going to be the absolute perfect camera"
Amazing review. Very logical, to the point, scientific, etc. love what you’re doing man 🙌
my mafia name is SONY BURANO
You're in perfect form, Gerald. Much enjoyed.
Always thorough and very informative.
In some ways, I agree, in some ways I disagree. The IR polution is something I don't really see as a huge issue. Most of the lenses I use have a protection filter on them for the sake of the front element, it would be an easy thing to switch them for a circular IR cut filter. That doesn't in any way negate or cheapen the inclusion of the internal ND, coz I'm not gonna be changing the IR filter all the time like I would with an ND.
I think the size vs feature set is also massive. I was at a launch event for it and the first thing out of everyone's mouths was "holy shit it's tiny". Like sure it looks big next to a mirrorless, but in a room full of people used to shooting with Alexa and Venice systems it's absolutely minuscule, while still having a lot of the IQ and pro features. I mean its right there in the name, Burano is a small island nesr Venice, this is meant to be a smaller version of their top end cameras, which it is.
And yes you can mimic some of the features with a rigged up mirrorless, but then you're adding a whole lot of unacceptable failure points to the system that just can't be justified when you're on a shoot where a lot of people are relying on the rig working perfectly. An XLR adapter is great until it gets snapped off of the hot shoe, an external recorder is great until you break the HDMI cable or the port.
As well, you gotta keep in mind that a lot of these things aren't gonna be bought by individuals, they're gonna end up in rental houses (all the rental places in my area have got them now), so the price/performance equation isn't as important as it seems on the surface. Is this a camera you should go out and buy? The answer, like it always is for 95% of video shooting when it comes to high end production gear, is fuck no. Are you a rental house? Do you want a B-Cam for your Venice 2? Are you a documentarian shooting in difficult circumstances (not gonna pretend that a lot of doccos these days aren't just archive footage and static headshots), well it might be worth your consideration. Or you're doing VP work. For the rest of everyone just go buy an FX 6 or something idk
SDI + HDMI out is disabled unless you record to XOCN is another gotcha. Otherwise, you need to choose either SDI or HDMI, but not both. The EVF also shows up in the shot when in the EVF mode.
I have two C100 Mark II, no plans on upgrading.
Technology is evolving way too fast, I feel like if I buy brand new in 2024, I might feel stuck with an old tech anyway within a year or two and regret that I’ve spent so much money on the new old thing 😂
I don’t need 4K/8K/12K or whatever, you know, I don’t do Netflix movies…
SD cards are affordable, files from the C100M2 are small, great workflow… it’s cost effective! It has internal NDs!!! The box is such a small detail… if you don’t have good lens, good lighting, good sound, etc, and if you don’t know how to operate the camera, the brand new box won’t do better than the old one.
Gerald, when you say "I am also not a filmmaker... take my opinion with a pinch of salt", I feel almost like some of the comments in the past have gotten to you. To be fair, we do not expect you to be a filmmaker... you are the person to go to for a deep, technical discussion, and that is what we expect from your videos. We are looking for objectivity in what is, otherwise, a very subjective field of work.
We watch your videos for what you are, and not for what you are not.
Well done Gerald! nice video, shame you don't have the camera for more tests... would love to see an 8K shoot out from you
Camera aside (and I think you nailed
it) this "Gerald Unscripted" video is great. Love the zen-like flow state!
This was suppose to replace the 2012 pmw-f55 $34,900 msrp + AXR-R5 $6,300. Other then rolling shutter the Burrito is defiantly a nearly complete replacement.
Dude the Alpha 1 is a BALLER
yes, but not for any professional video productions.
@@frankbregulla564 i saw where the A7IV has enough dynamic range in slog-3 at 24fps to rival the best cinema cameras in the world including the arri Alexa. It doesn’t have to be a cinema camera to get professional footage
@@frankbregulla564 Depends on what you would define as "Professional" Everything comes down to budget, we shoot a lot with a huge range of clients. To be honest the gap between high-end and "Prosumer" is tightening. Lots of tools for Rigging, Atmos Recorders and general quality have dramatically improved in the last ten years.
If you're across lighting and sound most clients can't even tell the difference between a 5k and 25k Camera
@@frankbregulla564 that's not true. I know people in the news industry who run a1s as run and gun news camera man operator cameras. a1s to run their entire wedding filmmaking businesses.
This style of video while longer is easy to digest information
Well I wasn't going to buy one anyone... but I guess now I can stop wishing I could
I'm still fairly new to cameras, but I've seen a lot of disappointment with "cinema" cameras as of late and I think the reason for that is that things like the FX3 exist. There are very affordable cameras (relatively) that get most people most of the way to a legit cine rig. Once we get into this price range, it seems its just a lot of creature comforts for people who are actually on set all day doing real cinematography stuff.
I'm with you though, if they made like an FX7 or FX8 with basically the A1 in an FX3 body with the noise reduction and such, it would be a killer camera.
Totally agree.
If the ND filters are a problem, why not just pick up a Z9 and have 8k raw internally for 1/5 of the price?
Or a S5iix that offers 6k prores HQ to ssd along with raw and Braw for less than 1/10 of the price.
I get that the sony is a pro level piece of kit and is built like a tank, and made for harsh environments etc, but boy did they leave it looking underwhelming for the money.
I'm kinda shocked you said you never had the A1 overheat with a Ninja at downsampled 8K, because this has happened to me on the regular (also af 4K120). Yes I moved the display away from the body and used a dummy battery. But on warm summer days and even in slightly warm studio settings I've had it overheat many times. My workaround nowadays is literally blowing some air over the back of the body whenever I can, that seems to help quite a bit just removing the hot air from the body. But I'm planning to rig a tiny fan to the cage in the future, as it's kinda weird to keep blowing at the camera lol
The ulanzi fan works well
I'm sad to see slow rolling shutter in expensive cameras. Modern sensors are so much worse for the latency / rolling shutter than a CCD sensors from two decades ago!
I have been waiting, hoping, dreaming, asking and almost crying for a FX version of the A1 for 18 months. Sony if you are watching, please do a direct competitor to the Canon R5 C🙏
I think the Burano *is* the FX version of the A1.
@@KeithSklower you are not wrong, but I mean a A1 with the FX3 body, little rolling shutter, 8k 30 fps and a price under $7500 usd
I think the cinema camera button/menu systems are designed for committee based decision making. Mirrorless cameras are generally being operated by a single entity with all decision power.
Thanks for being honest and not a kiss arse. Respect. C
This camera confirms what I've believed since 2010 with the 5D and what Gareth Edwards truly made mainstream with 'The Creator' last year. These small cameras of ours are compact, more fun to shoot with, simpler to work with for those of us that operate and especially with Sony's own FX3, stand shoulder to shoulder with the 'cinema' cameras. I'd take an FX3 over a Burano every day. They've made the little guy so good, there's no 'voila cinema' that the big cameras give me any more that make the extra money and size worth it. It's a great time to be a filmmaker.
I ordered the Burano after I have seen your review :) I agree in many parts and I feel your disappointment ( and expectation in this price range ). I have A1 and FX6 as well.
Sony Burano is the most complete cinema camera body on the market at the moment. For me the largest selling point was XOCN LT internal rec. 16 bit colour depth.
More I use it, more I love it. Burano is better then we think... for example:
CineD test result for dynamic range and latitude second place behind ALEXA 35.
How was that rolling shutter test compared to those cameras?
I hope Sony eventually makes a smaller cam with internal NDs and RAW. Something between an FX3 & FX6.
Awesome review! Thank you. I have an a7siii and save my setups in memory. That camera sounds far more tedious to use. I’d probably make a lot of mistakes
perfect sum-up of this camera 👌
Remember, when comparing raw to compressed codecs, your NLE will have 'debayer quality' and pre-encode processing controls that the camera will also be doing when encoding the compressed codec from the raw sensor signal. If you don't know how to control these parameters well you will actually lose quality available to you in the signal.
Nice rant. I think, with all of those caveats and fiddly workarounds to function, that the Burano cannot compete in a market so full of truly fantastic mid-price cinema and mirrorless cameras that can be kitted out to solve every Burano shortcoming, and at a fraction of its cost. To me, seeing how obvious the problems are that you have found, it's mystifying that more vetting didn't take place in R and D.
Hello, Gerald I see you from a lot of videos being thinking that h.265 handles noise weirdly, making much dynamic range range thn you hink it should but that is the all point of h.265 and also why it tends to work better with gop types of image compression, I suggest you just dig a bit oin the genesis of that "codec" made to be much efficient at file compression the preditive algorithm is better than h.264 resulting on much dynamic range on snr2 that seems outdated type of notation because a well recorded H.265 does result in better image quality that the well appriciated prores which works on h.264, well it is much the H.264 mpeg 4 that is based on apple format.
So that's why your readings seems strange, as a sort of very efficient but source(output) depending format, from one device to an other the H.265 can look good or to much processed!