Real vs Fake Slow Motion | Chronos 2.1 vs Sony a7S III

The Chronos 2.1 shoots 1000 fps in HD. The Sony a7s III can shoot 240 fps in HD. But do you need a camera like the Chronos to get great looking super slow motion? Or can you fake it with cameras like the Sony using Adobe Premiere Pro or After Effects? Let's find out.
EDIT: It seems something happened to the Pixel Motion Clip, so here's a link to the new one which looks smoother:
• New Pixel Motion Clip
CHAPTERS:
0:00 Intro
0:35 Chronos 2.1 Camera Info
2:20 Ground rules
3:00 Chronos 2.1
3:16 Sony a7s iii
3:33 Optical Flow
4:07 Pixel Motion
4:32 Side-by-side
4:50 Outro
Chronos 2.1 Camera
www.krontech.ca/store/Chronos...
Fotodiox Pro IRIS Lens Mount Adapter
amzn.to/2UY7SZt
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM Lens
amzn.to/3rBtwyC
--
Some links may be affiliate links, which means I earn from qualifying purchases at no extra cost to you. Thanks!

[@markferman5058]

Chronos definitely much better - Sony with adjustments still looks very mechanical.

[@BradGiannini]

Yes I agree there's something very smooth about that 1000 fps!

[@goodeggproductions]

On the A7Siiii, if you use the 240fps, but set your shutter speed to 1/4000 or even 1/8000, you'll get very crisp frames for Optical Flow to use to fill in the in-between to make it appear to be up to 1000fps. I've done this and it works incredibly well on some shots. The absolute key is to shoot at that extremely high shutter speed. Just using optical flow on 240fps with 1/500 shutter speed gives you that warpy, weird motion because the computer doesn't have enough sharp information to estimate the motion from one frame to the next.

[@BradGiannini]

Yeah that's a great idea, I just can't imagine the amount of light you'd need for 1/8000! I'm guessing that would work best outside on a sunny day. I will test that out though, thanks for the info!

[@goodeggproductions]

@@BradGiannini at 1000fps, your shutter speed is 1/2000. So this is just 2 stops more light. Click the ISO on the Sony up two stops and it’s done. And it’s not like the A7Siii is hurting for ISO headroom.

[@BradGiannini]

@@goodeggproductions yeah definitely, although it's already hard enough to get enough light with the Chronos, but yeah it's doable. I'm gonna try it out for sure.

[@tmiltoln]

chronos is 4.6666667 times better!

[@ipadize]

minimum

[@TimChuon]

Hey Brad! Awesome comparison-this was super helpful! Do you know if canon RF mounts work with the Chronos 2.1? Thank you!

[@BradGiannini]

Great thank you, glad to help! I don't think you can use the RF lenses, but there is a newish micro four thirds mount that I've been trying to get (whenever it comes back in stock). With that, there's a lot of adaptability, including speed boosters that could help a bit with the crazy amount of light you need.

[@FotodioxInc]

Fascinating! Nice review

[@BradGiannini]

Thanks for watching!

[@andreas_triant]

Hey there Brad, for 120fps product videos on the Sony A7s3 what lights would you recommend?

[@BradGiannini]

Hey - for a key on the not so expensive side I really like the amaran 200d, powerful enough for 120fps for sure! For 1000fps, well...

[@BleiteTV]

Nice video bro, thanks a lot

[@BradGiannini]

Hey thanks

[@user-uw6un2fd6n]

thank you for sharing. would you please also share the link of the blue ring or from where you purchase it, i would appreciate that

[@BradGiannini]

Absolutely, thanks for watching! The link is in the description, it's the: Fotodiox Pro IRIS Lens Mount Adapter Compatible with Canon EOS EF Full Frame Lenses to C-Mount Cameras

[@feyso6965]

Nice content and channel. Subscribed

[@BradGiannini]

Thank you!

[@edwardboe7383]

I really appreciate your videos featuring the Chronos camera. I am very close to pulling the trigger and purchasing the Chronos 2.1 HD myself. Are you happy over all with it? If you had the choice to make again, would you still get it? Thanks again!

[@BradGiannini]

Hey yeah I love it actually. It takes some getting used to and knowing when to use it but it gives you some really unique shots. I would recommend at least the 5.5 second version!

[@edwardboe7383]

@@BradGiannini Thanks, man! I'm likely going to go for it, so maybe we'll see each other running around filming in Chicago!

[@kensondelphonse1789]

The Chronos is the only option that captured the ice cube leaping above the beverage

[@troywalt4834]

This video is underrated

[@BradGiannini]

Thanks Troy, I'll be doing more with the Chronos soon!

[@OliniMedia]

Would’ve loved to see a comparison with the twixtor plug in

[@BradGiannini]

Absolutely - I'll use that next time for a comparison

[@PicturePulse]

Hi Brad try to shoot with a shutter speed of 1000 on the Sony A7sIII and use Twixtor Pro for Premiere or AE… gives much better results

[@BradGiannini]

Yeah thanks! I think I may do another video with different shutter speeds to see how they compare, would that be interesting?

[@SilvaGoof]

@@BradGiannini did you make a video?

[@FactNight]

what's the difference between Samsung note mobile " 960 FPS vs cronos 2.1 , 40 fps is not so much difference ?

[@BradGiannini]

In terms of fps yes not much difference. Check out my video here if you want to see the quality difference: kzbin.info/www/bejne/eWPUi6uGlr2Sh7M

[@FactNight]

@@BradGiannini thnks brother

[@TranslucentStudios]

Okay, watched all the way through. It seemed to me the extra frames in the Chronos showed off the sparkle in the droplets. I would LOVE to see more side by side comparisons. Thanks.

[@BradGiannini]

Thanks! More on the way!

[@TranslucentStudios]

@@BradGiannini One thing I've not seen enough of is actual humans in slow motion as demo material. Skin tones, color, etc. If you have a model it would be great to see how all that stuff comes out with the Chronos. Movement of clothes and hair would be a lot different I suspect with actual vs. virtual frames.

[@BradGiannini]

@@TranslucentStudios For sure, I can model!

[@ZerogunRivale]

Has any high speed camera had slow motion at 1000fps THAT smooth prior to the Chronos? And if so, how long has the technology been around. That is some SUPER smooth slow motion, moreso than any other slow motion I have seen before on other KZbin videos.

[@BradGiannini]

Yeah there are cameras like the phantom that have been around for many years now, but they cost almost as much as a house. Chronos is one of the first that can produce a really smooth image at a much more "affordable" price!

[@Holyeddybear]

A7s3 4000ss, 12000 iso then try optical flow?

[@BradGiannini]

Yeah that would be interesting with very very fast shutter, you would need a lot of light!

[@FidelTshivhasa]

Very nice comparisson

[@BradGiannini]

Thank you!

[@redpilljesus]

My biggest problem with the Sony footage wasn't even the chops. It was the image quality. Chronos lighting looked darker and fuller. I have an LG C2 OLED to look at it from, though.

[@BradGiannini]

That's interesting, the chronos requires a tremendous amount of light so probably more likely to have deeper blacks

[@UncleSeven]

Thank you for making this Video. I have the A7siii and I love it. The fake Slow Motion looks cool, but it doesn't satisfy me. I desperately desire the Chronos 😭 but I would like it to shoot 4k 😔

[@BradGiannini]

Yes even more than 4k would be a larger sensor. That would really make lighting easier and would improve overall quality!

[@mutantrental]

Thank you

[@BradGiannini]

Thanks for watching!

[@freerideinkmtb2420]

Love the Sony A7Siii Personally my fav camera. But I 100% want to Chronos as it's just not the same trying to manipulate the 240. Well worth it if your serious about taking your slow mo footage to the next level

[@BradGiannini]

Yeah I'd agree, I love the a7S III but the 240fps isn't very usable. The 120fps is great though!

[@zfdfilms]

nah just get a Phantom High Speed they're only 100k bucks LOL (kidding of course) but for budget stuff ahh yeah so epic!

[@BradGiannini]

@@zfdfilms $100k...super cheap!

[@DanielFercaeta]

you can trick that with any camera that shoots at 240fps, just set the shutter as you would if you had the possibility to shoot at 1000fps, it works great with steady shots

[@DanielFercaeta]

@Nicholas Lam yes it is hard but you can do it, it may take a few tries but it it possible, i have done it. of course you wont get a full take in 1000fps, luckily 1 sec

[@graphguy]

Haha, I about blew my milk through my nose when I saw the 'Cocaine free..." popup!

[@BradGiannini]

Ha they don't make em like they used to!

[@RonnelCuison]

I use my sony fs5 240.but there are rare moments that i use the 480 frames. While i still have not ordered the chronos i will settle with my fs5. The chronos look way smoother and natural compared to ae and pp edits.

[@digitalghosts4599]

240 fps interpolated to 1000 fps looks very fake to me compared to real 1000 fps from Chronos, but to be fair, the algorithms you used are very old and far from state of the art. Nowadays you can find dedicated solutions that use deep learning that apply the motion smoothing in a context-aware fashion, providing much better results! Unfortunately these tools are not that well known outside of the machine learning / computer vision industry yet. Check out Rife-App or Dain-App.

[@BradGiannini]

Yeah I agree there are some more advanced dedicated solutions, and they're getting better everyday. I'm sure someday in the it'll be nearly impossible to differentiate between them!

[@rusticagenerica]

I will see you !

[@BradGiannini]

Ok!

Hmm but what about video enhance ai and twixtor?... i also have the a7siii and wonder if i can fake it because the cronos is a bit expensive 😂

[@BradGiannini]

Yeah it sure is, I have some twixtor comparisons coming out soon!

@@BradGiannini that is great! Thanks so much!

@@BradGiannini have you also checked out the new time stretch feature of topaz video enhance ai?

[@BradGiannini]

@ I've heard of it but not tried it, I'll look into it!

[@ipadize]

the chronos is expensive but its totally worth the price if you compare it to a Phantom camera.

[@MarsOneBeatz]

What about the Sony Rx100 IV? That can shoot 1,000 fps, why isn't it ever talked about? Because it can't shoot it in hd?

[@BradGiannini]

It's funny you mention that camera, I got the idea for the video originally from using that camera. I think it's 1150 x 400 roughly for 960 fps, which doesn't totally hold up now as well as it did in 2015. But I still have a soft spot for that camera!

[@TheWeedyGarden]

Cronos wins hands down in my opinion. Thanks for the test 🙏🏻👍

[@BradGiannini]

Cool thanks for watching!

[@FKfilmphotography]

Zero competition the Sony footage looks garbage in terms of slow mo

[@LatinGoddessGame]

is NOT good enough. even using all the programs, all the restults are mediocre :(

[@BradGiannini]

Yeah it's hard to fake it!

[@TranslucentStudios]

"All the lights..." LOL

[@whiskycola5185]

is that a joke ? the ice cube looks like 6 fps somebody forgott to turn the effect on

[@BradGiannini]

Nope, the Sony just looks that way when it's slowed down that much, thanks for watching!

[@ZorgMK]

Topaz frame interpolation should be added here

[@vildplockad]

Try the plug-in Twixtor. It will finetune the slowmotion to perfection!

[@KrunoslavStifter]

Ah, now I know why Topaz Labs Video AI used name Chronos SlowMo for its AI model to fake slow motion, lol I though it was arbitrary names. :D By the way, a faster way to fake slow motion in similar quality as Topaz is with AI from DavinciResolve, I think only in studio version. Its called the "Speed Warp" setting in the Re-time Process settings of the clip. I have done some tests with it vs Topaz slow motion and they are very comparable, and in some situations Resolve is better, and always faster. Give it a try next time. Cheers!

[@BradGiannini]

Ha yes indeed!

[@stuCameraman1]

As I thought..... Motion morphing artifacts on manipulated Sony slow mo. You can also see this on some TV adverts when the DOP forgot to (or was too lazy to) film key product shots twice..... One at normal speed and one at slow mo speed.

[@BradGiannini]

Ha totally, or has happened to be before the client decides they want super slow motion well after the edit is done, which is fun!

[@chinitopinoy1726]

Yeah, I have a Chronos 1.4, and it's definitely better to have the added frames and the flexibility of a variety of super high frame rates. While software is getting better when it comes to interpolating frames, it still won't be as good as real frames (at least as of now). Future prove me wrong. hehe

[@BradGiannini]

Ha I'm sure it will one day!

[@digitalghosts4599]

I own 1.4 too and I find it very lacking when it comes to two factors - first of all, its color reproduction and noise performance are terrible compared to 2.1, not to mention any contemporary DSLR. Second - the sensor is so tiny, finding any lenses that offer high imaging quality is nothing short of a miracle. The crop factor is somewhere around x4 meaning that even wide angle 24mm lens are cropped so much, they appear like 100mm telephoto. This leaves you only with dedicated C-Mount lenses - ideally ones that are used for high resolution machine vision. That being said - it's a great and affordable camera for scientific experiments - it was very useful for some ballistic research and development of a coil gun, but for shooting commercials it's definitely not a viable choice.

[@chinitopinoy1726]

@@digitalghosts4599 do you shoot DNG on the 1.4? The files out of the 1.4 are lacking in those areas like you said, but I use a combination of Caprock filters, Neat Video and VEAI upscaling to get them to look decent. If you look at my page, and check out the Hummingbird video, I was able to improve it quite a bit. I know the 2.1 is much better and I would love to get it, but I need to work with what I have. Maybe I’ll think of getting the 4K version in the future when they come out with it.

[@digitalghosts4599]

​@@chinitopinoy1726 Thank you for the advice! I never really used it for much more than laboratory / shooting range experiments and research and unfortunately I don't really know how to use software to process DNG like Premiere, but I was generally referring to how the image works / looks like out of the box. I also used the 2.1 and I am an amateur photographer and a computer vision scientist and these were my main points of reference. However, we want to do some bird shooting with Chronos and your profiles could come in very handy for that! Chronos 1.4 also adds a subtle vintage vibe to the videos which I really like in some scenarios.

[@chinitopinoy1726]

@@digitalghosts4599 no problem! I’m thinking of making a video on how I work with the Chronos 1.4 files and what tools I use to help improve the image, so I’ll keep you posted if interested. 👍

[@AsherSkylark]

"taste the chopiness" Brad, you dont have to do Sony like that xD

[@BradGiannini]

Ha don't worry I'm a fan!

[@ALJAMMAL83]

Chronos 2.1 FOR SURE

[@TheMrLeoniasty]

Things like Twixtor could have better effects, or even better - Topaz AI has a slow motion feature, but still, none of these techniques match up to the real 1000fps !

[@BradGiannini]

Yes indeed, I did use twixtor in my frame rates video with negligible improvement, but yes you're right Topaz looks even better!

[@AtlantiXYL]

Chrono no doubt.

[@BradGiannini]

Yeah it's a fun camera!

[@iddeegee]

or you can get an Sony RX100 mark IV or higher

[@BradGiannini]

For sure, although the quality is iffy

[@iddeegee]

@@BradGiannini agreed, but you can get a used one pretty cheap compared to others... Plus one can use some AI resolution upscaling/enhancer which usually works better than AI frame rate generator (especially for non static backgrounds)

[@vincevenom3377]

Not even close...the Chronos crushes at the A7Siii during this test.

[@ggessex]

I don't think the a7siii was good enough.

[@BradGiannini]

Yeah not quite the same!

[@azee2one]

Chronos 2.1 wins big time clearly.

[@LoveChristJesus]

For me Cronos look much beter and if you have very fast speed scenes you can't capture with those 240fps.

[@cybercab]

Def a difference.

[@pellegrinoriolo]

obviously not good enough,slowing down 4 times with optical flow is just too much,also big difference in image quality. that 1080 from chronos looks amazing.

[@BradGiannini]

Yeah the Chronos is pretty good!

[@MODIFYISLIFETalonMichaelPena]

Try an RX100 and 960fps

[@BradGiannini]

Yeah for sure I've tried it, it doesn't have the quality but it's usable!

[@creamofstaticpictures]

No doubt - Chronos wins.

[@BradGiannini]

I agree!

[@sclogse1]

plastic ice.

[@txlec99]

ya cant beat the real thing but dam 7k for a camera just for a hobby is a little too much honestly its not even aimed for the average consumer. the company is so funny, "made it for the average consumer" wtf the price of a car lol. crazy how marketing works these days.

[@BradGiannini]

Ha no joke, it's crazy out there! At least prices are generally trending down with new releases

[@marcos.1815]

I would say, it depends what you are looking for. If you are looking for beautiful, bice colored clips, you may take the SONY. If you need high speed footage for studies, you are clearly better off with the CRONOS.

[@durrsky1515]

a7s III nope.

[@JayNikam]

No software can beat the real stuff. Optical flow and pixel Motion works at their best only when there is fluid in the shot. Rest of the times it always fails and gives away.... Chronos is definitely a must have for dedicated slow Motion. And 240 fps from sony is enough for cinematic stuff. Both are meant for different purposes.

[@BradGiannini]

Yeah different frame rates definitely have different uses!

[@danielperkins1396]

Chronos wins

[@philipchesleyiii]

Shouldnt cost $4500. It's rip off

[@user-jt5vm3mi1w]

life is a toilet

[@BradGiannini]

You never know what you're gonna get?

[@retromograph3893]

Sony faked slo-mo looks terrible, useless for anything professional. JMHO.

[@BradGiannini]

Yeah I would agree - not for professional use.

[@retromograph3893]

@@BradGiannini Agreed! .......... problem with the Chronos is the image quality is weak, so although it does the 1000fps very well, the image always looks extremely meh to my eyes. It's never sharp and just very lackluster. I do think part of this is that it's rarely in the hands of a top notch pro, so maybe pros could pull more out of it with better source material, technique, stronger lights and better lenses, but i'm yet to be convinced.

[@BradGiannini]

@@retromograph3893 well I would say that comes down to the small sensor size, so I agree it can't compare to something like a phantom. But I think its best use is sparingly and mixed together with shots from other cameras.

[@retromograph3893]

@@BradGiannini Cool! ........... i also checked out the FreeFly Wave camera and i think that has MUCH better image quality than the Chronos ........ it's good enough (only just) for some kinds of pro level work....... for me the Chronos is so weak, it's more like an expensive toy for rich people to mess around with high-speed video.

[@BradGiannini]

@@retromograph3893 yeah for sure, freefly wave has a large s35 sensor and does 4k up to 420fps, but it's about 2x the price! I think in just a couple years time high speed cameras will become good and affordable for the prosumer customer