Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Motion & Video => Topic started by: Morgan_Moore on December 29, 2014, 01:53:12 pm
-
Not been round here much.
Anyway just thought Id mention Id got a Sony FS7 - I like it.
The FS100 was nailed by thin codec, harsh colours and lack of ND.
The FS700 was nailed by thin codec but maybe had better colour and could gain a thick codec with the addition of the Odesey recorder and mess of wires and extra power.
The Sony F3 I had too was kind of cool but somewhat troublesome for getting nice colour - being sooo flat as to make everything look like a scandi drama -also to shine it needed recorder, mess of wires and extra power.
The FS7?
Onboard codecs up to 600mbs 4k/60FPS
HD up to 180 FPS with a softening above 60fps.
Slog3 is a flat look that is very linear and easy to grade especially as sony have now issued official LUTs that work really well.
I cannot say enough good things about SLog3 and the LC709 lut (that means Low Contrast - apparently a close copy of the arri alexa)
Add in XLR, ND, reasonable battery life on small batts and one has a pretty decent camera. The onboard power also runs the EVF too which reduces power/cable issues.
S
-
Looks very nice but at a high-ish price point.
Can you adjust the VF or the output to show a 'live' view of a 709 lut when recording sLog3?
-
Its close in price to a D4 :) And very competitive to any camera that you need to buy filters, mattebox, sound recorder for. Sony cameras allow some video stuff missing from GH4 for example such as hot swapping media for infinite roll time, possibly dual media recording, and other stuff which has value to some.
XQD media pushes the cost up too- but feel more solid than SD cards!
Displaying LUTs is a bit of a mess.
You can display a lut when shooting SlogEI mode but the waveform/histo are lost (with current FW), you cannot display a lut when shooting in HFR (high frame rate)
When doing a controlled shoot I would probably use a LUT (which can also be fed to a directors monitor) but when shooting fast I find looking at a slightly crappy 'log' image and judging exposure using the waveform is better.
The trouble i had with LUT is they tended to allow me to under expose. Because exposing with a lut you rely on zebras at 95, but if you cant get zebra how far under are you?
SLogEI mode also allows one to ETTR using 'cineEI' which is faux ISO, very useful. You may visit video fora where people suggest sony cameras are noisy - not if you expose for 800ISO not the 'base' 2000, EI allows that and sustains the look over a LUT allowing 800/ETTR to look correct in monitor (cams like the F3 to go ETTR you had to view a very bright looking image)
Slog can also be selected in 'Custom' Mode but no luts are available in custom mode - custom mode allows in camera noise reduction which appears to be of great value above 3200ISO.
Learning 'best use' is a bit of a mission and it seems different set ups apply best for different shooting situations and post production workflows.
Sony now have a semi useful bit of software 'Catalyst Browse' (actually a radical step in terms of 'motion' software) that auto de-logs the footage, applies your EI/ISO selection and offers temp tint and exposure sliders.
it only took them a decade!
S
-
...
Displaying LUTs is a bit of a mess.
You can display a lut when shooting SlogEI mode but the waveform/histo are lost (with current FW), you cannot display a lut when shooting in HFR (high frame rate)...
It seems from what I have seen, that the Shogun recorder has got the 'monitor Rec709 while recording sLog' thing right.
But Sony is always 'correct' to themselves and don't pay much attention to competition ))
-
It seems from what I have seen, that the Shogun recorder has got the 'monitor Rec709 while recording sLog' thing right.
But Sony is always 'correct' to themselves and don't pay much attention to competition ))
Can the Odyssey 7Q+ do this too?
Edmund
-
I don't know which monitor/reorders can display luts and record log at high frame rates
The situation is not ideal. Of course using a monitor that supports luts gets around it anyway.
--
The thing about this camera is that 4k and nice colour basically mean I don't feel i am shooting completely dead material
The images are good and that is not something I feel has previously been available in a non nightmare package
Red et all of course still hold the crown for images but are not easy to use solo.
-
I don't know which monitor/reorders can display luts and record log at high frame rates
The situation is not ideal. Of course using a monitor that supports luts gets around it anyway.
--
The thing about this camera is that 4k and nice colour basically mean I don't feel i am shooting completely dead material
The images are good and that is not something I feel has previously been available in a non nightmare package
Red et all of course still hold the crown for images but are not easy to use solo.
I wanted to get an FS7 for documentary work, but the launch color looked really bad. I'm happy to hear it's improved.
The ergonomics and the price with the lens look really great.
Edmund
-
I wanted to get an FS7 for documentary work, but the launch color looked really bad. I'm happy to hear it's improved.
The ergonomics and the price with the lens look really great.
Edmund
Yep Den Len's vid and others had terrible colour.
I cant post much at the moment but that is what Im saying Sony have got right.. Shoot in Slog3 and de-log using the official Sony LUT and you get good colour and a file that flexes well in post.. Id call the experience kind of 'raw light'
Here is a headshot of a mate - shot Slog3 and brought back to life with 'one click' of adding the Slog3LUT.. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/33167160/neel_1.25.1.jpg
Here is a video I made before I got the camera (using footage from another shooter) .. whatch me bend the files! https://vimeo.com/112625908
S
-
Nice image of your mate, and virtuoso demo of Resolve; but I still think the jury is out a bit on the FS7 color although the situation now looks much better than before. In a way it's strange how little sample footage is available for these cameras close to launch.
It seems Sony might announce some new camcorders in a week or so.
In the mean time, I will soldier on with my GH4. I'm a beginner.
Edmund
Yep Den Len's vid and others had terrible colour.
I cant post much at the moment but that is what Im saying Sony have got right.. Shoot in Slog3 and de-log using the official Sony LUT and you get good colour and a file that flexes well in post.. Id call the experience kind of 'raw light'
Here is a headshot of a mate - shot Slog3 and brought back to life with 'one click' of adding the Slog3LUT.. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/33167160/neel_1.25.1.jpg
Here is a video I made before I got the camera (using footage from another shooter) .. whatch me bend the files! https://vimeo.com/112625908
S
-
Of course the 'mate' image is not special but skin looks OK with a 'one click' grade (adding the LUT)
That is the thing that I go right back to my 2004 sinar Emotion.. the colour was there.. somewhere.. but without a good 'route' to bring it out quickly the cam was kind of a fail - the same was basically true for the Sony F3 motion camera, which also has great colour hidden away if you can find it.
The nikon D3 was my first raw stills camera that basically came into C1 looking basically correct- I have been looking for that in a video camera.
Nothing wrong with the Gh4.. if you like odd chip size, no ND, etc etc
S
-
Nothing wrong with the Gh4.. if you like odd chip size, no ND, etc etc
S
And if you like handbag size and low price :)
It's a strange object - you know it's not a "real" camera because it just isn't a "real" camera, and then you see the 4K video and then you fall off your chair. I couldn't believe it.
It's a good indication of where the consumer camera industry is going.
Edmund
-
Absolutely. Great little cam - shot some shots on a film I worked on with one - Im in the market for a small cam myself at the moment but Ill probably get a BMC4k not a GH4.
Simply the BMC4k feels a bit more solid, with global shutter and SDi out to a monitor and 12V input which makes it work with the peripherals I have.
S
-
Morgan,
Looks good.
I thought long and hard about buying one as I like the compact form factor, but I dunno I'm weary of buying new electronic stuff, especially as it comes out the door.
I've also had fits with Sony color on the fs100 though in the electronic world I guess that's very old tech by now.
I do think your screen grab looked good but what lenses are you using and have you tried the A mount adapter and autofocus and do the e mount lenses have any stabilization?
This is what I using now for "hand held" really shoulder mount or lower with the top handle.
(http://www.russellrutherford.com/red1_shoulder.jpg)
It works but it has the ergonomics of a belt sander.
BTW: My 2nd RED Bomb evf went out (don't know why as it was new) so I bought the zacuto for the interim. Maybe it's me, but I find the Zacuto to be very difficult to focus, almost impossible.
The RED is a drag but it shoots a pretty file that is professional.
I have to admit I'm a little amazed that Canon hasn't been in front of the curve with their c series. There used a great deal in Hollywood for B,C cameras, but not so much as an A cam.
Canon knows this and says they will up their game, which probably means there will be emphasis on $30,000 cameras rather than under 10 grand cameras.
Anyway, hope the FS7 works well for you.
IMO
BC
-
Canon knows this and says they will up their game, which probably means there will be emphasis on $30,000 cameras rather than under 10 grand cameras.
Anyway, hope the FS7 works well for you.
IMO
BC
I get the impression Sony was inspired by the travel travel industry where you pay 10x for leg and butt space: You pay 2x to unlock 4K on a camera that already has it (!), pay for the ports to allow data out in ProRes, pay to unlock raw, pay for an external recorder, etc etc.
The tech they have seems to be far ahead of what the market "needs", and so they're trying to maximize revenue by doling it out ...
I like their tech, I really do, but I hate this tollgate model.
What the camera you buy does has less to do with what it can do than with what it is allowed to do. What creative type is going to appreciate buying handcuffs?
Edmund
-
Coots - I don't think canon are off the curve - their C500 is an excellent camera and has been around for an age - just I could not afford one - the C300 is basically the king of docs (I don't really get why as I don't think 8bit/$15k adds up!), the C100 is also a winner at the 'entry level'.
C500 is used as a B-cam because the Alexa is hard to get into tight places.
I think Epic, C500, all of them have a decent (aka good enough for a major motion picture) image.
Im not sure why you are weary of new Sony stuff - one thing is they work! Like the FS100 always worked.
The FS7 could do with improvements in LUT management but LUTs were not even conceived to be on cameras at all but used on monitors. Again the FS7 is struggling to talk to third party metabones canon adapters which is not really a design flaw. Sony may improve those things in future firmware but the camera as it stands will fire up and shoot every day I am sure of that - none of my Sony cams ever missed a beat.
As for the AF - I have not tested it - my expectations are low, I only own the 16 pancake and 18-200 sony lenses (mainly using manual nikon) and have not tried them thus far. The C100 (and now 300?) is the cam with the best AF I think - but AFAIK it is still centre only.
I am glad you stick with the R1 - my only beef with that camera is that I am too puny to carry it without an army of assistants!
---
Ed
I dont think sony are too far on that lock out road (nothing like the C100-500) - yep they fkd up with not putting 4k in the F5 and now charging for it but beyond that all the other paid for bits are genuine add ons.
S
-
Here is another frame which is a bit more 'me'
It is easy to bend in post and critically to me allows the highlights to go in a pleasant manner..
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/33167160/shimmer_girls.jpg)
-
Coots - Slog is really psuedo raw - if you have not tried a sony camera with Slog you should give it a visit especially if you need a light weight camera with ND and sound. Any harsh experiences you have with the FS100 should be deleted in your head!
--
Both of you.
Don't think I am a Sony fan boy. If I had designed this camera I would have made a load of improvements. The menus suck, the buttons are badly placed, the EVF lead is too short and not replaceable, the body is too short and high for good balance - I have an endless list of things that I think could be done better!
But 4k 60p 10bit onboard, small batts, self powered EVF ND XLR and other stuff make this a king at a certain price/use point.
S
-
Ed
I dont think sony are too far on that lock out road (nothing like the C100-500) - yep they fkd up with not putting 4k in the F5 and now charging for it but beyond that all the other paid for bits are genuine add ons.
S
Look at the pxwx70, just out, 4K is supposed to come with a "pay" firmware upgrade sometime next year. The consumer version AX100 is cheaper, has it by default. WTF?
Same when you get an external recorder eg. Odyssey for the FS7, they make CD pay for the codec access and CD pass the cost on to the buyer. That way they don't even need to make gear anymore, just cash in whenever you try to get data out of their machines.
BTW, the guys who sold me my wireless audio gear told me the sound inputs on the cams are also crippled in some way if you don't use Sony audio gear.
I'm not complaining too loudly, I like the Sony cameras, but it is like a pretty stripper who has wants a tip to keep peelin'. I passed on the X70 although it was cheaper than the Pana, had a zoom lens and ND etc - I want something that does what it says on the tin from day one.
Edmund
[/quote]
-
OK maybe you are right - buy as you desire.
Personally Id pay for upgrades - which is far cheaper then binning a whole camera.
S
-
OK maybe you are right - buy as you desire.
Personally Id pay for upgrades - which is far cheaper then binning a whole camera.
S
I guess if you budget them in from the beginning it's ok.
One just needs to understand the pricing model.
Re. Slog, Norman tells me it's great, but will completely lose your shadows past a certain point, irrecoverably. Is that your experience? How well does changing wb in post work with slog?
I'm sure there will be an miniaturized consumer version of the FS7 out within a few months at around $3-4K, that will be castrated in some weird way so that the pros don't use it. There is much more money to be made selling E-mount lenses to soccer dads than upgrades to pros :)
Edmund
-
Morgan. Very interested in your comments on the FS7. On paper it seems just what I need. Many of my projects involve shooting water (rivers, sea). Getting the waves to look right requires high resolution and good colour. I use Hasselblad hD50 for stills. Now I am moving into filming images of water. I want to keep the high shutter speed, high resolution and good colour that I am used to in still photography. And I must have slow motion to freeze the fast moving capillary waves. Would you recommend the FS7 ? I was slightly spooked by your mentioning that the images become soft when going beyond 60fps. Zerui
-
I don't really know why you want a fast shutter - most 'motion' looks best with a 180 shutter angle.
You cannot shoot above 60 FPS at 4k, and also the HD image is a little soft above 60FPS
You can see the loss in resolution here.. http://www.dvinfo.net/article/acquisition/sonyxdcam/first-look-sony-pxw-fs7-l-s-s-shoulder-mount-camcorder-part-1.html
To create really stunning (aka up there with a hassy) slo mo you would probably need to consider an Epic or a Phantom Miro etc.
S
-
Coots - I don't think canon are off the curve - ...snip....
Im not sure why you are weary of new Sony stuff - one thing is they work! Like the FS100 always worked.
I am glad you stick with the R1 - my only beef with that camera is that I am too puny to carry it without an army of assistants!
---
S
Morgan the REDs shoot well, though 20 lbs stripped down like this.
You can't see it in this photo, but it has a zacuto shoulder mount that centers the weight, so 20lbs on the shoulder isn't that bad. For low dunch angles it's a little rough on the back, but the thing shoots one robust, pretty file.
I don't have blinders on about the Sony or weary of them, I'm just tired of all new tech they way they all companies work the system.
After all these cameras from dslrs to all of canons c series have a 4k or above sensor, they just pull them down. With the C series they shoot the whole frame and reprocess, with the 7d2 and 70d they line skip.
Even with that if the C100 II which has complete pdaf focusing like the 70d if it had a touch screen (like the 70d) and was available today I'd buy it, because the autofocus on the 70d is amazing.
I felt the c100 II would be good until you read in the fine print it only works the complete frame with stm lenses, and the 7d2 and 70d will do it with almost any Canon lens.
It's just silly.
So, I lift 20 lbs of RED.
Edmund,
Your right, but your missing the point.
Your not buying a camera, your buying into an ecosystem, like Apple. You buy into it, you buy into their accessories, and you ride it out hoping they keep the line going so it's affordable, though the fs7 is affordable for what it offers.
The thing is if you trick out your gh4 to match the fs7 with recorders, xlr inputs, a shoulder mount, cages, cold shoes, 4k hdmi recorders and you'll be close to the fs7 in price and a camera with the same size form factor.
Personally, I'm still not sold on Sony colour but as Morgan says Sony's work and the fs7 is the best deal out there right now.
Especially since you want to shoot interviews and documentary style. Probably isn't a better camera made for that for under 10 grand.
The thing is the camera makers and I have different objectives.
I want to go a far as I can with my imagery, to do good work and make money. (So I stay with my REDS).
The camera makers want a piece of the action and are willing to go to almost any lengths to get it, even if they hobble their own equipment.
That's the part that is frustrating, but we've become very use to it.
IMO
BC
-
I
Re. Slog, Norman tells me it's great, but will completely lose your shadows past a certain point, irrecoverably. Is that your experience? How well does changing wb in post work with slog?
Slog lifts shadows on camera and the LUT crushes them in post - that is a cool concept for noise free footage - but if you are shooting No LUT with slog then it is very easy to shoot too dark and the shadows just go black when the LUT is applied?
Conversely most log shooters are not going 'right' enough and getting noisy shadows.
Im not sure which issue Norman has :)
The thing about Slog1 was that it had a harsh 'knee' at the top of the file so you had to expose super carefully because you needed to avoid the soon to be crushed blacks and the at the bottom and horrid flattening knee at the top
Slog3 seems different in that it is pretty linear so you don't have to worry about keeping stuff out of the top end knee. Its basically linear and that is what makes it so nice if you are a stills guy used to linear files.
As for colour Slog offers 32, 45, and 55, you are not going to stuggle with colour if you choose the right one, say you shot under tungsten with the camera at 55 you could clip the blue channel into the shadows and have issues.
(https://community.sony.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/9114i82ED2F040EF5641B?v=mpbl-1)
-
Coots
If you look at the curves in the image above you see why sony camera can look terrible - it is the flattening of the highlights that we all hate so much.
(incidentally it is useful in 'live broadcast', (sony's heritage) as it kept stuff 'legal' when going live) - We dont go live, we let our highs blow or recover them with secondaries.
The linear nature of the Slog3 curve is what is so 'exciting' about the FS7 and they may have put it in the F5/55, because it just makes the camera do what it should do - be linear, just like Red has been since day one.
Do not judge any Sony Slog3 camera by any other Sony camera not running Slog3!
S
-
J,
Everything you say re tricking out the GH4 is true -
I'll believe the Sony color when I've tested it myself; shooting mixed available light is already horrible with "raw", I think it is a total nightmare with a baked in color temperature.
If I stay with video, I may get an FS7. Or maybe I'll get an Odyssey recorder/monitor and one of the old Sony CinaAlta monsters that are now retiring to ebay :)
The guys at the local school have told me to do some arty science type demos - they tell me for someone like me it's the way into the video scene. I'm thinking about it :)
Edmund
Edmund,
Your right, but your missing the point.
Your not buying a camera, your buying into an ecosystem, like Apple. You buy into it, you buy into their accessories, and you ride it out hoping they keep the line going so it's affordable, though the fs7 is affordable for what it offers.
The thing is if you trick out your gh4 to match the fs7 with recorders, xlr inputs, a shoulder mount, cages, cold shoes, 4k hdmi recorders and you'll be close to the fs7 in price and a camera with the same size form factor.
Personally, I'm still not sold on Sony colour but as Morgan says Sony's work and the fs7 is the best deal out there right now.
Especially since you want to shoot interviews and documentary style. Probably isn't a better camera made for that for under 10 grand.
The thing is the camera makers and I have different objectives.
I want to go a far as I can with my imagery, to do good work and make money. (So I stay with my REDS).
The camera makers want a piece of the action and are willing to go to almost any lengths to get it, even if they hobble their own equipment.
That's the part that is frustrating, but we've become very use to it.
IMO
BC
-
The guys at the local school have told me to do some arty science type demos - they tell me for someone like me it's the way into the video scene. I'm thinking about it :)
Edmund,
Art? Whatever.
Your worrying too much about the camera and not the other things that matter.
First. Define your audience. Filmakers don't shoot for themselves (at least with success) They shoot with an audience in mind, the defined market, the family, some you tube yahoos, an award's committee, but they have the audience in the front of their brain at all times.
When you hear about a director's cut, it's not the artistic director's cut that people think. It's the cut that the director thought would resonate the best with the audience.
Second. Study film makers and don't look for the negatives, look for the positives. Michael Bay is the king of "save the day" action. Not a great dialog director, but a amazing visual emotion director. Ridley Scott covers a story and keeps it exciting.
David Lynch shoots art. Pretty art and the critics love him, but he doesn't resonate with most people, not people that pay. Wes Anderson has a style, is somewhat dry funny, but you know it's a wes anderson film.
Anyway, study how these people (and others) tell stories. Also study dps that work and understand how much they bring to the STORY. I can make a long list but the web is full of good information.
Second the story. Always have a story (with the audience in mind) It can even be a home video or a silly jump around story, but you have to have a story. Graphics, photography, sound score will not surpass a story that people are interested in.
Third, shoot it with the best, most interesting subjects you can put in front of the lens. Boring in, boring out, slow in slow out. Script it and if you can't write, listen to music with great lyrics, that's always inspiring.
Fourth shoot it and light it if you can. Lighting will make most cameras perform better, even if you have a slight fill light, anything is better than trying to take a fragile video file and fix it in post.
Fifth and I think the most important (because it relates to the story) is learn how to edit. Really edit, not half ass slap it together edit. I don't care what program you use, but learn it inside and out so you can work it intuitively.
Editing binds the story, or at the least tells the story in an interesting way, sometimes saves the story.
The rest, color correction, effects, titles are there only to support the story. The guys that sell all this plastic stuff will tell you different, but trust me, it's always the story and how adept you are at telling it.
So bottom line is, you have a camera, you have sound, you have a tripod. That's all it really takes to film something.
If you get good, heck let's say great, cameras are easy to find, cheap to rent and if you want to own by the time customers come knocking you'll know what you need to shoot with.
IMO
BC
P.S. Last year we took 1 1/2 days off which is a lot for us and went to a family get together in central texas, at an old B+B farmhouse. I didn't go there to film, I went there to have fun with the kids and the family but shot about 50 clips with the 70d.
Once I started shooting I instinctively started thinking about a story and my audience, which is the family. I had to make sure to cover everyone, so no feelings were hurt, use the kids to set the tone, because they move fast and are natural, pick a sound score that would resonate and not be over the top or too emotional but not bland either as this was MOS except for the end.
It's not beautiful cinematography, but that wasn't the goal, it's real, it's interesting and my audience (the family) loved it.
Once again it's the story but the story has to play to someone. Pretty pictures aren't the only goal, pretty pictures just add to the medium.
The world is full of pretty pictures of ducks, water, sunsets, mountains, skiers (god there has to be 5 billion skiers jumping something) and a lot of other stuff.
Most are boring, because there is no story.
-
Yep - story!
But you do need a camera that doesn't fall over - Coots Im not sure you have used a 10bit camera - the file is 4X less fragile than a 8bit camera, but 4X more fragile than a 12bit camera (maybe)
Thats why I call it 'psuedo raw'
On the story thing I dont know if you lot know I shot a full feature, low budget, Ive got permission to release some images now.. and one thing image by image they are very simple and not that ambitious in photographic terms.. the camera was BMC4k and I elected to shoot 10bit prores not raw as 10tb was enough - if we had gone raw we would have been in the 40TB zone!
Film..
http://framedogs.com/nelson-nutmeg/
-
I'll believe the Sony color when I've tested it myself; shooting mixed available light is already horrible with "raw", I think it is a total nightmare with a baked in color temperature.
You do need to try a 10bit camera - I tested the colour on the F5 by setting it to 5500 and shooting under tungsten - with the SR444Codec (not on the FS7) it was easy to correct the bright orange images back to grey. The XAVC is not so flexible but 8 times less heavy (SR444 is heavier than Red!)
In log mode the cameras only have 3200,4800 and 5500 they don't have any more colour settings.
Of course the FS7 can add the rear module and then record raw via the 07q but the data and drive costs are beyond me.
Also Sony Cat browse sofware has temp and tint sliders which do help (but no grey clicker!)
S
-
Yep - story!
But you do need a camera that doesn't fall over - Coots Im not sure you have used a 10bit camera - the file is 4X less fragile than a 8bit camera, but 4X more fragile than a 12bit camera (maybe)
Thats why I call it 'psuedo raw'
On the story thing I dont know if you lot know I shot a full feature, low budget, Ive got permission to release some images now.. and one thing image by image they are very simple and not that ambitious in photographic terms.. the camera was BMC4k and I elected to shoot 10bit prores not raw as 10tb was enough - if we had gone raw we would have been in the 40TB zone!
Film..
http://framedogs.com/nelson-nutmeg/
J, I agree I have all the "stuff" I need now and will go out and do some shooting, and heed your advice and create an inner voice that murmurs "audience" in my ear :)
Morgan, J, My "feeling" is still that the FS7 color has been emasculated internally to avoid competition with the F5/F55 and to avoid a stampede with the $10K pricepoint, but that Sony may have gone a bit too far with the scissors. Let's hope you prove me wrong. Shoot, something half in direct sunlight, half in the shade as in the A7s video below, bring the highlights and shadows back and let's see ...
Anyway, I found two interesting videos that show how much more info you really need to grade (https://vimeo.com/111275418) when in unmanaged light, and how some cameras behave when over/under exposed in log modes (https://vimeo.com/104329851). I could watch the model in the second video all day :)
BTW Morgan, I know little about the *video* realities - you can tell me to shut up for a while when you get tired of the subject and I will do so :) . In 3 months there will be plenty of FS7 footage up anyway ... this thing is selling like hot cakes.
Edmund
-
But you do need a camera that doesn't fall over - Coots Im not sure you have used a 10bit camera - the file is 4X less fragile than a 8bit camera, but 4X more fragile than a 12bit camera (maybe)
Yes not fall over is a good quote.
The RED 1's I have are suppose to be 12 bit raw, some say 14 bit, RED says 13.5 stops with the mysterium x.
Now I don't know, don't care as long as it doesn't band, looks sharp and is deep. I do know that compared directly to my medium format still cameras there was 1 and a half full stops of headroom from the reds (useable headroom not just murky grey).
I bought my first REDs for one reason. They are very professional, they have everything it takes to start running (though their stuff is expensive) shoot a deep file and especially the R1 had all of the kinks knocked out of it by the time I bought.
I've stayed with the RED's for the same reasons. They're paid for and they keep running reliably.
Now. I'm not a RED fan boy, not a fan of any camera really except maybe Contax and we know where they went, so I have no predetermined brand bias.
I thought about buying an epic and or going to the Dragon sensor, but forgot about that pretty quickly for the reasons stated above. I just don't need it and don't want to add another 6 grand of video cards to process out a different file.
Since it's raw, I shoot the Reds on RED gamma 2, RED Color 2 (not that it changes anything in post).
It's funny. I can shoot a run and gun ad gig on a 70d and the gh3's and with some very careful post work get a good look, actually one that I think is as good as the RED's. Then I shoot a gig with the RED's a few clips with the smaller cameras and I think wow, what was I thinking about these little cameras.
If I was starting fresh today, I'd rent the FS7 and shoot a gig, then probably buy, but as I mentioned I'm covered for 4k and robust cameras. The R1's aren't perfect but damn good if you can get use to lifting the cases, the cameras and the rigging, but the film boys don't care cause they think an Alexa at 23 lbs dry is small.
In fact as I mentioned if Canon would come out with a 4k with the pdaf sensor and focus like the 70d and 10 bit minimum, I'd buy right now, cause I have a lot of canon glass and it's easy for me to carry two of the C cameras rather than the REDs, but they don't want to do that and I'm not going to drop 19 grand (actually 38 grand) for two c500's.
Film guys hate autofocus, but until you've shot with a 70d you don't know how good it is. it's really something Canon should build on.
It won't be long until Canon is going to have to come out with a 4k under 7 grand version of something. They'll have to have something to compete with the fs7 and I hope Sony continues to build on that system in a cost effective way.
IMO
BC
-
I have looked up Sony's 'Catalyst Browse'. It produced echoes in my mind of using manufactures' proprietary software for optimising colours in still photography. I find that Phocus gets the best colours out of my Hasselblad images, and Nikon's software does much better than Adobe or Apple for my D3 images. Especially for difficult subjects like flowers and water colours (see example below). Are we in a similar position with Sony and their cameras, in particular the FS7 ? Should one start with Catalyst then finish off with Resolve? Zerui
-
To fully use Resolve you need a flat image so it is best to put an untouched image into Resolve - Sony issue LUTs to Resolve so their colour science is 'inside' Resolve.
Cat Browse is simpler and faster than Resolve and retains meta data better (ISO selection is not lost - some times you have to correct brightness in Resolve because it does not read your 'EI ISO')
Simply Id used CB for fast turnaround or if you are a total newb, (unlikely as Phocus user) and Resolve for more in depth work.
S
-
Morgan, J, My "feeling" is still that the FS7 color has been emasculated internally to avoid competition with the F5/F55 and to avoid a stampede with the $10K pricepoint, but that Sony may have gone a bit too far with the scissors. Let's hope you prove me wrong. Shoot, something half in direct sunlight, half in the shade as in the A7s video below, bring the highlights and shadows back and let's see ...
Anyway, I found two interesting videos that show how much more info you really need to grade (https://vimeo.com/111275418) when in unmanaged light, and how some cameras behave when over/under exposed in log modes (https://vimeo.com/104329851). I could watch the model in the second video all day :)
BTW Morgan, I know little about the *video* realities - you can tell me to shut up for a while when you get tired of the subject and I will do so :) . In 3 months there will be plenty of FS7 footage up anyway ... this thing is selling like hot cakes.
Edmund
I dont think sony is 'crippling' the camera - yes it does not have the spec of the 5/55, but it is not crippled - it is a cheaper camera.
Vs F5
-more bits to work raw recorder and more cost
-less FPS
-no SR 444 codec
-no genlock
Vs F55
-all of the above
-no global shutter sensor
-different colour array completely
These are known. Also the FS7 is not really 'cheaper' than the F55 - because if you buy the back section, well the cost creeps up to the to F5 cost, to me there is logic to the price points and no apparent 'crippling'
Im telling you (after kodak pro back, hassy, Slrn, D100, D1, D200, D90, 5d2, ex1 F3, FS100 to name a few) that the colour feels 'ok' - I mean OK compared to bending a still in C1 !
Video realities? Audio is important, wires not breaking is important, minimising lens changes is important, ND is important, batt life is important, worrying about making a video (a challenge to all of us) and not the camera is important. Data rates may be important to pricing - aka on raw your client will need to fund a HD or two for every shoot day.
These are the things that elevate the FS7 above the GH4.. not really the image!
If you operate solo keeping mass low is important.
That low mass elevates the FS7 above a R1 on my personal shopping list.. even though the image on the R1 is clearly better-its like a proper raw still!
S
-
One other video reality - my stills cams (D3, D600) are not actually that good at stills until you light - but I supplement them with a couple of Qflashes, so nearly all my stills have a level of lighting that is not easily available to video people - the Qflash is very powerful compared to affordable portable video lighting. Im using a dedo Dled4.1 as my 'one light portable solution' for video and at $1000+ it probably has about 1/10th of the power of a Qflash!
That A7s video looked terrible (Slog2 not Slg3 BTW) but ultimately the main let down (vs a still portrait) was that the lighting was crap as you start lugging video lights around you will realise why!.
The Cion video looked terrible too - he has not got a clue how to expose- and the Cion is some duff old 10stop sensor from the machine vision spare parts bin (also available in the bmc 4k for 1/4 the cost)
Another video reality is exposure - your subject can walk to a different place, or maybe the sun comes out mid take - video lighting is a higher art that than stills lighting due the traversing of the space time continum (!) Of course shooting a movie scene you may have to light from multiple angles too ie for the front of a subject to look good.. and them from behind - this is why drama lighting is a challenge beyond interview lighting.
S