Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Sony FS7  (Read 28470 times)

Zerui

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 59
    • Foto Zerui
Re: Sony FS7
« Reply #20 on: January 01, 2015, 07:20:51 am »

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
Logged

Morgan_Moore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2356
    • sammorganmoore.com
Re: Sony FS7
« Reply #21 on: January 01, 2015, 07:57:18 am »

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
Logged
Sam Morgan Moore Bristol UK

bcooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1520
Re: Sony FS7
« Reply #22 on: January 02, 2015, 01:57:20 am »

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
Logged

Morgan_Moore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2356
    • sammorganmoore.com
Re: Sony FS7
« Reply #23 on: January 02, 2015, 05:30:44 am »

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.



« Last Edit: January 02, 2015, 05:33:12 am by Morgan_Moore »
Logged
Sam Morgan Moore Bristol UK

Morgan_Moore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2356
    • sammorganmoore.com
Re: Sony FS7
« Reply #24 on: January 02, 2015, 05:40:00 am »

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
« Last Edit: January 02, 2015, 05:42:40 am by Morgan_Moore »
Logged
Sam Morgan Moore Bristol UK

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Re: Sony FS7
« Reply #25 on: January 02, 2015, 02:42:52 pm »

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

« Last Edit: January 02, 2015, 02:45:09 pm by eronald »
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

bcooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1520
Re: Sony FS7
« Reply #26 on: January 02, 2015, 03:23:16 pm »


 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.
Logged

Morgan_Moore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2356
    • sammorganmoore.com
Re: Sony FS7
« Reply #27 on: January 02, 2015, 04:44:38 pm »

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/
Logged
Sam Morgan Moore Bristol UK

Morgan_Moore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2356
    • sammorganmoore.com
Re: Sony FS7
« Reply #28 on: January 02, 2015, 04:59:14 pm »

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


« Last Edit: January 02, 2015, 05:03:47 pm by Morgan_Moore »
Logged
Sam Morgan Moore Bristol UK

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Re: Sony FS7
« Reply #29 on: January 02, 2015, 10:10:49 pm »

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 when in unmanaged light, and how some . 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
« Last Edit: January 03, 2015, 12:49:56 am by eronald »
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

bcooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1520
Re: Sony FS7
« Reply #30 on: January 03, 2015, 02:36:58 am »



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
Logged

Zerui

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 59
    • Foto Zerui
Re: Sony FS7
« Reply #31 on: January 03, 2015, 04:41:09 am »

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
Logged

Morgan_Moore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2356
    • sammorganmoore.com
Re: Sony FS7
« Reply #32 on: January 03, 2015, 05:53:07 am »

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
Logged
Sam Morgan Moore Bristol UK

Morgan_Moore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2356
    • sammorganmoore.com
Re: Sony FS7
« Reply #33 on: January 04, 2015, 04:58:35 am »

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 when in unmanaged light, and how some . 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








« Last Edit: January 04, 2015, 05:08:32 am by Morgan_Moore »
Logged
Sam Morgan Moore Bristol UK

Morgan_Moore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2356
    • sammorganmoore.com
Re: Sony FS7
« Reply #34 on: January 04, 2015, 05:06:42 am »

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
« Last Edit: January 04, 2015, 05:43:29 am by Morgan_Moore »
Logged
Sam Morgan Moore Bristol UK
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up