FS700 looks more video-ish than AF100?

[filmguy123]

I read/heard that the FS700 produces a more video-ish image than the Panny because of cinestyle gamma curves... is this true?

Does color correction change this? Or are there customizeable gamma curves?

I'm thinking of selling the AF100 to move to the FS700 and am looking for some feedback on the camera and any pros/cons I may experience in the transition

[ksteiger]

Oh STOP!! Videoish means nothing. It is an amazing tool and will smoke your AF100...

[olof]

I sold my AF100 a while ago. I really liked it, but I like the 700 more. Here is why.

The 700 image seems much crisper, I would say that the resolution is quite a bit better, on the order of 900+ lines whereas the AF was barely 700 in my tests anyway. I am using the same Canon L lenses on both cameras.

I have not had the problems with banding, that I had in the AF. It was very tricky to come up with a PP in the AF that was not too noisy and w/o banding, for me anyway.

The Slomo in the 700 is fantastic, I will probably over use it. But it is fantastic.

The 700 is a bit bigger and the ergonomics a bit strange, but I quickly got used to that.

I like the handle on the 700, the lack of easily relocating it on the AF and lack of s/s trigger bothered me on the AF. Of course I made new handles for the AF and this fixed that problem. The 700 only needs an extension for the handle (http://www.westsideavstore.com/index...=product&id=62) much easier and less expensive.

I find the adjustments of the PPs in the 700 very easy to deal with. I got the 700 dialed in pretty easily.

They are both good cameras, but I feel the 700 easily has the advantage, the 4K will be very interesting.

I would rent one or find someone who has one and run my own tests. In my case it was an easy decision.

As far as videoish look, both cameras can be manipulated to look terrible or very nice. Lighting and production values are more important than the camera for a "look" IMHO. I would definitely claim the 700 has a greater dynamic range than the AF this can easily be tested, and is documented in several places on the web. More dynamic range makes it easier to light, but as I stated above production value is what makes great shots.

The imager on the 700 is also larger so your wide lenses are a bit wider, and I like the Metabones adapter better than the RedRock I had on the AF, the MetaBones does not need external batteries and is easier to control by the wheel on the camera instead of dual push buttons on the RedRock.

[David W. Jones]

Any modern camera can deliver a great look in the right hands.

But hey, it doesn't really matter which camera you get. In a year and a half you will be looking to replace it with the next latest greatest.


All the Best!

Dave

[Jason Adams]

I think any statement that starts with "I heard this" is a step in the wrong direction. There is plenty of footage out there from both cams. Take an objective look at both. They are both great cams. I don't like skin tones on the AF but that is just me. Also words like video-ish are usually words spoken by DSLR shooters who cant afford video cameras.

Both are great. Pick one and go make some art.

[SergeSmArt]

I read/heard that the FS700 produces a more video-ish image than the Panny because of cinestyle gamma curves... is this true?

Does color correction change this? Or are there customizeable gamma curves?

I'm thinking of selling the AF100 to move to the FS700 and am looking for some feedback on the camera and any pros/cons I may experience in the transition

So.. look for yourself:



Original: http://www.sergecinema.com/temp/PP3-Profile_03.jpg



Original: http://www.sergecinema.com/temp/PP3-Profile.jpg

so ??

[Nirv]

Looks more grainy in the dark areas than my FS100 ever did!

[ksteiger]

Yes Nirv. the Fs700 is a terrible grainy camera you should never buy one...

[ksteiger]

Sometimes this forum makes me gag...

[Nirv]

Yes Nirv. the Fs700 is a terrible grainy camera you should never buy one...

You can't see that noise? I know "grain" sounds better, more "filmic" even, but it is in fact noise and those images are riddled with it.

Thanks for your advice BTW.