Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 33
  1. Collapse Details
    Sony Alpha on FOX NFL
    #1
    Senior Member JPNola's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    New Orleans USA
    Posts
    1,472
    Default
    So what's going on here with these shots? By that I mean, there's nothing new here but for some reason these shots are eye-catching. I don't recall any of my own Sony A7 work having this crazily shallow dof. Or, is it less the super-shallow dof that is catching my eye and more the frame rate?

    The camera is an A7r II, the lens is the Sony 24-70 GM, shot using AF.

    https://www.engadget.com/fox-sports-...200048816.html





    The camera work here is rough. The Op who shot it would be the first to acknowledge that. He needs a person pulling focus for him and the AF is hit or miss. But I'm more interested in the "look" being produced here and how it is different than what we've seen before, if it is different.
    Big sources matter.


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #2
    Senior Member Run&Gun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    5,209
    Default
    I'm in the minority, but I do not like the stuff that FOX and CBS have been doing. Too many focus misses/oof shots, weird framing at times, mechanical gimbal pans/tilts and does not fit, in the context of the live broadcast. The real Steadicam shots are way better and fit the broadcast. BUT everyone has a rock hard stiffy over the shallow DoF sh!t.


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #3
    Senior Member Peter C.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    437
    Default
    Someone already brought this up. I'm with R&G, I hate it. There's no real reason to use it, except to emulate what you see in a video game like Madden. They also might be using the shallow dof to hide the empty stands, but I find it distracting. Reminds me of the quality difference between consumer mirrorless and expensive broadcast cameras. If they just closed the aperture down I wouldn't have a problem with it.
    Last edited by Peter C.; 01-21-2021 at 09:12 PM.


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #4
    Senior Member ahalpert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,206
    Default
    JPNola, your A7 must have had equivalent DOF at f/2.8 unless you were in a crop mode. There's no way this camera could have less.

    I dont see why they cant put the camera on a regular steadicam.

    Regardless of what the pros think, the audiences seem to like it. Maybe just for variety. Personally, I think they could have a bit more DOF. Everything has a sweet spot for DOF.

    Like that shot of Biden giving his inaugural speech and flattening right into the stairs behind him. It would have been really nice if those stairs had been a bit soft. C'mon, man.


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #5
    Senior Member Run&Gun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    5,209
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by ahalpert View Post
    JPNola, your A7 must have had equivalent DOF at f/2.8 unless you were in a crop mode. There's no way this camera could have less.

    I dont see why they cant put the camera on a regular steadicam.

    Regardless of what the pros think, the audiences seem to like it. Maybe just for variety. Personally, I think they could have a bit more DOF. Everything has a sweet spot for DOF.

    Like that shot of Biden giving his inaugural speech and flattening right into the stairs behind him. It would have been really nice if those stairs had been a bit soft. C'mon, man.
    $$$


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    9,011
    Default
    I don't know if being mindful of extra costs has anything to do it...I mean they probably have a truck filled with steadicams at this point after 40-50 years of this type of production.

    IMO, it's just easier to move around with the one-handed gimbal.

    In one of last week's game, I saw a gimbal operator still on the field just as the offense was breaking out of the huddle. They cut to the wide shot and he was hauling to get out of there.

    Plus - per usual - 99% wouldn't see the difference.


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #7
    Senior Member ahalpert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,206
    Default
    There's a difference between not seeing the difference and not feeling the difference. Everyone will feel the difference. People can't tell why Hollywood movies (generally) look so good, but they can tell they look good even if the only problems they ever notice are Superman's bad CGI moustache-removal.


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    9,011
    Default
    No, most won't...just not in this particular case. It's only a few seconds of celebrations.


    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    #9
    Senior Member Run&Gun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    5,209
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by NorBro View Post
    I don't know if being mindful of extra costs has anything to do it...I mean they probably have a truck filled with steadicams at this point after 40-50 years of this type of production.

    IMO, it's just easier to move around with the one-handed gimbal.

    In one of last week's game, I saw a gimbal operator still on the field just as the offense was breaking out of the huddle. They cut to the wide shot and he was hauling to get out of there.

    Plus - per usual - 99% wouldn't see the difference.
    This is the world I have lived in for the last two+ decades. Don’t think that pennies are not watched, counted and saved, even on the NFL. Trust me. Most people would shake their heads(as do I, even after all these years) if they saw the things that the networks will spend money on and not bat an eyelash(even when it’s essentially thrown in the trash) and other things that they nickel-and-dime to an almost ludicrous degree.


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Central NY
    Posts
    2,392
    Default
    I'm guessing these cameras are a nightmare to the video guys, do they offer any of the conventional shading controls back in the truck? And one of the pictures I saw had the camera in a big fig rig so size isn't even of benefit. Just get a large sensor ENG/cinema camera with a fiber connection on the back and a real CCU in the truck like an F55 or F65. Yes I know, not full frame, but does it really matter?


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •