FS7: B-camera: need your expert advise :)

Could anyone having access to one of those stills Sony cameras be kind enough and provide me with a link to an unedited, straight-from-the-camera, 4K XAVC-S clip? Preferably shot with S-log/S-Gamut... I'd appreciate it very much indeed! TIA,

Piotr
 
Sorry for bumping up this thread, but things are evolving and I've dropped the BMPC 4K as my B-cam candidate, and am trying to decide between the Sony A6500 vs. A7S ii. I would really appreciate advise from the more experienced pros on this Forum - and a prompt advise, too, as being a rather impatient person I'd love to buy one of them asap :) But please tell me which is the more important consideration for getting seamless inter-cutting between my S35mm FS7, and one of those Alphas:

- in the case of A7S ii, will the different sensor sizes (S35 vs. FF) be visible and distracting even if I use similar lenses (Canon EF - with the Speed Booster Metabones on the FS7, and just the "neutral" Mark IV adapter on the A7S ii)? My main reason for considering the FF A7S is certainly its low light performance - but also the best possible control over DOF, even with just F4.0 lenses I have; but will these advantages outweigh differing sensor size influence on the picture characteristics? I don't have enough experience to answer this question myself, so please advise!

- in the case of A6500, to use the same kind of Canon lenses I'd need to use the Speed Booster version of Metabones adapter on both my cameras (FS7 and A6500). I'd then have as similar "optical characteristics" of the two as only possible, with the similar sensor sizes and the same glass - but I'd lose the low-light capabilities of the A7s ii, and ability to catch those "beauty shots" with super-shallow DOF that only FF sensor camera can provide, which I could drop here and there in my 2-camera movies. Again - please advise about which advantages would prevail as I lack experience to kow that before I actually try...

Thanks in advance for your invaluable input, guys!

Piotr
 
Last edited:
When your fs7 is wearing a speedbooster it looks "full frame" anyway

I think sensor size will not mess up your look any more than many other factors
 
FOV-wise - yes, but DOF-wise - not, I guess... Plus I'm tempted with the A7S ii sensitivity, having all my lenses only F4.0-fast (or slow)... On the other hand, the a6500 has phase-detection focusing, which I read works much better with Metabones (be it Speed Booster or not).

I'm not hiding I'm after some really technical argument to help me decide for the more expensive option :)

Piotr
 
To be honest this thread, like most others, has now run the gamut and you have a ton of conflicting advice :)

There comes a point where making any choice and going to shooting something - ANYTHING - is better than continuing to procrastinate.
 
Hmm... From Metabones' FAQ:

How does Speed Booster® affect the depth-of-field?

The short answer is Speed Booster® on an APS-C sensor gives essentially the same depth-of-field effect as if a full-frame camera body were used.

The long answer is complicated. If we are referring to depth-of-field in the mathematical sense, that depends on the aperture, magnification and circle of confusion (CoC). Magnification in turn depends on distance and focal length. The 50mm lens now becomes a 35mm lens which behaves very differently in terms of perspective. The question is, do we still keep the distance the same? Should the CoC be kept the same? There are many missing variables we need to choose and fill-in before we could get a meaningful answer. When people claim Speed Booster® does not change the depth-of-field, they usually neglect to state the implicit assumption that the distance is kept the same (thereby changing the object size) and the CoC is kept the same. The same logic would lead to the conclusion that an APS-C camera has the same depth-of-field as a full-frame camera, too, which under the same implicit assumptions is mathematically true (the depth-of-field formula is format-size-agnostic, after all), but with which many people would disagree from practical experience.

However, when most people ask about depth-of-field, they are not interested in mathematics, but rather, they are after a certain kind of shallow depth-of-field "look". If this is the case, the short answer above applies.

Nevertheless, somehow a true FF, large photosite sensor camera (with my EF Canon lenses adapted via a simple and cheap adapter w/o boosting woodo) is more convincing to me than another APS-C one; the A7Sii would work so nice with my Sony 28-135mm, too!

Piotr
 
Last edited:
A plague on full frame and all its sons.. its a stills format.. s35 is the industry standard for many year,s.. all these great movies shot in s35mm.. do we need more SDF.. !!! more stills lenses polluting the optical gene pool... !! no we do not brothers.. strike them down.. get thee behind me Satan..
 
P.

Given all being equal for the mirrorless camera I would go for full frame.

I always give the short answer and wait for Doug to chime in with the long geeky one :)

--

Donny

Full Frame is just a format. it has pros and cons basically based on bigger being better.. or worse.
Close down a stop or two and you get the same DOF character as S35

pros
space for large light eating pixels
abundance of cheap 80s stills glass of high mechanical construction per $
cheap fast manual wide angles available from the stills back catalogue

cons
does not work well in PL cine glass world
no proper manual/parfocal zooms available
any 'super zooms' if made would be huge

simply if you are unlikely to interface with cine lenses I think it is a great format.

S
 
Last edited:
Donny 123 said:
A plague on full frame and all its sons.. its a stills format.. s35 is the industry standard for many year,s.. all these great movies shot in s35mm.. do we need more SDF.. !!! more stills lenses polluting the optical gene pool... !! no we do not brothers.. strike them down.. get thee behind me Satan..
Click to expand...

NzmsUSQ.jpg
*




* Except for my stills lenses.
 
morgan_moore said:
P.

Given all being equal for the mirrorless camera I would go for full frame.

I always give the short answer and wait for Doug to chime in with the long geeky one :)


--

Donny

Full Frame is just a format. it has pros and cons basically based on bigger being better.. or worse.
Close down a stop or two and you get the same DOF character as S35

pros
space for large light eating pixels
abundance of cheap 80s stills glass of high mechanical construction per $
cheap fast manual wide angles available from the stills back catalogue

cons
does not work well in PL cine glass world
no proper manual/parfocal zooms available
any 'super zooms' if made would be huge

simply if you are unlikely to interface with cine lenses I think it is a great format.

S
Click to expand...

Yes but I dont want that to change.. with all camera manufactures making full frame camera,s as a gimmick to sell the next big think.. and then presumably make us buy the new lenses to use them.. use the FF lenses on s35 sensors..ok maybe..
 
Donny,

While I can understand your "purist" attitude towards the use of Full Frame for video (and in fact, the whole "DSLR filming" hype of few year ago, in which I never participated) - please remember that in this particular thread, people like Sam and Ben are trying to help me make up my mind on which camera to adopt as a B-cam for my FS7, taking into account all the specifics of my particular situation and needs (goes without saying I'm very grateful to them for each piece of priceless info). So this thread is NOT yet another general discussion about still cameras adoption for video, and even less so whther FF sensors and lenses are "better" for video that S35mm format... And in my particular situation, some important facts are given:

- I need a small and lightweight B-camera
- I'd like it to be as sensitive in low-light as only possible, because:
- the FS7 isn't particularly good at that, plus
- I already have FF lenses and they are all only F4.0

This changes the perspective quite a bit, don't you agree? Cheers bro;

Piotr
 
moldcad said:
- in the case of A7S ii, will the different sensor sizes (S35 vs. FF) be visible and distracting even if I use similar lenses?
Click to expand...

If you have a Speedbooster on the FS7, they'll essentially be the same. Forget about all the FF/s35 equivalent-conversion rubbish and just treat them like they're both full frame cameras. In real world situations you'll never notice any differences in DOF or FOV between the two, and it definitely won't be distracting.

Personally I'd go with the A7sII because as you've said, all your lenses are FF, so you can make the most of them with only a cheap adapter. I'm also biased towards it because I already have an A7s as my B-cam so I'm comfortable with that form factor and layout, and a 4K (internal) version seems like a no-brainer to me!
 
Sometimes I hate having to choose :( I've got offers for both the A6500 (with Speed Booster and a few accessories) and the A7Sii (with Sigma adapter and those same accessories), and - mainly due to the Speed Booster price - the price difference is not as high as I anticipated between the two packages. The A7Sii is tempting because of its low-light performance and true FF, but the A6500 offers phase detection AF and touch screen... Even more votes, please :)

Piotr
 
Maybe think what that means?

-there is nothing to choose either would be fine
-neither actually does what you want/need
-you dont have the money to get the wrong one (maybe you cannot afford either therefore)
-they have pros and cons -get both and select the right one for the job
-just get another FS7 FS5
-you could also rent/borrow/test because having in hand is worth another 100 posts.
 
Thanks for this write-up, Sam. As obvious as it may seem, it's always good to confront one's own thoughts and doubts with non-emotional arguments of another person; this is exactly why verbalization and simply talking ones' thoughts over with others always help - and this is what boards like this Forum are all about. The more so that - in my case - I have nobody in my closest circle of people whom I could talk my dilemma over with... So, let me take your list and comment each point:

-there is nothing to choose either would be fine: not quite true; as I said if the A7Sii had phase detection it would be non-brainer
-neither actually does what you want/need: not true - each of them do, with just a few caveats
-you dont have the money to get the wrong one (maybe you cannot afford either therefore): the first part is definitely true; I cannot afford choosing the wrong one as I'll need to saty with it for long before I can upgrade again
-they have pros and cons -get both and select the right one for the job: definitely cannot afford both, for reasons stated above
-just get another FS7 FS5: as above - too expensive, plus I fancy a small stills camera as well (though not a priority)
-you could also rent/borrow/test because having in hand is worth another 100 posts: not so simple in Poland, where the market is still in its infancy

So as you can see, even though your points were all very valid - answering them didn't help in my dilemma. But still: in the context of your last point, consulting the matter with people on this Forum who might actually have used or tested both can be a very good substitute to renting and testing myself. And this is the reason I'm still trying to get as many hands-on opinions from you guys as possible; I can only offer apologies to those not interested it is taking that long :)

Piotr
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top