FS7: C300 MkII makes the FS7 look like good value

Andrius Simutis said:
Then why do we hear so many complaints about the Sony menu system?
I like that Canon didn't just make a square box, but something that when stripped down is quite useable handheld. On the shoulder, if you need to do that, it does require rigging but even the FS7 does to some degree. They're both really good cameras but neither the FS7 or C300 are perfect for every use. That doesn't make either of them instantly "crap".
Click to expand...

You presented "crap" as if it were a quote. I may have beaten the C300 up a bit but I never used the word "crap". They are both great little cameras for the money. I do think that the design of the Fs7 will force Canon to redesign the C300 so that it comes with a better monocular viewfinder. The C300 Mk II does not address the ergonomic advantages that the Fs7 has over the C300. I know of several individuals who have purchased an Fs7 or plan to purchase one soon. I do not know of anyone who purchased a C300 MkII or plans to purchase a C300 MkII. As far as the "hot hand", it is my opinion that Sony currently possesses it.
 
icarusfilm said:
I don't now why people are always so dismissive about autofocus. Canons Dual Pixel AF implementation is very effective and can be used for certain shots that would be impossible without it. I don't understand why sony took a step back with the fs7 giving it reduced AF capabilities compared to the fs700 or the a7s that has continuous AF and face tracking.
Click to expand...

icarus- I think the dismissiveness of auto focus is twofold. AF wasn't very good until relatively recently. AF tended to hunt too much for focus. More significantly, AF cannot intuit what the operator desires to be in focus. That is why feature film productions still use an assistant who pulls focus. AF can't rack focus from a person entering a room to a phone on a table in the foreground and perform that rack focus at the moment that an actor mentions the phone. AF cannot use focus in a narrative manner.

For much of my career AF was a feature on consumer video cameras only. It wasn't a feature on professional video cameras. Thus giving rise to the notion that AF is for amateurs while professionals focus manually. AF was seen as a "cheat", a "cheat" that didn't perform all that well, and a "cheat" that was extremely limited in its ability to use selective focus in-shot. Professional camera ops took pride in the fact that they didn't depend upon AF and they took pride in their ability to focus manually. Manual focus is a skill that increases in ability over years of shooting as it becomes second nature. It is an art form in an of itself. Slapping on the AF seemed like an attempt to circumvent having to master that art form. The lazy man's way or the way for those who could never master the skills required for complex manual focus techniques.

People are dismissive of AF for the many of the same reasons that they are dismissive of AE.

Much of the above is arrogance and somewhat of an "old timer" way of thinking as AF has improved dramatically in it's capabilities. Many younger videographers came up on glass that was designed primarily for AF and made manual focusing problematic regardless of how much time one put into it, no matter how skilled the operator. So for them AF didn't have the same taboo. It wasn't that they were too lazy to acquire manual focusing skills. It was that the glass sucked for manual focusing.

Just curious- what sort of shots would be impossible without AF?
 
JPNola said:
You presented "crap" as if it were a quote. I may have beaten the C300 up a bit but I never used the word "crap". They are both great little cameras for the money. I do think that the design of the Fs7 will force Canon to redesign the C300 so that it comes with a better monocular viewfinder. The C300 Mk II does not address the ergonomic advantages that the Fs7 has over the C300.
Click to expand...
I wasn't using the "crap" quote as attributed to you, just the "idea" or "opinion" of what is "crap" vs the unequivocal declaration that this=crap.

JPNola said:
I know of several individuals who have purchased an Fs7 or plan to purchase one soon. I do not know of anyone who purchased a C300 MkII or plans to purchase a C300 MkII. As far as the "hot hand", it is my opinion that Sony currently possesses it.
Click to expand...
Uh, if I'm not mistaken, the C300 mkII was only announced this week. We'll see who's hot to buy it when it's actually shipping. I'm guessing a lot of the TV productions will go with it as too many producers still love that Canon look when they can't afford an Alexa. That'll also mean that a lot of the rental houses will have it. I'm sure too that a lot of people will buy the FS7, especially once Sony sort out some of the bugs. If I was buying a new camera soon I'd be hard pressed to choose between them considering the price tags and features. If I were renting, I'd probably just go with the C300 II.
 
JPNola said:
AF can't rack focus from a person entering a room to a phone on a table in the foreground and perform that rack focus at the moment that an actor mentions the phone. AF cannot use focus in a narrative manner.
Click to expand...
It's getting there. Touch screens and selectable focus speeds will be able to do this if they aren't already. (I'm not up on the latest AF systems)
The face detection AF is also getting really good.

JPNola said:
Just curious- what sort of shots would be impossible without AF?
Click to expand...
I had one last year. Granted it could be done with a full crew and a dedicated good AC pulling focus, but it was just me out there picking up the shot. The scene the director wanted was a guy running down a dark street coming straight at the camera, and shot long to blur out the signs in the background. Damn, that was a hard shot to get!
For the solo shooters and small productions using photo lenses, AF can be a life saver. Full crew and cine glass? Nah, you don't need AF.
 
I have used AF very successfully with the c300 on a slider sliding towards and object while the AF held focus also having talent walk towards camera continuously etc.
Things that could only be achieved with a very good focus puller. Of course AF can't tell what you want and isn't a "always on" solution but it is a tool that can be put to use.

JPNola said:
icarus- I think the dismissiveness of auto focus is twofold. AF wasn't very good until relatively recently. AF tended to hunt too much for focus. More significantly, AF cannot intuit what the operator desires to be in focus. That is why feature film productions still use an assistant who pulls focus. AF can't rack focus from a person entering a room to a phone on a table in the foreground and perform that rack focus at the moment that an actor mentions the phone. AF cannot use focus in a narrative manner.

For much of my career AF was a feature on consumer video cameras only. It wasn't a feature on professional video cameras. Thus giving rise to the notion that AF is for amateurs while professionals focus manually. AF was seen as a "cheat", a "cheat" that didn't perform all that well, and a "cheat" that was extremely limited in its ability to use selective focus in-shot. Professional camera ops took pride in the fact that they didn't depend upon AF and they took pride in their ability to focus manually. Manual focus is a skill that increases in ability over years of shooting as it becomes second nature. It is an art form in an of itself. Slapping on the AF seemed like an attempt to circumvent having to master that art form. The lazy man's way or the way for those who could never master the skills required for complex manual focus techniques.

People are dismissive of AF for the many of the same reasons that they are dismissive of AE.

Much of the above is arrogance and somewhat of an "old timer" way of thinking as AF has improved dramatically in it's capabilities. Many younger videographers came up on glass that was designed primarily for AF and made manual focusing problematic regardless of how much time one put into it, no matter how skilled the operator. So for them AF didn't have the same taboo. It wasn't that they were too lazy to acquire manual focusing skills. It was that the glass sucked for manual focusing.

Just curious- what sort of shots would be impossible without AF?
Click to expand...
 
icarusfilm said:
I have used AF very successfully with the c300 on a slider sliding towards and object while the AF held focus also having talent walk towards camera continuously etc.
Things that could only be achieved with a very good focus puller. Of course AF can't tell what you want and isn't a "always on" solution but it is a tool that can be put to use.
Click to expand...
Traditional focus pulling job will be an archaism in few years time. In 20-30 years in the future people will laugh that years ago you'd had to do it by twisting cog wheel directly on the lens. Look at all those focus systems that are coming this year: dji, red rock micro etc. You will be pulling focus by touching buttons on the screen of your smartphone/tablet and selecting subjects, speed etc. This is the future, that will save a ton of time and money by taking away human mistakes. Everything is dramatically speeding up...
 
alohype said:
Traditional focus pulling job will be an archaism in few years time. In 20-30 years in the future people will laugh that years ago you'd had to do it by twisting cog wheel directly on the lens. Look at all those focus systems that are coming this year: dji, red rock micro etc. You will be pulling focus by touching buttons on the screen of your smartphone/tablet and selecting subjects, speed etc. This is the future, that will save a ton of time and money by taking away human mistakes. Everything is dramatically speeding up...
Click to expand...

Maybe so but I find that people tend to overestimate the speed at which the future will arrive. Going by the Jetsons we should all be driving flying cars by now.

Years ago many proclaimed that film is dead. Yet later today I will be working on a feature production shooting on film.

If you have a crew member pulling focus by touching a screen then you are still using manual focus and not AF. You are just focusing manually by touching a screen instead of turning a focus wheel. And there will still be mistakes in data entry. Or the production incurs cost from being halted as a result of the focus system crashing. Then all the people who laughed at the thought of twisting a cog will be crying for someone with experience in turning a focus wheel.
 
This thread is about the sony fs7 which is geared towards the single operator market. No one is going to choose the fs7 for any well budgeted fiction or commercial production except this one or two paid by sony to delude people into thinking they are going to shoot the next breakout hit for 10K.
People with budgets will never consider anything but and alexa or epic for their projects. They will have focus pullers and will work with cine lenses. For doc shooters that have to beg production for a sound man and only dream about an AC AF properly implemented is a huge benefit.
 
Sure the FS7 won't sneak into major budgeted movie productions, even the F55/F65 is having a hard time to that capacity but for independent film producers and filmmakers will continue to use and make the most of whatever they do have. The FS7 won't be any exception to that. We've seen it in the past with movies like Open Water, 9 Songs, and Monsters (actually EX3 with 35mm Letus adapter).

Since I do attend film festivals on a very regular basis (more the independent ones) I can tell you that during Q&A panels when filmmakers as asked what camera was used, it's either RED or Canon cameras the majority of the time. In fact I'm usually the only guy who says the S word.
 
starcentral said:
Sure the FS7 won't sneak into major budgeted movie productions, even the F55/F65 is having a hard time to that capacity but for independent film producers and filmmakers will continue to use and make the most of whatever they do have. The FS7 won't be any exception to that. We've seen it in the past with movies like Open Water, 9 Songs, and Monsters (actually EX3 with 35mm Letus adapter).

Since I do attend film festivals on a very regular basis (more the independent ones) I can tell you that during Q&A panels when filmmakers as asked what camera was used, it's either RED or Canon cameras the majority of the time. In fact I'm usually the only guy who says the S word.
Click to expand...


Count in one more guy. I used the FS700 for the last feature and the FS7 for the current one (shooting weekends as we speak). Last one was a selection in 17 festivals and won awards in 5, so the camera didn't hurt. The features are of course micro budget, but as you said, why would anyone with a budget use an $8K camera?

Sonys may be used more than you think. A good reference is the website "ShotOnWhat". The FS7 is too new to be on it, but the F3 page is full of films shot on it. https://shotonwhat.com/cameras/sony-pmw-f3-camera
 
JPNola said:
icarus- I think the dismissiveness of auto focus is twofold. AF wasn't very good until relatively recently...
Click to expand...
There are some very high end AF systems that use a low powered laser and cost ~ $80,000. It's used on fast moving objects that even a top focus puller can't handle. Other systems use a sonar. Others use magnetic detection (by placing a small magnet on an actor). The sonar based Red Rock Halo is ~ $2,500-$3,000 for a full package, including a wireless remote control.

As to C300 MK II, it has an 80% AF screen coverage, so one should be able to track pretty well with it. The first generation C100 and C300 used a very small center square and it was easy to pass the baton, so to speak.
 
Back to the original point of the thread...the FS7 is a great value vs the c300 on every level. If you will all look back at the "issues" and "quirks" inherent in the c300 during the first year of it's release, available in their Forum around page 90 or so...you will see a very similar pattern of the camera needing bug fixes. It was hardly perfect and there are many reports of Issues in the Forum. If I hadn't already bought an FS7 and started reading this forum, I would probably take a wait and see approach to camera purchases---which would be a crying shame because the FS7 is a great camera, with a few bugs, like all the others, that will be addressed in short order. And to the last point in the thread--I've never used AF in 32 years, but I'm not a still photography shooter so I don't expect it in an ENG/EFP camera. Go shoot and have fun with all the great tools we are lucky to have at prices that are 1/4 what I paid for my first Ikegami HL79EAL in 1984, which I had to pay an engineer to register the tubes for me every few weeks. You guys are so lucky and you don't even know it. I'd love to read more about How you're using your FS7, post videos, instead of all the rest of the Issues that are on here every day. You can shoot around the Issues. You do with every camera you've ever used, because they all have them. IMHO
 
I have a friend who is an experienced shooter, - started in film etc. - who swears by the AF and particularly the face detection in the FS700. He says its great for shots where talent is walking toward you, which are always hard to rack without a good assistant and even for long lens interviews to track talent leaning in and out. Its not a deal killer for me on the FS7, but it is a shame they just didn't bother with it. You may need a touch screen though and that perhaps is again requires more camera power.
Its not enough to make me want to switch to a C300 II though which seems less exciting than I expected. Now that Juan Martinez has confirmed that FS7 will get center scan the advantages seem quite strong. Actually having that extra stop and lower DOF with speed booster was a big + for the FS7 also.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top