Camera options for slow-motion

N

nickbeef

Active member
I shoot a lot of corporate promos and also do music videos and some narrative work. For me, all of these types of productions would benefit from shooting slow-motion.

Currently my A cam is a C100, which unfortunately only shoots 60 fps interlaced. Why any camera still shoots interlaced is beyond me (perhaps this is effectively the same as shooting 60p720?)

In any case, I'm looking to purchase a new A cam soon and looking at the options out there. Can anyone suggest cameras out there that are good for shooting slow-motion, preferably in 1080? To me, being able to shoot in a high frame rate is more important then 4K. I'd prefer upgrading from my C100 and making that my B cam, but I'd also be open to getting a DSLR as a new B cam, as long as it was able to shoot high frame rates in 1080p.

Thoughts?
 
Well I think the Sony FS7 is probably the best option out there for affordable slow-motion work at the moment. It gives you 4k @ 60fps, 2k @ 180fps (all in progressive, 10-bit 4:2:2 codecs), and up to 2k raw @ 240fps if you pair it with an Odyssey 7Q.
 
First things first.... What do you consider "high frame rates", and what is your budget?

Secondary question.... Do you already have a lighting package in place to support shooting high frame rates, or is that a budgetary item as well?
 
How high for frame rate? - 60p, 120p or 240p? 120p is easier. Sony from the RX10 II on up is leading the pack. Samsung NX-1 is good for 120p as well.
 
I've had my FS700 for two years and have hardly shot any slow motion because of the damn flicker in most normal light... And I'm no fan of daylight ;)
 
Definitely, the new Sony FS7 and FS5 jumped to the top of the list for their slow-mo capabilities. The fact that they both shoot up to 240fps @ 1080 (even in 8 sec bursts) makes it hard to beat. Honestly, I suspect that 240fps, is probably a bit overkill some of the time, but if I had it as an option I would definitely use it.

Really the only thing holding me back is that I already have a Canon, I slightly prefer the Canon look straight out of the camera, most of my lenses are EF, like the Canon ergonomics... but is any of that worth paying $15K for a C300 MKII?

I'd say 240fps is great if I had it, 120fps is probably the sweet sport for what I need, and 60fps is barely slow enough to consider slow motion.

My current light kit consists of a Kino Diva, a 1K rifa 88, some 650 tungsten, and 2x Yongnuo 600 LEDs. I could always use more & more powerful lights, but this gets me by.

I'd say the maximum of my budget is in the $10K range (partly because that's where the fs7 and C500 are about), but realistically $6k or $7k is more in the range of where I feel comfortable that I could get a solid return on my investment (at least at this stage of my career).
 
dmitrizigany said:
I've had my FS700 for two years and have hardly shot any slow motion because of the damn flicker in most normal light... And I'm no fan of daylight ;)
Click to expand...
Really? I shoot slow motion all the time....yeah, I totally overuse it, because it makes things
look so dramatic. Now a ton of the stuff I shot slow motion for is outdoors, so there is no
issues there.....but still......this was shot inside under 'indoor gym' lighting. As I recall,
I had to test framerates, and may have had to shoot this at 120 instead of 240.
I can't remember now for sure though.
https://vimeo.com/91975744
Password: AKstategymnastics
 
Last edited:
The Canon C300 MKII is a balls-to-the-wall camera. If you're already into EF glass it's very much worth considering.

I don;t know what your work is - but with networks starting to reject any work not from an approved 4k standard, the C300 MKII is looking better and better even at that price. But hang on until NAB if you can as there might be something that causes one of those common Canon huge price drops like the C500 just saw.

The FS7 will pose some issues for your lens collection - but that's a serious camera. Can't go wrong with an FS7.
 
FS700 is still hard to beat for overcranking on a budget, especially if you add a 7Q/7Q+. Problem is if you do that you'll have trouble using other cameras since 4k@120fps burst or 2k@240fps continuous straight to ProRes is hard to compete with :)

That said, it'd be nice to have intermediate framerates sometimes...
 
DPStewart said:
The Canon C300 MKII is a balls-to-the-wall camera. If you're already into EF glass it's very much worth considering.

I don;t know what your work is - but with networks starting to reject any work not from an approved 4k standard, the C300 MKII is looking better and better even at that price. But hang on until NAB if you can as there might be something that causes one of those common Canon huge price drops like the C500 just saw.

The FS7 will pose some issues for your lens collection - but that's a serious camera. Can't go wrong with an FS7.
Click to expand...

I'm seriously not trying to be an ass, and I'm aware that Netflix and a couple other places
want 4k masters. I am wondering which networks you are talking about that are starting
to reject any work that is not from an approved 4k standard? I certainly don't do
'high end' stuff by any means, but the last couple months, I shot stuff for Discovery,
ABC/Good Morning America (twice), CNN, and Disney. They were all happy with
plain old 1080 24P......except for Good Morning America who wanted 720P (I kid you not!)
Just curious what networks are now only accepting approved 4K standard stuff.
 
Last edited:
There's very little in the way of day-to-day network that is requiring 4K. I did some green screen elements for CBS for the Super Bowl in 4K and just shot some sit-downs a few weeks ago for another network in 4K(for reframing in post), but the vast majority of my work is network @ 720P. GASP! People act like 720P sucks. It doesn't.
 
With NAB so close, I would think you would be best to wait and see what might show up. I think color is becoming more and more equal between makers. I recently purchased a Sony RX10 MKII for the slow motion capability and have been very happy with the slow motion and the color.

The Ursa Mini 4.6 had some nice frame rate specs. We will see when it shows up in the wild. You actually have quite a few choices these days. It really depends upon how nice of an A camera role you need or if the slow motion can be a specialty camera.
 
Is 60i, on the C100 effectively the same as 60fps@720p? Or when I deinterlace, does it combine the two frames, somehow making the effective frame rate back at 30fps?

I know they are exactly the same, but are they effectively the same?
 
60i is effectively 1080p30. So you have more resolution but would have to make up frames to get to 60p. If movement is limited this is not as noticeable compared to say a panning shot. I have converted 60i to 720p60 for web use and it looked quite good.
 
Bassman2003 said:
60i is effectively 1080p30. So you have more resolution but would have to make up frames to get to 60p. If movement is limited this is not as noticeable compared to say a panning shot. I have converted 60i to 720p60 for web use and it looked quite good.
Click to expand...

So basically, it's useless for slow-motion.

Whats the purpose for cameras even having an interlaced option these days? CRT tv's have been obsolete for years.
 
nickbeef said:
So basically, it's useless for slow-motion.

Whats the purpose for cameras even having an interlaced option these days? CRT tv's have been obsolete for years.
Click to expand...

Because it is a broadcast standard!

In fact 99.9% of my deliverables are 1080i as requested by TV stations and broadcast outlets.
 
Interlaced is still used in broadcast television. So it is included as a legacy format. Canon did not lead the charge so to speak in the 60p recording area though. In my view, 1080p60 is the new interlaced. Sort of a catch all format which is best for acquisition but can be delivered with slower frame rates if needed.

If you want to keep the full 1080 frame of resolution then yes, 60i is not the best choice for slow motion. How slow is the main point though. 60p on a 24p timeline gives very nice slow motion for many uses. Will it be the best for showing a bullet? No. That type of slow motion needs as many frames as you can feed it. It all depends upon what you want to shoot. 120p is a nice middle ground of not needing a crazy fast shutter speed but still giving plenty of frames to work with.
 
Ok, so I did a test with my 60D, b-cam, at 60p@720. I was happy with the level of slow motion. I could live with a camera that shot 60p@1080. Although 120fps would be better...
Realistically, my budget is about $7000, but I can dream bigger.

Here's what I'm looking at according to B&H:

No 60p@1080 on the C100 mk I
No 60p@1080 on the C300 mk I (though yes 60p@720)
No 60p@1080 on the 5D mk III (though yes 60p@720)
YES 60p@1080 on the C100 mk II

unsure about these ones?:

unsure on the C300 mk II?? (probably?, and out of my price range anyway)
Yes 60p@4K on the C500 (and 120p@4K?!?! B&H says "up to 119.88p in 2 frame steps), but only with an external recorder, right?

Or if I wanted to go the Sony route:

a7S II - 60p & 120p @ 1080
FS5 - 60p @1080 (though 120, 240, 480, 960!?!?! but listed as 60i???)
FS7 - 60p @ 4K?!?! (also 1080 up to 180fps in S&Q mode)

This is just what I could find form B&H. Are some of these only on external recorders? Anything I should be warned about with some of these. Any other good general use cams I'm not considering?
 
I have the FDR-AX100, which does 120fps 720p, and also the PXW-FS7, which does 180fps 1080p. I like the AX100 so much I'm about to order a 2nd one. If you order on B&H, they give you a $100 gift certificate with this camera. The AX100 records audio in high speed mode (many/most cameras do not). Lower end consumer cameras do not let you zoom once you hit RECORD. The AX100 lets you zoom and will continue to provide a correct exposure as well as auto focus, or you can go manual exposure and manual focus if you like. The high speed video is saved to the SDXC card as 120p. If you want to play it back at real time speed, that's easy to do, or anywhere you want, up to 4x slow-mo so it's easy (in Vegas Pro anyways) to ramp the speed up/down. Most cameras roll the HFR into 29.97 for storage on the card. It's a Handycam, small form factor, proper video camera, as opposed to a dSLR format. Most of the footage in this video was shot with the AX100.

Mark



https://vimeo.com/144132164
 
Last edited:
For corporate work, I use slowmo often. Any time it's b-roll and not dialogue, I shoot 30p for 24; generally it gives motion just a little more "weight" and gravitas.

I use 60P a lot for more drama, for beauty/fashion, etc. You can always speed it back up and add motion blur. I've shot a fair amount of 120p for stuff that has more emotion (fund raising, medical stuff, etc).

I've been ridiculously impressed with the NX1. Yeah, I know the future is up in the air with that system and prices have been bizarre (bought the body & kit lens for $1300 before xmas, today it's $1700).

But for gigs, I shoot it with Nikkors, and I also use ancient 1960's Canon FL glass on it (gorrrrgeoussss). It's a mofo of a camera for the price range. With native glass, the AF is pretty impressive as is the OIS.

120 FPS @ 1080 looks very good up to 800 ISO or so - I've used it in working edits at up to 2000 iso with Neat Video. 4K up to 30p.

4K is awesome when needed - there's more rolling shutter at 4K though; I use it for interviews (reframing gives a 2-camera look and is great for editing dialogue) and anything that will get keyed or motion tracked. I had to go get 8 more Terrabytes of drives though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top