Cinematic Sony NEX-FS700 Test Footage - Raw and Ungraded

NextWaveG

NextWaveG

Well-known member
I've been hearing people say that the Sony FS700 is too "videoish". I recently shot a short action film which was my first chance to really test out the FS700. Each scene was lit and setup as you would any true film. In these scenarios I was really blown away by the image from the FS700. Coming from a Canon 5D MkII, the FS700's codec held up so much better while still having a ton more dynamic range.

http://www.nextwavedv.com/analyze-the-frame-cinematic-sony-nex-fs700-test-footage/
 
Nice, thanks for sharing. Looking forward seeing the graded footage... imo it's nice to see more narrative work from the FS rather than all the commercial and docu that's been shown :) (smell my envy? hehe)
 
I guarantee you that if you posted footage from a Sony and claimed it was from something else, most people would believe you. A lot of perception is colored beforehand, and so it will always look "videoish" regardless.
 
Actually I find the opening shot pretty videoish.
Too wide lens and a half soft light on the guy's forehead IMHO
You would need ether a pretty hard light to just rim him or a 4x4 diffusion with a par can behind it, to light that scene.
Looks like a faster frame rate than the rest, but I'm not sure.

Also the next two shots are soap opera in my book.
Some color correction (post re-light) could fix that to a certain degree.

The office scene is alright but doesn't blow me away.

The rest looks very cinematic to me, really nice job on those Tony.

Frank
 
Postmaster said:
Actually I find the opening shot pretty videoish.
Too wide lens and a half soft light on the guy's forehead IMHO
You would need ether a pretty hard light to just rim him or a 4x4 diffusion with a par can behind it, to light that scene.
Looks like a faster frame rate than the rest, but I'm not sure.

Also the next two shots are soap opera in my book.
Some color correction (post re-light) could fix that to a certain degree.

The office scene is alright but doesn't blow me away.

The rest looks very cinematic to me, really nice job on those Tony.

Frank
Click to expand...

Thanks for the thoughts Frank. I always enjoy hearing how a DP would approach a scene differently.
 



Footage looks great, but looks like video to me. Nothing wrong with that and think this camera would be great for Tv,Web work. For cinematic work maybe using older vintage glass can help bring that certain "look"? Regardless though I really liked how it looked, but it does look like 100% video to me.
 
Footage looks great, but looks like video to me. Nothing wrong with that and think this camera would be great for Tv,Web work. For cinematic work maybe using older vintage glass can help bring that certain "look"? Regardless though I really liked how it looked, but it does look like 100% video to me.
Click to expand...

+1
 
I agree this footage looks "videoish." It took me several months of experimenting with PPs before I got a look I was happy with using the FS100, I think we have to give the FS700 users time to fine tune this camera's settings as well. There are so many parameters to futz with in the PPs that we can not expect people to get a great looking, highly stylized image out of the box. I've also come around to the thinking that it's best to get as close as you can to a final look in-camera. Unless you're grading a 10-bit or raw image there's almost always a price to pay in shooting "flat". Just my $.02.
 
Sony F65 ungraded would also look like video. Only with even higher DR and resolution.
Something organic is missing I cannot describe.
 
Last edited:
I agree with Vision films on this one. I just dont like the look of it. it does look videoish to me even if i didn't know what camera it was shot on. Just doesn't feel right (if that makes any sense)...doesnt feel cinematic to me. However the shots do look great and are very nicely lit.
 
Part of "cinematic" also defines actors, props, set dressing, etc. To me all of those aspects were weak and I'd call "amateur" at least. That's part of the package in my opinion.
 
Hi

It does have a video look to me. Then I ask myself why. It is the contrast between the super clean parts of the picture like the faces and digital artifacts in parts of the background. Either one is okay but to me both in the same shot make for two different looks and that says "not film" to me. My mind can buy into the artifacts as a type of strange film grain or I could buy into a super clean image. But seeing both makes me feel like something is amiss. This is of course a subjective and artistic opinion. I also must wonder how much of what I am seeing are compression artifacts from web recompress rather than in the original.
 
I'd agree on that - looks "videoish". It would be nice to see graded version of this one to compare. I guess we all got spoiled by DSLRs and their high contrast / crushed blacks/ oversaturated look right out of the box.

P.S. Actors play was not impressive at all, but I'd give a high five for cinematography to you, NextWaveG!
 
Just downloaded the footage, the frame rate is 30fps and not 24, that ALONE is the main reason why it looks the way it does.... Truly DISIKE the look of 30fps
Also a color grade MIGHT help.
-------------------------------------------

Color graded a small still from the footage

hwd5xl.png



Ungraded

huglli.png



In the graded pic I added some film grain and changed the white balance. I think you should be careful with such harsh lighting and try to diffuse it better. Also stay away from 30fps.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, aside from the fact this is an awesome looking and very professional production... the video seems not to reflect any kind "cinematic" look almost on purpose... not that that's a bad thing at all. Most things aren't meant to cinematic, but this video can't really be trying to go for that vibe, if so, then I'm actually pretty curious. Is the FS700 even capable of a "film-like", cinematic look? I mean, I've even seen some FS100 stuff that looked pretty decent in regards to being cinematic, so there's no way that it can't be possible with the FS700.
 
That doesn't look like 30P to me, looks like Sonys 24. But it may have been shot 24 yet exported 30. That still wouldn't make it look like 30, just 24 in 30.
 
Kholi said:
That doesn't look like 30P to me, looks like Sonys 24. But it may have been shot 24 yet exported 30. That still wouldn't make it look like 30, just 24 in 30.
Click to expand...

You could be right? I guess we really need the op to chime in to tell us what frame rate it was shot at. Also I think you have to really like Sony video image as it looks different than other cameras.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top