FS7: Considering FS7 or URSA

Im just not getting this.. the BMC is basically perfect for this application IMO.

If one has used sony and BMC - I have - one realises that the bmc stuff has many things that make it better than sony - step beyond the 444-4kprores which is the perfect studio format and well everything we moan about with sony camera.. dumb menues .. softening in HFR whatever .. wfm not working with a LUT - all of that stuff just doesn't happen on BMC cameras.

The bmc 4k I used was just a little rock

Yes the FS7 is awesome for carrying around and I would not use an URSA on a RNG job.. but for the $ im convinced it is very very very good - and way better in a studio than an F5/55 with all the gack, and wierd menu balony even the F5/55 offer..

S
 
I'm with Morgan - for what the op specifically needs, the Ursa seems to be ideal - the fs7 is a great all rounder but that doesn't mean it's always the right tool. Some folk seem to get very protective over their latest acquisition
 
ade4all said:
I'm with Morgan - for what the op specifically needs, the Ursa seems to be ideal - the fs7 is a great all rounder but that doesn't mean it's always the right tool. Some folk seem to get very protective over their latest acquisition
Click to expand...

hahahah....yup!
I'll give the FS7 a year; and some shiny, new toy will catch the videogencia's eye. You'll dump the FS7 like yesterday's oatmeal.
 
Last edited:
That is not actually true because the FS7 makes 'sweet pictures' the only thing I want. I new the Fs100 was a challenged (highlights) from day one - the FS7 is not challenged. But then Im rational and still using my 2008 nikon d3 for stills - I upgrade until I get a 'sweet picture' then stay still.
 
morgan_moore said:
That is not actually true because the FS7 makes 'sweet pictures' the only thing I want. I new the Fs100 was a challenged (highlights) from day one - the FS7 is not challenged. But then Im rational and still using my 2008 nikon d3 for stills - I upgrade until I get a 'sweet picture' then stay still.
Click to expand...
well, Sam, you and I both have the experience of a few years. The FS7 is a fine camera, for what it is. And it fits a certain contemporary camera market. When NAB rolls around, we'll see what shines brighter.
 
For sure - but like my d3 for stills a sweet image is a sweet image - of course there are jobs where the FS7 is not right - but im not seeing affordable 2000FPS for a while or FS7 performance in a a gopro form - they are the things I would like :)

S
 
HFR, 6K, no rolling shutter, RGB 4444, automagic RAW post workflow, lens communication standardization, 35mm format, PL mount.....all these things are where the industry might go. And I'm sure I've left off a ton. But, having 6K distribution, for example, doesn't make 4k obsolete, even tho' Sony would like us to think it's so. From my perspective, a camera should have a 5 year minimum useful lifetime. The F3, for example, is still a fine camera. And for a client who 'demands' cutting edge acquisition, I hope they're willing to pay for it, or, they can find a wealthy film student who can give it to them. Most clients can't tell RAW from MPEG, much less even know there's a difference. But, a discerning client WILL know the difference between Vivitar and Zeiss optics. I'd much rather sell based on a solid inventory of good optics than on the latest craze in acquisition.
 
Last edited:
Yep yep - but im only interested in sweet pics - skyfall looked nice to me at 3.5k to 2k in the cinema.

Id actually want a camera that made post easier!

S
 
cuervo said:
hahahah....yup!
I'll give the FS7 a year; and some shiny, new toy will catch the videogencia's eye. You'll dump the FS7 like yesterday's oatmeal.
Click to expand...
I don't doubt for a second that something new will come out that'll impress people. Right now my FS7 is giving me and my clients great images, it's already paid for itself so I couldn't care less what nonsense people spout about it.

Back on topic, it would seem like the Ursa would suit the OP. Just make sure you at least try it in the flesh as it's the true test of suitability.
 
Thanks again for the posts. Lots to ponder. I'm still leaning towards the URSA, but who knows. I woke up last night with the words RED Epic in my mind. Hmmm :-) I'll see if I can convince my boss. Probably not.
 
Aaveum said:
This is what you got from my post, even after I said I wasn't particularly talking about the FS7 and Ursa specifically?

My point was, if the FS7 handles the highlights more efficiently than the Ursa it's not necessarily because of the 2 extra stops as you said. Number of stops is not important in this case. How those stops are allocated is. If a 14-stop sensor allocates more of the dynamic range to the shadows and a 12-stop sensor allocates more to the highlights, the 12-stop camera will handle highlights more efficiently than the camera with the higher number of stops. Again, I'm not specifically talking about the FS7 and Ursa here. Hope it's clear now.

P.S. Maybe next time you could quote my whole post to avoid bringing it out of context.
Click to expand...

But what you fail to mention is that if a 12 stop camera allocates more stops to the highlights, then it comes at the expense of the shadows and mid-tones so you will have more noise in the lower values. There is always a penalty with lower DR cameras no matter how you tweak it. That's what happened with the FS700 and S-Log2. The highlights were great because S-Log 2 crammed so much of the range into the highlights, but the shadows were really noisy. I personally like the more balanced range I'm getting from the FS7 and CineEI.

Once again, all camera manufactures are probably going to inflate the DR a bit, so the 2 extra stops on the FS7 is 2 extra stops over the URSA. Charts and real world tests have shown the FS7 to be around an honest 14 stops. The highlight on the FS7 is really good.
 
jshbckr said:
The key difference here is that the URSA is capable of 444 ProRes. This is why it will key better than any FS7 or 7Q combo. Every pixel has its own chroma and luminance information. 422 gives you little edge issues because some pixels sample chroma from a neighboring pixel. If you're in a studio all the time, I'd say the size of the URSA isn't an issue.

As nice and flexible as the FS7 is, I would suggest using the URSA for heavy studio+green screen work.
Click to expand...


Prores444 is not ideal for green screen compositing. Not by a long shot. The compression will wreck havoc with attempts to extract fine edge detail and key motionblur.
I've spent over 2 decades in visual effects post production. There isn't a month that goes buy where I don't get a commercial in that fell for this canard and we end up spending tons of overtime attempting to make the material look presentable. Any savings that the producer thought they were making by shooting Prores 444 for VFX instead of RAW or uncompressed slog HD is instantly vaporized and actually the cost of fixing the mess is far greater than simply having shot it correctly the first time around.

If you need to shoot GS material you are far better off shooting uncompressed slog RGB 444 @ HD resolution and ideally RAW. It doesn't matter if it's HD, 2k or 4k. You simply want to avoid any compression at all costs.
 
Last edited:
I totally agree that the more color resolution the better, and if someone asked me to shoot their green screen project I would advocate SR Codec on my F55 or 16-bit RAW R5… but at the same time I've shot an entire music video in green screen studio using three Canon 5D Mark III's without any complaints.

I think good lighting, modern keying software and someone who knows how to use it will go miles in post.
 
Usra is a big camera....nah huge camera so you need to consider support and all the other stuff that buying a big camera entails making it a lot more costly. ( hah try flying it on a Ronin or helix ! ) Once / if BM upgrade the sensor it may become something to consider ( along with a gym membership ) but for 12 stops of DR there are better options out there.

The FS7 maybe a lot of things but it is not a camera to be shooting raw with ( given the Frankenstein module thingy that has to hang off the back ) so as noted by others not optimum for VFX .......but then what can you expect around this price range. Having said that it should do a better job at it that an Ursa.
 
Last edited:
starcentral said:
I totally agree that the more color resolution the better, and if someone asked me to shoot their green screen project I would advocate SR Codec on my F55 or 16-bit RAW R5… but at the same time I've shot an entire music video in green screen studio using three Canon 5D Mark III's without any complaints.

I think good lighting, modern keying software and someone who knows how to use it will go miles in post.
Click to expand...


It all comes down to edge quality and what is acceptable to the client and the shop. Sure you can key material out of a 5D; if you don't mind a hard edge or one that has been soft eroded etc. You are not going to be able to key a person with long blowing hair from H264 and the color latitude is so narrow that even spill suppression will get interesting.

Compressed GS material makes everyones life difficult, even when working in Flame or Nuke. You can only make it look so good, it takes more time and effort to get there and you need a good operator and tools.

My point is that contrary to the OP Prores444 is not ideal for GS work. You can make it work, but it is not ideal. If you are going to shoot GS with an USRA the answer is to shoot RAW, not Prores.
Personally I would take the FS7 because I have more trust in the Sony color science and noise performance. Then I would shoot unimpressed RGB444 slog or RAW.
 
cuervo said:
I think everyone who posts on these pages needs to attach a disclaimer to their posts. To whit: "The opinions expressed by the author are personal opinion and do not, necessarily, represent actual facts".
Click to expand...

It also needs to be kept in mind that there is a difference between opinion and fact. As an example math is a fact and not really debatable like an opinion.
 
Harry Lime said:
My point is that contrary to the OP Prores444 is not ideal for GS work. You can make it work, but it is not ideal. If you are going to shoot GS with an USRA the answer is to shoot RAW, not Prores.
Personally I would take the FS7 because I have more trust in the Sony color science and noise performance. Then I would shoot unimpressed RGB444 slog or RAW.
Click to expand...

Hi Harry, I'm the original poster here, and I don't recall typing or referring to Proress444. I'm just looking for the best GS camera I can find. Thanks.
 
Harry Lime said:
Prores444 is not ideal for green screen compositing. Not by a long shot. The compression will wreck havoc with attempts to extract fine edge detail and key motionblur.
I've spent over 2 decades in visual effects post production. There isn't a month that goes buy where I don't get a commercial in that fell for this canard and we end up spending tons of overtime attempting to make the material look presentable. Any savings that the producer thought they were making by shooting Prores 444 for VFX instead of RAW or uncompressed slog HD is instantly vaporized and actually the cost of fixing the mess is far greater than simply having shot it correctly the first time around.

If you need to shoot GS material you are far better off shooting uncompressed slog RGB 444 @ HD resolution and ideally RAW. It doesn't matter if it's HD, 2k or 4k. You simply want to avoid any compression at all costs.
Click to expand...

I appreciate the response, I certainly don't have much green screen experience, so this is helpful. My intention with mentioning the ProRes 444 is that it is 1. better than the 7Q's RAW to ProRes422, 2. better than the FS7+XDCA ProRes 422 HD that will be coming out. and 3. it's better than XAVC-I. So yeah, it's definitely not the ideal (uncompressed) but I think if you're comparing to the FS7's capture methods, it's better than those (ProRes 422 and XAVC-I). But for the best, yeah, OP should stick to RAW or uncompressed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top