Couple of FS100 Projects

Let's remember that danstone also said the Af100 was his preferred choice.

So I did a little googling for sensor flares and reflections.

Here's what I found:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fGqI2ZctzQ < Someone else who also lacks talent/experience who has lucked into receiving an excellent camera.
http://vimeo.com/20157010
http://vimeo.com/20723688
http://nofilmschool.com/2011/03/panasonic-af100-truth-sensor-flare/ < several examples.

I'm not dissing the AF100 just the other plonkers who think that sensor flare is a problem not of their own making. Remember the AF100 has a significantly smaller sensor so it reflects less light. My recommendation for Dan and any other users struggling to control the light entering their lens is to go back to using 1/3" camera. You can point them anywhere.

"Crawling mid tones" I laughed so hard I almost sh4t at that point.

The FS100 is universally known and has been demonstrated in many online tests that its sensor produces the cleanest output even at ridiculously high ISOs. In fact that's probably the main reason why the FS100 has "video" like image and nothing really to do about motion. http://vimeo.com/23294197 , The AF100 doesn't hold onto highlight any better than a correctly setup and exposed FS100.

IMO, danstone is just trolling these forums, he uses the classic faint praise of the camera then uses condescending terms to describe competent users who a very happy with the image they can produce with the FS100. I take great issue with statements which effectively means I'm better than you because you're happy with the image of the FS100. Those video examples you posted Dan just shows the level of your own competence and Sony never got back to you because they were saving your embarrassment. You better hope Discovery channel doesn't see those clips as they're career limiting and evident that Discovery channel should be qualifying camera operators as well as cameras!

As any industry becomes democratised equipment and technology finds its way into the hands of people who wouldn't normally have the chance. Sometimes these people are unskilled and even incompetent. We have seen examples on these very forums where people referring to themselves as DPs don't even know how to manually white balance a camera. Which is fair enough and the forum can help these people but in the case of people like Dan, who don't want to listen nor learn but to massage their own superiority complex, it's probably best to ignore them.

As I see it Dan and people like him have two choices, acquire the necessary skills to use the FS100 or simply sell it and buy another camera.
 
Gary W said:
Dan, who cares what your network says about the FS100. I can tell you not very many people on this forum. As I said before, learn how to use the camera instead of blaming all your problems on it. It grades well and I get great footage out of it, in fact I am shooting a shot comedy in the middle of June with three of them. If you don't like the camera, and you don't want to take the time to learn how to use it correctly then post on a forum for a camera you do like. Frankly, I am tired of hearing your complaints and I am not really sure why you post on a forum for a camera you really have nothing good to say about! Personally I think you like the attention!
Click to expand...

I have to apologize. I was unaware that these forums were merely here to praise and high-five each other about how awesome these cameras are. Maybe we should ask the moderator to remove all posts that are not 100% positive. That way people won't get their feelings hurt as much.

First, I was asked the reasons why we decided not to go with the FS100. I responded. Second, I was asked to post samples. I did. If you don't like what I write, don't troll my posts. Seems simple to me. The ARTnVIDEO guy obviously has so much time that he can do a complete background check (while still completely missing the point of most of what I've said). His posts are so far off that they don't even warrant a response.

And, "who cares what your network says about the FS100?" Well, I do. As do any of the other 49 professional production companies working for this network. Obviously this network doesn't like the results they're seeing from a group of cameras (of which the FS100 is only one of many). And, according to you, these guys who work daily with CineAltas and Varicams simply "don't know how to use the FS100".

As for my criticism not being constructive, I'd beg to differ. There are certainly others who are asking questions and sending me messages asking for more information. I, for one, would have loved this information before I bought this camera. As I said, I bought this camera as a test (along with the AF100).

There seems to be a trend by some people on this forum to blame well-known camera shortcomings on "user error". If you're okay with the results from this camera and what you have to achieve to get them, that's terrific! I'm happy for you.

I do realize I have a doom-and-gloom way of asking for help. But if you don't have any constructive input aside from "it's user error", move on down the line to another post. In my 'sensor reflection' post there are some guys giving excellent input and I keep following up on that post for other people who are having (or, rather, care that they're having) reflection issues.

Again, I'm NOT saying this camera sucks. It doesn't. I'm also NOT saying the AF100 is better than the FS100. It's not. I'm merely saying that for this particular project the AF100 meets our needs better than the FS100. No need for hurt feelings.

And as to why I don't post in the AF100 forum... I don't need to. The AF100 is a more popular camera in my area. If I have a problem with it, I just call one of a kagillion owner/operators. I'm the only one with an FS100 around here. When I ask my rental houses for advice they just give me a "we don't know, they just sit on the shelf" kind of answer.
 
paulcurtis said:
AVCHD is unacceptable for most networks around the world. Nothing to do with the camera. It's not based on QAing the footage, but simple bitrates and 'on paper' specs of the codec.

Of course there are many ways to avoid AVCHD.

cheers
paul
Click to expand...

Thanks Paul. Exactly what I'm saying. It's not a bad camera - it just doesn't work for us in this situation.
 
ade4all said:
tis only a camera folks, dont take it so personally
Click to expand...

This is getting ridiculous. who honestly has the time to google web videos and go through old posts to prove a point? It's a 5 thousand dollar camera. It's working great for some, for others, not so much.

I just come to this forum for occasional info & to see work examples, but we're beating a dead horse here.
 
danstone, I havent missed anything. You do not feel the camera is for you, and your company (that's clear), I addressed your reason to always point out, your opinion, that the camera is not for professionals, it's entry level, and it's image is this or that. It's like you think someone missed it, when you said it before.
 
Dan i have to say though that you've never really quantified any of the problems beyond the sensor glare. You talk about things falling apart, excessive reds, crawling mid tones and the general usability or lack thereof of the camera. On a forum like this there are plenty of people browsing before making a purchasing decision and i think it's unfair to suggest these things without really backing it up properly. Opinion is fine but it's nice to show and explain real samples if you're going to go down that route.

Perhaps there's even something up with your workflow, perhaps there are ways that the issues you see can be mitigated.

I think the comment about the AF100 piqued interest because it's pretty much the same deal there too AFAIK.

At the end of the day we're dealing with what is really quite a cost effective 35mm sensor camera that, with all it's faults, is capable of producing a stunning image.

Watch some movies from the 70s and 80s and if you can drag yourself away from the story watch for some truly awful lens aberrations, noisiness, blurriness and see how far we've come along. We can all technical create better quality now. Of course as Nirv and others point out, the trick is what are you going to create

cheers
paul
 
Deepfocus88 said:
This is getting ridiculous. who honestly has the time to google web videos and go through old posts to prove a point? It's a 5 thousand dollar camera. It's working great for some, for others, not so much.

I just come to this forum for occasional info & to see work examples, but we're beating a dead horse here.
Click to expand...

Oh, sorry you feel backing up an argument with data to prove a point is somehow wrong. Honestly, how long do you think it takes to do a google search? I didn't need to go through old posts as Dan has repeated the same diatribe over and over without showing examples. Now he has posted examples we can see that he has difficulty using the camera. I have explained, sometimes at length, how to use the camera and avoid sensor reflections which are common to _all_ large sensor cameras.

Shooting with a wide open aperture and pointing the camera at the subject in shadow in front two huge windows which are blown out to b*ggery is poor camera technique. Even if there were no sensor reflections the image is still horrifyingly bad and any competent camera operator would be embarrassed to shoot in such a way. If that is not user error what is it?

I, and many other people here could explain to Dan how to shoot that scene without sensor reflections but he is not interested. Presumably it's more fun to troll and pretend you're some big shot that shoots a ton of film with $60,000 dollar lenses.

I am all for giving camera companies a hard time and giving them stern feedback when they let the side down but these so called deficiencies are down to poor craft and not poor equipment.

CU
 
Oh, sorry you feel backing up an argument with data to prove a point is somehow wrong. Honestly, how long do you think it takes to do a google search?
Click to expand...

Yup, I could see that reply coming up 6th avenue in a cab.

Continue your argument gentlemen, I'll just go back to work…..
 
Once again Nirv points out the logical. I come to these forums to better my craft and to
find ways to work around the short comings of what ever I am using at the time, in this
case it happens to be the FS100.
I view these forums as an aid to just that professionals coming together to share there
experiances in the field and knowlege learned, so that we can all produce a better product.
The knowledge and information I have gained here has greatly improved my work with this
camera and at a much faster rate than if I were to rely on my own.
Dan offers nothing to assist me in that, he only show me his lack of skill and willingness
to learn. His post offer nothing of substance.
 
Last edited:
Gary W said:
Once again Nirv points out the logical. I come to these forums to better my craft.
Dan offers nothing to assist me in that, he only show me his lack of skill and willingness
to learn. His post offer nothing of substance.
Click to expand...

What I see is a handful of people being completely rude, further judging someone's skill when none of them have work up for others to see. If you want to talk about someone's skill, make your work public. Dan's put his work up a few times in the threads he's started.

I also see accusations of someone trolling that clearly is not trolling. It's simply someone that has a different opinion on the tool. If you don't like it, stop bumping the thread combating his opinion. If you sincerely believe he's trolling and his posts aren't useful to this forum, report his posts so that the rest of the mods can have a look at it.
 
If you don't like it, stop bumping the thread combating his opinion. If you sincerely believe he's trolling and his posts aren't useful to this forum, report his posts so that the rest of the mods can have a look at it.

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