FS7: Footage Comparison: Sony FS7, Canon C100, and Canon 5D Mark III (Magic Lantern Raw)

Thanks for taking the time to test. I'm always impressed with the ML raw it's just not practical for what I do at all. I personally liked the FS7 image over the C100. In the end grade the C100/FS7 looked really similar but I prefer the way the FS7 renders skin highlights. Of course this is all viewed on my iPhone so I'll take another look at a real computer.
 
QuickHitRecord said:
I had an FS7 for a few days and compared the footage with that from my C100 and 5D Mark III (with ML raw). I thought that it might be interesting to some here:

https://vimeo.com/119093979

Details are in the video description.
Click to expand...

While trying to ignore the fact that the skill and experience of the grader makes all the difference in the world, I found the 5D footage to be to dark and too brown. Crushed blacks too. The C300 skin tones looked plastic and flat in places. The fs7 could be warmed a little.

In reality all three could be made to look better in post, but the C300 would worry me more.
 
5D Mark III seems to do better with flesh tones even at 800ISO. Hope you will write your thoughts after others chime in.

Would it be possible to dl the FullHD somewhere?
 
Last edited:
Why didn't you use the same lens on each test? You had the Canon 35 1.4, so you should have used that on the 5DIII. I really like ML Raw but its workflow is cumbersome. I like my FS7 because it just works all the time and the workflow is really nice. I also don't trust ML Raw for issues with overheating and workflow.

I would love to see a comparison of daylight footage.
 
I guess the moral of this story is, they all look good enough.

With that said, outside in the hot blazing sun, it would be a completely different story probably as highlights come into play and that's where the FS7 really shines. I thought the FS7 and the 5D3 both looked really good. The C100, while nice, definitely had a thinner, more plasticky look to it. But that's just nit picking as it's still really good.

Thanks for the tests and making the cameras look good.
 
Thanks, all.

I didn't touch the colors on the FS7 or C100 footage, only exposure. The footage can certainly be made to look better but I wanted to see what the baseline was.

With regard to using the same lens across all three, I didn't have a high-hat or tabletop tripod with me so I would have had to change up my wide shot. I will try to match them if I do another test like this. I think that a lot of you know how it is; I could have tweaked and made adjustments for hours, but my helpers don't have the freakish attention span that I do when it comes to this stuff.

I'll have to ask my talent if she's okay with my posting the original files up.
 
thanks for the update...what is your post workflow when working with magic lantern and the 5d3...?(I'm using resolve and fcpx)
 
niki said:
thanks for the update...what is your post workflow when working with magic lantern and the 5d3...?(I'm using resolve and fcpx)
Click to expand...

I use MLVFS to mount the MLV files so that they can be opened in Resolve. I set the project to BMD Film color space, apply Cinelog-C as a LUT, tweak white balance and exposure as necessary (while monitoring with the Cinelog to Rec.709 display LUT), and export to either ProResHQ or ProRes4444. I then edit the ProRes files in Premiere or Resolve, depending on the complexity of the edit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top