FS 700 hands-on review with footage

It is all there as it was in the original raw files, at least that is how it behaves with Red material.
 
allupons said:
I also dislike sharpening in general. That said, if applied with a subtle hand, and done to an oversampled image before it is downsampled to 1080p, the results can be solid from what I have seen. Regarding lines of resolution, you seem to be selling the field a bit short, at least when referencing zacuto and abelcine. They show that the canon DSLRs are at about 740, af100 at 800, fs100 at 950, f3 and c300(i think as I cant find an official test) at about 1050, and the alexa at 1100. Given that field, I would hope the BMCC is better than 800 lines. But more importantly than what charts reveal, is how detail and resolution appears in the real world use imo. The only currently available footage for the BMCC looks like a canon DSLR equivalent, and to me that is disappointing. To my eye the fs100, and of course the $10k+ cameras appear far more detailed than the canon and nikon offerings. If the BMCC matches the fs100 in detail / resolution I will be ecstatic as I think the fs100 has an incredibly sharp image. Too bad all the footage is currently online in 720p, making it impossible to tell if the softness is in the base recorded image or the highly compressed upload.
Click to expand...

In the case of this, I will respectfully disagree with Zacuto's testing revealing anywhere near 740 lines of actual resolution for Canon DSLRs especially, and definitely 950 from the FS100. I'm sure I could find more than one chart for each of these cameras revealing that Zacuto's measurements are pretty optimistic on their part. And, of course, that the current footage up looks anything like DSLR footage in the category of resolved detail, to me. But, different eyes see different things so that's all well and good.

Since BMD actually isn't taking anyone's money on pre-orders (it didn't cost me anything but a credit card authorization to get in line), I don't think they really owe us anything but to make good on the specs that they released when the camera's shipping. Now, in the event that I had to pay a dime up front, then I would definitely agree.

The only last thing I will mention is that I am not being skeptical about the BMCC in order to promote the fs700 or any other camera. I have virtually 0 interest in the purchase of a fs700, as to me mega high framerate cameras define the reason for a rental market to exist. As I have said before, I would LOVE the BMCC camera to be everything it claims it will be and more, but until I see proof with my own eyes I will never believe what a spec sheet tells me to.
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with that! It's definitely not wise to spend money before seeing any footage and, at the end of the day, the footage is what counts. I'm definitely pretty optimistic about it but that won't affect the decision to not purchase if it clearly isn't up to snuff.



paulcurtis said:
Nice image but jam packed full of moire and aliasing (look at buildings/roofs and see the colour aliasing - looks like a Leica M9 which lacks an OLPF), even on a still frame, would hate to see it in motion. Where was this generated/posted? Could be a very substandard debayer? Perhaps unfair on the camera at this early stage...

cheers
paul
Click to expand...

I personally don't see any moire, at least not on the level where moire would actually affect a moving image. But, it's also pretty difficult to say within a still image that's been doctored. Just more of a reason why they shouldn't release footage until it's actually at a point that's indicative of shipping quality.

Anyway, good convo. Perhaps time to turn the topic fully back on the FS700, apologies fellers but glad that it was civilized!
 
Kholi said:
I personally don't see any moire, at least not on the level where moire would actually affect a moving image. But, it's also pretty difficult to say within a still image that's been doctored. Just more of a reason why they shouldn't release footage until it's actually at a point that's indicative of shipping quality.

Anyway, good convo. Perhaps time to turn the topic fully back on the FS700, apologies fellers but glad that it was civilized!
Click to expand...

If you look at the buildings and any fine details (especially around windows) you can see thin pixel lines of various colours that shouldn't be in the image. They're not lens aberrations but debayering issues. Or just not having a good enough OLPF (perhaps the pre production camera didn't even have one). I'm sure the final version will be fine but it will be softer i would guess. Not a problem, it's about range not resolution as far as i'm concerned.

cheers
paul
 
Are you guys really talking about pixels in a JPEG that was posted on some blog, downloaded, graded, JPEG compressed again and posted again?

Frank
 
Postmaster said:
Are you guys really talking about pixels in a JPEG that was posted on some blog, downloaded, graded, JPEG compressed again and posted again?

Frank
Click to expand...

Yes. A JPEG from Resolve, "some blog" meaning John Brawley's blog... the only person that's used the camera to date. And, I'm assuming that you're trying to say that the original JPEG is in adequate for judging, to which I would disagree with you.
 
ha, my thoughts too Frank. I think we are all still in the dark until a better test video comes out. Although, I would assume Black Magic's goal with the 2.5k sensor is to achieve 'perfect' 1080p, a la C300 and the FS700? Do you guys not anticipate it having better resolution than the FS100?
 
Have tried to tell people this before... but, Bruce states it pretty plainly:

#88

Bruce Allen said:
Don't be. A high quality JPEG is a perfectly fine image container, as long as it's not compressed to the point where it introduces unnecessary banding / quantization. If you have a slightly noisy source, it's actually good.


You know that HDCAM - the built in recording format for the Sony F900 (you know, Star Wars, etc) - was 8-bit, right? Not to mention the Panasonic Varicam (DVCProHD 8 bit), etc.


For some reason there is this weird snobbiness about 8-bit - but the main thing is: look at the footage. Is there unnecessary banding introduced in areas that you really want to stretch out?


No? Awesome. Go ahead and grade then.


We have to deliver pretty much everything at > 8-bit resolution for theatrical film out. I render in at least 16-bit precision pretty much all the time. However, almost always, the stock footage, 3D renders etc that go into the composite CG are 8-bit sources. This is slowly changing with OpenEXR / float pipelines, but that's more for HDR and linear compositing reasons than due to banding issues.


Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
Click to expand...
 
Kyle McConaghy said:
ha, my thoughts too Frank. I think we are all still in the dark until a better test video comes out. Although, I would assume Black Magic's goal with the 2.5k sensor is to achieve 'perfect' 1080p, a la C300 and the FS700? Do you guys not anticipate it having better resolution than the FS100?
Click to expand...

Perfect 1080 comes from 4K+, which is pretty much the main reason to acquire in 4K for delivery in 2k/1080. Perfect 4K will come from 8K.
2.5K should be a decent 1080/2k Master, but it should not deliver C300 results.
 
Kholi said:
And, I'm assuming that you're trying to say that the original JPEG is in adequate for judging, to which I would disagree with you.
Click to expand...

What I´m saying is, that there is no point to worry about artifacts in a image that was more than once jpeg compressed, graded and raped by some forum software, coming from a camera prototype with a sensor that is not properly calibrated yet.

I´m all in for pixel peeping, but maybe we should wait, till we get our hands on original files of the production model.
I bet there will be quite a quality difference - the sensor calibrating alone is a big thing.


Reminds me of some guys, that tried to judge the quality of the C300 , from a clip, based on Vincent´s film, shot with an iPhone from the projection screen and uploaded to YouTube.

Frank
 
Postmaster said:
What I´m saying is, that there is no point to worry about artifacts in a image that was more than once jpeg compressed, graded and raped by some forum software, coming from a camera prototype with a sensor that is not properly calibrated yet.

Frank
Click to expand...

At the bottom level, yeah, when final images are released that's when we'll know everything. I'm commenting on the idea that a JPEG is inadequate for viewing, and it's plenty adequate if compressed properly. Didn't realize you were talking about the JPEG and the sensor, because the post just asked about the JPEG.

The comparison of the iPhone thing... guess it's just nothing like that to me but to each their own!

Anyway, ja.
 
I was just pointing out some fine aliasing which isn't JPEG compression based. Dodgy debayering or no OLPF i think (i wrote a simple debayer for a raw camera head i had once, which also had no OLPF - there's quite a lot to debayering properly, i found out that much at least!)

Very much like Leica M9 shots in certain situations.

cheers
Paul
 
I wonder sometimes if anybody will ever be happy with any camera? Seems like everyone want's the "perfect camera" in terms of price, resolution, and ergonomics, but there will never be such a camera. I like so far what the FS700 has produced in terms of price, picture, and future 4k, as for Black Magic we have to wait and see. Can pixel peeping be too ocd at times? Maybe? But with so many options out there for cameras I'm sure all of you will find the right camera for you, be it RED, Sony, Canon, BMC, Panasonic etc.. I'm just happy that Sony gave us there version of a C300 at a reasonable price, IMO.
 
Pixel peeping of oversampling or new cinegamma curves? No thank you, boobies in slo-mo please. It'll be the must have camera of 2012.

The first person to shoot a busty woman doing vigorous exercise on their FS700 will get a million hits. Mark my words...
 
Ruben/Sheri said:
I wonder sometimes if anybody will ever be happy with any camera? Seems like everyone want's the "perfect camera" in terms of price, resolution, and ergonomics, but there will never be such a camera. I like so far what the FS700 has produced in terms of price, picture, and future 4k, as for Black Magic we have to wait and see. Can pixel peeping be too ocd at times? Maybe? But with so many options out there for cameras I'm sure all of you will find the right camera for you, be it RED, Sony, Canon, BMC, Panasonic etc.. I'm just happy that Sony gave us there version of a C300 at a reasonable price, IMO.
Click to expand...

I would say the FS700 is overall, pretty much the best camera right now for the price.

I just wish 2 things

1) Better ergonomics. It's such a strange shape. Unlike most, I like to shoot with minimal gear especially since I love the handheld aesthetic, and this camera is a bit odd for that style of shooting.

2) Small, DSLR style internal mic. I shoot a lot of MOS soundless type stuff and just need reference sound. I'd rather keep it light weight for that stuff and not have to strap the large mic on just for reference sound. But like I said, I like to keep it minimal

But Sony did a great job with it overall. Im buying one.
 
I personally love the form factor. I like the idea of building around a simple box-shape than building around a machine with a handle that could prove useless depending upon how I build it.
 
morgan_moore said:
Constant comparison to the BMD seems strange to me

The BMD shoots DNG - thats wonderful - but will eat computer and edit times
-it needs a $2k battery system
Click to expand...
Seriously!!!? I recall reading someone say it could use cheap batteries easily. That's a far cry from "needing a 2K battery system". What is true here?
 
Ruben/Sheri said:
I wonder sometimes if anybody will ever be happy with any camera?
Click to expand...

Ive worked in stills for 15+ years
My first camera was a nikon FM2n and a roll of 25-100 or 800 film
It had awesome latitude, worked when you pressed the button
It set my standard
I then spooled through about 10 digital stills cameras playing the latest release game
When the nikon D3 dropped on my mat - I new I had what I wanted, a digital camera whos performance euqlled my 1990 FM2
I have not bought a camera for stills since the 2008 nikon D3 - the D3 is in professional use every day, I have little interest in a better stills camera than the 2008 nikon D3 and never had a query from a client about the image quality

the same will happen in motion eventually (the only bugbear is can you ever have too many frames per second?)

If I could afford an F65 I could probalby be happy with it for the rest of my career (which is food for thought!)

IMO

S
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top