FS5: FS5 4K color and bit depth

[JMtheDP]

I don't know how financing works wherever you are but over here leasing is popular. It's basically a way of buying a camera - but on finance. You pay for the camera in installments, at the end of it you can buy it for a small amount or give it back. Or sometimes you "rent to buy". Leasing =/= renting.

It's basically a way of buying but spreading the cost out. I figured if you needed an FS7 it might be an alternative to look at different ways of paying for one, rather than finding a cheaper camera.

 

[ChristopherA]

Have you considered a used FS700 and an odyssey 7Q? It's not quite as compact as the FS5, but you can use the 4k RAW output and record as either RAW or ProRes.

 

[DLD]

Well if everyone is just going to suggest you get a worse camera and add a recorder to improve the codec ...

I was just abiding by the conditions set forth by the OP. My suggestions would have been greater had I wished to play with OPP.

Oh and NX1 with an external recorder provides a pretty nice image too. And the rig can be affordable as well.

 

[DLD]

4:2:0 is the *minimum* chroma sub-sampled resolution that comes from a not-oversampled bayer sensor.

A camera can compute higher color resolution than is possible from using single 2x2 arrays by using overlapping 2x2 arrays.

Hi, Tom. Wouldn't this require a lot of additional processing power?

And, to your knowledge, which cameras have this "overlapping" feature?

 

[naavt]

High frame rate got a mention in the requirements but nothing specified regarding resolution requirements for the HFR content. Have you analyzed that requirement in terms of capability of the cameras under consideration, i.e. resolution and speed?

Once more, Sony's FS5 seems the perfect camera regarding HFR. 240fps @ 1080p is a fantastic asset for this project. BMD URSA mini 160fps windowed is not bad either.

I don't know how financing works wherever you are but over here leasing is popular. It's basically a way of buying a camera - but on finance. You pay for the camera in installments, at the end of it you can buy it for a small amount or give it back. Or sometimes you "rent to buy". Leasing =/= renting.

It's basically a way of buying but spreading the cost out. I figured if you needed an FS7 it might be an alternative to look at different ways of paying for one, rather than finding a cheaper camera.

That's really a good tip. Thanks. I'm going to see if it can be done (probably yes). Planning for that on the total budget upfront is where I can see some issues but let's see.

Have you considered a used FS700 and an odyssey 7Q? It's not quite as compact as the FS5, but you can use the 4k RAW output and record as either RAW or ProRes.

To be honest I didn't. But it really adds up in the form factor front and Convergent Design's recorder is not cheap. I don't know if Atomos could be a cheaper solution if we did go that route.

I was just abiding by the conditions set forth by the OP. My suggestions would have been greater had I wished to play with OPP.

Oh and NX1 with an external recorder provides a pretty nice image too. And the rig can be affordable as well.

It sends a 422 color space but it's still is an 8-bit codec. Anyway, we feel that a DSLR won't be the best bet for a project of this nature.

 

[LeoGrey]

Could you please elaborate on the subject matter of your documentary project and why 8 bit is not good enough? There are plenty of documentaries / indie films on netflix shot with 8-bit codecs that look exceptionally beautiful. Hell there are even big budget features shot in 8 bit that look amazing. I for one can't wait to see what will be accomplished with the latest evolution of mirrorless cameras.

It sounds to me like you don't have much of a decision at all. If the fs7 is out of your price range then so should 4K acquisition. Big screen or not there is absolutely nothing wrong with 4K/HD 8-bit 4:2:0. It's understandable that you may WANT more resolution and a thicker codec(who doesn't?), but do you really NEED them?

Beggars can't be choosers and if I were about to begin a 3 year project the camera I'm using would be the least of my concerns

ps: Projects shot over that kind of duration(3 years) are RARELY filmed on the same camera.

 

[yoclay]

Ok, it doesn't have high frame rates, but have you considered the DVX200 ?
Seems like a good choice for docs, will probably be pretty rugged and is also quite inexpensive.

 

[Nirv]

8bit UHD with REC709 or Cinegammas will be plenty good enough. Small screen or big screen if you have any intentions of shooting Slog3 personally I'd give 8 bit a miss because there are times when 10 bits is only just enough, a lot of low dynamic range scenes will fall apart in 8 bits.

If the project isn't UHD then I think there's no better small package HD camera around than the FS5 with potential to grow its capabilities with external recorders when Sony gets round to it. That said the FS7 is not much more expensive and does the whole shebang.

A 3 year project with limited funds may be better off just hiring the camera when it's needed. If you're committing to a 3 year project you'll have some idea of what's going to be filmed and when so you'll be able plan the rental and potentially save a lot of money.

 

[naavt]

Could you please elaborate on the subject matter of your documentary project and why 8 bit is not good enough?

At the time I cannot disclosure the subject matter of this project. I can say that it involves one of the major national companies here. One with many other affiliates around the world. Although it's not the biggest budget project we all participated in it is for certain the major project in which we all be involved to date (despite all crew members having more than 20 years on the field), and one we all feel that we want to do no matter what we have to make to bring it to life (and this includes putting money from our own pockets into it).

Why 8-bit codec is not enough? Besides what this project means to us (and that is THE main reason), I can point some other three:

1st - Future proof of this project. It's a 3 year shoot with a 4 year forecast to completion. We don't know how things will be 4 years from now but the future will bring better images for sure. Not worse.

2nd - A few posts back I did gave an example on how a better coded can be of major importance. Quoting myself: "Last documentary we have shot was made with a BMPCC. It was a very small project and both us and the network who asked for it were very pleased. We have shot ProRes HQ which gave us the ability to "play" a little in post. One example was the entry scene, which was intended to work one way and ended completely different in the final edit, where our images were intercut with archive footage (not intended at first), and because of that we had to think a way to harmonize the whole scene, and that came in the grade session. "

3rd - We have to rely almost on natural light. Yes. You can obtain gorgeous images from an 8-bit 420 codec with the proper lighting, asset we will not have on 95% of this project. Because of that CC and Grading will play an important roll on the project's final image.

As I told previously, I believe the main output to be 2K DCP if ever turns out for us. The resolution has to do more with framing options in post than with screen projection. If I have to choose between resolution and a better codec I will definitely choose the second over the first. Ideally, it would be great if we could have both within our budget. That was a FS5 with 10-bit 422 UHD.

It sounds to me like you don't have much of a decision at all. If the fs7 is out of your price range then so should 4K acquisition. Big screen or not there is absolutely nothing wrong with 4K/HD 8-bit 4:2:0. It's understandable that you may WANT more resolution and a thicker codec(who doesn't?), but do you really NEED them?

For the reasons above, yes I do.

Beggars can't be choosers and if I were about to begin a 3 year project the camera I'm using would be the least of my concerns

That's the beauty of pluralism and the right for us all to be different from one another Fortunately the crew involved shares my opinion.

ps: Projects shot over that kind of duration(3 years) are RARELY filmed on the same camera.

I'll give you that. Totally agree. But for now we have to draw a plan for the next 3 years and it implies a camera acquisition for the duration of the project. No workaround this.

 

[Nirv]

At the time I cannot disclosure the subject matter of this project. I can say that it involves one of the major national companies here. One with many other affiliates around the world. Although it's not the biggest budget project we all participated in it is for certain the major project in which we all be involved to date (despite all crew members having more than 20 years on the field), and one we all feel that we want to do no matter what we have to make to bring it to life (and this includes putting money from our own pockets into it).

So a 3 year project for a multinational company that doesn't pay enough to get an FS5? You're having a laugh, a half decent wedding videographer would have that FS5 paid off in a month.

 

[naavt]

So a 3 year project for a multinational company that doesn't pay enough to get an FS5? You're having a laugh, a half decent wedding videographer would have that FS5 paid off in a month.

I cannot argue with you since I really believe that I would make the exact same assumption as you if I were living in another country that wasn't the one I'm living (probably wouldn't write it though).

As I told in a previous post, 80% of the film industry here is financed by the government cultural ministry, and our project falls in that 80% category. Our country is making big efforts to exit bankruptcy so film financing is very hard to find. Don't know if you read what I've posted early but I told that all the involved are willing to put their own money into this project.

I'm just looking for opinions on this matter (thank you for yours), and I'm not worried if you believe what I'm saying or not. I assume that things are easier on your country. I'm happy for you. Really am.

 

[JMtheDP]

I also hate to tell you that reframing from a "4K" source if you're thinking of going to the cinema rarely works out well. Beyond a 10% crop I find it becomes very noticeable very quickly, but that's me.

 

[JMtheDP]

Naavt

It might help us to help you, if we knew where "here" was

 

[naavt]

Naavt

It might help us to help you, if we knew where "here" was

Portugal. The infamous country that is all over the news because of our external debt, and that like our Greek "brothers" is desperately trying to get out of the finance hole that successive governments have put us all into.

 

[yoclay]

I cannot argue with you since I really believe that I would make the exact same assumption as you if I were living in another country that wasn't the one I'm living (probably wouldn't write it though).

As I told in a previous post, 80% of the film industry here is financed by the government cultural ministry, and our project falls in that 80% category. Our country is making big efforts to exit bankruptcy so film financing is very hard to find. Don't know if you read what I've posted early but I told that all the involved are willing to put their own money into this project.

I'm just looking for opinions on this matter (thank you for yours), and I'm not worried if you believe what I'm saying or not. I assume that things are easier on your country. I'm happy for you. Really am.

Well said.
Very artfully stated.
I am sure you are going to do an excellent job.

You would also make a good fencer.

 

[alaskacameradude]

As I told previously, I believe the main output to be 2K DCP if ever turns out for us. The resolution has to do more with framing options in post than with screen projection. If I have to choose between resolution and a better codec I will definitely choose the second over the first. Ideally, it would be great if we could have both within our budget. That was a FS5 with 10-bit 422 UHD.

Unfortunately, I don't think the camera you want, exists at the price point you want
or with the form factor you want. You can get 10 bit 422 UHD/4k in the FS7......
but it costs more than you want. You can get a FS700/7Q that will give you 10 bit
422 UHD/4k and it will probably fit in your budget.......but the form factor/ergonomics
aren't great. The FS5 has a good form factor and price.....but no 10 bit 422 UHD/4k.
Canon? Either too expensive (C300 MKII) or no 4K at all. Panasonic? Again
either too expensive (Varicam) or no 10 bit 422 UHD 4K. BlackMagic? You will
be waiting awhile for the 4.6K Ursa, so how long can you wait until you must get
started? Would the BlackMagic 4K version work for you? There just aren't many choices
yet in the space you want, with the specs you want.......there may be soon, but
not right now.

 

[Nirv]

You would also make a good fencer.

Why, are fencers exceptionally smug too?

I refuse to believe taking handouts from the cultural ministry is the only way to release a film in Portugal and other ways of funding a feature are possible.

The arts sector in the UK has been demolished due to government austerity cuts and I know of one organisation I've worked with many years ago was particularly badly but they are still going because they've got the private sector involved and cut their cloth appropriately.

Renting a camera as and when needed would be the obvious way forward. In three years time the fs5 will look a sad little camera so over the course of the project renting would allow naavt to use the best cameras available for the available funds and maybe one day the camera might meet his expectations.

 

[yoclay]

Why, are fencers exceptionally smug too?

I refuse to believe taking handouts from the cultural ministry is the only way to release a film in Portugal and other ways of funding a feature are possible.

The arts sector in the UK has been demolished due to government austerity cuts and I know of one organisation I've worked with many years ago was particularly badly but they are still going because they've got the private sector involved and cut their cloth appropriately.

What you chose to believe is not relevant here.
Keep your personal politics out of it.

This is a camera discussion. Nothing else.
Further, telling someone else that they are "having a laugh, a half decent wedding videographer would have that FS5 paid off in a month" seems pretty smug as well.
Go bully someone else. Your attitude is way out of line.

 

[naavt]

Unfortunately, I don't think the camera you want, exists at the price point you want or with the form factor you want. (...) There just aren't many choices yet in the space you want, with the specs you want.......there may be soon, but not right now.

Yes. I'm aware that I'm asking too much. As I said in the first post, this was some kind of a personal outflow. Nonetheless, many users provided their useful thoughts. Forums are these fantastic sharing places.

What really bothered me in the first place was coming across with what seemed the solution for our problems, and to realize that the dream was broken by one single detail in a otherwise perfect camera for our needs.

I also hate to tell you that reframing from a "4K" source if you're thinking of going to the cinema rarely works out well. Beyond a 10% crop I find it becomes very noticeable very quickly, but that's me.

I have to say that I have no experience on this matter (digital age wise). All the latest digital projects I've shot were done at 1080p. In the "old days" I've shot many 4 and 3-perf negatives to reframe them. Many were mixed in post (which was a pain to do).

In the current project the only issue I was foreseeing is a super sharp, unrealistic high definition image, since we aren't scanning things to 2K but "squeezing" all 4K pixels into a 2K image. In that respect, what do you think it won't work?

 

[Grug]

I'd give up on the idea of 4k, and grab an F3 with one of the newer external recorders that will let you record 4:4:4 and 60fps ProRes for slow-motion material.

You'll get a wide dynamic range and lovely highlight rolloff, 10-bit colour depth and a really sharp 1080p image, built-in NDs.

They can be had used for crazy prices at the moment, and for the price, offer the best overall image quality available right now. I think that's the most sensible compromise you make in terms of cost/performance.