FS5: FS5 vs A7SII for 120fps
- Thread starter yoclay
- Start date
Doug Jensen
Carbonite Member
Neither. The FS7 is the better camera for 120 fps.
Not a possibility. These are the two choices. So which one?
Doug Jensen
Carbonite Member
I don't understand why those are the only choices. If you are renting, then surely you can rent any camera you want. And if you own those cameras yourself, and are therefore stuck using one of them, then why ask for opinions? You must know which one YOU prefer operating.
But given those two choices, I would choose the FS5 because it is a real video camera instead of a still camera that just happens to shoot video -- plus you'll also have a 10-bit XAVC-L codec for grading. I own an A7s (not an A7sii) and the rolling shutter is terrible compared to my FS5.
But my best advice is to skip both those cameras and use an FS7 if the shoot is important to you.
But given those two choices, I would choose the FS5 because it is a real video camera instead of a still camera that just happens to shoot video -- plus you'll also have a 10-bit XAVC-L codec for grading. I own an A7s (not an A7sii) and the rolling shutter is terrible compared to my FS5.
But my best advice is to skip both those cameras and use an FS7 if the shoot is important to you.
Last edited:
Gizmosgadget
Active member
Which ever one records continuously. I think the FS5 only records in bursts. Very limiting IMO. The A7SII I think shoots continuous HFR but the bitrate takes a hit down to 20mbps. But as Doug mentioned, the FS5 has a much better codec.
I am not renting. This is an unpaid promo piece. The FS7 is out on a documentary and these are the only cameras in my entourage that do 100/120fps. It is what it is.
I was under the impression that the FS5 was actually noisier than the A7SII. Perhaps this has changed with firmware updates? Also, not sure if you have to be in crop mode on either of these cameras to shoot 120fps continuously.
Also, correct me if I am wrong but doesn't XAVC-L only do up to 50/60fps on the FS5?
Doug Jensen
Carbonite Member
Where are you getting your misinformation??? Really, unless you have first-hand knowledge of the cameras it might be better to just not say anything rather than to disseminate such ridiculous and erroneous information. I own both the FS7 and FS5 and I can assure you that slow-motion looks fantastic at up to 240 fps on the FS5 and 180 fps on the FS7. Beautiful video.
So is this in some kind of burst or windowed mode for the FS5?
Doug Jensen
Carbonite Member
All slow motion above 60 fps on the FS5 has to be done with a burst mode, but only 960 fps is a cropped mode. 480 fps and 960 fps on the FS5 are unusable for professional work, but everything else looks great if you shoot it right.
FrameFarmMedia
Veteran
A lot of users forget to account for the extra light needed and end up underexposed. Underexposing at all will kill your highspeed. Feed that sensor light and beware of flickering light sources.
nyvz
Veteran
The tradeoff is being cropped or buffered. Which is less of a pain to you? Frankly I'd go with the fs5 for fashion since 240fps could be handy as well for that fashion moving still style or if you need to shoot clips between a photographers flashes or something.
Basically do you want to have to wait for your clips to record from buffer or be limited on the wide end lens wise and lose do etc. Then again the a7sii might be considerably better at getting ok exposure shooting high speed in limited light.
Basically do you want to have to wait for your clips to record from buffer or be limited on the wide end lens wise and lose do etc. Then again the a7sii might be considerably better at getting ok exposure shooting high speed in limited light.
dave dugdale sorta did a vid which could be helpful:
http://www.learningvideo.com/10-bit-vs-8-bit/
ymmv
be well.
rob
smalltalk.productions
http://www.learningvideo.com/10-bit-vs-8-bit/
ymmv
be well.
rob
smalltalk.productions
Doug Jensen
Carbonite Member
Actually, none of the FS7's slow motion modes are cropped* or buffered. You can shoot at 180 fps (or less) for as long as you want with the full sensor. That's part of the reason why I suggested it as being a much better alternative to the other cameras under consideration. 10-bit 4:2:2 XAVC-I would be yet another big reason. CINE EI is another reason. Better ergonmics is another reason. A better viewfinder is another reason. Better peaking and zebras are two more reasons. I could go on and as to why an FS7 is a much better tool for the task at hand. But if that is not possible, I would defintately choose the FS5 over an A7.
(* unless you choose to turn on the optional center scan mode)
Doug Jensen
Carbonite Member
If someone asked you, which is better for driving a nail . . . a crescent wrench or a screwdriver? Wouldn't you take the opportunity to suggest that a hammer might be a better tool for that task? 
The fact is that both the FS5 and the A7sii suffer from severe handicaps for this type of shooting. But I've already said too much so I'll just step aside.
The fact is that both the FS5 and the A7sii suffer from severe handicaps for this type of shooting. But I've already said too much so I'll just step aside.If someone asked you, which is better for driving a nail . . . a crescent wrench or a screwdriver? Wouldn't you take the opportunity to suggest that a hammer might be a better tool for that task?
Actually, they are all hammers that drive different nails. Since the hammer you want is not available, one must stay within the reality of what one is offered. Otherwise this thread wouldn't exist to begin with.
I am not concerned about viewfinders, waveforms and the like, I have a Zacuto Gratical which has all of those for instance and I am shooting in a controlled environment.
My biggest concern surrounds noise and artifacts.
I found this to be a very interesting comparison especially concerning noise (though it doesnt address high frame rate):
http://www.learningvideo.com/10-bit-vs-8-bit/
deltoidjohn
Veteran
I've not shot with either (still stuck back on the FS700/A7s) so can't give advice based on IQ of each camera, but if there is a photographer directing the talent and you are not going to have full control of the shoot, then the A7sII might be better simply for the continuous recording. Nobody on set will appreciate it if you ask the model to hold a pose for an extra 30 seconds because you are still waiting for you camera to finish recording the previous shot from the buffer!
If you're the sole director, this is not so much of a consideration.
If you're the sole director, this is not so much of a consideration.