FS7: FS7 Lens Decisions as a potential new FS7 user...

When you say "we'd probably need both" and reference the 24-105 as well as 24-70, you can really get away with just one. Based on reading your posts here, "not needing the best" ... "very fast setups" and "run and gun" - I would keep the 24-105. That lens with a speed booster will be your bread and butter. I often bring extra lenses, and rarely use them for run and gun jobs. The 24-105 will give you an impressive range for running around, lets you focus nice and close, you get a decent ability to zoom in. It's a pretty good lens especially if you already have it.

In my kit of zooms is an 11-16 tokina, paired with the metabones mk4 non optical EF adapter, and also a 70-200 f4, that gets paired with the speed booster. Those lenses, while not the fastest obviously, cover a range that gets me through. I rarely need to switch to the long lens for a shot, more often it's if I want to be shooting only tight shots, or staying further away from whatever I'm shooting, etc. I do find myself at the 105mm end of the 24-105 quite often though, which is why I would choose that over the 24-70 - plus that IS makes a definite difference going handheld.


Good luck with whatever you do. Don't get caught up so much in reading what other people's opinions are though. Put a camera in your hands, you've already got some great lenses, see which ones make sense, see which ones get used, see which sit on the shelf and just make some pretty pictures.
 
I was looking at the Ursa mini Pro as well, and I can't recall all the specifics, but there were some things that immediately turned me off. Although some of those things could be less relevant for others... I totally get that :)

- Ursa needs a rig, the FS7 doesn't (some would say it does, but I've been happy with the build in shoulder support.)
- There was something about some buttons that clicks when you press them. They are apparently audible in fx. talking head situations.
- Noisy preamps (from reading about it... I find the FS7 amps decent for my use)
- I saw some examples of pink spot suns, and then some without.

I would like to try it for studio sticks shoot, but I would want to own it or rig it up for run and gun use. I know it produces lovely images, but if I war image quality between FS7 and Ursa and add war of ease of use between the two, the FS7 for my general use wins by a mile.
 
Legrev.

I'm not saying the Ursa is better

I'm saying that selling half of ones lenses to get the fs7 may not be a better strategy.

Frankly I see the ops list of lenses as being a kind of minimum for professional operation.

Wide mid macro and medium tele - without that lot I would be too embarrassed to offer myself for hire.
 
morgan_moore said:
If you check extrashot blog a die hard f5 owner basically says he prefers the Ursa which is quite shocking.
Click to expand...

I think it depends on your job .. if you are making your own stuff.. doesnt matter buy what gets the job done best for the price .. if your totally a gun for hire.. freelance camera person.. then it does matter what camera you have.. e.g. 1..Production manager calls... yes I have a fs7/f5/55 /Amira/C300/500/700 Pana LT... ok great whats your rate...

Eg2.. yes I have a Ursa pro... .. errrr whats that.. do you have another camera..
 
Yes I saw that review.. and know Paul Ream is a big F5 fan..was surprised too ! and thanks to him we had the 4K up grade ..
 
morgan_moore said:
If you check extrashot blog a die hard f5 owner basically says he prefers the Ursa which is quite shocking.
Click to expand...

I was completely surprised because im sure he has run and gun low light occasions when 1600 iso will not do the job.
As a canon shooter I wont budge to bmd until i can get clean 8000 iso
 
Clearly he (Paul Ream) has not given it the full run.

From the OPs description of his work (this is a thread for the OP not a camera war) it sound like he shoots in reasonably controlled situations and is short of cash. Hence my suggestion to consider the URSA rather than trading down with his glass for an FS7

S
 
morgan_moore said:
Clearly he (Paul Ream) has not given it the full run.

From the OPs description of his work (this is a thread for the OP not a camera war) it sound like he shoots in reasonably controlled situations and is short of cash. Hence my suggestion to consider the URSA rather than trading down with his glass for an FS7

S
Click to expand...

For that war we have the best thread ever, golden info about the meaning of life, camera's and the solution for all video related problems: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?343438-5-reasons-the-URSA-Mini-is-better-than-the-Sony-FS7
 
Wow – All these comments and points of view are really helpful. Thanks!

Yes – We’re doing our own project right now, and for the moment aren’t taking on external work. I’m incredibly tempted to start doing the latter just for some positive cash flow, but our local market seems so oversaturated with true experts with years of experience - that jumping in seems daunting. (Maybe I’m overthinking this part?) But it would be great if our FS7 as a tool might help us earn some cash.

Given the nature of the subjects we film, so much winds up being last minute that we don’t want to rent. Owning our own gear has been fantastic and has kept things really simple. Simple is good right now.

Per Black Magic cameras in general, our DP (who works on our major shoots) has always had huge aversion to them and I sensed that they’re geared more for carefully blocked cinematic stuff. Plus, now that I’ve finally stepped up to trying out a proper built-in ND filter for the shallow DoF shots (briefly playing around with JVC’s LS300 last year), I’ve got the bug and can’t go back. Screw-on ND filters was a PITA, IMHO. Also, particularly given that our project is not yet profitable, there’s a part of this that involves potential resale; both the JVC and the Black Magic cameras seem to cater to small niches and would seem far more difficult to sell down the road. At least with the FS7, if all things go to hell, we could at least recoup part of our investment as it seems to be the most popular camera for pro shooters and we should be able to get much of our money back. And with the A7R/Sii twins, I expect those prices to drop sharply next year – and I’d really prefer to get away from an HDSLR workflow if we’re finally upgrading. (Our subjects seem to want to see a proper camera per taking us seriously…)

If money was no object, of course – I’d make sure to keep all our lenses as it took a while to build that collection. I figure with the 100mm macro IS and the 70-200L 2.8 IS, we could purchase those again when things take off and if we really missed not having them. I miss the 35L but then again – we hardly used it and needed the money back. I’m also looking into financing options today to offset the rest of the purchase, which is cool – so thanks for the suggestion.

Assuming the used FS7 that arrives today is actually in workable shape and I’ve really stumbled upon an incredible bargain that’s close-to FS5 pricing, I think that the game plan will be to do plenty of test shoots over the next few weeks and see what works for us before selling off anything.

As of today, my guess is that our revised and simplified kit bag may wind up being the 16-35L, 24-105L, a used Metabones Speedbooster, a new and cheap Commlite adapter (effectively making the above lenses into a 34-52 and a stabilized 36-157 respectively), and our cheap but sharp 70-300 IS for super-rare, non-zoomed tele work (which could also be used as a crazy 105-450). The total outlay for the two adapters would be about $500…our focal length range would be covered…IS isn’t needed as much for 16-24mm anyhow…and we’d have at least f2.8 options all the way from 16-157mm. If we need even shallower DoF or more light, we could investigate f1.4 options. (Hell...I have an old Nikkor 50 1.4 with an F-EF adapter that might do the trick n a pinch.)

And if the above doesn’t work, I guess I could resell the Metabones Speedbooster and make most of my money back, and look into the Sony 18-105 as a backup solution.

Again, you guys rock. Thanks for all the advice; I’ll be sure to stay tuned if anyone has other thoughts and such -- as the decision making process may not be overnight – I really will need to just go test the lenses to see what works in practice. So, fingers crossed. Cheers and thanks!
 
thoomp said:
Given the nature of the subjects we film, so much winds up being last minute that we don’t want to rent. Owning our own gear has been fantastic and has kept things really simple. Simple is good right now.
Click to expand...

Honestly, owning is the way you really make money below the extreme high-end. By owning my gear, my average invoice is three times what it would be vs. just operating.
 
thoomp said:
* Buy a Sony 18-105 f4 for 90% of the time as f4 is what we're used to for run-n-gun on the 24-105L - and the Sony will have autofocus
Click to expand...
It is also a very small lens, nice and lightweight compact!

And if as you say you'd use it 90% of the time, it does seem like this would be the definition of a no brainer decision to buy a Sony 18-105mm f4!

As it is such an affordable purchase. (if you were considering the 18-110mm then yup, that would be a bit tougher decision to make, because it is a much pricier lens than the 18-105mm)
 
thoomp said:
Per Black Magic cameras in general, our DP (who works on our major shoots) has always had huge aversion to them and I sensed that they’re geared more for carefully blocked cinematic stuff. Plus, now that I’ve finally stepped up to trying out a proper built-in ND filter for the shallow DoF shots (briefly playing around with JVC’s LS300 last year), I’ve got the bug and can’t go back. Screw-on ND filters was a PITA, IMHO. Also, particularly given that our project is not yet profitable, there’s a part of this that involves potential resale; both the JVC and the Black Magic cameras seem to cater to small niches and would seem far more difficult to sell down the road. At least with the FS7, if all things go to hell, we could at least recoup part of our investment as it seems to be the most popular camera for pro shooters and we should be able to get much of our money back. And with the A7R/Sii twins, I expect those prices to drop sharply next year – and I’d really prefer to get away from an HDSLR workflow if we’re finally upgrading. (Our subjects seem to want to see a proper camera per taking us seriously…)
Click to expand...

The URSA Mini Pro has built in ND filters too.

thoomp said:
The total outlay for the two adapters would be about $500…our focal length range would be covered…IS isn’t needed as much for 16-24mm anyhow…and we’d have at least f2.8 options all the way from 16-157mm. If we need even shallower DoF or more light, we could investigate f1.4 options. (Hell...I have an old Nikkor 50 1.4 with an F-EF adapter that might do the trick n a pinch.)
Click to expand...

The Nikon lenses are awesome! You should awesome them more often. Plus Nikon adapters are much cheaper than Canon adapters.
 
Hey guys – Just checking back in after a week of having the FS7 in-hand with a follow-up. Hopefully it might help the next FS7 newbie, who’s moving from Canon HDSLRs and already owns Canon glass.

I have more FS7 questions, but I started a separate thread for that:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?355900-Other-FS7-Newbie-Questions


• First off, I’m almost fully convinced that the camera itself is the right move for me, and it is a huge step up to a true professional video camera (shoulder mount). The Canon XF100 sold last week on eBay and the 5D Mark ii and other gear is now up for auction – both of which were great stepping stones to a proper pro camcorder.

• From what I’ve recently learned, this was a former rental camera. However, the body itself is in fantastic shape and seems to work just great, with the only caveat being that the attachments that came with it have need a little TLC per wear and tear. Again I got this at an FS5 price and I’d be a fool to pass this opportunity up.

• Next, it’s much heavier than I expected and I’m clearly not used to shoulder mount cams. I’ll have to put the SHAPE grip adapter on my Xmas list, as it’s a PITA to screw/unscrew the grip per the rosette. I tried to use some 15mm rail kit stuff I already own to try and make things better per the balance, but it made it heavier and I’ve decided to just sell all that off both for kit simplicity and weight.

I have gotten the weight further back via a cheap shoulder pad and a quick-release mount I had kicking around, plus adding a longer 15mm rod for the viewfinder – both of which seems to help for now.

• For my workflow, where I need to get in/out pretty quickly per my filming subjects and I don’t have the luxury of time for elaborate setups, I’ll really need to rely on IS and a basic tripod setup. Meanwhile, the extra weight definitely helps significantly with the shakiness – which is awesome to see.

• After some basic tests in FCPX, the ingest of 4K was faster than I expected and it was a joy to be able to zoom in in post for additional options. Given the Sony codec, either it’s just me or I don’t yet see an unreasonable explosion in computer demands (hard drive space, processing power, etc.). Heck – I may just start filming everything in 4K at this point for options later.

• Shooting in Slog3? The initial results are stunning. Unless I’m missing something in my workflow, this seemed stupidly fast to apply in FCPX (I think automatically) and was no big deal. My hope is that the days of worrying about having to crush every black are fewer than in the past, and the footage just pops on the screen. To me, that wow factor is like the time I went from 4:2:0 to 4:2:2 in post. Certainly the image quality per Slog3 is of the pro-level advantages that certainly seems worth the increase in cost, weight, and size.

• Canon lens-wise, the FS7 plus the SpeedBooster is definitely the game changer just as many people have raved. I can’t recommend enough that anyone going over to the FS7 from a Canon get the SB and keep their good glass. What about the Standard Metabones? If you want a 1.5x tele-extender, then grab one but not at the expense of the SpeedBooster. Here’s the funny thing. For photography, maybe Sony glass would be more important. But for manually focusing everything in pro video, the Canon + SpeedBooster solution makes far more sense. Best of all, the FS7 with both the SB and the STD in your kit to give you more options in a run-n-gun package more than a Canon C300, or even the FS7 with native Sony glass.

Again, I’m pretty darn happy per my initial purchase and if I can make it work per the financing, I can only hope that I’ll be able to make the most of it and go tell some cool stories. Thanks for everyone’s input and feedback!
 
Last edited:
As a new FS7 user, I tried several lenses and ultimately decided on the Sony/Zeiss 35 mm f1.4. So far, this seems to be a good match, especially for shooting in log and low light situations.
 
B4 to E mount adapter

B4 to E mount adapter

karma17 said:
As a new FS7 user, I tried several lenses and ultimately decided on the Sony/Zeiss 35 mm f1.4. So far, this seems to be a good match, especially for shooting in log and low light situations.
Click to expand...

As an early adopter of the FS7, lensing has been my major issue. I currently use a variety of Nikon zoom lens and have been very satisfied. However for off the should run and gun type of shooting, they are limited. 17-35 is nice for some applications as is the 24-70 and for interviews the 70-200 is wonderful. But if, like me, you moved from the 2/3" world where a 4.5-50 (with doubler) was your standard "go to" lens, then you really miss that option.
Cinema style lenses are well and good but even accounting for the price tag, they are huge, bulky and still don't have the range I'm used too.
As the majority of my work is NOT 4k, I decided perhaps a B4 to E mount adapter would be a good option. I still have two HD zoom lens (Fujinon and Canon) that in their day, cost roughly $25k. These are quality lenses with built in servo but are only suited for 2/3" sensors.
I recently purchased the MTF B4 to E mount Super 16 adapter and I couldn't be more pleased.
https://www.adorama.com/mtfb4s16m43...-WICJNC74yIQOYy12SCqqiMT3QyQhis8aAjZ0EALw_wcB
It fits snuggly on my camera without having to double adapt as some of the other mounts require. One mount version of the dual mount adapter, which is also by MTF, must have the doubler engaged in order to get full coverage.
The MTF B4 to Super 16 requires you enter center cut mode which for me, is just fine. I'm still getting 2k and now I have a fully functional HD zoom lens at a fraction of the price and weight of other options. It only garnishes about a stop and a half of light, which is still faster than the kit lens at f4. Your only other extra is a D0-tap power cable for the servo and some sort of lens support bracket.
Now you lose your auto iris but who uses that anyway?
I took delivery this Saturday and have been testing it and I am truly stoked. It's very sharp and to be able to make smooth zooms is a blessing. I even get a decent bokeh, though not as good as the Nikon's, so basically the zoom will be my "go to" and the Nikon's will be used for interview work, though I wouldn't be afraid to do an interview with the zoom.
After it's all said an done, you will need to invest just under $3k for the adapter, a power cable and my biggest challenge, a suitable lens support bracket, which I'm still searching for.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top