FS7: FS7 successor (rumours/expectations)

I never used it but it would be fun to grab my Sony 18-105 on the FS7 and just go outside and let the AF do its thing and see what comes.
 
J.Brown said:
I never used it but it would be fun to grab my Sony 18-105 on the FS7 and just go outside and let the AF do its thing and see what comes.
Click to expand...

I think you will be surprised. To get the best out of the SELP18-105 you really need to have the latest v4.00 firmware on board the lens. I found it does improve the lens auto focus response. Sony claim the following for this upgrade. Just remember you can't do the lens firmware upgrade on the FS7, strange but true. You need basically an A series mirrorless to execute the upgrade.

https://www.sony.com/electronics/support/lenses-e-mount-lenses/selp18105g/downloads/W0011234

Chris Young

"Benefits and improvements

This utility updates the SELP18105G lens system software to version 04 to provide improvements to the focus tracking accuracy and stability.

If you have not already updated your SELP18105G lens to system software version 03, this utility also improves the tracking accuracy of the focus position in the zoom stop control when you use the zoom operation in MF setting, and adds the function to set a zoom rotatory direction using a menu displayed on the screen of the camera.

IMPORTANT: The lens must be attached to an E-mount body camera to perform this update.

Note: The NEX-5, NEX-3, NEX-C3, NEX-VG10, and PXW-FS7 model cameras cannot be used for this update."
 
Cool. I'll let my A7RIII do the upgrade then. The 18-105 is neat but it's just holding up space in my bag as an emergency lens for FS5.
 
The biggest problem with the 18-105 is that you have to have the Lens Compensation on in the FS7. That of course forces LUTs to be burnt into the file when shooting LOG. Without the compensation on you are fine to record clean LOG on board but without a monitor LUT. I seem to remember Doug Jensen some years back shooting something with the 18-105 with compensation off and the results were pretty decent. Mind you there were no real static verticals in the images to draw your attention. From memory it was motorcycle racing or something like that.

Chris Young
 
WHy cany you do a lens correct in post?

Clearly a grown up software would read the meta and do it right but even in resolve you could correct once, and make a 'power look' or whatever they are called and paste it onto any 18mm shots.
 
J.Brown said:
I never used it but it would be fun to grab my Sony 18-105 on the FS7 and just go outside and let the AF do its thing and see what comes.
Click to expand...

I tested the autofocus (among other things) on this lens on my FS700 back when it first
came out.

http://alaskacameradude.blogspot.com/2015/04/sony-18-105the-baby-sea-monster.html

It was actually fairly decent (although the FS700 had face detect which I'm not
sure that the FS7 has so that helped.) Not nearly as good as it works on the A6500
nowadays but a later firmware update for the lens also helped it's autofocus performance.
Still, I'd like to see the autofocus (among other things) from the Sony mirrorless
cameras, make it's way into the professional line.
 
To the benefit of Sony, they do have a full range of their high quality G-master lenses (not cinema per se but likely adaptable) and the AF Zeiss Batis and Samyang primes. Canon has a similar lens selection and is certainly using it on the C100-200-300-500-700 series. Nikon and Panasonic are a little late to the dance but Z6 and S1 seem to provide quality image and some form of AF, with more improvement expected down the line with the ProRes Raw via HDMI upgrades.
 
morgan_moore said:
WHy cany you do a lens correct in post?

Clearly a grown up software would read the meta and do it right but even in resolve you could correct once, and make a 'power look' or whatever they are called and paste it onto any 18mm shots.
Click to expand...

Unlike processing RAW stills where you can apply a lens correction in let's say Lightroom or Aperture that works on the particular field curvature or distortion of a particular lens model, length and aperture video lens distortion is much harder to correct on a moving image when the lens is zoomed to different positions. The SELP 18-105 for example goes from, if I remember correctly from fairly severe pincushion at 105mm through to fairly obvious barrel distortion at 18mm. In a fair number of NLE's this can be fixed as long as the lens stays at one focal length. If you try to correct the distortion on an active zoom while rolling well I guess the software would have to read certain lens metadata from the video file to know exactly what distortion factor to apply at any given zoom position. All sounds a bit beyond most modern NLE's and I highly doubt that the 18-105 lens or any other cheaper lens would carry the necessary position/distortion information to enable this. Cooke's "/i" technology lens metadata system can do this but then the camera and the lens need to be able to communicate with one another for the information to be embedded in the recorded image data stream. All very much at the higher end of the shooting business. Cooke describe it thus:

"Digital cameras that are /i equipped (ARRI Alexa & LF, RED, SI 2K, Sony Venice, F55, F5, F65, F35, F3) and film cameras (Aaton Penelope, Arricams) talk to /i lenses directly via contacts in their lens mounts. The /i Technology provides the framework; the extent of camera data made available is the choice of the camera manufacturer via their software and software upgrades." Note the last part of the sentance "...the extent of camera data made available is the choice of the camera manufacturer via their software and software upgrades." So I guess it's all possible. Whether we will ever see such a thing? I doubt it.

https://www.cookeoptics.com/i/itech.html

Given that information then I guess a camera/lens manufacturer could program that information into a lens data stream. The fact that 99.9% of true cine zooms are optically correct and maintain distortion free images while zoomed or in different zoom positions there seems to be little or no need for such distortion correction information. After many complaints on the lens distortion performance limitations on Sony's full frame 28-135 where the lens correction had to be ON when used with the FS7 Sony fixed the issue with the 18-110. With the 28-135 on the FS7 with lens correction turned on you were unable to shoot LOG without burning the monitor LUT into the image. Whereas with the S35 optimized 18-110 an information slip comes with the lens that states when using this lens with an FS7 to "Turn OFF lens compensation'" The 18-110 was designed optically correct throughout its zoom range to deliver distortion free images. Even when the lens compensation is turned off with the 18-110 all metadata relating to fall-off and CA is still transmitted from the lens to the FS7's lens data file so that the camera can apply the necessary fall-off and CA correction for any given aperture at any given zoom position.

In essence I think if the Sony Alpha 7/9/Z90 type of Hybrid AF was incorporated into the FS7 series it would probably behave in the same way Sony's "cine zooms" behave when used on the A7/9 series, very well indeed. Of course this would necessitate a new sensor for the FS7 as that is where the heart of Sony's Hybrid AF resides, on the sensor. Sensor points distributed widely across the length and breadth of the sensor is what is delivering the A series performance. It's a example of what good phase detection and contrast detection combined together can achieve for good Hybrid AF performance. This has just been improved again on the A7III with its latest v3.0 firmware upgrade. For stills it even has animal eye focus!

Chris Young
 
'Lightroom and aperture' = 'grown up software'.

I know what they do* :)

Of course the lens is communicating its data.. thats how it works in the small cameras.

My point was really that on some static wides a bit of correction might do the trick.

If you want to zoom 'in shot' and sustain a correct image you can swap your 18-105 for a canon cn17 and pay the cost in mass and $.

If your post production people are too incompetent to be able to do a couple of clicks in Resolve.. let them pay the cost in $ and hire you an assistant to lug the Cn17 around.

Its a simple choice.

Ive shot on productions with the sony 18-200 horror lens and the CN17. each has its place and the 18-200 is very very handy - with the CN17 not only did I have to lug that about but also a zeiss 70-200 and zeiss 100m macro (thats 7kg of glass in total)

Oddly I was watching some anamorphic high end film last week.. the wides are semi fisheye in the levels of distortion. I dont think its a look I personally like but clearly some get along with it.

--
*too well - having been running a Phase One back on a Hassy H1 body when Hassy introduced Phocus and thier bendy 28mm shutting down the use of Phase on Hassy H bodies.
 
Last edited:
Yes MM as I said "In a fair number of NLE's this can be fixed as long as the lens stays at one focal length." As for "If your post production people are too incompetent to be able to do a couple of clicks in Resolve.." Well that's me if I'm posting on my own jobs and so far I seem to be competent enough to sort out this issue as you put it in a couple of clicks :) Or as you say pay for a CN17-120 if you don't want to fix anything distortion wise on in shot zooms.

As much as it is a kit lens that masquerades as a pseudo ENG/Cine lens the 18-110 does hold true and square right through its range on the FS7 without compensation turned on. For a lot of corporate work I find it fits the bill very well without weighing a ton or costing an arm and a leg. There are better and worse lenses out there and I still maintain the 18-110 does have its place in the budget end of glass. We have mixed 18-110's with the CN17-120's before and the two shots have been hard to separate. One thing the 18-120 doesn't do is ramp down aperture like the CN17-120 after about 90mm. It ramps to just on F4.0. The Canon also exhibits more CA on the FS7 more than likely because there is no CA compensation going on with the in our case with the PL versions. We only used the dumb Meatabones PL to E-Mount adapter. The Canon is beautiful thing to use and has a very solid durable feel to it like my broadcast 2/3" Canon lenses. The fact that it's faster is also nice but on live stage shows we rarely shoot at full wide so that's not a major issue. Unlike many 'cine' zooms the Canon's 180% focus rotation also delivers a good feel for hand focusing much like an ENG lens. The killer for me is that on the end results I can't justify paying over six and a half times more for the Canon when I don't have to.

You said "Oddly I was watching some anamorphic high end film last week.. the wides are semi fisheye in the levels of distortion. I dont think its a look I personally like but clearly some get along with it." I feel much the same way and a fairly recent production from the old firm that smacked me in the face with wide end barrel distortion to the extent that it drew my attention away from the film's narrative was "War & Peace." Just look at 11.00 and 16:00 seconds on the following clip. This distortion raised its head numerous times throughout the production which I found disappointing. Not a fan of it at all.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-BCmUeHE5c

Chris Young
 
cyvideo said:
For a lot of corporate work I find it fits the bill very well without weighing a ton or costing an arm and a leg. There are better and worse lenses out there and I still maintain the 18-110 does have its place in the budget end of glass.

Chris Young
Click to expand...

I wholeheartedly agree with you Chris. The Sony 18-110 isn't sexy and won't get rave reviews at f4 - and I resisted it for some time. But paired with the FS7 it does become a workhorse all-in-one for many types of shoots - which, at the end of the day - pay the bills for the equipment I buy. It's not exactly like using 2/3" ENG broadcast lens - and certainly is a compromise of sorts - but it's maybe the best s35mm substitute without spending a bunch more and adding lots of weight.
 
^ And that's certainly fine. Again, it won't "wow" you with 1.8 bokeh, etc. but for certain shoots, where carrying & swapping lenses may not be in the cards, then it may not impress you - but it is a solid performer.
 
J.Brown said:
I worked with the 18-110 once and wasn't impressed at all.
Click to expand...

JB I was the same as you on first use. Wasn't super impressed with it. Then I used someone else's 18-110 on a series of related shoots over a number of days and thought "It's sure not a piece of glamour kit but it's just like your everyday run of the mill car. It gets the job done with the minimum of fuss." If it had been more expensive I probably wouldn't have bought it. That aside now having owned one for a couple of years I'm amazed how many times I've dropped back to this lens for ease of use and time saving over lens swapping. As far as my corporate clients go they wouldn't know bokeh or image aesthetic if you threw it at them. If they can see their clients and products sharp and sterile clean they are happy... and pay the bill. From a personal POV I would much rather have a Cabrio but clients won't pay me any more for it. It's not like I'm doing real cinema type work. Like with my FF 24-105mm lens with a Speed Booster it's no glamour it's just a still camera lens compromise but hell it gets the job done. If I need a parfocal lens for fast re-framing without having to chase focus all the time the 18-110 delivers in spades. As markfpv points out it's a solid performer. For $$$ performance and feature set value I know of nothing else out there that comes reasonably close. It there is another lens out there that offers what the 18-110 package offers at a reasonable $$ value I'm all ears.

Chris Young
 
I suppose if I was shooting more people on stage it would a viable option but I find it not that cooperative when making pretty footage.
 
Well that may be just the point. Everything we do is not only about shooting low depth of field pretty footage (BTW - low depth of field isn't the only way to get pretty footage.) I don't use my 18-110 when I want low DOF , but its a wonderful tool at an incredible price for other kinds of shooting and there are lots of those. I have mine set up with an old Microforce zoom motor with the help of a custom zoom gear made by followfocusgears.com. This finally gives it all the usefulness of a traditional B4 camera for anything where smooth zoom control is desired. Great for live events of all kinds.
 
LennyLevy said:
I have mine set up with an old Microforce zoom motor with the help of a custom zoom gear made by followfocusgears.com. This finally gives it all the usefulness of a traditional B4 camera for anything where smooth zoom control is desired. Great for live events of all kinds.
Click to expand...

+1, I like the sound of that. I might investigate this option.

Chris Young
 
alohype said:
Ok, how about Canon 24-105 on a speedbooster? One stop brighter, focal length almost the same as Sony equivalent.
Click to expand...

Which Sony equivalent are you referring to?
Certainly would never bother attaching a microforce to zoom a lens that wasn't parfocal - plus of course the exposure ramping of the 24-105, which may maintain a fixed f/stop, but certainly loses t/stop (transmission) as it zooms in.

Meanwhile -- a question with the microforce/ 18-110 combo:
I'm sure it's great (a big improvement) for control over slow and smooth zooms -- but how does it work for really fast zooms? Any perceived lag in zoom or focus?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top