Fs700 with or without external recorder? And why?

I

imax

Active member
Hi,
I'm ready to buy fs700 but i'm thinking about an external recorder.
What do u Think about it, it is usefull for normal purpose (not heavy Cc or strong CC)

The internal codec is enought good? I have also a ex1r and its codec is awefull!

Thanks ;-)
 
I've been very happy with the FS700's codec...coming from the 5D MkII.

There's a rumor going around that Sony may announce a new codec for the FS700 at IBC. Even if they don't, I'd save your pennies for the eventual 4K recorder.
 
imax said:
The internal codec is enought good?
Click to expand...
Well, good enough for what? For some purposes, yes. For other purposes, no. For example, the internal codec is still 8-bit, and it's still 4:2:0, like the EX1R's. That will prove plenty fine for many purposes, but not good enough for other purposes.

I have also a ex1r and its codec is awefull!
Click to expand...
The internal codec on the FS700 is similar to, but better than, the codec on the EX1R. It is similar in that they are both 8-bit, 4:2:0, long-GoP codecs. It is better in that it is a more efficient codec, more resistant to codec artifacts, and able to handle more complex detail.

But if you're looking for the best the camera can do, the forthcoming raw external recorder will obviously be the ultimate. No idea what its price or delivery time will be though.
 
Having edited extensively with both the XDCamEX codec and the FS100/700 codec I have to say the FS100's is considerably better
 
Hmmm Is it useful in the sense that it can give you twice the amount of color resolution and increase the speed of your transcoding downtime? Absolutely. Is it useful in the sense that it will make all your shots look like it was shot with an Alexa? No. A shot that is well lit and has fluid motion on a mediocre codec will always look better than a poorly lit, poorly executed shot recorded uncompressed.

With that said I have a Fs700 and a nanoflash and I love it. It's internal codec is good, but damn the nano blows me away.
 
Dan, seems the BM hyperdeck shuttle yields absolutely no perceivable difference between onboard AVCHD compared to the BM deck, yet the Nanoflash DOES seem to have a perceivable difference?
Do you really see a marked improvement in color space (4:2:0 - 4:2:2)? and also hearing reports of slight gain in detail/sharpness with the nano?
It's a pain to be tethered, but if theres an improvement using the nano, im game. (There's also the rumor that Sony will implement a new AVCHD 50mbs 4:2:2 codec as well to consider?)
 
The internal codec has worked great for us. My fingers are crossed for a nice 422 xdcam-like update from IBC too - considering we mostly use FS700 footage alongside PMW700 footage.
 
Jusgorilla said:
Dan, seems the BM hyperdeck shuttle yields absolutely no perceivable difference between onboard AVCHD compared to the BM deck, yet the Nanoflash DOES seem to have a perceivable difference?
Do you really see a marked improvement in color space (4:2:0 - 4:2:2)? and also hearing reports of slight gain in detail/sharpness with the nano?
It's a pain to be tethered, but if theres an improvement using the nano, im game. (There's also the rumor that Sony will implement a new AVCHD 50mbs 4:2:2 codec as well to consider?)
Click to expand...

I did tests a long time ago (there should be threads in the FS100 forum). There is a big difference with fine detail and movement, but that's only of concern to you depending on what you do with the image. If you're doing any heavy post, keying or grading then the difference can be quite visible. An example would be to pan across a tree with leaves moving in the wind. Or any fast movement. The eye might not pick up much but a secondary colour grade would.

Also i feel that the AVCHD codec sharpens and noise reduces at a fundamental level, regardless of sharpness settings in camera. I believe that when you start moving the camera the codec can sometimes sharpen a little, which to my mind and eye produces a little pop. This is only really visible when viewing native files and not something you can review on vimeo.

I'm soon to test two shuttles - one running uncompressed and one DNxHD to see if the DNxHD is acceptable to me. In off line tests comparing codecs there are subtle differences between DNxHD and uncompressed (obviously) but whether they will impact my pipeline is my question (and how good is the DNxHD encoding on the shuttle, i have no idea whether it's 100% the same as software)

I will report back once i've had a chance...

cheers
paul
 
Thanks Paul

But my main concern is I'm hearing the nano flash is achieving a better image with a more noticeable difference compared to the Black Magic deck?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top