FS7: Gotchas. quirks, problems & solutions

Personally, i wanted the SWIT to power the camera and use the D-tap out to power something else (alphatron, odyssey, etc). I suppose I could use a D-tap splitter to power the camera and an accessory from the SWIT... Where did you guys get the D-tap to FS7 cable?
 
My Swits come with a Dtap and a dedicated cable with the Sony plug on the end. That would work fine for you if you don't mind not seeing the battery remaining time readout in the VF.
I think most of the third party batts work that way. The only problem people are having is using third party batts that don't have a Sony cable and claim to be Sony compatible but aren't.
 
Hi, i'm having trouble understanding the Metabones issues so I want to ask a straight question.

Does the FS7 have trouble with communicating to Canon lenses with the latest Metabones E to EF adapter? (Not speedbooster) Or is it only on older versions? I'd like to get the FS7 + adapter, but I don't want any lens issues when using Canon lenses.

Thanks,
 
I have to say, that both of my metabones adapters work.

The speedbooster and the smart adapter II both work as they should.

I see, that this depends highly on your lenses. I checked 5 lenses up to today and
all of them work as they should. Some even change the iris as they did on the FS100/700.
Some need lots (2-4) of turns to even change 1 stop.

The problem seems to be that we don't have consistent behaviour here. Some have big problems and
say: stay away! I don't have any problems.

The FS7 seems to be the perfect companion for docu and "cinematic R+G".
When I put the Canon 24-105/4L on the speedbooster the FS7 is able ti display the depth of field on a
bar like the EX1/3 (or their PMW successors) did! This is perfect for people like me who don't like
expanded focus that much.

Yes. There are still some quirks with the FS7 (waveform/histogram in cineEI - veeery laggy menu)
but I learn to like the camera with every hour I test it.

I'll have another meeting with a Sony guy in 2 weeks and will try to find out and show him all the
"issues" that we discuss here.
 
which lenses did you check today Erik?

I'm purchasing both EF > E mt Metabones speed booster and the simpler Mark IV that doesn't affect image size.
However I'm not sure whether to purchase all EF glass or just get some APS-C ones as native E mt.
Here i'm thinking about the Tokina 11-16 and maybe the Sigma 18-35 f1.8.

Any thoughts about that? Getting EF lenses is more flexible as i can put them on a Canon DSLR , but maybe there are advantages to going directly on the camera with E mt.
 
Same thoughts here.

No Canon EF-S (APS-C) lenses anymore as they won't work with FF cameras.
I checked:
- Canon 24-105/4L
- Tokina ATX Pro 28-70/2,8 (focal distance not displayed)
- Canon 70-200/4L
- Canon 80-200/2,8L (focal distance not displayed)
- Canon 50/1,8 II (focal distance not displayed), iris changes fast enough

more to follow soon

BTW:
native E-mount lenses do not behave any different!
The SEL 18-200 (FS100 kit lens) needs turns and turns and turns...

This is not acceptable to me as is the issue with the exposing tools!
It's not really a deal breaker but this needs to be adressed by Sony
very soon.
 
I have manual glass, too.

Horses for courses!

I use stabilized zooms with the ability to show the focus distance in your display where I need
them: R+G. No primes...

It's an issue, but in the end most of the glass already works. I means Canon glass on Sony cameras
with a third party elctronic adapter. It delivers focus distance, IS, iris control...
This is very close to what I can demand from photography lenses used on digital cinema cameras!
 
The iris issue is a big drag. I have used all Nikon lenses on my F3 and love the convenience of manual click less iris control even on G lenses with the G adapters. The downside though is no Image stabilization because not a single manufacturer has bothered to make a nikon adapter that will send power to the lens. So for me EF lenses are a concession for IS. Once I go that way for some lenses though I think it would be best to have them all turn in the same direction.

How many fractional steps does the iris give you between f stops? Hope its more than 3 and thus not too steppy.

Sure hope Sony fixes this.
 
jshbckr said:
Another thing worth mentioning is that the FS7's distance from base to center-of-lens is almost identical to the C300. My matte box isn't height adjustable so it requires the LWS standard 85mm distance between center-of-lens and center-of-rods, which is right where it is with this Berkey System C300 plate. In the picture is a plate+shoulder pad that Berkey set up for me as a tester. He is working on a baseplate solution for the FS7 which will be similar to what I have in those pics. It's a great baseplate system, with rosettes on the sides, quick release low-profile shoulder pad.
Click to expand...

Hey Josh, since the FS7's center of lens distance is close to the C300 (which is pretty tall), does that mean that FEWER Matte Boxes and Follow Focus are compatible because of the height issues? I have a Lanparte follow focus which is fairly low in height, but I noticed they made a speciel Lanparte C300 arm. Is that because the cameras are too tall?

http://www.lanparte.com/html/104.html

So without the special Berkey C300 plate, your Matte Box and Follow focus would not work with the FS7? I'm assuming the Berkey plate elevates the rods somehow and lessens the space between the rods and the center of the lens?

I'm hoping to avoid buying a new, very expensive plate, but seems like I might have to. Sigh.......
 
gene_can_sing said:
Hey Josh, since the FS7's center of lens distance is close to the C300 (which is pretty tall), does that mean that FEWER Matte Boxes and Follow Focus are compatible because of the height issues? I have a Lanparte follow focus which is fairly low in height, but I noticed they made a speciel Lanparte C300 arm. Is that because the cameras are too tall?

http://www.lanparte.com/html/104.html

So without the special Berkey C300 plate, your Matte Box and Follow focus would not work with the FS7? I'm assuming the Berkey plate elevates the rods somehow and lessens the space between the rods and the center of the lens?

I'm hoping to avoid buying a new, very expensive plate, but seems like I might have to. Sigh.......
Click to expand...

Well, technically the "standard" distance from center-of-lens to center-of-rods is 85mm. So my fixed-height matte box is exactly that. Berkey's C300 plate actually doesn't have any height adjustment, neither does my matte box. Upon re-measuring with my calipers, it looks like the distance between lens and rods with the C300 plate is closer to 86-86.5mm on the FS7... So I'll need to talk to Berkey about that. It looks like there is a little bit of room to get the rods RIGHT against the bottom of the body, which should bring us to 85mm fixed.

Here are some pictures of the current C300 plate on the FS7. I'm talking to Berkey about shortening the front of it so it doesn't protrude as much... not sure how much we can really bring it down, may need to just slide it back, but I didn't want to encroach on the built-in shoulder pad. Personally, I really dig the Berkey shoulder pad design on this one, mainly because it provides back rods for my V mount plate and other accessories. The best part is that it's basically quick-release with the rods, and if you want the shoulder pad but not the back rods, they just thread out.

1cyiu+

1jVah+


Although this plate is flat like another poster said they wanted (they didn't like that the Vocas plate contoured with the FS7 body), it's important to remember that the rods aren't height adjustable. So using this plate on a future camera (if you're looking at future-proofing) totally depends on that camera's base-to-lens difference. I will chat with Berkey about his thoughts on height-adjustable rods (I know Shape and Zacuto have universal baseplates with height adjustable rods... but they are bigger, fixed shoulder pads, they use sony v-lock tripod setups which require that type of tripod or a $200-300 tripod adapter... Costs add up quick.) There is a lot to be said for being able to break down your baseplate to smaller essential pieces.

Gene, if your matte box is fixed-height but NOT at 85mm, then I would look into a way to make it height adjustable or at least fixed to 85mm.

I'll post this in the other topic as well, but in terms a top plate, are there any hole patterns that people would prefer? I'm giving some feedback to Brian Berkey regarding the FS7 top plate. He might make a prototype tonight for me to test-drive. Any input would be appreciated, since I know lots of people mount different things to their plates. Additionally, I think he's looking at a design that will be horseshoe shaped to accommodate the stock handle, as well as an inset "filler" plate for folks like me who take off the stock handle in favor of a broad/flat cheese plate top.
 
Thanks for the post Josh. It was me who didn't like the vocas plate due to adjustability. Good to know about the centre distance. I don't use Matte boxes often so renting an adjustable one for those times shouldn't be a massive deal but I do use a FF more often. I have several lens gear rings of differing diameters so that might make up the difference in height but I will have to wait and see when my camera arrives. I have an older model shape basepate without the adjustable rods so I will have to see if that works. The new Zacuto VCT plate looks nice and has adjustable rod height but its VCT and fixed shoulder pad which I like but I can see how it wouldn't work for many.
 
gene_can_sing said:
Hi Josh,

Just double checking, the Berkey handle you are using is the same one you had for the FS700? So I'm assuming that since this one works, Berkey is not coming out with an FS7 specific handle?

Is it this one?

http://store.berkeysystem.com/quick-release-short-versahandle/

Thanks for the info.
Click to expand...

Yeah, mine is kind of put together from various parts, but it's using Berkey's NATO quick-release rail. The picture in the link you sent is a little weird because the handle is sideways (parallel to the rail), but you can remove the bolt and put it any direction you want relative to the NATO rail. The stuff is rock solid.

I'm not sure if Berkey would make an FS7 specific handle. What would you look for (or what would make it FS7 specific)? The handle you linked has a 15mm block that can hold the FS7's EVF rods (same as the stock handle) and you can add cold shoes all over the handle if you want. Let me know if there are any features that you would look for in a handle and I'll talk to Berkey about it. Right now, the thought would be that you could just mount the NATO rail to the FS7 top plate if you wanted to use his handle system. And since the FS7 uses a simple 15mm rod for the EVF, it doesn't need a funky EVF adapter like the F5/F55 handle.
 
Looking at Berkey's F5/F55 plate, it looks like the main part of the base plate is the same as the C300 but it uses a slightly thicker plate to attach to the camera (assuming it needs this thicker plate to hit that 85mm distance). So for those concerned about future flexibility, there might be an opportunity to just get a special shim plate for a future camera and reuse the rest of the baseplate/rods/shoulder pad.

It's also worth noting that this baseplate is around $500 bucks or so, instead of $1000 like Sony and Vocas plates. So I think future shim plates would sweeten the deal, knowing that it's flexible for future cameras (unlike the Vocas plate).
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I'm sure this handle would work great for the FS7.

One more question. Is the Nato handle easy to take off and re-attach? I have a Think Tank backpack that I keep my FS700 in, but there is no way the FS7 will fit with the handle on, so it's going to have to be constantly removed / attached.

Sorta off topic question for this thread, but how are the shadow noise levels of the FS7 vs 7Q (which can be noisy)?
 
gene_can_sing said:
Yeah, I'm sure this handle would work great for the FS7.

One more question. Is the Nato handle easy to take off and re-attach? I have a Think Tank backpack that I keep my FS700 in, but there is no way the FS7 will fit with the handle on, so it's going to have to be constantly removed / attached.

Sorta off topic question for this thread, but how are the shadow noise levels of the FS7 vs 7Q (which can be noisy)?
Click to expand...

Haven't done too much extensive testing, in the middle of an edit now, but I'm going to try and get something shot in the next day or two. I shot a chip chart quick last night, WB set to 5500, light meter read f/16 so I set my aperture to that. There are two shots in this ZIP, one is Slog3 flat. The other has a Koji LUT baked in using the MLUT Internal Rec (Slog3Sgamut3.Cine to Cine709 2383 LUT). Sorry for the any wiggling in the shot, the camera wasn't on a tripod, I just had it propped up on my desk, haha. Here are the files:
http://d.pr/f/11EDP

Haven't done enough to really determine if it's better or worse noise than the 7Q. It looks pretty similar on first glance. Cleans up when you darken the shot a bit. I also have Resolve (full) which has pretty great noise reduction in it.

EDIT: also worth mentioning that I used LED panels and didn't have my magenta gels, so there is a bit of green if you're getting really nitpicky on color. Haha. Don't just too harshly, I just shot it quick to see how applied LUT compared to baked-in LUT.
 
Last edited:
On the subject of rig components I got a email reply from Ryan of Wooden Camera today

.We are working on a full set of accessories for the FS7 which will be released in the next few weeks. This will include a baseplate, top plate, PL adapter, and power plate.
Click to expand...

Which is nice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top