Having doubts with the FS700, can we be honest here?

J

jayrock

Active member
I have the FS700 on pre-order, but since it's not going to be shipping any time soon, I've been stuck with doing more critical thinking on it. Honestly, I have yet to see any good FS700 clips. The image looks soft, lacks contrast, noisy even in daylight and it has the *please don't hang me for saying this* "video look".

I just saw one on vimeo, shot with Zeiss CP lens, thinking this may be the one video that might clear all doubts, but it simply was not impressive. I'm shooting with a hacked (quantum orion) GH2 and I'm not feeling like I should be spending this much money on this cam. I rather get more Zeiss ZF glass and the Black Magic CC. What do you guys think? Are we just seeing a wave of uninspired test shots with kit lens? I could be wrong.. I want to feel good about this camera. Is there something wonky with the compression to vimeo? What's going on? Why can't we see a Philip Bloom Portrait of a Boxer type image yet?
 
jayrock said:
I'm not feeling like I should be spending this much money on this cam. I rather get more Zeiss ZF glass and the Black Magic CC. What do you guys think?
Click to expand...

I think you're better off spending your money on glass. Cameras come and go, but glass is eternal. If you are happy with your GH2 (and I am with mine), then I think there's no reason not to hold off on the FS700 if you don't like the clips you are seeing from the camera.

I would also suggest you wait until more people have their hands on the Black Magic Jesus-cam and see the clips there before you make a switch to that one.
 
Just stick with the GH2 since you like the look. For me, I've noticed a lot of really bad tests on the FS700, but I've seen a few really good ones also shot on both the FS700 and the FS100; and I'm confident I can get the look out of the camera that I want. Frank G., James Miller and Cody Cha's vimeo stuff really convinced me.

I guess you just have to look at a bunch of clips other than the slow motion pie in the face, water and smoke tests, and decide whether it's for you or not. Here's a few FS700 clips that I like

https://vimeo.com/45600150

https://vimeo.com/45059023

https://vimeo.com/44888224

https://vimeo.com/39888828

Mine is coming tomorrow and I CANNOT wait. But if you feel that you can get the same look out of your GH2, you should just keep using that and save your money. For me, When taking everything into account, I just don't feel I can get as nice of a look out of the Canons or the GH2, so that's why I'm going the FS700 route.

My beefs with Canon are
1) Soft image
2) moire / aliasing

My beefs with GH2
1) Lack of dynamic range.
2) 2x crop.
3) Poor lowlight
4) Image seems too contrasty for me.

FS700 is not perfect, but at least to my eye (and everyone is different) it's on another level than the Canon DSLRs and GH2.
 
Last edited:
jayrock said:
What's going on? Why can't we see a Philip Bloom Portrait of a Boxer type image yet?
Click to expand...

I own a Porsche...why can't I drive like a pro race driver?!?

You should just be glad that cinematography is an art form, and not worry about whether or not FS700 is good enough for you.

P.S. No, I don't really own a Porsche.
 
I initially has reservations about my C300, and saw a mixed bag of good and bad clips out there before I got it (some looked cinematic like "mobius", some very video-ish). My first few shoots left me feeling I wasted my money and wasnt happy, but after a few shoots I found the sweet spots of the camera (and also got used to how I was gonna treat it in post) and so now I love the camera. I think it truly is just about the art form. As long as the image you getting is acceptable, you can make your living.

I have a FS700 on order.

So for me, I know I'll get the best out the FS700 I could possibly get, and even if it takes more work, it'll just make you a better filmaker in the end.
 
90% of content on the web that is simply camera test footage is quite horrible footage. People who are actually shooting good looking content with their cameras and making a living doing it are rarely post camera tests or have the ability to show off their footage as a camera showcase, they are off making great looking content that you will never know what camera it was shot on. Some camera companies pay professionals to shoot content to promote their cameras, a lot of those are poorly shot as well, and some is well done, but that is also to some extent more a function of the budget of those promotional productions.

Forget about sample clips you find on the internet. Try the camera or buy it and sell it if you need (you can often make a profit selling pre-order cameras to people who really want them early but did not pre-order anyway).

I own an FS100, and I cringe every time I have to go back and shoot on a Canon DSLR. The GH2 is a great camera in many respects, but the FS100 does amazing things when you consider that it is a bigger sensor, has batteries that last all day, has XLR, and creates amazing images even at ISO6400 and above. The GH2 is sharper and smaller and cheaper and has a nice evf (and that is why I own it as a B-camera) but it cannot do 1080p 60fps, and falls apart pretty quickly beyond ISO800.

The FS700 just continues that tradition with amazing high frame rates and high ISO performance well beyond a GH2 and better dynamic range and new gamma curves and built in ND, etc.

My FS700 is coming this week and it is hard for me to see any reason to worry about it as an asset to my business considering how happy I've been with my FS100 and all the improvements the FS700 brings.
 
It's more about the Indian than the arrow. However, FS700 is NOT a mini-F3, but it's darned good and to me, was worth it just for the high frame rates.
Biggest complaint is physical design/ergonomics. Whomever designed it, apparently never touched a camera for the purpose of actually SHOOTING with it! :Drogar-Smoke(DBG):
 
jetswing said:
I own a Porsche...why can't I drive like a pro race driver?!?
Click to expand...

+1

Define 'cinematic' and 'video' from your perspective? Are they functions of the camera or to do with what the camera is pointing at?

As for the BMC perhaps the reason you like it is that there haven't been 100s of god awful tests released, just a few great examples from a talented cinematographer. You wait until it finds it's way the the masses and then compare it. (plus you'll be hard pushed to get good wide glass on it via the ZF range)

Lens investment is good but that again is a tool and we have personal opinions. For example i've side by sided some ZF glass with older Contax Zeiss glass and actually prefer the CZ glass. I find the ZF a little colder, sharper (at 16mpix) but with a little more aberration (most likely a side effect of the sharpness increase). That would go for the CP.2 glass too as AFAIK the actually glass itself is the same.

Really depends what you do with your cameras. I'd imagine the form factor of the BMC being quite difficult to work with, i think you'll need an external monitor to focus properly and then suddenly that form factor becomes quite awkward. YMMV.

cheers
Paul
 
This is still, in my opinion, the best FS700 video out there:

https://vimeo.com/40277885

Especially from around 2:05 in, the shots have a nice grade, good DR, good lighting, cinematic movement. Remember this was on a pre-production model and only in Frank's hands for a short time... Imagine the results after a few months with the camera.
 
I love this camera. I had 5d for a while and I can honestly say the images are much more detailed, not at all soft. And I have seen a lot of video shot with it using the standard profile which does look pretty washy. But if you mess with them and start undertanding how they work, you can get a lot of dynamic range, nicely held highlights and shadow detail. And much less alasing than the 5d. But you can not just get perfection right out of he box. As I would expect.
 
Jay Birch said:
This is still, in my opinion, the best FS700 video out there:

https://vimeo.com/40277885

Especially from around 2:05 in, the shots have a nice grade, good DR, good lighting, cinematic movement. Remember this was on a pre-production model and only in Frank's hands for a short time... Imagine the results after a few months with the camera.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the warm words Jay.

Frank
 
Jay Birch said:
This is still, in my opinion, the best FS700 video out there:

https://vimeo.com/40277885

Especially from around 2:05 in, the shots have a nice grade, good DR, good lighting, cinematic movement. Remember this was on a pre-production model and only in Frank's hands for a short time... Imagine the results after a few months with the camera.
Click to expand...

I completely agree with that, i think if you grained it up and softened it a little you'd have a very filmic look.

cheers
paul
 
gene_can_sing said:
My beefs with Canon are
1) Soft image
2) moire / aliasing

My beefs with GH2
1) Lack of dynamic range.
2) 2x crop.
3) Poor lowlight

FS700 is not perfect, but at least to my eye (and everyone is different) it's on another level than the Canon DSLRs and GH2.
Click to expand...

I agree with all these points - and I'll add DSLR audio workarounds, lack of comprehensive picture profiles/adjustments compared to the FS. All these points led me to sell off my 5d2 and GH2 in favor of the FS100. After owning a number of DSLR's and "traditional" video cameras, the FS to me combines the best of both worlds with a superior workflow and video codec.
 
While I have the highest respect for Franks film making I dont feel that example really tells much about the camera, especially in terms of DR and highlight handling - many of the shots are dark - yep that looks cool but as a camera test I dont think its much to go on, certainly in terms of checking the performance considering the well known highlight handling of the FS100..

frank2.jpg
 
gene_can_sing said:
My beefs with GH2
1) Lack of dynamic range.
2) 2x crop.
3) Poor lowlight
4) Image seems too contrasty for me.
Click to expand...

1) Agreed, but I know how to work around that, as pretty much everyone has to do for every cam under $10k.
2) Actually, the GH2 is a 1.8ish crop. I thought I would have more a problem with this coming from APS-C, but in reality, it's totally a non-issue.
3) I never ramped up over 1600ISO on my Canons and I find performance to be similar between the two at that level. I really wish people would explicitly state that they don't like the GH2's performance at 3200 or 6400 ISO so there would be more of a sense of ridiculous when it comes to the phrase "low-light performance".
4) This is much less of an issue if you run it through 5DtoRGB first.
 
I'm obviously no Frank's advocate (nor does he need one), but I guess he didn't make that movie to show any specific technical aspect of the camera :)

And even with this reservation, the many dark scenes that are virtually noise-free speak in favor of the FS100... I own the FS100 and the EX1 - and while the latter can be noticeably sharper, such dark scenes would need heavy de-noising in post!
 
I think people are being a little quick to pass judgement.

I'm not sure what Sam sees as gack in the highlights. Without infinite DR a camera will hit max exposure and I don't see anything in those FS700 clips as being an issue.

It has taken me a couple of months of continual usage and refinement to tailor my FS100 presets and shooting style to get the very best from the camera. The FS700 hasn't been out as long as I've owned my FS100. Give people time to lean how to get the best from the very different gamma curves of the FS700.

Shooting highly compressed video (there I said video) is never going to compare to shooting RAW where you so much more flexibility to "tune" the image and best fit the knee and gamma curve for the image after the fact.

What are you expecting?
 
The opening (still) frame of this is pretty harsh https://vimeo.com/45600150

Of course I dont want to pre judge the camera, Im just suggesting that franks exposure topping out around 60% - while stylish and aesthetically pleasing - is not a strong camera test - which it was not intended to be in the first place..

S
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top