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

Sam,

Have you done the same thing with frames from various features? It's an interesting way to check the range of what we consider 'cinematic'. You can download 1080p trailers in abundance and the one thing that you'll usually find is a distribution similar to Franks example. Skin tones are usually around 40%, very rarely will you see anything blown except for extreme highlights. Stick them into FCPX and use the waveform to see distribution of tones.

Now whether you expose up and grade down depends on what you're trying to achieve but in general, exposure on features sits quite low, although there's usually something super bright in the scene to show contrast.

It's a really valuable experiment

cheers
paul
 
+1, Paul. That's just great general advice. If you are interested in duplicating the film look on your camera (any camera), your best bet is to find a movie that you think exemplifies the kind of look you like most, pull in some clips/stills (Blu-ray source preferable) and examine it with tools and scopes.

Also keeping in mind that a lot of what you see in a finished film looks nothing like it did when it came fresh out of the camera.
 
Which attributes first led you to pre-order this cam?

To me, it looks to have a slightly nicer overall image than than FS100... plus the bonus of high FPS, NDs and better I/Os (including RAW,12 bit 4K, one day which should open up more DR)... Are these enough? If not, dump the pre-order and see what the BMCC brings, or keep saving for something more filmic (Scarlet?)
 
Well I decided not to pre-order the FS700 and stay with the FS100 myself, but not because I don't think the FS700 is nice, it's just with the help of Frank, I'm getting more out of my FS100 than I ever dreamed. I was very unhappy with the profiles that Sony created for the FS100, and my work with them, I just wasn't getting the best results. Luckily, Frank kept at it and has really mastered this camera. Much of his latest footage is just absolutely impressive.

The things I love about the FS700 are the ND and the even better highlight handling *to my taste* that I've seen tested by the likes of Adam Wilt who I talked with about his impressions. Sure, the FS700 seems to have a tad bit more noise, and still handles extremely high contrast edges with the same aliasing breakdown that the FS100 has, it excels in many other areas.

What you need to decide is, do these matter for you?

In other words, what is it that you are trying to get away from your GH2 for? The rolling shutter on your GH2 is horrendous, on par with the 5D. I know, I've specifically tested it. I can shoot 85mm hand held on my FS100 and not get wobble all over the place. With an equivalent FoV on the GH2 for what I was shooting, I promise you, it would have looked bad. I know, I tried the shots on my 7D with 85mm which has a FASTER refresh time than the GH2 and it was like a jello factory.

However, if you don't shoot a lot of kinetic material, or, you are locked down a bit more, maybe that isn't important for you. We all have different needs.

Next, the FS100 has quite a bit of DR and has MUCH LESS noise than a lot of cameras. Most reviews I trust on the FS700 say, yeah, there is a bit more noise, but it's not a bad noise. I understand exactly what they mean. I've used ISO20000 shots from my FS100 in a production. Sure, there is much less sharpness, but, they really do look organic. I've even posted a shot on here somewhere in a situation where we just found a random opportunity of something to shoot so we shot it in non-ideal conditions and it was usable. Do you want more DR out of the camera and more room in the shadows to work? If so, maybe the FS is for your, if not, no.

These are all examples of what you need to ask yourself. I think the BM camera is really cool, but it still has a lot of unknowns. The FS100 and FS700 are known technologies now. They FS700 is just an extension of the FS100 so there will be a lot less questions that can't be answered. While I like the BM camera, I am NOT giving up the low light performance of the FS100 for it. Why? Because that low light performance is felt ALL across the exposure range. It means you get very very clean. For VFX work, this really helps me. And when we are ready for the grain, we just add it during post.

Given that I trust Frank's evaluation of the FS700 given his amazing knowledge of the FS100, I'd say, if he tells me it's an improvement, then it is. :)
 
Rick Burnett said:
Well I decided not to pre-order the FS700 and stay with the FS100 myself, but not because I don't think the FS700 is nice, it's just with the help of Frank, I'm getting more out of my FS100 than I ever dreamed. I was very unhappy with the profiles that Sony created for the FS100, and my work with them, I just wasn't getting the best results. Luckily, Frank kept at it and has really mastered this camera. Much of his latest footage is just absolutely impressive.

The things I love about the FS700 are the ND and the even better highlight handling *to my taste* that I've seen tested by the likes of Adam Wilt who I talked with about his impressions. Sure, the FS700 seems to have a tad bit more noise, and still handles extremely high contrast edges with the same aliasing breakdown that the FS100 has, it excels in many other areas.

What you need to decide is, do these matter for you?

In other words, what is it that you are trying to get away from your GH2 for? The rolling shutter on your GH2 is horrendous, on par with the 5D. I know, I've specifically tested it. I can shoot 85mm hand held on my FS100 and not get wobble all over the place. With an equivalent FoV on the GH2 for what I was shooting, I promise you, it would have looked bad. I know, I tried the shots on my 7D with 85mm which has a FASTER refresh time than the GH2 and it was like a jello factory.

However, if you don't shoot a lot of kinetic material, or, you are locked down a bit more, maybe that isn't important for you. We all have different needs.

Next, the FS100 has quite a bit of DR and has MUCH LESS noise than a lot of cameras. Most reviews I trust on the FS700 say, yeah, there is a bit more noise, but it's not a bad noise. I understand exactly what they mean. I've used ISO20000 shots from my FS100 in a production. Sure, there is much less sharpness, but, they really do look organic. I've even posted a shot on here somewhere in a situation where we just found a random opportunity of something to shoot so we shot it in non-ideal conditions and it was usable. Do you want more DR out of the camera and more room in the shadows to work? If so, maybe the FS is for your, if not, no.

These are all examples of what you need to ask yourself. I think the BM camera is really cool, but it still has a lot of unknowns. The FS100 and FS700 are known technologies now. They FS700 is just an extension of the FS100 so there will be a lot less questions that can't be answered. While I like the BM camera, I am NOT giving up the low light performance of the FS100 for it. Why? Because that low light performance is felt ALL across the exposure range. It means you get very very clean. For VFX work, this really helps me. And when we are ready for the grain, we just add it during post.

Given that I trust Frank's evaluation of the FS700 given his amazing knowledge of the FS100, I'd say, if he tells me it's an improvement, then it is. :)
Click to expand...

Rick,

Which PP are you using now?
 
From what I've seen, Rick Burnett echos my thoughts on not being much of a candidate for an upgrade (unless he felt it was a good ROI), yeah, built-in NDs are terrific, as is SDI, but most people who already have an FS100 have worked around those issues by now, and the upgrade doesn't seem to be worth the additional cost for most. However, the FS700 is a good package for those who might have liked what they saw from the FS100, but held off for whatever reason.
 
Gary Huff said:
From what I've seen, Rick Burnett echos my thoughts on not being much of a candidate for an upgrade (unless he felt it was a good ROI), yeah, built-in NDs are terrific, as is SDI, but most people who already have an FS100 have worked around those issues by now, and the upgrade doesn't seem to be worth the additional cost for most. However, the FS700 is a good package for those who might have liked what they saw from the FS100, but held off for whatever reason.
Click to expand...

This I agree with. If I was buying RIGHT NOW, sure, I would get the FS700 instead. But the loss I'd take on the FS100 to get into the FS700 doesn't make the differential worth it for me, at least not at this point in time. Lately, I'm not even using my 60p as much so the extra slow-mo, while nice, isn't a need, more of a want.

As for the profile I am using, it's Franks before the V2 Firmware Update. I will have to post it online. I am not sure if Frank updated the settings for V2 Firmware, but I don't want to change any of the settings. After pushing the profile through a lot of different tests it handles so many things well, I just use it for everything now.

Frank, did you make any mods to that picture profile for V2? Or just test it in V2?
 
yes, these are the settings for V2

K-Tone 2.0

Based on the K-Ton warm, vintage, sweet home Alabama Kodachrome 25 look – here comes a new version.

Black Level: 0 (set per scene)
Gamma: Cinematone 1
Black Gamma High, +3
Knee 102,5, -1
Color Mode: Cinematone1, +7
Color Level: -6
Colorphase: -7
Colordepth: R +2, G +6, B +5,C +5, M 0, Y +5
WB Shift: LB-CC, -8, -1
Detail: Level -4, Manual off

G-LOG A 2.1

Black Level: 0 (set per scene)
Gamma: Standard
Black Gamma High, +7
Knee 105, 0
Color Mode: Pro, +8
Color Level: -2
Colorphase: -7
Colordepth: R -3, G +2, B +5, C 0, M 0, Y +2
WB Shift: LB-CC, 0, 0
Detail: Level -2, Manual off

G-Log B
This is a very special and more aggressive, almost gritty look.
It brings out every wrinkle in a face.

Black Level: 0 (set per scene)
Gamma: Cinematone 2
Black Gamma High, +7
Knee 105, 0
Color Mode: Cinematone2, +8
Color Level: -4
Colorphase: -1
Colordepth: R +7, G +4, B +5, C 0, M 0, Y +0
WB Shift: RB, -9, +6
Detail: Level 3, Manual on, V/H 0, B/W, Type3, Limit 7, Chrispening 4, HL. Detail 0,

GlenColor 2.0

A look you can use, if you don´t want to fiddle too much post.

Black Level: (variable – start at 0 and adjust to your scene)
Gamma: Cinetone2
Black Gamma High +7
Knee: 105% and slope +5
Colormode: Cinematone2 +8
Color Level -2
Colorphase 0
Depth: R+4, G+7, B+7, C+7, M+4, Y+7
WB-Shift R-B, R-7, B0

If someone wants to bookmark the site is here: http://frankglencairn.wordpress.com...100/4-new-picture-profiles-for-the-fs100-2-0/
 
I enjoy flickriver's lens explorer tool and have used it to find lenses to buy. But it's also good to just compare cameras and the look at the state of art in stills cameras and you'll see the same "issues" that the FS100/700 are reported to have e.g. posterisation of highlights and harsh highlights.

The FS100/700s are obviously more limited because they shoot at much lower resolution, higher compression ratios and a very limited colour sampling resolution which exacerbates any issues at the margins of the image.

We're only a few years away from affordable RAW recording for all and the FS100 will probably be my last compressed camera and those that buy the FS700 will have the option of that workflow in due course.

I saw another kick-starter RAW camera project go past on my Twitter stream this week, so Sony will be kept honest with the price of the FS700 RAW recorder.

Harsh highlights.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/visionthreeimages/6552593295/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/visionthreeimages/3994778548/
 
Last edited:
Nirv said:
I
Harsh highlights.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but if you know what you are doing (aka good lighting/flagging/scriming/exposure), the right PP settings, plus a bit highlight desaturation and a nice shoulder applied in post takes care of 90% of this problem.
When I can control the light, I try to keep everything within 5 or 6 stops and the skintones between 30 and 40 IRE. On the 700 it's even better. If one can't live with that, renting a Red or Alexa takes care of the rest.

On the other hand, I just saw an episode of "PanAm" (shot on Alexa) and - DANG - harsh highlights. The h264 compression might play a roll here, and it was an extreme situation, but nevertheless, there is no perfect camera.

Frank
 
Okay, just checked out my preset I use and it matches IDENTICAL to GlenColor 2.0, so you didn't change any settings from pre-Firmware V2.0. I run with black level set to 0. This preset has been AWESOME for me.

I've bookmarked your page so I can send it to other people.
 
jayrock said:
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?
Click to expand...

There are some annoying features that have been passed down from the FS100 which has made me not get this camera and they are:
1) Annoying LCD screen, it still shows 1-stop less exposure
2) Poor handheld ergonomics (but is a killer Steadicam camera though!)
3) No built-in mic for audio reference (this would have been a killer feature as the FS100/FS700 stripped down is a killer Steadicam camera as it is so symmetrical, more so for the FS100 due to the lack of ND-Filter)
4) Not enough native E-Mount glass and of good quality for pro's.
5) No dedicated Gain dial

In addition to the above legacy annoyances, the FS700 adds additional unwanted ISO noise. The FS100 was perfect with it's 3.4MP sensor, but the 8K sensor appears too much for 1080p.
 
ectobuilder said:
There are some annoying features that have been passed down from the FS100 which has made me not get this camera and they are:
1) Annoying LCD screen, it still shows 1-stop less exposure
2) Poor handheld ergonomics (but is a killer Steadicam camera though!)
3) No built-in mic for audio reference (this would have been a killer feature as the FS100/FS700 stripped down is a killer Steadicam camera as it is so symmetrical, more so for the FS100 due to the lack of ND-Filter)
4) Not enough native E-Mount glass and of good quality for pro's.
5) No dedicated Gain dial

In addition to the above legacy annoyances, the FS700 adds additional unwanted ISO noise. The FS100 was perfect with it's 3.4MP sensor, but the 8K sensor appears too much for 1080p.
Click to expand...

I like the ergonomics of it. After I got the handle rotated with the record button pointing straight up, this has been one of the easiest cameras for me to shoot with VERY steady without a stabilizer. It wasn't intuitive at first, and others that I've let use my camera have questioned the grip, till they shot with it, then they understood why I put it that way. I wouldn't want it any other way myself.

No built in mic, this annoys me to NO end. I am still struggling to get a smaller mic and/or placement since I only want it for reference. Not happy with any positions yet.

I am using the Meta-bones adapter for my EOS lenses, works perfect. Auto IRIS button is AWESOME. Zero complaints with this adapter.

I have asked till I turned blue with regards to gain dial, same with panasonic. Maybe one day. That said, using the autogain trick of allowing it to only go to 0dB, I get at least 4 settings with 0 being one of them :)
 
Well, first off, I can not afford an upgrade to the FS-700 right now. That being said, I don't think that I would upgrade to it even if I could. I just don't think that the camera is that much of an improvement over the FS-100 to plunk down the cash, if I had it. The FS-100 is an amazing camera, but very, very far from perfect. I just think that the large sensor HD camcorder market is in it's infancy and I want to wait at least another year, or two, and see what comes down the pike before I upgrade my camera.

I also want to second the hats off to Frank on his great work on the FS-100 picture profiles. Thank you Frank. My go to PP is Glen Log A v.2.0. I work very low budget and my f stop is usually WFO. That PP is a life saver. Of the PPs I have tested, this is the one that gives me the most dynamic range and from looking at the stuff I have shoot through the scopes on my NLE, Glen Log A v.2.0 gives me almost a full stop to play with; without baking in the contrast. I started shooting and studying film and shooting with Glen Log A v.2.0 really reminds me of film that has been flashed prior to processing. I LIKE THAT A LOT.

So, I am going to stay with the FS-100 for a while and wait until there is a camera of comparable price that does much, much more.
 
Thanks guys. :beer: Glad you find my profiles useful.

Just a little heads up, as you can see, I changed the gamma in G-Log A version 2.1, from 709 to Standard, which gives you a hair more room to play with.


G-LOG A 2.1

Black Level: 0 (set per scene)
Gamma: Standard
Black Gamma High, +7
Knee 105, 0
Color Mode: Pro, +8
Color Level: -2
Colorphase: -7
Colordepth: R -3, G +2, B +5, C 0, M 0, Y +2
WB Shift: LB-CC, 0, 0
Detail: Level -2, Manual off

David G. Smith said:
I started shooting and studying film and shooting with Glen Log A v.2.0 really reminds me of film that has been flashed prior to processing.
Click to expand...

Ha, I never thought of that, but now that you say it, yeah really.

Frank
 
Last edited:
Postmaster said:
Thanks guys. :beer: Glad you find my profiles useful.

Just a little heads up, as you can see, I changed the gamma in G-Log A version 2.1, from 709 to Standard, which gives you a hair more room to play with.


G-LOG A 2.1

Black Level: 0 (set per scene)
Gamma: Standard
Black Gamma High, +7
Knee 105, 0
Color Mode: Pro, +8
Color Level: -2
Colorphase: -7
Colordepth: R -3, G +2, B +5, C 0, M 0, Y +2
WB Shift: LB-CC, 0, 0
Detail: Level -2, Manual off
Click to expand...

Thanks Frank, I will try that out as soon as I can.
 
Ha Rick. I think we must think alike. I have mine set up with the handle in the EXACT position that you do, and I can run and gun
all day long. Obviously it's not ideal as no handycam which puts all the weight on your wrist is ideal. But it's not worse than
any other 'small camera' style set up......PD-150, DVX 100, Z1, EX-1, or any of that type. With it set this way, and the kit lens
with active steadyshot turned on, I can handhold it at 200mm and it looks like it's on a tripod. Even with my FD non stabilized
lenses it works just great. I haven't got the Meta-bones adapter yet.....waiting for someone to get it in stock. I too wish they
would just make the side wheel work with gain just as it works with color temperature settings and shutter speed. That would be
a great firmware update (hint hint hint!!!) O yeah, I also wanted to pass on thanks to Frank for clarifying the latest and
greatest PP. I'm turning into a PP junkie and love trying them all and seeing the different looks they give. Frank has some of
the best PP's out there, they are just awesome. Sony should totally comp Frank an FS700.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top