How do highlights compare to the FS-100? Debating upgrading

Michael Solomon

Michael Solomon

Well-known member
Hey guys,

I'm at a point where I'm ready to move on from my FS-100. For the longest time, I thought that my next camera would be the black magic cinema camera. It's images are stunning and beautiful. However, that camera has some serious limitations for me. Mostly the fact that a lot of the work I do requires 60fps shots at a minimum.

The only thing is, I'm getting kind of sick of the image my FS-100 produces. It's great.... except for the way that it handles highlights. I can't stand it. Even after a year of fiddling with profiles, the fact that the second you clip a highlight it goes plastic and ugly is really starting to annoy me.

I was wondering how the highlight handling of the FS700 compares. I know it has some cinegammas that aren't available on the FS-100 and I would love to hear about your first hand experience with it. The high speed options of 120/240 are definitely a nice perk, as well as the option to rent the 4k raw recorder for jobs that require it.

I'm pretty stuck with what I want my next camera to be. I thought for a while that it might be a scarlet, but I just don't have the cash to buy into a full system by myself. I was hoping the F5 would be a bit lower in price. The F3 would be appealing but it has the same limitation as the BMC in the sense that it won't go past 30fps.

Anyways, basically looking for some confirmation that the FS-700 would be the right purchase for me =)
 
The Cinegammas basically make the FS700, the "Easier" version of the FS100. I think with enough fussing on the Pic Profiles on the FS100, you can probably get the highlights pretty good.

On the FS700 when using the Cinegammas, the highlights are really good just right out the box. I also really like the colors and way it distributes the dynamic range on the FS700. IMO, just because of the Cinegammas, the FS700 has a very different look than the FS100. Coming from Canon, I personally was not crazy about the FS100's image so I never got one. But I really like the FS700 image, more so than my 60D and 7D, and that's not just dealing with resolution either.
 
It is better, i have them both here and if i had any time i'd do a side by side. But the highlight handling on the 700 is just 'right'. However the 100 is less noisy in low light and the shadows seem a bit better, it's smoother overall. But in daylight situations the 700 just works better overall.

Having said that and playing devils advocate, if i was to get something now i'd be seriously tempted by a second hand F3 with slog or if i could wait, perhaps even an F5.

There's quite a price difference between the 100 and 700 and on a practical level that's better highlight handling and ND filters. The super slow mo is a bit gimmicy unless you have a real use for it. The RAW/4K ready aspect is all a bit murky, one of the reasons i did upgrade was the ability to get more than 8 bit out of it in the future but now it transpires that looks to be another £6k or so. Of course i could argue that's a stepping stone to an F5 or F55...

If you can make back the money on it, then go for it, because it will save you time messing around with profiles...

cheers
paul
 
Michael. I think you're making a mistake discounting the F3. It does 60p, just at 720 but the quality of that 60p is still very very good.
 
Ah... maybe I should just start saving and look into the F5..... 2k 120 fps with 14 stops of DR sounds rather nice. As well as the option to go rent a recorder for 4k raw when a client needs it.
 
Michael Solomon said:
Ah... maybe I should just start saving and look into the F5..... 2k 120 fps with 14 stops of DR sounds rather nice. As well as the option to go rent a recorder for 4k raw when a client needs it.
Click to expand...

That's my next move. I'll get a used F5 when I upgrade my FS100. Everything in between is bit meh. The FS700 is one step forward and one back.

Im hoping there will be an F4 (an F5 without the 4k) or something between the fs700 and F5.
 
The thing with the F5 that people seem to forget is that it's 2 1/2 times more expensive than the FS700. Seem like the F5 without the viewfinder is going to be about $18K. The viewfinder is another $2k at least so you are looking at 20k minimum verses $8k for the FS700. So you have be making some good coin to consider that jump.

With that said. The 4k on the FS700 is a joke and Sony really mislead people on it. Sony should just bump up the internal codec to make it a little more competitive because I think that the F3 will be gone when the F5 comes out and the FS700 will sit below the F5. Reading the F3 forum, seems like lots of them are going on EBay.

The FS700 is a really good camera. The Cinegammas make it much better than the FS100. The slow motion is amazing if you shoot music videos, sports or artistic pieces and is far from a gimmick when used for certain segments.
 
gene_can_sing said:
The thing with the F5 that people seem to forget is that it's 2 1/2 times more expensive than the FS700. Seem like the F5 without the viewfinder is going to be about $18K. The viewfinder is another $2k at least so you are looking at 20k minimum verses $8k for the FS700. So you have be making some good coin to consider that jump.

With that said. The 4k on the FS700 is a joke and Sony really mislead people on it. Sony should just bump up the internal codec to make it a little more competitive because I think that the F3 will be gone when the F5 comes out and the FS700 will sit below the F5. Reading the F3 forum, seems like lots of them are going on EBay.

The FS700 is a really good camera. The Cinegammas make it much better than the FS100. The slow motion is amazing if you shoot music videos, sports or artistic pieces and is far from a gimmick when used for certain segments.
Click to expand...

I haven't seen any FS700 footage that I thought was any better than the FS100 in fact I have found it altogether much noisier, not just in low light, and not the step up I would consider worth making. Granted the FS100 require voodoo to get the best out of them and to know when best to use which curve but I'm on top of all that.

The F5 level of camera is my next purchase whether that's a used one in a couple of years or if Sony produce a NEX E Mount derivative of the F5 and successor to the FS700. The next camera has to be very obviously better from a client's perspective not my own pixel peeping one.

It's going to be interesting to see how the camera companies bring in updates to existing mid level cameras without completely cannibalising their £10k+ market. A S35 Blackmagic camera would've done for them, maybe next year?
 
Nirv said:
I haven't seen any FS700 footage that I thought was any better than the FS100 in fact I have found it altogether much noisier, not just in low light, and not the step up I would consider worth making. Granted the FS100 require voodoo to get the best out of them and to know when best to use which curve but I'm on top of all that.

The F5 level of camera is my next purchase whether that's a used one in a couple of years or if Sony produce a NEX E Mount derivative of the F5 and successor to the FS700. The next camera has to be very obviously better from a client's perspective not my own pixel peeping one.

It's going to be interesting to see how the camera companies bring in updates to existing mid level cameras without completely cannibalising their £10k+ market. A S35 Blackmagic camera would've done for them, maybe next year?
Click to expand...

Hey Nirv,

Having been running them side by side there is quite a difference. It's also true that the 700 is noisier. As i said there's no clear cut winner right now, noise or highlights.

I've also seen a few cases of extreme math/clipping problems with debayering in very saturated light (blue specifically), the 100 was way worse than the 700, ruined a few shots too.

The F5 is probably a generation on from the sensor inside the 700 so it will be interesting to compare. The key with the 700 is this ongoing temptation of greater than 8 bit out of it. That's the Achilles heel of the FS series IMHO.

Why emount F5? You can get adapters for most lenses for the FZ mount too. As you say the F5 is tempting and priced very well, but the 55 more so in terms of colour gamut. I'm guessing the F5 is quite noisy compared to the F3 in the same way the 700 vs 100 is. Now with 4K what the options for post noise reduction would do with that remains to be seen.


cheers
Paul
 
Nirv I agree on the 700

If I could send my Fs100 in for a ND upgrade - Id do it now and pay £1500, but buy a whole new cam without a raw option - nah!

it will be very interesting if the 700 and recorder creates your 'F4'

Lets see what it does and when and for how much

I do beleive the F5 will be another class, especially with the recorder option - at that level its is close to all I have ever wanted, £10g id do it but £20g, Im just too poor

My latest voodoo with the FS100.. https://vimeo.com/55627118

Pretty pleasing for £0

S
 
Why E mount?

Well I used that to place the camera in terms of market sector, a NEX version of the F5 if you will. You may consider the FS700 as that camera with the RAW recorder.

The Mahout video looked pretty clean in the night scenes but even on Vimeo you can see the next step up in image quality and that's my next move but only at the right price. I'm not prepared to play the camera companies silly game of limited incremental updates year on year. The FS100 is a capable tool but there's nothing yet that screams buy me as an upgrade.

All I really want is FS100 style body, S35, E Mount,as many stops of DR as is possible 14?, 10 bit 422 at 1080p. I don't want 4K and I have mixed views about the use I would have for RAW if the camera shipped with half decent profiles that were flexible.

As for the "extreme math/clipping problems with debayering" I'd love to know what that means but more importantly what that looks like.

Cheers
 
morgan_moore said:
I do beleive the F5 will be another class, especially with the recorder option - at that level its is close to all I have ever wanted, £10g id do it but £20g, Im just too poor
Click to expand...

Bang on where I am. That's why I said I'd go with a used F5. In 2 years a F5 + Recorder used will be in my ball park or someone will have produced the camera I want at the price I want. The Blackmagic is so close and V2 maybe the one.

Once we've got the camera we've always wanted how do the camera companies sell us the next big thing? I guess that's what they're worried about. An F55 at FS700 prices is not that far away.
 
Back to my stills history - I had 5 digicams until I got the one I wanted the nikon D3.
Nikon have indeed got a problem now in that Ive stopped buying a camera every year or two.
But nikon I guess made a profit in the 1990s when I only got a new FM2 when I had smashed or had stolen the one before.

I mean given 'the perfect cam' we still can want more FPS or a spare one!

They have plenty to sell us without this painful spooning of features, which ultimately costs them as people like me are just sitting it out with an FS100 :)

I think if the F5 was 'owner op' price (£10g) they would sell 10000, but at hire price they will sell 1000, I have my own theories on which would more profitable.

Which is more profitable for canon - the 5d2 or the 1dc?

Sorry to drift OT

S
 
Nirv said:
Why E mount?

All I really want is FS100 style body, S35, E Mount,as many stops of DR as is possible 14?, 10 bit 422 at 1080p. I don't want 4K and I have mixed views about the use I would have for RAW if the camera shipped with half decent profiles that were flexible.
Click to expand...

You and me both, although the E mount is physically not that strong, hence the FZ mount. Even on the 700 it flexes like crazy.
On the other hand i would want RAW, not so fussed about 4K but at the same time would happily use it if it was there.

Nirv said:
As for the "extreme math/clipping problems with debayering" I'd love to know what that means but more importantly what that looks like.

Cheers
Click to expand...

I've enclosed a crop, i have to be mindful of full frames for various reasons but this shows you what i mean. Strong blue filter on a dedo, pure blue. Sent the highlight handling of the 100 crazy, this was with Franks last profile. Blue has clip completey as you'd expect, there's no red light but the green just went a bit odd, solarised almost. The 700 version (different angle) is much more controlled, i'll have to see if i can find a suitable frame there. It's still not perfect on the 700 but usable.

Cheers
Paul

 

Attachments

  • weirdclippingfs100.jpg
    weirdclippingfs100.jpg
    38.5 KB · Views: 0
i'd want to try it again without the fauxlog profile, in my case i find them to be the cause of clipping.

Still might crap out on that shot tho, just later and smoother with another profile choice

d
 
Last edited:
@Paul

That's interesting. I recall someone posting a still from inside a nightclub where there was a black ring round bright lights. It was never pursued any further.

I have seen this in news footage of emergency vehicle lights which more than likely won't be Fs100s (but likely Sony cams) so whether it's a setting issue or a feature of Sony cams I don't know. I'd be interested to find out.
 
Michael Solomon said:
Street price is $16,500 Source: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/898427-REG/Sony_PMW_F5_CineAlta_Digital_Cinema.html

You don't need to use their proprietary viewfinder
Click to expand...

One of the biggest attractions of the F5, to me at least, is the AWESOME Loupe / LCD combo. It's so well thought out in it's adjustability and that just makes one less thing (3rd party) that requires rigging / rods. The F5 Loupe / LCD is a huge part of the great ergonomics and I think that a large majority of the people buying the camera will get it.

I've read that the Loupe/LCD list price is $3800, so the street price might be $3000 at the least. You're still looking at $20K regardless. Not pocket change. But the F5 is definitely worth $20K, especially since the C300 is $16K and it's far less of a camera in almost every aspect. If I had $20K, I would buy the F5 in a second, but since I only had about $8K, I had to get the FS700, which is still a very good camera for the price.

I really hope in the next 2 years Black Magic will come out with a super 35mm camera that will be truly revolutionary. I think their current offering is good, but the 2.3x crop, horrible ergo, low ISO max and no high frame rates make it a no go for me. But fix those things, and they will have a serious winner that can challenge the big boys.
 
Khachik Mkrtchyan said:
You don't have to hope. They are indeed working on EPIC price range cinema camera. At least this is what I've heard ;)
Click to expand...

I think we're diverting from the OP to total fantasy wishlist land!

Although i have to jump in as the coffee kicks in... Whilst the BMC is an interesting tech demo, it's not really a very well thought out camera - just look at the mount confusion and the new m43 mount. What makes you think an EPIC priced camera from BMC is going to offer anything that you can't get elsewhere? Bearing in mind the reality check they've had with getting the BMC out of the door i would have thought by the time it would ship then the F5/F55 of the world and other large manufactures will be long shipping. You can take an industrial vision camera (I did once, years ago) and get some fantastic imagery out of it but it's not a workable camera. I've footage from a 1" kodak CCD sensor that is still better than most results today and that was a good 2 to 3 years ago. Don't underestimate how hard it is to make a camera even if you have the sensor and AD on a plate.

AFAIK BMC (and i have lots of their products and highly recommend them) don't design sensors, nor manufacture them, so they're at the mercy of third party companies for designs and specs? Perhaps that's changing now, but sensor fab is a very different league to electronics design...

But in terms of the OP (which i've sadly managed to divert from), 700 or not - what would the alternatives be? Are there any?

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