FS7: How is FS7 for low light?

OlegKalyan said:
Saw, read on Adorama review, " it's limited", could you share your observations?
Click to expand...

Depends on what you consider 'low light' and in what modes. I haven't shot a lot of extreme low light and CineEI isn't right for that duty but in Custom mode it has handled anything I have used the C300 for but I usually don't shoot in pitch dark. I'm sure the Canons might be better under extreme low light conditions. What ISO are you looking to shoot?
 
The FS7 has so many different opportunities to control the footage...

If you use cineEI, the camera is rated 2000ISO, but inhibits quite some moise, as there
is no noise reductio (NR) applied to the footage.

But you can use SLog2/3 in custom mode and having noise reduction applied in camera.
I haven't done this but I'm experimenting with the cinegammas up to 6400ISO.
As far as I can see, the footage is comparable to what the C300 delivers. You can adjust
NR in camera and set different levels of black gamma which makes noise more apparent if you
lift it.

If you're looking for the lowlight king, use the Sony A7s, but the FS7 is still good enough for me.
I was happy with the lowlight capabilities of my FS100 and the FS7 seems to be even better or
at least better controlable.
 
Last edited:
Erik Wittbusch said:
If you're looking for the lowlight king, use the Sony A7s, but the FS7 is still good enough for me.
I was happy with the lowlight capabilities of my FS100 and the FS7 seems to be even better or
at least better controlable.
Click to expand...

FS7 and A7s have different sensors with similar latitude characteristics, it seems, does FS7 much better in bright day light situations?

The question about low light capabilities include dymamic range and inherent noise in shadows, how much camera looses DR in ISO 6400 as opposed to ISO 2000, or ISO 200, for example?
What iso is it rated at 14 stops of DR?
 
OlegKalyan said:
Interesting observation, ISO 800 is noise free and has best DR from the FS7 sensor?
Click to expand...

You're misunderstanding what Osslund is suggesting. He says 'rate' the camera at ISO800. In EI mode the camera still records at ISO2000. If you rate the camera lower you are deliberately overexposing. In this instance to avoid noise. If you avoid clipping the highlights dynamic range will be unaffected.
 
IMO it is great in lo-light like sensible low light - if you can get a fully thick WFM at 4000 ISO you are golden - fill the WFM at 8000 and you still have acceptable footage - fill that WFM.
 
The FS7 is about as sensitive in low light as the C300 the F3 or the FS700 - in other words - damn sensitive. In custom mode you can shoot at 12db (aka 3200 ISO) and it is so clean you won't notice the difference from 0 db. That's very clean. at 18db you will some noise but that's not even bad.
The general consensus seems to be - shoot Custom in low light. If you shoot Slog3 you will preserve a much wider Dynamic range , but you will see more noise. Pick your poison . Do you need more high;ght protection than you get in Hypergamma 7 or 8. That's when people start shooting at 1000 or 800 ISO. To me 800 ISO ain't low light - that's the Red Epic world.
 
Back to the original question and premise of the OP-- the statement on the Adorama review. The reviewer did make a statement noting something to the effect that the camera is limited in low light and then he proceeded to pitch the A7S. I review products. For me it served as yet another reminder that sometimes we who often have limited use of a product sometimes get things wrong. Or sometimes we just make a blanket statement that can be misleading. That's why we have editors and technical editors. If I had written "limited low light", I would have been challenged by an editor to clarify. Low light compared to what? Or, describe your low light testing and say what you found. Manufacturers often ask to read a review in advance for fact check. I have even had manufacturers challenge results. Sometimes I revisit. Sometimes I relegate their comments to marketing and I stand by my conclusions. The goal is accurate reporting of the specs along with what I hope will be an albeit subjective but accurate reporting of the product.

What we see here is exactly the result of a sloppy review. Or a review that needed to be constrained to a 2 minute video. The result-- someone truly looking for information comes away with a less-than-accurate impression. Probably better to have shot the camera at a Hypergamma 7 or 8 at higher ISO's and then reported results. Or to have shot a low-light test and post that video as well.

Meanwhile, as a number of posters to this thread have noted, I consider it to be a sensitive camera-- certainly not capable of the ISO's of the A7S-- but definitely a workable image at the higher end of the camera's ISO capabilities. I'll be more specific when I write my review.

A good lesson to watch what we say or write....

Ned Soltz
 
Can anyone do an ISO ramp up vs any other well-known camera? (hopefully a c100/300 but anything else would work even a DSLR, then we can measure how it competes against all cameras)
 
Ebrahim Saadawi said:
Can anyone do an ISO ramp up vs any other well-known camera? (hopefully a c100/300 but anything else would work even a DSLR, then we can measure how it competes against all cameras)
Click to expand...
That would be great, in appropriate gamma for FS7, and another camera (C100, C300, 5dmk3 anybody?)!

Ned Soltz, the Adorama statement made me think, do I need to buy anothe camera for low light in addition to FS7?
 
I just did a multi camera shoot with two FS7 cameras. One of the other operators was using the camera for the second time, and during a song performance being recorded he turned on auto gain, and didn't know how to turn it off, and made the mistake of then closing the lens down (trying to get the light levels back where he had placed them). On auto-gain the camera went to db15 from db0. The gamma for this was REC709:STD5, shooting in 4k. It was a mistake, and he doubled down on it by closing up the lens, but the results... At 1080p I'm not sure the client will even notice the gain. I can see it, but I'm looking for it, and I have a professionally trained eye. It's definitely got grain, but it's usable.

Mind you, this is a lit venue. This camera is not going to replace the need for lighting kits. But with careful lens selection, it will enable you to get some night-time streetlight shots and such that typically call for big lighting packages, so long as you're going to accept some grain.

Honestly, our third camera on this shoot was a PMW-100. I'd put the PXW-FS7 at 15db gain against the PMW-100 at 0gain in terms of actual 1080p output performance on clarity and grain.
 
OlegKalyan said:
That would be great, in appropriate gamma for FS7, and another camera (C100, C300, 5dmk3 anybody?)!

Ned Soltz, the Adorama statement made me think, do I need to buy anothe camera for low light in addition to FS7?
Click to expand...

Now the question is "how low?" Are you shooting outdoors by moonlight or in dimly-lit city streets? Then get an A7S. I am not particularly a great fan of C100 and C300 and the F7S will equal them in low-light performance. 5DMkIII is no match for A7S, IMHO.
 
Mind you, everybody's clientele and shooting format is different, but I've seen instances of people thinking they need a second "low-light" camera who would be far better off in the long run investing $3,000 in an Arri lighting kit. That may not be the case for the OP, but speaking more generally, the solution isn't always to just have better low light sensitivity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top