FS7: Is the FS7 as good as the F55? Why own the F55? Opinions...

[morgan_moore]

Having just received my FS7 I can say that it's far from the build quality of the PMW cameras. In a way it's a toy camera made in China which equals less quality.

Personally I think the chimney is a joke, the handle is poorly designed and made by Fisher Price, I have concerns about the connections of both, but actually I think the body is OK.

Do you ever know someone who has broken a FS100 or 700 - total plastic but they seem to just work. I did a job with someone who had 3 Reds and an Fs100, the FS was the only one he trusted to actually shoot a picture every day!

 

[SJX]

Probably. Judge for yourself.. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B2FFYfpCQAAv6oX.jpg:large

The thing about weight is so much how you shoot.

Ive not used an F35 but all the others are fine on the shoulder when in a 'production' environment.

But I want a mobile camera.

Now lets do a shot of someone lying on their back, camera pointing straight down, or maybe handheld in a vehicle or held over a desk while filming somone at their keyboard.. or let us go on a demo in Central London, get there using public transport then eight hours on the feet and climb up some walls to get a high angle. Then weight counts.

Right tool for right job. If this is all you do ok. But this doesn't make small better. It make small good for your shots. But say F5 or red is heavy make no sense. Maybe heavy for small kid. For normal cameraman no.

 

[steve phillipps]

But I think original question is answered. The answer is: No.

For you, perhaps. That's the problem, some people on here make pronouncements and see them as facts, others have and respect opinions, experiences, differences and discussion - that's why I'm here.
Steve

 

[morgan_moore]

Right tool for right job. If this is all you do ok. But this doesn't make small better. It make small good for your shots. But say F5 or red is heavy make no sense. Maybe heavy for small kid. For normal cameraman no.

Indeed when I shot a feature and had 'people' I really didnt care about the mass of my camera.

But I think there is questioning of a 'normal' cameraman and what they can do or be expected to do.

For example car shooting, once upon a time it was 'normal' to maybe remove a door to make space for the camera - today that is mostly not needed.

Also overheads, low shots and the like - really hard with an F35!

S

 

[Ben Scott]

Some people on here are so argumentative for no reason. Shooting all day handheld on Scarlet/Epic and running from point a to point b with the camera and legs can be backbreaking work. It can also be fine if you're relatively static and/or have an AC or two to help out. The F5 can easily get heavier than an Epic. This 'for a normal cameraman' stuff is rubbish. Roger Deakins like to operate his camera. Do you think he'd be okay to go all day on his shoulder with a fully loaded Alexa on Skyfall 2: Electric Boogaloo?

 

[Liam Hall]

Ok now the cop out. ok.

Um... no cop out. Just thought it was getting pointless.

The bottom line is the FS7 feels no more plasticky than the EX3. The handle and VF don't feel bullet proof, but the body is tough. That said, I don't like the rubber covers for the connections. However, for me, it's not about the feel, it's about the image. And the image it offers is great bang for the buck. No question about it.

 

[morgan_moore]

Some people on here are so argumentative for no reason. Shooting all day handheld on Scarlet/Epic and running from point a to point b with the camera and legs can be backbreaking work. It can also be fine if you're relatively static and/or have an AC or two to help out. The F5 can easily get heavier than an Epic. This 'for a normal cameraman' stuff is rubbish. Roger Deakins like to operate his camera. Do you think he'd be okay to go all day on his shoulder with a fully loaded Alexa on Skyfall 2: Electric Boogaloo?

Exactly

My load is Camera+mic, Sticks, bag of glass and a light on a stand.

One thing is Im hoping to bin my Satchler 'normal camera man' legs and make more use of my flimsier miller solo legs and maybe even lose my Arrow25 head and get some 'DSLR' head.

So not only does the camera save aches but lighter sticks will help too!

Everything is stripped down. 70-200 F4 not 2.8, Dedo DLH4, not panel, etc etc - and Im out there with 60p in 4k S35 - the new normal.

S

 

[Ben Scott]

So far for me physically the only potential weak point on the camera is the EVF cable but I dare say knowing that will make me subconsciously baby it at all times.


EDIT: Absolutely Morgan. Swapping out 10kg of sticks for 5kg of sticks is going to make a massive difference to the type of jobs I can 'one man band' over the course of a day or several days. F&V Ringlights with reversible stands and a portable softbox where needed. Small contax zeiss primes with excellent optics. UD11 wireless lav where needed.

 

[morgan_moore]

You should check the DLH4 light. Pocke rocket.

The thing about it is I can get it in my Miller sticks bag, with sticks and a lightstand.

I can check that bag and camera goes with me in the overhead.. I hope!

S

 

[Ben Scott]

I love the DLH4 but they're a bit pricey once you have the mains supply too for me. Keep seeing them on ebay so biding my time for a bargain but tbh I want one more for gobo possibilities

With the F&Vs I can have 2 ringlights, a softbox, batteries, mains power, chargers, modifiers etc all in one small backpack and still have room for a laptop and drive and stuff. They are very light, very compact and put out a lot of light.

 

[morgan_moore]

Sorry I meant the Dled 4.0 the even pricier 'daylight' LED version - runs of Vlock.

S

 

[Ben Scott]

hahaha yeah maybe not this week. I think I've already done over £10,000 in the last month refreshing my kit.

 

[Grug]

Sorry I meant the Dled 4.0 the even pricier 'daylight' LED version - runs of Vlock.

S

I'm not sure I see much point in spending extra on the DLED 4.0. I was quite enamoured by the idea of their bi-color DLED4, but then I tested it up alongside the good old DLH4 and the little halogen unit puts out about a stop more light than the LED - which means that correcting it to daylight leaves you with roughly the same output as the LED, but with the added benefit of significantly more output in tungsten.

I now have two of the 150w Dedos, and two of the 650w Dedos - and they really do make my life easier.

 

[morgan_moore]

I'm not sure I see much point in spending extra on the DLED 4.0. I was quite enamoured by the idea of their bi-color DLED4, but then I tested it up alongside the good old DLH4 and the little halogen unit puts out about a stop more light than the LED - which means that correcting it to daylight leaves you with roughly the same output as the LED, but with the added benefit of significantly more output in tungsten.

I now have two of the 150w Dedos, and two of the 650w Dedos - and they really do make my life easier.

the daylight (led) one is brighter than bi-colour (led)?? but fundamentally I need a light that does not rely on the mains..

Topic Drift!

 

[Ben Scott]

Well the original topic is why have an F55 when you could have an FS7 and I believe that can be answered in one sentence. I much prefer the thread's new life

 

[Grug]

the daylight (led) one is brighter than bi-colour (led)?? but fundamentally I need a light that does not rely on the mains..

Topic Drift!

No, this is very rare for LEDs but the bi-color actually matches the output of both their singular Daylight and Tungsten versions (which is why the price is so much higher for it I suppose).

But fair enough! Back on topic.

 

[NeedCreative]

haha what a great thread!

I had a C300 for years which I found to be incredibly durable. Time will tell but so far the FS7 seems of similar build and quality - the body proper that is. It's all metal (light metal) and I am not worried at all. The EVF I have my doubts about (that cord!), and the grip and handle seem like they will die in relatively short order and are clunky, if comfortable. The handle is a little plasticky but sturdy.

All in all it's a decent mix and the core body is more than fine. I've used the C300 extensively... for years, and it never let me down. This body seems about the same. So that's a good benchmark. I could never say that about my old FS100 from years ago which I thought was a POS build wise... and even that was decent enough.

Clearly the F5/F55/Alexa, whatever are heavier and made of higher grade metal. Some people want (or even need) that, so there are options and that is great.

As to the OP, and skipping past all the negative comments, absolutely there are differences between the F5/F55. Build, color gamut, center crop, all of that. Apparently too the processor in the FS7 is slow as molasses. The core sensor and image processing seems to be identical, but for some unknown reason Sony may have chosen to put in a cheaper application processor (menus, overlays, etc) which slows it down.

It's annoying, but something had to give for the price. I'm just happy the key parts - body build and codec/IQ did not suffer. For the target market - small production studios, single owner/ops... this camera is "essentially" the same as the much more expensive F5/F55. Is it the same for every production? Nope. But for the target market it is where it matters: the image, with not huge of a compromise in the rest (current FW notwithstanding) as to not be a horrible compromise.

Now, if I have to shoot say a high end commercial with a budget and a crew - I might rent an Alexa. I'll have the budget so why not? You know you're getting a beautiful picture, ease of use, and it's a brick that will take a beating.

But to say the FS7 can't be used to make a motion picture is nonsense. It will look just as good as every camera out there save an Alexa, and output the same or similar quality as the F5 gives you at least. The real question is are you willing to put up the plasticky but comfy grip, the plastic but sturdy handle, the cheapie arm and the weird screws, the lethargic application processor, the so-so EVF and permanent "please destroy me" cords...

That's why it's best for a shooter with no AC. (Saying it's just for a "one and band" is pushing it; I haven't made anything purely myself for years.)

You use the tools that are best for your production and what you can afford or get a good ROI on. The reason the FS7 is so exciting to many is for what used to be the price of a high end DSLR you can now get the quality in the end of say, a Red, for far lower cost. Your colorist will thank you, your audience will still be happy, and your wallet will hug you.

I plan to use this camera until it dies (purely theoretically; I never end up doing that), and I am sure a faster/better model will come out someday with perhaps a global shutter, or faster processor, or what not as technology pushes prices down. But you could theoretically get years out of this thing without issue, as only when we start to get to REC2020 do we need to start thinking about new cameras and that is possibly 10+ years off from being widely implemented in consumption devices.

But none of this negates the fact that for $8,000 you can get a camera that matches or come very close to the output and image quality of a camera that cost the price of a small Mercedes Benz. That's huge, and makes it a target for those who do not define themselves with how many pounds of expensive gear they can hoist on their shoulder.

And really, in the end? None of this crap will make your stories any better. Easier, less time consuming... maybe. But tell better stories? Make people cry more? Make people laugh? That has nothing to do with the camera.

All these cameras from $1,000 on up are capable of taking cinematic looking images to the average consumer. It's what you do with it that matters.

 

[morgan_moore]

And really, in the end? None of this crap will make your stories any better. Easier, less time consuming... maybe. But tell better stories? Make people cry more? Make people laugh? That has nothing to do with the camera.

Well that is sort of true but not. My one little feature I filmed the days just drained away - for example the directors had a sh_it monitor that took an age to boot - and those seconds add up to less takes, shots, etc. and less shots/takes does add up to poorer story telling.

In stills I use a 'pro' F3 and a 'consumer' D600 (which makes a better file) but working with the latter cam I really notice that the slightly clunky menu does lower my fluidity. On the feature the BMC was tight.

FS7 is sloppy in the menu but I dont remember the F5 being much better or better laid out.

Menu is one of a million things that waste 5 seconds on a shoot and those things do matter - but I dont really feel the 5 is any better than the 7 in that regard!

 

[jshbckr]

Well that is sort of true but not. My one little feature I filmed the days just drained away - for example the directors had a sh_it monitor that took an age to boot - and those seconds add up to less takes, shots, etc. and less shots/takes does add up to poorer story telling.

In stills I use a 'pro' F3 and a 'consumer' D600 (which makes a better file) but working with the latter cam I really notice that the slightly clunky menu does lower my fluidity. On the feature the BMC was tight.

FS7 is sloppy in the menu but I dont remember the F5 being much better or better laid out.

Menu is one of a million things that waste 5 seconds on a shoot and those things do matter - but I dont really feel the 5 is any better than the 7 in that regard!

And to your point, the less headache/hassle/etc there is, the better everyone can do their job. If the director is wondering why we can't roll yet and it's because some function isn't loaded yet or you have to fiddle through some menus to change a setting... that stresses the director out and is an unnecessary obstacle. In my mind, a nicer camera is all about removing barriers. The less you have to menu-dig and the less "gotchas" you have, the better off the whole production is.

 

[Ben Scott]

The 'can you shoot a motion picture on it?' question is fun but ultimately not really helpful considering that Wes Anderson is shooting on Super 16mm and 28 Days Later was shot on Canon XL1 dv cameras. 70-80% of what makes a film look cinematic is not the camera, but is in fact lighting, set design, makeup and costume. And THEN the glass and THEN the camera.

Carrying on from NeedCreative's post, I have a rule of thumb about which shoots I'll do and if people are trying to get a deal I always try to find out if the camera is the most expensive thing on the production or not. A rule of thumb for me is that if it is, the film isn't going to look great no matter what I do and I should decide whether I really want to do it or not.