Low light shooting

B

brian891

New member
Hey everyone!! I am an independant videographer based in New York, I got my FS700 about a month ago and shot a few things but am a little frustrated as I feel like I am not getting nearly the potential of my FS700 that I should be getting. My first problem is that my low light footage is VERY grainy, like, much more then I imagine it should be , here is a video I shot for Pacha NYC a local nightclub. Notice the immense amount of grain in this, anyone have any tips for setting up my FS for low light?


Another problem I am having is with color, do most people shoot in Slog2 and then correct it in post? I dont even know how to activate my Slog on this camera I am quite new to all of it, i need some help! hahah

Thanks for any help that can be provided
 
Hey Brian - Most of this seems to be slow motion, I'm guessing overcranked at 60fps and played back at 30? I would think with such low-light conditions that having the shutter speed down low enough to over crank would greatly reduce the amount of light your sensor is getting and would be a great huge source of noise. Did you have to raise the gain to get enough exposure?

Anyways, it'd be great to know the settings on your camera as well as your lens you're using and that kind of stuff so the group here can give you the best advice on how to move forward.

As far as color goes, if you're shooting internally to the SD card I strongly recommend against using S-Log2. The coompressed 8-bit footage just isn't prepped to handle the push in post to get the color properly adjusted, and I don't think it'd be easy to work with for the low light work you're doing. If you're using the O7Q to get 10-bit HD ProRes, then SLog2 becomes an option, for sure.
 
Hey , so yeah I should have noted that I am shooting 120FPS in that video, the lens is the 18-200mm kit lens f/3.5mm ... do you think getting a lens with a lower fstop capability would give me a better low light image? I picked up a Sony A7S the other day for $2k, almost 4k less than my fs700 and the low light shooting is soooo much better than my FS, im honestly kind of annoyed. Especially since Ive been watching other peoples footage at low light that looks much cleaner.
 
brian891 said:
Hey , so yeah I should have noted that I am shooting 120FPS in that video, the lens is the 18-200mm kit lens f/3.5mm ... do you think getting a lens with a lower fstop capability would give me a better low light image? I picked up a Sony A7S the other day for $2k, almost 4k less than my fs700 and the low light shooting is soooo much better than my FS, im honestly kind of annoyed. Especially since Ive been watching other peoples footage at low light that looks much cleaner.
Click to expand...

The kit lens is great for outdoor shooting where there is plenty of light and you can
really use the range it has. If you want to shoot slow motion inside, I'd suggest
a lens like the Sigma 18-35 F1.8. It will be much cleaner. A7s is great in low
light. But if you want to shoot outdoors in normal light, it has no inbuilt ND filters
and you will probably need 7-9 stops of ND on the front of the lens as the sensor
is so sensitive.
 
Definitely agree that you probably shouldn't touch S-log2 if you are recording internally to SD cards. The internal 8bit just does not have enough color space to properly bring back in post without banding and other artifacts. It's possible, but in uncontrolled scenarios like you've just posted above, you'd be better off using CineGamma4 or 2. This is just my preference, you should experiment for yourself. Click the Picture Profile button on the side of the camera and browse through the 7 options they give you. You have to enter the sub-level of those options to know which cinegamma or rec709 setting each profile is set to. Also, there are great customization setting online which you should try. Google Allister Chapman, if you don't already know of him.

High frame rates are going to generally be more noisy and contain a lot of moire due to the line-skipping (I believe) required for processing at such high frame rates from a 4k sensor. A faster 1.8 or 2 lens would definitely be to your advantage. But also, you should invest in Neat Video (or something like it). It's a great software that does wonders in reducing noise from footage. It would really clean up what you already have.

Lastly, if you are recording internally, which you then should be using cinegammas, you might try exposing to the right on your histogram...given that you don't clip any of your brights. Over exposing a bit, by working at a higher ISO and lower Fstop would allow you to bring your footage back down in post, helping to deal with the noise issue. Id say you can push your ISO up to 1600/2000 and still get footage that you can clean up with noise reduction software. Although, the goal is to find a nice balance between ISO and Fstop, while keeping your shutter speed/angle at 180 degrees (roughly twice your frame rate). You probably already know this, but your histogram and your zebras are going to be your best friends! :)

A7s is a low light beast. If you work with the cropped mode, you can reduce the amount of rolling shutter...which would be advantageous for you in high movement scenarios like a dance club. Where the FS700 really comes alive is with an external recorder...such as the odyssey 7Q(+). This way you can work in 10bit color space (or Raw) with much more room to color and grade in post. A7s and FS700 make a great two camera team. I'm jealous!
 
120fps at f3.5? What ISO? I'm surprised it's not noisier... Super slow motion is noisier than s&q by at least a stop because of the way it samples the sensor to achieve the higher framerate, plus the stop or more you lost from the faster shutter it requires. Try to see if 60fps s&q will give you a close enough look to what you want, it'll be quite a bit cleaner. And get a faster lens! And a speedbooster. Also the thing about shooting with an on camera light is that you tend to expose the foreground very well but significantly underexpose the background which will leave it much noisier. You may be better off with a faster lens and turning the on-camera light down or off to balance better with the dark background unless the on-camera light is critical to the look you want.

Also I have to disagree about slog2. Slog2 is really important in situations like that because it overcomes some of the horrible and basically unfixable issues the camera has with saturated, primary colored lighting like club lighting. Also slog2 is great because you can rate it lower and pull post easily to get a much cleaner image. I've shot a lot of slog2 internally and it looks great with the right LUT, though like any gamma you have to know what you are doing and use it properly and where and how you can push it. Perhaps some of you have seen banding from 8bit slog2 but I can't say I've seen it at least for Web or TV. I'd probably be a little more careful for theatrical release though...
 
Last edited:
nyvz said:
120fps at f3.5? What ISO? I'm surprised it's not noisier... Super slow motion is noisier than s&q by at least a stop because of the way it samples the sensor to achieve the higher framerate, plus the stop or more you lost from the faster shutter it requires. Try to see if 60fps s&q will give you a close enough look to what you want, it'll be quite a bit cleaner. And get a faster lens! And a speedbooster. Also the thing about shooting with an on camera light is that you tend to expose the foreground very well but significantly underexpose the background which will leave it much noisier. You may be better off with a faster lens and turning the on-camera light down or off to balance better with the dark background unless the on-camera light is critical to the look you want.

Also I have to disagree about slog2. Slog2 is really important in situations like that because it overcomes some of the horrible and basically unfixable issues the camera has with saturated, primary colored lighting like club lighting. Also slog2 is great because you can rate it lower and pull post easily to get a much cleaner image. I've shot a lot of slog2 internally and it looks great with the right LUT, though like any gamma you have to know what you are doing and use it properly and where and how you can push it. Perhaps some of you have seen banding from 8bit slog2 but I can't say I've seen it at least for Web or TV. I'd probably be a little more careful for theatrical release though...
Click to expand...

I also disagree. I have used Slog-2 with great success for internal recordings. I use Slog-2 for internal slowmotion and with my Odessey 7Q.
 
To avoid hi ISOs, which will lead to noisier footage, you definitely should not overcrank, but
use 30p with 1/30s and a faster lens. I never use the SEL18-200 in low light conditions.
Use fast primes or f2,8 zooms on a speedbooster, which will give you an effective stop
of t2,0.

It's also better to avoid SLog2 if you'Re not that experienced on using and grading SLog
footage in post. It'S not that it's bad or anything, but it's a very profile of it's own.
Use one of the cinegammas and a fast lens combined with norma framerates/shutterspeeds
and your footage will look better.

I think you made everything "wrong" concerning noise when you use a slow lens and high
framerates (fast shutterspeeds) together in low light conditions...
 
As far as lenses, look into the Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 ($400). It comes in Canon EF mount, which will be a great addition for a speedbooster. Also, it has Optical Stabilization, which will be great for your handheld work. Plus, the added speedboster will give you a T stop of about 2...I believe.

I also have to agree about onboard light. Unless it's an aesthetic decision, it's going to make exposing light and dark areas more difficult. Definitely turn it down or off.

As far as the Slog2 issue in club scenarios with bright primary colors, I'd say that you should experiment. It's possible to expose Slog2 to get decent results for internal recording. However, my little rule that I stick to, more oftn than not, when recording 8bit 24mbps is to get the image from the camera as close as possible to what I want the final product to be. This is because, again, 8bit doesn't allow for too much post work and I can retain more image information. Not to say that you can't color/grade 8bit footage, because you can. I've done it and people do it all the time. The folks suggesting Slog above also probably do it...and I'm sure with great results, too! But try it out and see how comfortable it feels for you. My personal suggestion is to customize a picture profile based off of a cinegamma, but tweak the gamma, knee and color settings to counteract some of the negative effects of harsh club lighting mentioned above. You might find a custom profile to be of good use to you until you feel comfortable with Slog2.

I I don't mean to negate others' opinions regarding Slog2, because it's true that it can be done well. But if you're new to log, it's easy to ruin footage in ways you cannot retrieve. Unless you are pretty familiar with the way the log curve maps stops onto IRE values, and where your skin tones should be, Id say always make sure to shoot some cinegamma picture profile footage just in case.

Ah, lastly, about slowmotion. I'd second the advice from others in this thread about sticking to 60fps. I believe that anything above 72fps (if the fs700 will even do 72fps) will engage line skipping and other processing stuff that gets pretty noisy...not to mention the shutter speed requirements mentioned by others. Instead, sticking to 60fps or below still will get you decent slow motion in low light, which you then have a bit of room to play with using after effects plug in like Twixtor. If you can download a free trial of Twixtor, I'd highly recommend it. It can be a bit tricky at first, but if used well and in moderation, it can give you some great results!
 
Sorry to say, but the Sigma 17-50 is an APS-C lens and therefore
does heavy vignetting on the Speedbooster and FS700.
You'll need full frame lenses for the Speedbooster or put APS-C lenses
on a regular Smart Adapter...

I used the Canon EF 24-105/4 on a Speedbooster but this lens flares heavily -
not my recommendation for clubs with lots of lights.
I use a Canon EF-S 17-55/2,8 IS on a Smart Adapter most of the time and
it's my favorite lens - but lacks the long end. I will use a Canon 70-200/4,0 IS
on a Speedbooster for more range here.

There is no perfect one lens solution out there...
 
Erik Wittbusch said:
Sorry to say, but the Sigma 17-50 is an APS-C lens and therefore
does heavy vignetting on the Speedbooster and FS700.
You'll need full frame lenses for the Speedbooster or put APS-C lenses
on a regular Smart Adapter...

I used the Canon EF 24-105/4 on a Speedbooster but this lens flares heavily -
not my recommendation for clubs with lots of lights.
I use a Canon EF-S 17-55/2,8 IS on a Smart Adapter most of the time and
it's my favorite lens - but lacks the long end. I will use a Canon 70-200/4,0 IS
on a Speedbooster for more range here.

There is no perfect one lens solution out there...
Click to expand...

Ah, good to know about the sigma.

Did you remove the rubber bushing on your EF-S?--to mount on speedbooster.
 
No,

I don't put APS-C lenses on my Speedbooster as it doesn't make
much sense. I use full frame lenses on the Speedbooster,
EF-S (APS-C) lenses on my Smart Adapter, just as it is meant
to be...
 
Erik Wittbusch said:
Sorry to say, but the Sigma 17-50 is an APS-C lens and therefore
does heavy vignetting on the Speedbooster and FS700.
You'll need full frame lenses for the Speedbooster or put APS-C lenses
on a regular Smart Adapter...

I used the Canon EF 24-105/4 on a Speedbooster but this lens flares heavily -
not my recommendation for clubs with lots of lights.
Click to expand...

Not to mention the Canon 24-105 IS is actually a T5.0 or slower... Sigma's 24-105 OS is more like a real T4.0.

There isn't one perfect lens solution for low light, but the sigma 18-35 f1.8 (works with speedbooster 24-35) or tamron 24-70 f2.8 VR with speedbooster or sigma 24-105 f4 OS with speedbooster are all reasonable options. Otherwise, the sigma 35 or 50 f1.4 art lenses with speedbooster are hard to beat in low light, and in a cramped club, a 35 with speedbooster might be all you need. Also IS isn't usually as necessary when shooting slow motion.
 
Thanks for all the input, I was at B&H today and they were talking me into the Rokinon Cine t1.5 24mm, for $560 , i was reallllllly close to buying it but wanted to check here first while I have the thread open and see if any of you guys would reccomend it, if so ill probobly order it tonight! hahaha. Im a very impulsive person, which is how i ended up with the FS in the first place.. (I ran my Mark iii over with my truck a few weeks ago)


http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/896981-REG/Rokinon_cv24m_nex_24mm_T1_5_Cine_Ed.html
 
I've heard pretty good things about the Rokinon Cine lenses, and have been on the fence on buying several of them on different occasions. From what I understand they're not as near-perfect as the more expensive ones, but they get you 80% of the way there (for a fraction of the prices).

I just don't know how I'd like run-and-gun nightclub shoot with a prime lens. Personally, when I'm just filming on the fly, I tend to prefer a zoom lens so you can grab a tighter shot in a pinch... but that might be personal preference.

If you don't use the zoom on the kit lens when shooting these pieces, then get the Rokinon and give it a go. It'll certainly be better than the kit lens.
 
First and foremost put on a F2.8 atleast. A 28-70mm Canon with an adapter ? You will instantly see a significant difference in grain without even changing any other setting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top