FS7: New Sony F7 XDCAM 4K Super 35mm Camcorder

Marino215 said:
It's a winner, great camera, you can't go wrong. If I didn't already own the fs700/7q I would feel the same way. I just wish image wise it would've been enough to sway me away. The fs700/7q image is amazing. I'm sure the fs7 will even be better (certainly better ergonomics, build and design) but not so sure it's worth it for me to shell out more money for basically the same quality image. That's where I'm at and can't stress enough if I didn't already have the fs700 the fs7 would most likely be my next camera.
Click to expand...

I kinda feel cameras are on the iphone cycle. Like if you have a model you buy in every 2nd generation. They are just close enough to make it not worth upgrading but the next model will fall within the feature to $$ ratio. I'll be having this same dilemma when you jump on the FS8. and I'm weighing the benefits. :)
 
It's just up to you...
The FS100 can do most of the stuff the FS700 can do (without 7Q of course).
The FS700 with 7Q can do most of the stuff the FS7 can do...

No "real" need to upgrade here.
 
The fs7 will be around a lot longer than the fs700 will. With its great build/design, 10 bit internal 4k, that is your insurance policy. Most of the people I work with including myself would much rather shoot internal than with a recorder. So even after something else comes down the pike the fs7 will still be a viable and productive tool. The truth is if the fs700 had a good internal broadcast codec i would keep it regardless of what I purchase down the road. Unfortunately dslrs for a 1/3 of the price beat it spec wise, it's kinda hard to swallow after just 2 years with the fs700. Thank God for the odyssey or I would've gotten rid of it many months ago.
 
Erik Wittbusch said:
It's just up to you...
The FS100 can do most of the stuff the FS700 can do (without 7Q of course).
The FS700 with 7Q can do most of the stuff the FS7 can do...

No "real" need to upgrade here.
Click to expand...

I certainly don't agree. 10-bit 4K XAVC 422 internal without external device is a huge "upgrade" in my books. So much so that its largely in part how I justified the price of the new F55 since it mean no more external 3rd party devices with dangling recorder, power requirements, proprietary media that doesn't work on anything else, etc..
 
Last edited:
The C300 has shown how in demand a great internal codec is to production. Being able to knock out broadcast friendly xavc files or post friendly Pro res (external unit) internal is such a benefit.
 
Marino215 said:
The fs7 will be around a lot longer than the fs700...
Click to expand...

Sony NEX-FS700
dimensions: 145x178,5x235,5mm
weight: 1680g
(source: Sony website europe)

Sony PXW-FS7
dimensions: 137,8x221x241,3mm
weight: approx. 2000g
(source Sony brochure PXW-FS7)

The difference comes from the design of the top handle. They are more or less the same size!
 
Last edited:
starcentral said:
I certainly don't agree. 10-bit 4K XAVC 422 internal without external device is a huge "upgrade" in my books. So much so that its largely in part how I justified the price of the new F55 since it mean no more external 3rd party devices with dangling recorder, power requirements, proprietary media that doesn't work on anything else, etc..
Click to expand...

Of course that is true - but if the FS700 with the 7Q is not good enough for you, the FS7 won't do the job either.
If you want it for less cables and 3rd party devices - it's up to you. But the footage just won't look different...
 
One good side effect of the FS7 predicted high sales is, unless everyone buys the extension unit that will eventually allow prores. There will be a ton more XAVC out there for clients to have to deal with. Hopefully making us 5/55 owners lives a little easier and possibly erasing the need to even buy the prores upgrade.

Now.. all of you soon to be FS7 owners, promise to all of us that you'll tell your clients the FS7 only shoots xavc and not mpeg so we can finally be done with this 8-bit nonsense.
 
c300 - 8 bit internal 4:2:2 recording 1080p recording up to (30 fps) - 10-11 stops dynamic usuable dynamic range with bizarre looking motion - weird shutter with motion that doesn't quite feel right and is really top heavy- cost - 12k

fs7 - 10 bit internal 4:2:2 recording 4k up to (180 FPS) - arguably around 14 stops dynamic range, better looking motion - cost around 8k-12k where you can use a speed booster and get canon glass on it and have in essence a full frame camera that balances well. with s log 3 and s gamut.cine that can look similar to the alexa - with the ability to do raw output.

hmmmm. I don't think there's much of a comparison - I wouldn't recommend to anyone to buy a c300 at this point.
 
eddavid said:
c300 - 8 bit internal 4:2:2 recording 1080p recording up to (30 fps) - 10-11 stops dynamic usuable dynamic range with bizarre looking motion - weird shutter with motion that doesn't quite feel right and is really top heavy- cost - 12k

fs7 - 10 bit internal 4:2:2 recording 4k up to (180 FPS) - arguably around 14 stops dynamic range, better looking motion - cost around 8k-12k where you can use a speed booster and get canon glass on it and have in essence a full frame camera that balances well. with s log 3 and s gamut.cine that can look similar to the alexa - with the ability to do raw output.

hmmmm. I don't think there's much of a comparison - I wouldn't recommend to anyone to buy a c300 at this point.
Click to expand...
Better looking motion? You've seen two videos and one of them was shot entirely 60p 4k.
 
Does anyone have any informed knowledge about how the FS7 will compare to the Cinema EOS line in terms of low light? I believe the FS7 has a native 2000 ISO but am interested how it will hold up to the C300 low light capabilities. If its comparable...then its really a no brainer for me to switch over. With a speed booster it may be possible to have internal 4k, slow motion, in low light situations. The event environment shooter would be in heaven.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top