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

Very nice footage.

But these lenses "hide" what the sensor is capable of. They reduce the dynamic range and soften the image a lot.

I don't think there's really a difference in the footage from the F5 and the FS7 if they share same sensor, same colour filter, similar or same A/D processing, same or similar picture profile and same codec . We won't see any big surprises from the FS7 footage...
 
Grug said:
Focus peaking on the F5 (with the OLED EVF at least) is tremendous, mine is on permanently and makes confirming focus a breeze.
Click to expand...

Must say, I'm still a fan of focus peaking too. The punch-in zoom is not much if your subject is moving. I suppose it's personal preference, subject matter and what you're used to.

Steve
 
Mitch Gross said:
Sometimes you guys really give me a laugh. The FS7 just announced and you're already worried that there wil be an FS7 replacement in the future and it will be full frame? How do you ever sleep at night?

I have astounding news for you. Sony will keep on introducing new cameras. There is usually one or maybe two within a price category every year or two. These cameras will always be better than what came before, because it would be madness to go the other direction. (I love it when a company releases a product as "our best ever!" If it wasn't better, why would you make it?)

A camera is a tool. It has a viability lifespan. When it is released, if it is a significant improvement for your work that justifies its purchase then you buy it and use it. You should expect it to be superceded in a couple of years max. If you can stretch anything more from it that is gravy. So the value calculation has to be if that purchase justifis itself over the next year or two. If it does then the conversation is over. If not then don't bother.

In other words, don't CARE what other camera may come along -- how do I feel about this one?
Click to expand...

I guess it all depends on how you look at it. You said it yourself.....new
and better cameras WILL come along. I am making an educated guess
as to what I think will be coming. Because I shoot R&G but with
clients that like the 'look' of a large sensor this interests me. As many others
have said, the 28-135 isn't quite there for Super 35 but for FF, it would be perfect.
I own a FS700. The FS7 seems to be a step up, but I suspect a bigger step up
is coming. It's really not much different than when I used to skip from FCP 2 to
FCP 4 without paying the FCP 3 upgrade. So you may 'laugh' at me, but
on the other hand, I laugh at the 'American consumerism mentality' that
you must always have the 'latest and greatest'. Seems to me to be business
smart. No camera/lens combo has quite what I need but I suspect one will soon
so I should do what, buy now anyways? Na, I think that instead of spending
money just to have the 'newest toy', I'll wait this one out to see if a new FF
camera or 18-90 lens for this FS7 is introduced....and an important caveat on
the lens....it should be similar in price and performance to the 28-135.
Yes I know about the Cabrio 19-90 and no, I don't have a spare $35 grand
in my couch cushions. But $2500 (which is the cost of the 28-135), I could
do that.
 
Last edited:
Isn't it odd that this camera uses the "old" sensor from the 2012 PMW-F5 and we're still super excited? Usually there's a lot of bitching about reusing the same sensor over and over (like Canon did with the 7D sensor) but no one really cares.
 
Osslund said:
Isn't it odd that this camera uses the "old" sensor from the 2012 PMW-F5 and we're still super excited? Usually there's a lot of bitching about reusing the same sensor over and over (like Canon did with the 7D sensor) but no one really cares.
Click to expand...


The internet cares! ;)
 
28-135 FF is equiv to 42-200 crop frame S35. I have been using just the kit lenses 35/50/85 on the F3 and using an adapter for the occasional wides with a 17-35 Nikon and even less often 11-16 but lately 90% is no wider than 35 so this 28-135 seems just fine to me and I am ordering with this lens. The image stabilization will be great for handheld and really helpful at the long end. Maybe they will come out with a matching wide zoom lens later but for only one lens this seems fine. I hope the EVF is good enough for focusing critically since with a large sensor and 4 K that will be needed. I think this camera is a brilliant alternative to the Amira at about 10% of the cost with the zoom lens combo!
 
Osslund said:
Isn't it odd that this camera uses the "old" sensor from the 2012 PMW-F5 and we're still super excited? Usually there's a lot of bitching about reusing the same sensor over and over (like Canon did with the 7D sensor) but no one really cares.
Click to expand...
The point is it's difficult to think how it could be realistically better. The photosite count is optimal for basic 4k, and it's very easy to derive excellent 1080 from it via simple processing. It may not give full 4k resolution - but if it had twice the photosite count, it may not perform as well in other respects.

It's no accident that all of Canon, Sony, and soon Panasonic will be using sensors with very similar characteristics - 3840(4096)x2160 photosite count, s35, and likely similar basic technology. It's a bit like how aeroplanes of a given size all now look far more similar than was the case a few decades ago - the manufacturers put the same requirements into their computers, and the Laws of Physics give them much the same answers. Still sensors used for video are a different story. They were plagued by compromise - still are to an extent. It's difficult to satisfy stills and video in one sensor without one being compromised.

There is better possible - and the F65 sensor is maybe an example with it's better resolution, even the F55 with it's global shutter. But is it realistic to expect such for the price? Sony - just like the other manufacturers - are a business with shareholders to answer to. They've all got to recoup past R&D spend via todays sales. Personally, I think it's pretty amazing to get we are getting for the price.
 
Once again you are assuming that it is an "old" sensor design when you actually do not know that. It could in fact be a newer generation from the F5. You don't know and Sony is not going to tell.
 
Mitch Gross said:
Once again you are assuming that it is an "old" sensor design when you actually do not know that. It could in fact be a newer generation from the F5. You don't know and Sony is not going to tell.
Click to expand...

Not to mention all the hardware that is used to process the information from the sensor or any other part(s) in the chain between the light hitting the sensor and the final recorded data.... imho

For all the comments on wanting the perfect, future proof, run and gun setup. I think this is sometimes a conflict in technology. S35 giving shallow DOF and someone wanting to be able to capture anything and everything says to me that the best solution would be a standard HD ENG camera. If the thought is wanting a run and gun zoom lens so that swapping lenses out during a documentary shoot / nature shoot is the end means, then any of the S35 cameras would be the answer and the question would be to start your purchase from the glass point of view. What lens do I want to shoot with. Price point. Positive/negative factors. Future proof. Then from there pick a camera that will support the lens, be it Sony, Canon, Hitachi, Red, Samsung, etc. This way you have the perfect glass for run and gun, and what you record on doesn't really matter. The purchase decision was for R&G capabilities, not manufacturer or FPS or recording media etc. At least that is my take on it. As Mitch said, cameras are a consumable. The stuff in your kit; lenses, lights, audio will out live any camera if you give your device a good 5 year plan....
 
Last edited:
steve phillipps said:
I thought the optimal count for 4k with debayer was a 6k sensor? Steve
Click to expand...
Well, I did say "basic" 4k..... :)

It's quite true that a 4k Bayer sensor won't give full 4k resolution, and to get the latter you need approx. twice the photosite count - so for quad-HD about 5.5-6k horizontally. But that means a bigger sensor or smaller photosites, which may mean better resolution but other compromises. It also becomes more difficult to deBayer and scale to the output resolution. It depends how you define "optimal" across all factors.

And at the moment, 4k is in it's infancy. A lot of people are asking if it's worth it at all, and to be true it only is on a large screen. At the moment, I'm inclined to think the 4k sensor is optimal at this price point.

In years to come, it may change, and the sensor design as used in the F65 is (IMHO) far better than 6k Bayer as it also delivers true 4k with much simpler processing. It's completely wrong though to call it "8k" - such would be expected to have 4x the photosite count of a 3840x2160 sensor, this has twice the count. It was talked about in this forum a few years ago if anyone's interested - http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?224519-Q67-Bayer-with-a-twist - Sony call the principle Q67, and fundamentally the pattern etc is Bayer, but rotated through 45 degrees..
 
I've never looked carefully at F5 (or F55) AVCHD and am wondering if the quality is similar to what you get from the 4K2HD downcovert from FS700 RAW in the Odyssey 7Q? (i.e is it also downconverting from its 4K RAW)

I have compared that to my F3 and the Odyssey was a strikingly cleaner look - not so much noise as a generally cleaner image quality. With FS700 detail off entirely it was as sharp or sharper than the F3 at my normal setting of -17 (which is still quite a bit of detail). I guess the difference was true sharpness rather than that created by detail - very natural. Actually I thought it would blow back up quite well. Check out the 300% blow up below. That's a comparison between the FS700 internal vs 7Q-4K2HD . F3 probably looks a little better but not dramatically.

https://vimeo.com/89601613

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dk-tESaP2eQ

Should I expect something similar from the FS7? That would be delicious . I would think Sony should be able to match Comprehensive's ability to down convert.

Added Later:

YES!! - Found a post from Allistair Chapman saying the F5's AVCHD was sharper with detail OFF than the F3 with detail ON . That sounds like what I observed with the 7Q.
If that's true and the FS7 is likely similar then the quality of the FS7's HD will be much better than the F3 or the internal FS700/100.
That's what I'm hoping for.
Fingers crossed
 
Last edited:
Mitch - there is a different between 'better' and 'different' cameras.

A 'Better' camera may do 1000FPS and come in 2019 - such a camera would rely on the inevitable increases in computer power per dollar over time

A 'Different' camera may have the A7s chip in an XLR shoulder form box.. and that could come in November - such a camera would entirely use todays technology

The latter may be more appropriate to non cabrio owning run-n-gunners - that is the 'worry'

S
 
Last edited:
Personally, I think too many of us on here need to stop spending money on successive generations of cameras and start spending it on actual useful things like decent lights, 4x4 frames, floppies, a variety of diffusions, cardellini and super clamps, grip heads, c-stands, low and high combo stands and at least one decent sized overhead (12x12) - things that can actually help us make better pictures, rather than just technically higher quality versions of the same pictures.
 
At least one Sony representative have stated that the FS7 have the same sensor as the F5. Anyways I'm not complaining about it. To me I found it great to essentially get the F5 in a better body for less.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top