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

Ive not tried the FS7 but here is my experience with the F3.

Standard gammas just kill the highlights and make a 'video' look

Cine gammas (where you can color balance, add noise reduction etc) do not massacre the highlights/DR and basically give the same sort of look to Slog.

Im sure a Cinegamma (not 'legal' Cine2) is what you need..



EDIT

My understanding of CineEI is that it is designed to use with raw (F5/55) - If anyone has shot Red you will be aware that the ISO is fixed - aka fully adjustable in post - so nothing you do in camera affects the image - now with Red one could just set the camera at the lowest ISO 320 and blat away - but in that mode often the monitor becomes too dark so one need to crank up the monitor brightness - one does this by adjusting the 'ISO' on the camera - this does not affect the file (apart from maybe the meta data) - CineEI is absolutely the same unless one is recording the viewed image. I cannot understand why anyone would use CineEI when not shooting raw.
 
Last edited:
I own an F3 and frankly have never been a big fan of the Cine gammas though I use them often. People disagree about this but I find they they are OK when needed but are not kind to flesh tones . Maybe that's because I usually have to give my clients something they can take home or look at on the monitor and I should be underexposing touch more. But even then I'm not nuts about it. From my understanding the SLOg3 baked in looks are much prettier and much more DR.
Is no one else here tempted by the possibility of a baked-in near Alexa look?
 
Last edited:
I dont see how a profile is 'kind' or 'unkind' to flesh tones? All the gammas do is.. change the gamma

But maybe there is some subtlety that is being missed (by me) - I thought the huge difference between STD and Cine/Slog is that STD saws highlights

FWIW Sony Catalyst gives a very simple interface for delogging..

S
 
Cine gammas have very aggressive compression in the high end and it tends to creep into Caucasian flesh tones making them look plasticky .it is subtle and It doesn't happen all the time . if your exposure is low enough you are clean.
However I generally run them at 60 and I often see the effect . Unless I have highlight issues I prefer 709 -type 5 on the F3 with the gamma at -4. Last week I shot an interview with a guy against a window . I set up both cine 4 and 709 and let the client choose . He went for 709 saying the face looked more natural . I agreed and clients almost universally pick 709 . Most of my tech friends agree and we're all 25 year veterans . I f I ran the faces at 50-55 I might be safer but it would be under and it might stay that way in the final. It's just the way it is.

By the way 709 doesn't " saw highlights " you still have your knee . Not the greatest but it helps and even an aggressive knee usually avoids the face . Also there are plenty of times where cine gammAs are appropriate .

i am looking at Sony catalyst as another approach to the issue but even then I'd prefer to have color nailed in or close.

Of course it's all hypothetical until I get the camera in my hands :)
 
Last edited:
Lenilenapi said:
Is no one else here tempted by the possibility of a baked-in near Alexa look?
Click to expand...

I definitely am.

I often edit what I shoot but I need to sometimes also hand off the footage to someone else, and, IMO, a Canon C-Series WideDR mode is what I am looking for in this camera.
 
Incidently - CINE EI is not only for RAW, its also for SLog3 recording XAVC . Most of us won't be shooting RAW which requires a separate back and which takes up tons of disk space.

Re RED - adjusting the ISO and Kelvin doesn't affect the RAW output of the RED files, but that metadata has 2 important functions in the real world of clients.
1- It gives the client an image that they can approve of in the field. That's really important in my world.
2- I don't know the whole Red workflow but my understanding is that the first thing the client sees is your metadata on the image. They can make minor adjustments easily or they can completely re adjust it, but it comes up the way you wanted it to for a start. That's invaluable to me as a DP.

I recently shot some exposure tests on an EPIC. I downloaded the card to my laptop - clicked on the pics and they looked exactly the way I wanted them to - no fuss , no adjustments.

Now I'm new to this workflow and perhaps its easier than I understand. How easy is it for a client to open an Slog file and look at it with a good LUT right off the bat? If you are in Custom mode using Slog3 you do have access to more color controls right? How does that metadata reside with the clip and what do you need to access it? In that case though, do you have access to viewfinder and monitor LUT's in Custom mode? I thought you did not.

Here's what i don't get about Cine EI - if you can record Slog3 at 3200 , 4800 and 5600, then I imagine they could also provide you with a full range of Kelvin plus a small range of green & magenta to adjust, (not to mention a white balance button.) Maybe there's a good technical reason but if not , it ain't much to ask for.

BTW - I'm sure this will be very unpopular here, but I think 709 gets a bad rap. What you do within the gamma range is more important than its limitations. I have shot plenty of 709 video over the years that i think looks great and natural. Plus I've seen plenty of stuff shot with log and and with Cine Gammas that for my money looks like XXXX. You make the pictures, not the camera!

I'm excited because i understand Slog3 is a real advance in the look of the camera so that's what I want to be able to access, but if I'm say in low light and slog might be too noisy I won't hesitate to jump into 709 if that's the right tool for the job.

I also agree with Matt - we're in competition with things like RED and Canon Log C that are fast and easy to deal with in post.

Sorry for ranting , I'll be quiet now.

Lenny
 
Last edited:
Shipment (non)update for people who are awaiting their cameras. I pre-ordered mine from B&H on September 19th, and it's still "On Order".

On November 2nd, one B&H rep told me it should ship within 7-8 days. Another rep today (Nov 6) essentially refused to give me an estimate. They've confirmed a few cameras came in but not enough to fill all pre-orders.

Just wanted to provide a point of reference for people might be planning on the camera to arrive by certain shoot dates.
 
morgan_moore said:
My understanding of CineEI is that it is designed to use with raw (F5/55) - If anyone has shot Red you will be aware that the ISO is fixed - aka fully adjustable in post - so nothing you do in camera affects the image - now with Red one could just set the camera at the lowest ISO 320 and blat away - but in that mode often the monitor becomes too dark so one need to crank up the monitor brightness - one does this by adjusting the 'ISO' on the camera - this does not affect the file (apart from maybe the meta data) - CineEI is absolutely the same unless one is recording the viewed image. I cannot understand why anyone would use CineEI when not shooting raw.
Click to expand...

If I remember it correctly up until firmware version 3 on the F5/F55 CineEI mode only worked with RAW. It was version 3 which enabled recording to SXS cards, which essentially meant you could select slog gamma in CineEI mode.

About RED RAW vs Sony CineEI - actually they do not really work the same from my point of view. With RED like you said, you are recording at 320ISO and the accompanying metadata file keeps the settings made in-camera which you can utilize in post, or actually just discard and go back to the "default" which is the true base RAW file at 320ISO that was recorded. With Sony CineEI you are locked at the camera's native ISO (2000 for the F5, and 1250 for the F55) but if you start to adjust the camera's ISO you actually will affect the native recorded image (RAW or slog) because the ISO only adjusts the gain of the LUT and not the recorded signal itself - but because changing ISO affects your exposure tools and monitor or VF it causes you to "bake in" any over or underexposure and if you are overexposed for example you are not going to get that latitude you lost back in post. So I see RED and Sony as working differently.


Lenilenapi said:
From my understanding the SLOg3 baked in looks are much prettier and much more DR.
Is no one else here tempted by the possibility of a baked-in near Alexa look?
Click to expand...

I have a handful of clients where I bake in a slightly modified version of the LC709-A LUT and its pretty well good bye Sony look for good. I agree with you, why should I waste time copying footage to a computer and then transcode it in post when the same thing can be done in-camera in real time? But the limitation is the white balancing which is why Sony needs to enable LUTs for custom mode, or make two CineEI modes - one for RAW and one for slog.


Lenilenapi said:
Incidently - CINE EI is not designed for RAW, its designed for Log .
Click to expand...

As stated earlier in my above post CineEI on the F5/F55 was designed for RAW, then later Sony enabled it for slog by allowing recording to SXS cards. Interestingly enough, CineEI on the F35 and F3 were designed only for slog because there was no RAW on those cameras.

:huh:
 
Last edited:
Dennis,
Well first I think we basically agree, that Sony ought to either enable LUT's in Custom mode or do something to CINE EI to enable white balancing and manipulation. It seems like enabling LUT's in Custom is the easy answer and give you an ISO choice as well in Custom. That would do it.

However even from your description I don't see much difference between RED and the way CINE EI works. In both cases the underlying exposure doesn't change and in both cases the ISOs you set-up for monitoring will cause you to make exposure decisions that could radically affect your picture. i.e. if you set up the RED for ISO 2000 it ain't going to look good because you're really exposing for 320. Fortunately you have the histograms to keep you safe.

Likewise in CINE EI if you expose at 400 ISO you're nevertheless optimized for 2000 not 400 so you will lose a lot of DR. There are differences because with RED my understanding is the gamma steps are equal throughout the range while in SLOg they vary so it is probably more sensitive to getting off the sweet spot of the curve.

On the F3 you don't have a CINE EI mode though, its just a Picture Profile and you can do anything you want with it - except get a decent LUT unfortunately. It seems like Sony engineering has been awfully late to understanding how to make LUT's and Slog work in tandem and while mightily improved, its still not 100% and still not equal to RED's arrangement from the beginning.

Can anyone fill- in with how Alexa uses LUT's.
 
Honestly, to me it seems like LUTs were originally the domain of high end cinema equipment few of us could afford, and their purpose as a field monitoring and post production tool was understood by the professionals leveraging them. As these tools have become available at a much lower price point, and available on cleanly recordable SDI outputs, there seems to be a surge in people who want to use LUTs as Picture Profile shortcuts to a baked image. I don't think this is what they're intended for. And my understanding is that the transforms involved mean you can't just apply arbitrary white balance settings to a LUT.

Just use the picture profiles if you don't have time to process through Resolve. Not everything needs 14 stops of dynamic range either.
 
Lenny I think you are right, not sure why they seemed so different to me for a second. I have shot with both and graded both :s

And I forgot the F3 never had cineEI mode.
 
Viddovation said:
my understanding is that the transforms involved mean you can't just apply arbitrary white balance settings to a LUT.
Click to expand...

That may be true, and if it is I'll drop the whole issue, but at least so far I haven't read anything convincing. After all Sony allows you to use 709 Type A or 709n 800% at 3200, 4800 and 5600 Kelvin. That implies that you should be able to use any white balance in-between. RED lets you do it.

I haven't shot with an Alexa, but just looked at the Alexa manual and indeed you have adjustments for Kelvin and + - green and magenta. Also for EI and they have a great way of describing the affect of changing the EI by showing in the manual how your steps of latitude above and below neutral grey change with EI. So what's so different about Arri Log and Sony Log?

Lenny
 
The LUT goes on top of the image no matter what WB it is, and from what I've seen in post applying Rec709 LUTs (or other LUTs for that matter) whatever white balance preset I chose seems preserved. ie. when I've purposely biased the WB to get a desired color tint.

The difference is not so much Arri Log vs Sony Log. It has to do with the fact that in RAW mode on the Sony varying white balance settings would require some rocket science algorithms - at least that's how Alister had described it in a post somewhere on the interweb. And again CineEI mode was primarily made for RAW, so the limits we seem to have in CineEI mode are mostly due to "RAW".
 
I never found the limited 5600k or 3200k settings when shooting on the F3 in locked S-log mode to be a problem. It has always graded fine and when I use the Samurai Blade and the LOG viewing mode on that I got an image that gave my clients a good look of how the final image could end up like.
 
I just spoke to a few techs who work with Alexa and if I understood them correctly, like a RED you have a basic LUT for monitoring and viewfinder and then you have simple camera controls for adjustable Kelvin as well as green and magenta offset. These are metadata if you shoot Raw but if you shoot the Alexa 709 that's your baked in look.

I imagine RED and Alexa are the competition here and neither seems to have any problem giving you a LUT with some white balance control and with Alexa you can have it baked-in in 709.

So why does Sony have this complicated system with CINE EI and CUSTOM? Either there's a good technical reason or SONY engineers didn't get how most people would prefer to work. If its the latter we ought to ask them to straighten it out.
 
Last edited:
I think the Cine EI/Custom approach is understandable. Sony's primary camera history lies in broadcast, and that's the angle a large percentage of F5(5) owners seem to be coming from. They're used to the features of Custom mode and would expect the cameras to have them.

Cine EI caters to shooters from a more conventional film workflow.

It's just that there's been a few snafus in terms of LUTs, Noise Reduction and False Colour interoperability. Which Sony are (albeit slowly) addressing via firmware updates.

Yes, it's a little frustrating, but I have to say, since I've uncovered the existence and purpose of ALL FILES on the camera, operationally the camera has become about as simple as one could hope (I generally only need to press the Menu button now to format media, everything else can be controlled externally and through ALL FILES)
 
Osslund said:
I never found the limited 5600k or 3200k settings when shooting on the F3 in locked S-log mode to be a problem. It has always graded fine and when I use the Samurai Blade and the LOG viewing mode on that I got an image that gave my clients a good look of how the final image could end up like.
Click to expand...

Isn't that only C-LOG, not S-Log?
 
Grug said:
Cine EI caters to shooters from a more conventional film workflow.
Click to expand...

Well who are those shooters? The big guns are shooting with RED's and Alexa's and they both offer LUT's and color controls at the same time.

The film guys didn't leave their look to the lab - god forbid. They carried boxes of filters to hone it in precisely . They would often shoot a chart in white light for the timer, then put whatever look they wanted in front of the lens and expose as they saw fit . "Make the chart look good, then leave my footage the hell alone" . I used to send specific timing lights to the lab so they wouldn't screw up my look. How many times did I see a DP go bananas or get fired when the dailies of their beautiful dark blue night exteriors came back looking like cheery mid-day sun.

In the video world the high end shooters always had a highly paid tech painting the picture in 709 for them . They hate the fact that that guy is often gone now and so much power has gone to post.
 
Last edited:
Before discussing this any further, lets wait for the camera to hit our own hands.

In theory, I miss the ability to bake in LUTs in CineEI, too.

But I think I'll always use custom mode anyway to tweak the image to my favorised look.
Custom doesn't neccessarily mean you'll loose dynamic range or a certain look.
The look that can be achieved with baked in looks in CineEI should be repeatable in
custom mode, too. If not, it can be a problem.

But I'll wait to receive my camera and test this myself before complaining.

It's waiting for me at my dealers office since monday... :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top