FS7: NO Sony Fs7!!

Fyi- I deleted a post I made because it only mucked things up more.

I was thrown off by Morgan using “4K” in regard to still images, which is not something I am accustomed to. I don’t think of digital stills in terms of “4K”, “2K”, “HD”, “SD”.

I’ve never heard anyone say “that photo is 4K”.
 
JPNola said:
Fyi- I deleted a post I made because it only mucked things up more.
Click to expand...

Yeah I sort of wonder if I need to ban myself from this thread for pulling it off track.



EDITED TO ADD:
That was obviously a joke, btw. I'm not insinuating that JP should be banned or anything.
 
Morgan- I just had a little adventure trying to figure out the music you used in the video you linked above. I shouldn’t have had to.
 
Luis Caffesse said:
Yeah I sort of wonder if I need to ban myself from this thread for pulling it off track.



EDITED TO ADD:
That was obviously a joke, btw. I'm not insinuating that JP should be banned or anything.
Click to expand...

Might be fun to ban myself from the thread I started. :D

( why is it that the small window of suggested emojis are a bunch of emojis that are rarely used and few of the most commonly used emojis? It gives me suggestions like this one: :badputer: )
 
Luis Caffesse said:
Yeah I sort of wonder if I need to ban myself from this thread for pulling it off track.



EDITED TO ADD:
That was obviously a joke, btw. I'm not insinuating that JP should be banned or anything.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. This is why I say leave the rambling and veering off course alone(to an extent). Sometimes you end up with a discussion that's just as interesting or important as the original topic. And sometimes more so. I personally find the focus discussion interesting. I was going to jump in much earlier, but you and others have covered most of what I was going to touch-on.
 
Are you suggesting the discussion of optical theory is more interesting than updates on the shipping of my FX9?

Seeing as tangential excursion is okay...

Recall the real-name debate had recently?

My post about my client is an instance where one might not want to use real name. If the individual visits this forum they might see my post and think it complaining about them or inaccurately characterizing their position, dislike that, and pull the job from me.

Posts where I ask questions revealing lack of knowledge could also be seen by a client who questions why they are hiring a DP who does not know X , or doesn’t understand Y, when they should.

With real-name your exposing of your lack of knowledge is tied to your real name and potentially harmful to your business / career. And that potentially inhibits inquiry / learning. Because under real name you are reluctant to reveal any lack of knowledge, misunderstanding of photographic concepts, or weaknesses.
 
Probably would know it's you anyway unless, "I’d even consider Komodo but NO Fs7! It isn’t Netflix compliant. It isn’t true 4k." is said a lot around the office.
 
morgan_moore said:
And this I still beleive - peaking is bunk. In my mellow old age I can see that it helps when the situation is bad.. like sitting on a tuk-tuk in zambia not really being able to see any thing at all.

So my FS7. .I had (and you will laugh) all those assists off and soon relagated the 'monitor' to be a confidence view for the director and bought a smallHD 502.. which is OK, but not great. Ive had various monitors - shogun - DP1, Dp6 and now even a 23in set monitor. Really they are all pretty piss poor in all modes for getting the right (correct) eye sharp.

Recently I shot something and did use peaking an focus bash.. (at the same time) considering them the best of a bad bunch of tools. Was it sharp ? No idea really.

Im now moving to AF and letting the computer do the heavy lifting. And if you are not shooting through a bush in heavy backlight it seems to be the thing :)
Click to expand...

I'm not laughing. You continually denigrate a camera that you proudly admit to not wanting to learn how to use properly. If you want to know what is wrong with the FS7, look in the mirror. So, you used peaking years before on some other camera or cheap montor (probably didn't use it correctly back then either) and then jump to the illogical conclusion that peaking is useless on every other camera in the world. If we were talking about people instead of cameras, I'd say you were a racist bigot. :-)

A professional examines everything a new camera offers without making any assumptions . . . and THEN decides what settings, features, and techniques will produce the best results. You, my friend, have been struggling against the FS7 for years when a few minutes in the first days of ownership would have made life so much easier on shoot after shoot. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's my impression from the dozens of threads like this one where you complain about things you don't understand and don't want to learn.
 
Last edited:
Luis Caffesse said:
So each image is either in focus or it is not - but you cannot say that all copies of an image are either in focus or they are not.
Click to expand...

Yes, I can say that. Maybe you have decided that you can be less precise about focusing in HD than you need to be in 4K because you don't think it will be noticed. I cannot say that for my own work. Either the focus is correct or it is not. Read my previous post above about how NOTHING is different about the camera or lens when you change from a 4K codec to an HD codec. Nothing. Resolution makes no difference and the techniques and tools you use to achieve focus are exactly the same. Either you got the focus right or you didn't. But I will agree there are different degrees of missing the focus and some might slide by.
 
Doug Jensen said:
I'm not laughing. You continually denigrate a camera that you proudly admit to not wanting to learn how to use properly. If you want to know what is wrong with the FS7, look in the mirror. So, you used peaking years before on some other camera or cheap montor (probably didn't use it correctly back then either) and then jump to the illogical conclusion that peaking is useless on every other camera in the world. If we were talking about people instead of cameras, I'd say you were a racist bigot. :-)

A professional examines everything a new camera offers without making any assumptions . . . and THEN decides what settings, features, and techniques will produce the best results. You, my friend, have been struggling against the FS7 for years when a few minutes in the first days of ownership would have made life so much easier on shoot after shoot. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's my impression from the dozens of threads like this one where you complain about things you don't understand and don't want to learn.
Click to expand...

Your interpretation is sort of fair. Until you touch the camera.

I was coming from the hasselblad H1 and the nikon D3 (admitedly stills cams) not to mention a BMW 7, not a camera at all - all of these things are pleasant to be around for long hours of work. Im lucky to have used decent tools over the years starting with the legend nikon F3. But the FS7.. the handle.. hard sweat slip plastic.. the focus punch in an artifacted mess .. the screen on some wonky platstic conflab - the cam is basically a toy**. The build not even up there with the EX1 or certainly the Betacams that I have less experience of. The EX1 felt like they tried thier absolute best for the price - same with the Z1 or 5 or whatever the last tape cam was. That nice little 'ziess' lens had some sort of feel.

The main reason I binned the viewfinder was I found the lead too short and the chimney too .. embrrassing ? bizarre? wonk (?) . Not the peaking or suchlike.

But the point reference to this thread is I think AF ups the hit rate esp on doco.. expecially for the younger (cheaper) operators and it is therefore worth suggesting that this is the wrong cam for some projects. (if you are a producer)

Conversly the 4k60 ND 10bit, intelligent level of compression, XLR and price point at the time make it a box that has huge appeal. The central box is pretty good, the hard handle and screen are pi_ss poor afterthoughts.. that I threw away and replaced with more pricey alternatives leading to some enjoyment of the camera.

So I did in fact "examine everything a new camera offers without making any assumptions . . . and THEN decide(s) what settings, features, and techniques will produce the best results."

I decided that the best use would come from swapping to a 1080 monitor and a carved wooden handle and using manual iris lenses*.. and beleive that that delivered the best reults.

My physical interaction with the camera was limited as far as could be.

Im going Canon now and losing two bodies FS7 and nikon Z6.. both are fine camera bodies.. that for thier own reasons failed in the larger ecosystem

Well I actually dont know about losing the FS7 but for a manual focus ND camera the BMPPro seems a lot lighter.

*the side iris wheel is also unaceptable
**actually thinking this through.. the free stuff they give you with the cam are toylike, the actual body is OK.
 
Last edited:
JPNola said:
Calm down, Douglas. I was talking about your formidability on knowledge of video.
Click to expand...

Oh, that's too bad. I was thinking I'd take you out to dinner at one of your favorite Bourbon Street restaurants. Maybe when I come back through NO next month. :-)
BTW, are things open? Would love to do the WWII museum when I pass through again in May. Headed to Big Bend NP right now for some mountain biking and shooting with the FX6.
 
Sam, the build quality of the FS7 is something we can agree on. It works and I haven't broken mine, but I don't like the "feel" of it any better than you do. Don't even get me started on cheapo feel of Sony's lenses.
 
Doug Jensen said:
Oh, that's too bad. I was thinking I'd take you out to dinner at one of your favorite Bourbon Street restaurants. Maybe when I come back through NO next month. :-)
BTW, are things open? Would love to do the WWII museum when I pass through again in May. Headed to Big Bend NP right now for some mountain biking and shooting with the FX6.
Click to expand...

You had a bad moment and now are trying, rather feebly, to paper over it.

I suppose that’s somewhere towards commendable.
 
JPNola said:
You had a bad moment and now are trying, rather feebly, to paper over it.

I suppose that’s somewhere towards commendable.
Click to expand...

I honestly don't understand what you are saying. Bad moment? In what way? And how am I trying to paper over it? Please educate me because I'm cluessless as to what the hell you're talking about.
 
Doug Jensen said:
Yes, I can say that. Maybe you have decided that you can be less precise about focusing in HD than you need to be in 4K because you don't think it will be noticed. I cannot say that for my own work. Either the focus is correct or it is not. Read my previous post above about how NOTHING is different about the camera or lens when you change from a 4K codec to an HD codec. Nothing. Resolution makes no difference and the techniques and tools you use to achieve focus are exactly the same. Either you got the focus right or you didn't. But I will agree there are different degrees of missing the focus and some might slide by.
Click to expand...

I am not saying that we can decide to be less precise in HD. What I am saying is that HD is less precise.
There is a wider margin of error as resolution drops - this isn't about whether or not we decide to be more or less precise, it is about the precision of the resolution in which we are aquiring.

It seems you are talking about a conceptual focus point - where the lens will focus perfectly for a given frame. And yes, you're right in that the lens and camera do not change with the resolution.
But you seem to gloss over the fact that what changes with the resolution is what can be resolved. And that is the very heart of what 'focus' is.

As an example of what I was saying earlier - can everyone tell which (if any) of these images are out of focus and which are not?


NUMBER 1:
1-reduced.jpg


NUMBER 2:
2-reduced.jpg


NUMBER 3:
3-reduced.jpg
 
Luis Caffesse said:
I am not saying that we can decide to be less precise in HD. What I am saying is that HD is less precise.
Click to expand...

Luis, yeah I get that and I think we are basically on the same page, but I cannot remember a single instance where I looked at one of my clips on a 4K monitor and said "yeah, it's a little out of focus, but the edit is going to be in HD so it's good enough". Have you? If so, I'd like to see some of those 4K shot(s) that would make the cut for an HD edit but wouldn't be good enough for 4K. Imagine a client calling to say, "hey some of the footage you shot yesterday looks soft." And you say, "Oh, nobody told me you were shooting for a 4K edit. I know it was sloppy, but I thought it was good enough for HD. I'll do better next time". Client, "there won't be a next time."

With all that said, I think the bigger point that I was trying to make is being lost in a technical discussion of what defines being in focus. Set that aside for a minute. What I was trying to say is that focusing (and almost every other feature and function) on the FS7 is exactly the same whether you are shooting HD or 4K. There is no difference with the camera settings, the performance of the viewfinder, peaking, focus mag, or anything else. If someone sucks at focusing in 4K then it's likely they also suck at focusing in HD. There might be a wider allowed margin for error in HD, but the skills required, shooting techniques, and equpment needed, do not change. And the stock FS7, when setup and used properly is perfectly capable of being focused manually with precision -- if you have a good lens attached. Sam disagrees that the FS7 is good enougn, but he admits to never even giving the camera a chance. That kind of "blame the gear" attitude bothers me.
 
Last edited:
Pictures.

On my phone they all look sharp.

On my laptop it looks like the image resolution is the limiting factor (the words under AP are not resolvable) with a mild 'feel' that the middle shot is focused front in a manner to mildly drop focus on the patterned card and sharpen up the lid vs the other two??
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top