FS7: NO Sony Fs7!!

JPNola said:
They’ve mistaken me for being opposed to AF. Rather ignorantly mistaken, in some cases.

All I was pointing out is that there is image-making of a manner for which AF will struggle and may never be able to perform. For some reason certain people could not stomach the suggestion that AF cannot now, today, perform all manner of focusing. As if I insulted their child or something.

A wild thread, this one. I’ve been accused by a New Yorker of speaking on something I know nothing about and threatened with violence by a Floridian transplant.

Welcome to dvxuser.
Click to expand...

I thought it was a good conversation but you always appear to become unhinged.

I saw your original remark in post #136 before you edited it, but it wasn't worth responding to as I've seen you on many occasions edit or delete your posts after you take a minute, and it wouldn't help anyone if I did respond (btw, they always have a copy of the original on the server).

With that said, I do have a lot of knowledge for manual focusing.

I will always be the first to tell anyone that I'm a nobody, and I never speak about anything I have no knowledge about.

But I didn't start video production with auto-focus cameras.

Your overall description....anticipating movements, reactions, understanding various human behavior, blocking, focusing speeds, creative pulls, making focusing decisions and compromises based on our own productions and storytelling…all of us did do these things day-in and day-out way before this new technology was even thought about.
 
You seem rather certain of yourself. Just as you were certain about something about myself that you could not possibly know.

I too thought it good conversation. Until I was hit with being told I don’t know what I am talking about. Rather than simply you disagree. Or have experienced differently. And yes, you successfully tweaked me into losing my cool. Congratulations.
 
Thank you for the levity, ahalpert. And for the motivation behind it.

Since my call that produced this topic-started I received another booking. They asked what camera I own, I told them Fs7 & FX9, they said Fs7 would be just fine.
 
ahalpert said:
Semantics. The key usefulness of "AF" imo is that it readjusts focus to keep a subject sharp. That part is automated, and can be one of the biggest challenges of executing a shot at times.
Click to expand...

Playing devil's advocate here Abe, play along..

But explain to me how much a film sequence benefits from an AF system readjusting focus to keep a subject sharp, when the subject is already temporally blurred by the same motion AF is tracking through? Should we automate frame rate to temporal motion to keep a subject sharp in the temporal dimension?

I see the point of tracking AF for capturing a sequence of sharp stills, and less necessary for filmic sequences where a certain amount motion blur is desirable, and that sharp pinpoint focus shouldn't really be as significant as it is when motion is actually slower or stopped, and thus easier to follow focus manually.
 
Just throwing this out there in general...

The video is from Canon's first DPAF camera from 2013.

Granted it's slower (probably f/3.5), but this would be very difficult to do by hand on a full-frame sensor at larger apertures, and the out-of-focus inconsistencies would be much more noticeable.

Hollywood and the like working on controlled sets are smarter with their production decisions and pulls. They aren't capturing a lot of moving action at f/1.4 at 85mm, but when they do you see tons of missed focus EVERYWHERE.

If you are required to film similar sequences like below with faster glass, what choices do you have? And would the viewer(s) ever notice any minor focus changes that the AF system controls so well?

 
Last edited:
NorBro said:
There are thousands (not hundreds but thousands) of videos on YouTube of people touching the screen on their DSLRs/mirrorless cameras to select what they would like in focus.

The car keys example is about as simple as you can get with AF and the highly customizable speed options the elite AF cameras have.

I know many are just now getting into their first AF cameras as 2020 was a banger for new systems, but it's been like 6 years since AF was more than reliable and able to handle almost any situation possible.

We don't hear about features being shot with AF because the 1% doesn't use AF cameras, lol.

IMO, ARRI is a monopoly and at this point it's just the default option. There is no discussion about which camera should be used. If it's not an ARRI, RED handles the rest with the occasional blockbuster shot on the Venice (including many with Sony being a part of the project).
Click to expand...


Certainly the FX6 is the first camera in a long time where I have at least wanted to test it out. Nothing at all to do with being a luddite but it's part of the process I find organic and beautiful and I might want to adjust the speed of a pull to be behind or in front of the action which AF cannot possibly guess.

But a video of my kid running around sure go for it. He was invented to test a focus puller.
 
Last edited:
JPNola said:
They’ve mistaken me for being opposed to AF. Rather ignorantly mistaken, in some cases.

All I was pointing out is that there is image-making of a manner for which AF will struggle and may never be able to perform. For some reason certain people could not stomach the suggestion that AF cannot now, today, perform all manner of focusing. As if I insulted their child or something.

A wild thread, this one. I’ve been accused by a New Yorker of speaking on something I know nothing about and threatened with violence by a Floridian transplant.

Welcome to dvxuser.
Click to expand...

I wasn't putting a dog into that fight at all.. just my thoughts going from f5 to Fx9.. I found it a real joy to work with , it made going on a crappy interview shoot exciting .. after many years of PL s35 lenses .. I just went totally FF with much cheaper Sony lenses , I mention the AF for interviews because thats when its pretty much 99% going to work, I havnt done a manual focus interview for a long time now .. B roll sure it gets confused easily , you can make the effort to use the smallest size focus area and shift it around, but thats actually harder than just doing the focus yourself , but if your doing alot of interviews , man this thing is great at FF85mm f2 .. folks just have time on their hands .. its the inter web.. but I wouldn't buy a used Cadillac from anyone from Florida .. :)
 
risk is that lens choice becomes dictated by prioritization of focus accuracy, the work suffers.

AF making your work worse, not better.
 
Ben Scott said:
Certainly the FX6 is the first camera in a long time where I have at least wanted to test it out. Nothing at all to do with being a luddite but it's part of the process I find organic and beautiful and I might want to adjust the speed of a pull to be behind or in front of the action which AF cannot possibly guess.
Click to expand...

Speed cranking is definitely AF's Achilles heel (the camera's AF, not the future post-production focus where you can key-frame speed changes).

You can turn the wheel with your wrist very slowly and then instantly snap it 180° with the whip...great organic freedom and AF cannot do this.

Now I don't know how often you would want to do this with a full-frame sensor and fast lenses - just like how often you're shooting people moving full-speed at the camera like in the tests above - but it doesn't matter because the scenarios do exist to showcase how both focus systems can beautifully work together.

If you have a minute, check out this video...especially at 2:05. If your camera is not object-tracking or face-tracking for you, with some systems you can hold your finger on the screen and drag the AF box to control the pull behind or in front.

 
Also, one aspect that's not mentioned much is that manual focus has the advantage of using some of the best manual cine glass in the world, which will only enhance your motion pictures in a way still lenses will not.

And many still lenses breathe.

Breathing isn't much of an issue with highly advanced, impossible-by-hand tracking, but for slow, narrative work with focus changes, it could be distracting. And even if the camera can perfectly track your slow moving faces in the scene, one may still want to use some of his or her new Leitz glass that's sitting in the closet. :laugh:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1616191-REG/leitz_cine_t1_4_summilux_c_12_lens_kit.html

Leitz Cine Glass.jpg
 
Last edited:
Claearly AF is for getting the job done. MF - like 70mm film - has a place.. but a pretty rare one in the future.

A big step would be an AF system (I forsee two imagers about a foot apart on big cine rigs) that can drive MF lenses and is properly configured giving cinamatic modes and touch to the 1st.

S
 
morgan_moore said:
Claearly AF is for getting the job done. MF - like 70mm film - has a place.. but a pretty rare one in the future.
Click to expand...



Film is alive and kicking over a century after its introduction. The 'DSLR revolution' got as far as them being used as crash cams on some features, aside from the couple of outliers that everyone used as an example of 'oh look it was shot on a 5D'. There would have to be an inarguable reason for it to be better than the existing systems. Which it isn't.

I have not heard of a single cinematographer, 1st AC or Director that believes that autofocus is ready for the limelight yet. It will be a long, long time before it is established on sets in any way, shape or form and I doubt strongly whether it will ever become the norm. We'll be living on Mars before that point at least. At feature level it is a solution to a problem people aren't having.
 
It will be sooner rather than later. And I think it's only going to take another generation.

Everyone in control right now with the very limited opportunities available is, quite frankly, old.

They have no reason to change unless they are being paid to change.

___

But the odds are greater for more AF work moving forward as people are born into it.

I respect the process, but I have never shot on film or have even seen the physical form for that matter...and it's completely irrelevant to me just like manual focus will be for millions.
 
I don't even think more people are born into it now or anything.

It's not a new invention. It's just gotten a bit better. Which film schools are teaching how to use autofocus as opposed to (or even alongside) focus pulling? I appreciate lots of people that are one-man bands are seeing the possibilities of it but that is a very different sensibility.



As for film, the likes of Aronofsky, Nolan, PTA, Wes Anderson, Sofia Coppola, Tarantino, J.J. Abrams still have a lot of movies left in them and are not Hollywood 'old' and still want to shoot film. Again there will quite likely be people living on Mars before people stop making movies on film.


I guess we'll see. We are all just speculating.
 
Last edited:
Definitely all just speculating, watercooler chat, but AF has improved more than a bit.

It went from being unusable at all to AI taking full control of it...those accomplishments are technology journey worthy.

I actually think AF will not even last that long, and that everything will be captured by machines on extremely high-resolution light-field cameras made to be manipulated in post.

RAW and AF is kind of that cyborg right now where you can change some settings.

It just makes a lot of sense with the way the world is moving, but I think most of us won't see it.

___

As far as film school, I didn't even know they were still around (very serious, not facetious).

These days, the dream is to make your first million by 16 on YouTube and TikTok.
 
Ben Scott said:
Film is alive and kicking over a century after its introduction. The 'DSLR revolution' got as far as them being used as crash cams on some features, aside from the couple of outliers that everyone used as an example of 'oh look it was shot on a 5D'. There would have to be an inarguable reason for it to be better than the existing systems. Which it isn't.
Click to expand...

The DSLR thing..

-provided better options than an EX1 and letus (which I had)

If you were a full budget wet film shooter this means nothing. If you were like me on the ground it meant a lot.

-as a raw still shooter.. we got the thing out of the box and said 'when this does 25FPS raw' we will be talking (no on ever rated the h263 codecs)

Clearly pushed the prices of the F35 towards the price of the F3 level

As raw becaomes more viable (R5?) the 'revolution' will continue.

It has been a huge influence for everyone apart from the most privilaged.

Film has always been 4k aquistion, and however terrible the scans so was 'archival' quality (not to mention the highight bending) because it could be re-scanned/photographed

--

As for the speed of progress.. we amazon has oblitarated whole town centres in a couple of years. The focus puller is a minor thing in that everything changed world.
 
As far as film school,

Film school is still alive and doing manual focus.

It shows how it is still about being in the in crowd rather than efficient execution of shots that get you work. Terrible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top