FS7: Question to RED, or higher end camera owners on their FS7 interest.

Quiz:

Shot on the F55, can anyone tell if this is Custom mode or CineEI?

16378061948_094eaf47d1_b.jpg
 
I think that the use of s16 zooms with the coming center crop will be a big deal. If it truly works lossless in HD it will make the fs7 one of the most versatile cameras around. The ability to have a s16/super35mm switchable camera would be amazing. Super 16 for all Varite style shoots is so much better suited than s35.
 
But you will lose your SDF ,as the sensor is just a bit bigger than ENG 2/3.. I find s35 is fine for varite.. the problem with s35 doc shoots is the only zoom lenses for it are Cabrio or CN7.. expensive and heavy ..
Another great use for the CC is to use it as a loss less digital extender.. as long as your not shoot 4K.. effectively doubling up your lens.. (field of view)
 
Donny 123 said:
But you will lose your SDF ,as the sensor is just a bit bigger than ENG 2/3.. I find s35 is fine for varite.. the problem with s35 doc shoots is the only zoom lenses for it are Cabrio or CN7.. expensive and heavy ..
Another great use for the CC is to use it as a loss less digital extender.. as long as your not shoot 4K.. effectively doubling up your lens.. (field of view)
Click to expand...

As I mentioned before, not compared to variable-aperture stills lenses you won't - only compared to the big boy S35mm zooms. And if you can't afford those anyway, then you're not missing out on anything.
 
Donny 123 said:
But you will lose your SDF ,as the sensor is just a bit bigger than ENG 2/3.. I find s35 is fine for varite.. the problem with s35 doc shoots is the only zoom lenses for it are Cabrio or CN7.. expensive and heavy ..
Another great use for the CC is to use it as a loss less digital extender.. as long as your not shoot 4K.. effectively doubling up your lens.. (field of view)
Click to expand...


You don't lose SDF. shooting a say S16 zeiss 11-110at f 2.2 will be as shallow as a 35mm at f4, besides you don't want to be shallow all the time.
But with a 11-110 or a canon 8-64 you have a huge range and you can still throw on a 35mm prime for a shallower shot.
 
Grug said:
As I mentioned before, not compared to variable-aperture stills lenses you won't - only compared to the big boy S35mm zooms. And if you can't afford those anyway, then you're not missing out on anything.
Click to expand...

What is a variable aperture lens.. arnt they all ..? ..
 
icarusfilm said:
You don't lose SDF. shooting a say S16 zeiss 11-110at f 2.2 will be as shallow as a 35mm at f4, besides you don't want to be shallow all the time.
But with a 11-110 or a canon 8-64 you have a huge range and you can still throw on a 35mm prime for a shallower shot.
Click to expand...

But your field of view will be different .. Im not dissing using s16 zooms.. if you don't have access to the S35 zooms.. and if you don't have an easy rig it will save your back thats for sure.. but I,d still rather have the DOF/FOV from shooting S35.. its also easy to get the S35 zooms out of SDOF.. just take an ND out .. your not shooting with a tiny depth of field all the time.. only when you want to ..
Main point is the advantage also of CC as a digital zoom.. which is not sonys idea for its use.. and why they seem to not want to put it as an assignable button on the F5/55 although every man and his dog wants them too for V1
 
Morgan, Lets not ignite the our old argument about old and new ways of shooting. Actually I don't think are 2 different ways of shooting at all, just more or less appropriate ways to shoot within your budget. On a train i think even in the old days there just would not have been much you could do for lighting unless on a huge budget, so you would just get more burned out windows. You would compose as best you could to avoid really unpleasant windows , but they would be unavoidable to some extent.
For this situation - "thank god for log". But that's a worst case scenario.
 
ha I can assure you old school was the same.. you would only gel a train window on a commercial or feature .. all sorts of problems gelling windows for shots in a moving train.. that would only be for the big time..
 
Oh dear, here we go again. Sam it has nothing to do with old-school new school or how old you are, or how old I am. Only a major feature film, Or an expensive commercial could afford to gel the windowsin a railroad car. It has nothing to do with new camera old camera.Just money as well as what kind of look was desired. What you call old-school might of been shooting film, with the same dynamic range As your FS7. I've never worked on a project that would have done it any other way than you did. It's just an older video camera would look worse, and old-school film would look pretty similar .
Old-school new school exists only in your mind.
 
Lenilenapi said:
Dare I say – it's ageist.
Click to expand...

Im not at all - I have huge respect for the older operators - Im a bit old to be ageist.

I think I kind of 'defined' old school in my head. That is shooting 'in camera' vs 'shooting for post' that is 'new school'

In my photographic career (started on film in a dark room in about 1992), transitioning to stills digicams like the D1 and Kodak Slrn which had tiny DR and had to be completely nailed in camera, I switched to wide DR raw capture in 2003 with the hassy H1, or suchlike, and it seemed like a huge amount of work switched from 'on set' to 'in post'.

Mainly I was shooting hotels and editorial magazines

Digitally corrected verticals were swapped for shift lenses, ND grads were swapped for sky burns, and a smaller light package came in to play with more recovering of windows and the like in post.

Using the logic that 'on set' time is more expensive than 'in post' time these things seemed to be a breakthrough.

Most important personally to me I found that shooting with a lighter (physically) lighting package made my work more fluid mobile and enjoyable with I hope better results.

I think that in motion capture is moving that way - but slowly because the tech is behind and also motion is so much more of a team, so everyone from commissioner to editor needs to be on board.

The difficult journey now is that clients are happy to make savings on set but are not happy about upping the post budget - the work has to happen somewhere and it needs to be paid for.

S
 
Last edited:
People were shooting and exposing in camera for the darkroom ever since photography was a thing. From the extensive selective dodging and burning Ansel Adams et al employed to these incredibly famous and iconic shots.

hnAks8r.jpg

8gWByRh.jpg

kQZDFvo.jpg



All of which funnily enough chose to blow out the sky in favor of a more punchy and contrasty shot :)

SpAe9gF.jpg


That said a good ND grad used correctly adds far more to your shot than any post effect with a power window.
 
Absolutely and that (dodging in the darkroom) my first introduction to creating 'finished' images - Im really pleased that FS7/Slog/Resolve are bringing that home :)

S
 
I hear what you're saying. I guess I still don't understand What youmean by old school . Film negative has been around for ages, and alsocorrects in post. New school can burn the LUT in the camera.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top