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

G

Gene Sung

Veteran
I know a few of you guys interested in the FS7 are coming from RED and I’d like to hear your reasons for getting an FS7.

Or even the guys who own higher end cameras like the F55 or F5, do you feel like you’re making your money back on it? Would you plop down $40K again, knowing what you know now? Would the FS7 change your decision in owning a RED/F5/F55?

I was originally all set to get the FS7, then I started thing about getting a Dragon Epic (near $37K for a basic kit). Obviously, way more expensive. I can “Almost” justify it and that’s a hard place to be, because if I were further back on my DP path, I would not get it; and if I were further along, I probably would get it. Being “Almost” there, leaves a bit of uncertainty. I do motion graphics so I can swing it financially, but it’s still expensive.

For my better jobs (a couple gigs a month), I shoot Network projects (decent TV budgets) that usually involve some type of VFX or motion graphics which is where the RED would be really handy - RAW and high resolution. Mainly, I could really benefit from RAW because these jobs have a lot of VFX going into it. The 7Q RAW is uncompressed so way too big and the Sony Dock solution for the FS7 is just ridiculous.

I’m starting to think it might just be better to upgrade to the FS7 and rent the Dragon when needed since it’s so cheap to rent in LA. The FS7 just isn't quite enough for what I need (RAW), but the Dragon is quite enough on the money department!

But yeah, I wanted to get the RED / Higher end camera guy’s opinions and insight before my final decision.

Thanks
 
probably you read my story on the forums already, but here is the condensed version:

- had a Sony F3 for 2 years and was not impressed
- put the F3 for sale and placed an order for a RED camera
- Sony announced the new F and that it would have RAW
- sold the RED kit unopened when I got it. took a hit but didn't care
- waited for the new F to ship
- decided on F5 + RAW but then thought I'd give 4K XAVC 10-bit a chance so changed my mind for F55 without R5
- decided after 12 months that you need the R5
- 2 months later the all-file hack comes out for the F5
- 1 months later the FS7 is announced and it does 90% + that the F5/F55 can do

I will never regret owning one of the best cinema cameras on the planet. Really the F55 is easily in the top end of the bracket. It was expensive but I managed to afford it and I would own it again, and again, and again. The use of LC709 and Kodak 2383 LUTs have really saved Sony from my point of view however, because if after investing $45k I still couldn't shake that Sony video look then it would be for sale and I would jump into a used Alexa, maybe new Amira, or definitely a RED EPIC.

Really no one camera will work for absolutely every situation and something will always be missing. In the end you have to decide what matters to you most and what you can afford to have.
 
I just sold my Epic-X for the very same reasons.

I'll rent when I need to and the budget allows.

I am considering the FS7/F5/C400? right now but am in a holding pattern to see what Canon does next.

Currently My C100/Blade works just fine.
 
I'm not really qualified to answer, seeing as I haven't owned a higher end camera, but I know people who have invested in better camera systems in order to increase their hiring appeal. Here in Minneapolis, there are a lot of DSLR owner-operators, and quite a few people in the $5k-8k camera range, but after that it's a pretty harsh falloff. I only know a handful of C300 owner/ops and a couple RED owner/ops. But this is also an area where an Epic's day rate is $1000+. So some people who are hiring shooters and want that quality might opt to hire an Epic owner/operator (they know the camera, their gear rate might be lower than renting, etc).

While it sounds like an Epic would be nice for your workflow, you're in a saturated RED market where owning one might not increase your odds of getting hired.

But I hear you that it's a tough spot to be in... I sometimes wonder if buying a higher end kit would help increase my hiring appeal. But right now, I'm OK with using a camera that is paid off super fast and makes me money. Less stress.
 
mcgeedigital said:
I just sold my Epic-X for the very same reasons.

I'll rent when I need to and the budget allows.

I am considering the FS7/F5/C400? right now but am in a holding pattern to see what Canon does next.

Currently My C100/Blade works just fine.
Click to expand...


Matt...you literally just described my exact situation down to each piece of gear. I am exactly in the same place. Right now....on hold. I most likely will wait for NAB.

The C100 Mark II looks kinda tempting...but really, I want to see the next iteration of the C300 before anything. My guys tells me that is my sweet spot...unless Canon really botches the specs on that one.

If they release an 8 bit 1080P cam...I'm gonna punch myself in the face....repeatedly...with my C100...and video it.

Do I miss my RED cam...well...yes...

Does my C100 have me covered for the next few months while I let the camera companies duke it out....absolutely.
 
ReelWorksMedia said:
Matt...you literally just described my exact situation down to each piece of gear. I am exactly in the same place. Right now....on hold. I most likely will wait for NAB.

The C100 Mark II looks kinda tempting...but really, I want to see the next iteration of the C300 before anything. My guys tells me that is my sweet spot...unless Canon really botches the specs on that one.

If they release an 8 bit 1080P cam...I'm gonna punch myself in the face....repeatedly...with my C100...and video it.

Do I miss my RED cam...well...yes...

Does my C100 have me covered for the next few months while I let the camera companies duke it out....absolutely.
Click to expand...

C100 is a surprisingly nice little camera. And I feel like I'm in a similar boat with the FS7, I'll use it for the next year or two while seeing what other companies come out with.
 
You are very right. 99% of my job entails shooting music videos and concert events. I have been mixing RED footage and C100 stuff for many years. I'm sure almost all clients could not pick out one from the other.

That says a lot for the C100. Nice little camera.


...if anything...I get more solid content from the C100. The thing weighs 2 lbs!
 
I'm launching a new production company and had the same conversation with myself. I came to the conclusion that with the pace of tech and rental rates only a sub $10K camera made sense to my budgets and ended up buying the FS7. It met my do it all requirements leaving me to only rent specialty cameras when the needs and budget it there. As nice as it would be to have a camera one step higher the increase in price premium was too much a jump for the few additional features as nice as they are. None were necessary to my business. The choice was made easier because I didn't have a current camera system (apart from DSLR) as I had used my old employers C300s for the last few years. If I had a C100 or C300 I would be holding tight to see what Canon has. I had no investment in Canon and have no doubt the C300II will be $13-$14K and 6 months away from my hands which is lost money in rentals. The FS7 came at the right time and with the right features.
 
Kinda with you. The artist in me really wants to jump the gun and go $35K in and pick up a Dragon (with accessories). The realist in me says "these days, its really guaranteed that every camera, no matter how high end, will be worth almost nothing in 3-5 years. Its a guaranteed loss." Yea, you can make your money back...but the difference is...10 years ago there was a HUGE difference in image quality. Now...not so much...at least in the eyes of the clients.

So, on a business investment return level, a $10K camera seems to be the sweet spot. You can easily make your money back on that in a reasonable amount of time. I work for a record label so I'm on salary...no matter what camera I own. I can also rent when ever I need to. So for me...it doesn't make sense to purchase a $35K camera over a 10-$15K camera for level of quality that most clients are not sharp enough to pick up on.

The part that sucks is...I "want" the $35K camera. I don't "need" it and the rational part of me usually ends up going with what I need.

Just my 10 cents.
 
ReelWorksMedia said:
... So, on a business investment return level, a $10K camera seems to be the sweet spot. You can easily make your money back on that in a reasonable amount of time. I work for a record label so I'm on salary...no matter what camera I own. I can also rent when ever I need to. So for me...it doesn't make sense to purchase a $35K camera over a 10-$15K camera for level of quality that most clients are not sharp enough to pick up on...
Click to expand...
Well, a $10K camera (Cion) will be shipping any week now (by the end of December ... or so we've been told). It'll do Raw to an external recorder and 4444 internally, the latter of which may also be sufficient for the VFX.

It could be worth the wait, depending on its preorder list.
 
So far...the Cion footage does look very very nice. My only issue is, the sensor has, more or less, been said to not hold up well...at all...in lower light situations. From what I have read, and I have never personally had my hands on the Cion, its going to be a great production camera. But...if you intend on shooting in a vast set of conditions (production shoots, low light, doc style)...the sensor may not hold up nearly as well compared to others currently out...or scheduled to be released in the coming months.

Please prove me wrong on that. The properly lit footage I have seen does look fantastic.
 
I just took a peak at the CION footage again. Admittedly so, it does look fantastic...and I love the codec, resolution, frame rate options, and price. Hopefully they are much better with the menu layouts and don't follow Sony's train wreck approach.
 
You probably know I come from stills photgraphy - well in 2005 I spent $25k on a hasselblad digital back. That camera put me in a special little club of people who could produce glossy magazine material digitally. Joining that club got me some gigs - lots of gigs - for about three to five years - the camera (and my early adopter stance) worked for my business. Today any 'DSLR' is good enough for glossy magazine work - yes a Hassy gives 5% advantage but today it is 5% in 2005 it was 95% advantage. Today I would never buy a Hasselblad - in fact I recently sold it for $2k!

Moving to video we see that in maybe 2010 the Red put you in that little club of 'high quality digital cinematography' - but the BMC, FS7 and others (nearly) open that club to all comers.

IMO the era of the owner op Red is over, and has been for a while.

Id own an FS7/Bmc4k and rent more expensive cameras.

S
 
Ugene I think bottom line is the Fs7 is a real great price and by adding RAW, maybe even ProRes the images will be even better than most of the XAVC footages seen online. Well, at least they will have tons more leeway in post. So you will not be disappointed with one.

Still while the F55 might not be worth the extra cost, over the Fs7 I'd still see if you can't justify getting the F5 somehow. I wrote a lot of reasons about why here.

As yet another option if transcoding after certain shoots isn't an issue for you, you can also consider a Scarlet. Battle tested ones (when they come up) start at $7950.

Good luck with whatever you do decide.
 
Last edited:
ReelWorksMedia said:
... Please prove me wrong on that. The properly lit footage I have seen does look fantastic.
Click to expand...
A low light shoot is probably not going to be welcome by the Cion owners/operators.

But, as has been mentioned above, can someone juggle these various $5K-$10K cams depending upon need and get a better bang for the buck than with F55? I guess that depends on the preponderance of work that someone does. Cion for everything + A7s for the (very) low light work may be one option. For doc/reality work, as Dennis said, FS-7 could do just fine.

And it's true about the difference between a $5,000 camera and $50,000 camera being "5%". I linked to some NX1 footage a couple of days ago and it looks fabulous. How soon will it be until someone rigs NX-1 into a jack-of-all-trades workhorse for well under $5,000?
 
I'm with Dennis on this one. If the Epic is a sketchy stretch financially, I'd be looking at the F5 instead. The internal SR444 codec is as good as it gets for compressed HD recording and will stand up to extensive visual effects far better than XAVC on the FS7 can. Add the R5 recorder and you have 16-bit, 4K linear raw - which is pretty much the richest digital negative money can buy at the moment (and with the F5 all recording remains 'internal' and camera offers a clean, ergonomic form factor).

The sensor grid flare issues with the F5(5) have had me looking at other possible camera options over the last couple of days (both upgrades and downgrades), but I'm at a bit of a loss really - there's really nothing out there that compares to the F5. In terms of feature-set and price-wise, it's in a class of it's own. Cheaper options either don't have a sensor to match, or require franken-rigging to get raw recording. And upgrades with comparable feature-sets require an extra $10k-$30k to play.
 
DLD said:
And it's true about the difference between a $5,000 camera and $50,000 camera being "5%".
Click to expand...

Well said about the difference only being 5%, and if we're comparing apples to apples in terms of the ability to shoot the 16-bit RAW on both cameras here's a gentle reminder of where things get drastically different:

img02.jpg


Yes there's the Odyssey but let's not forget it's 12-bit RAW not 16-bit, and its an external device yet again. I know from my F3 days how many guys spent $4k-$8k for an external recorder (like a PIX or Gemini), media, cables, etc.. who would easily rather have just spent $10k extra on a camera without them and all the headache. For some of the ex-F3 guys it was quite easy to justify the F5 because with the built-in SR444 codec your going to get as high quality as you would with an external 3rd party recorder. With the F5/F55 add another $5k and you get an R5 with a snap-on module, or just rent it when you need it - again no cables.

What that is worth to each person is different. But its still something to factor in when making these decisions.
 
Last edited:
I have a FS7 on order, and a Dragon, Epic and a C300 in the cupboard. I co-own most of the gear with my colleague.
I won't get rid of the REDs, (but I put the C300 on the market) after getting used to the IQ of the RED and it's specs its just no way.
I am buying the FS7 to get a camera that is small and light, hopefully easy to toss out and get the shot straight away. It's purley for TV production, and I think I will be able to get my ROI much faster than with the RED cameras.
I'm Hoping it will become a workhorse like my EX-3 was back in the day, quickly paying for it self.
But I'm not fooling myself thinking I will get 95% of the IQ of my Dragon with this camera.
All my cameras have paid for them selves, but at different speed. I think the FS7 will pay for it self rather quickly. I was contemplating a F55 or F5 this summer, happy I didn't get a F5 (I got a C300 instead as it was best suited to a job I got).
I still think a F55 could be a good investment, but I stay in RED land in that price bracket as I prefer those cameras with my work flow.
 
Last edited:
If you go to a Red, there is nothing worse than being trapped in a raw workspace all the time. You would need to check with your post people on that show before jumping into that. They also eat batteries like nothing else so that keeps them from being practical for a lot of shoots (docs). Also huge movies and major TV shows with higher budgets than anyone's projects in this forum, that play in theaters world-wide or via NBC/CBS/PBS etc. are often shot in 444 1080 so keep that in mind.

Cion has no internal ND's so for me it's dead in the water. (no doc use practically possible)

I can still out-perform many new pricey cameras with an F3 shooting log with a Blade so you might consider using something like that until the market settles down next year.

And I'm going to keep saying it, raw is not written "RAW", those letters don't stand for anything thus should never be capitalized. It's Raw or raw only. Thanks. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top