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

On the 4k conversation...

I'll take an amazing image over resolution only, but 4k capture does so much nice stuff to the image aside from increase the pixel count that wherever possible it's a big part of the way I like to work now. Luckily we are finally at a point where you don't have to choose one over the other. Plenty of cameras can now shoot a 4k+ beautiful image with little in the way of compromise.
 
Ben Scott said:
Give it another week or so and hopefully the video will be done and I can post some stills for the pixel peepers but I was pretty surprised at what the FS7 was doing when I really didn't have it 1000% dialled in yet.
Click to expand...
I'm surprised you think the FS7 beats the FS700+7Q. I did some rough side-by-side testing and from what I could tell, the 7Q's ProRes files were sharper than the FS7's XAVC files (4K on each). An unsharp filter helped the FS7 footage get a bit closer in sharpness, but there was still more detail in the 7Q ProRes file. I'm also a fan of the noise in ProRes. It's very natural vs noise that gets compressed in a more compressed codec like XAVC.

Specifically, how did you determine the XAVC was better than RAWtoProRes?
 
by shooting a job with both cameras both using the same lenses (Contax Zeiss) under the same mixed lighting conditions shooting the same subjects and then having to go through 600Gb of footage the following weekend and create some quick colour correction LUTs to match them. I've never used the FS700 7Q combo but the operator is a pro and has used it for ages so I'm assured it was set up correctly. I was surprised by the amount of noise in the shadows and the nasty highlight rolloff compared to the FS7.

I should add this was all at 1080p and I haven't tested them together at UHD

EDIT: Really nice showreel on your site by the way. Some great shots in there.
 
Last edited:
When I meant docuemntary work I meant everthing not only interviews. For example: Following a subject all day, Broll, events, etc thats when I think the FS7 shine


mcgeedigital said:
Don't lecture to me on the advantages of 4k. I've been shooting it since 2007.

If the interview is that important, I will have a second angle, maybe even on a dolly, with a different framing that will cut much better in the edit than simply reframing the same shot.
Click to expand...
 
Ben Scott said:
by shooting a job with both cameras both using the same lenses (Contax Zeiss) under the same mixed lighting conditions shooting the same subjects and then having to go through 600Gb of footage the following weekend and create some quick colour correction LUTs to match them. I've never used the FS700 7Q combo but the operator is a pro and has used it for ages so I'm assured it was set up correctly. I was surprised by the amount of noise in the shadows and the nasty highlight rolloff compared to the FS7.

I should add this was all at 1080p and I haven't tested them together at UHD

EDIT: Really nice showreel on your site by the way. Some great shots in there.
Click to expand...

Believe me, I am no die hard 7Q fan (quite the contrary) but the 4k2HD is the cleanest HD I have ever encountered. I obviously haven't seen your shots but this sounds really strange and totally at odds with most peoples feedback. The IQ from the FS700+7Q really takes some beating IMO. However, reliability wise, the 7Q is awful and the ergonomics of the combo are a nightmare. That's where I see the FS7 winning hands down. IQ wise, I don't see really any advantage.
 
Hey,

i think the FS7 would be perfect for Run'n'Gun, especially with the motorized lens provided.
Yes, it's not top noth glass, but will cover 80% of your low payd jobs...

To me the really great benefit is the mount. A huge variety of lenses available
with built in stabilization. Huge selling point for me as a F55 owner.
(yes, i could buy the 18x140 Sony lens developed for the F3 but the price
is not right... ;.-)

As for RED. I think it's a matter of taste. i didn't like any of my RED experiences.
not because of IQ or whatever (which is great with Dragon), but just for simple handling issues.
(IMHO you need some sort of rig so you can film in a stable way,
and boy - on a shoot i wanted to attach a paralinx for the director
just to realize that the HDMIport is inactive with the +1 module attached. that was a bummer ;-)

Also consider, whatever camera you buy, do you really want to rent it out?
I personally don't - because there always goes something wrong. did it with my
F3 when the F55 was already on its way, and the entire Rig with an Alura fell to the ground.
So what if i had a shoot the next day? i would have to rent one myself...and costs for picking one up,
checking, bringing back (in my case 250km away) is certainly not easy to get from a job when a deal was already made...
also there are so many RED's around that making big money with rental seems unlikely to me.

anyways.
the fs7 is great, the f5 is better in handling/connectivity terms i think...
F55 and RED are great. but more expensive ;-)

cheers
 
Prendi said:
Believe me, I am no die hard 7Q fan (quite the contrary) but the 4k2HD is the cleanest HD I have ever encountered. I obviously haven't seen your shots but this sounds really strange and totally at odds with most peoples feedback. The IQ from the FS700+7Q really takes some beating IMO. However, reliability wise, the 7Q is awful and the ergonomics of the combo are a nightmare. That's where I see the FS7 winning hands down. IQ wise, I don't see really any advantage.
Click to expand...

I totally understand what you're saying, but I can only go on what I've seen and tested myself. Maybe I have been spoiled in the past but Red 4k/5k transcoded to 1080p is the nicest looking 1080p stuff I've worked with and the FS700 stuff was a million miles away from that. The FS7 on the other hand was a couple of steps closer for me in terms of overall image quality. That said, that isn't something I just just on sharpness alone, something I feel is wrongly pushed as the sole parameter defining image quality.
 
The question becomes, for me, are these new cameras (FS7, F5, Cion, C100/300) good enough movie cameras for 4K projection, high end commercial work, TV non-news, etc. We know the RED, F55, F65, Alexa can do that. I shot with a RED this spring and I love the way that looks. Can one of these cameras do that or get close enough? I don't know. We'll see. I hope so.

It's only the RED that shoots only RAW and as an owner, as described here, that can be an issue. I shoot a bunch of interviews, or a panel talk or something, I need to leave something with them that they shouldn't have to grade unless they want. That is why these cameras are so powerful because of the range of application now that we have 4:2:2 10 bit or 4:4:4 12 bit HD, 2K, UHD 4K and RAW.

I want something like the F55 or Alexa, something that is a movie camera, that I can use otherwise. Every time I read American Cinematographer I see so many smaller pieces recording ProRes right to SxS. These cameras are getting close. Look at how the C300 has taken off. It has proven "good enough" to start claiming some of that ground. Can they get close enough in DR, highlight handling, color science to make it an alternative to the big budget cameras?
 
Last edited:
"good enough are the two worst words in the English Language" - a misquote from the film, "Whiplash"
 
eddavid said:
"good enough are the two worst words in the English Language" - a misquote from the film, "Whiplash"
Click to expand...

I mean like the AF100 was "good enough" for the first Raid Redemption or how the C300 was "good enough" for Blue is the Warmest Color. I'm thinking about good enough for a first feature, or good enough for a regional commercial or promo spot. Sure, the F7/C300/Cions are not Alexas and if it makes budgetary sense to do otherwise, then rent an Alexa or Epic or F65/55 with a set of Cooke S4s and an Angenieux 24 - 290 but "good enough" in the sense that you could, with skill and good content make something that holds up. I can thing of worse things.

DVXuser's genesis is the first "good enough" camera, no?
 
Last edited:
I understand people are excited about the FS7. It's a great offering and the bang for the buck is insane. I'm seriously thinking of getting one, pending a few things. But let's not fool ourselves that a FS7 matches the big guns like the Alexa, Epic Dragon or F65 in image quality. I think this is crossing the line from reality to fanboyism. Sure it may be better in low light and a few other things. As people have already said the big gun cameras are made to be used with light. But overall the big guns are for sure better. That's why they are the big guns.
 
I don't think anybody thinks it comes anywhere near that level. but in those overlapping circles of stuff you COULD shoot with an Epic or Amira but that isn't a feature or high-end work - and I've seen truly terrible work done with both where you would think they were shot on DSLR - that's the stuff where it depending on the situation might make more sense to use something like the FS7.

I've made the move to Sony because there are simply more jobs the FS7 is capable of being used on without issues or caveats than my old red was. Outright image quality wins would have to go to the Scarlet/Epic, but 2000iso with built in ND and usable slo mo weighing 2.5Kg? That makes it very very appealing for all kinds of work my Red would never have gotten.
 
Ben the point is the Alexa, F65 and even Epic are not made to do as many jobs as possible. They are made for cinema. If people use them for something else is their problem.
 
I know, I made that point earlier. However in the real world there is a large crossover where people ARE wanting to use cinema cameras they have paid tons for on other paying gigs. That's pretty much the whole reason the Amira now exists, isn't it? To be the on-the-shoulder ENG version one of the big cinema cameras. While it can't compete for outright image quality, the FS7 can compete for those types of jobs with all the other benefits it brings. Next week I have a boring corporate gig which I'm using the FS7 on and which I could never realistically have used the Red for (and would have had to rent something in for) and that rental will pay about 10% of the total cost of the camera.

In summary - I think this was a good investment that will pay for itself quicker than my Red did.
 
Honestly Im not seeing any problems with the FS7 image yet - ok we know HFR is skipped - but 60p4k where are the problems? (also the BMC4k makes a great image)

Look at stills cameras most $1000 DSLRs have an image good enough for Vogue or Nat Geo.

That time will come with motion cameras.

A top end future motion camera will probably not have a better image than the FS8 - just HFR PL loads of IO ports and stuff that make it good for being on set.

The current top end motion cameras are poor on HFR anyway - slower than the directors Iphone. (apart from Miro)

S
 
Not really sure you can compare the slomo from an Epic Dragon with that from an iphone to be honest :)

But yeah I'm very happy with the image so far.
 
Yep Epic has a lead on the F5/55 Amera and iphone.

What is it 300? vs 240 - the point is we should always be able to amaze our clients show them something totally mind bending compared to what the could do themselves.

My stills photographer colleague in the office is totally uninspired by 60p - his (no knowledge) idea of slo-mo is Guiness adverts and Hurt Locker explosions - my cameras cant do that.

S
 
Last edited:
Ben Scott said:
I know, I made that point earlier. However in the real world there is a large crossover where people ARE wanting to use cinema cameras they have paid tons for on other paying gigs.
Click to expand...

Maybe with RED but I doubt too many people are trying to shoot corporate with an Alexa or F65. Those are mainly rental house cameras and the few who own them surely have higher end customers to justify the cameras.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top