FS7: Red Raven and FS7

mainstreetprod said:
Thanks, I'll be posting some shots of the experience later. I'm pretty confident that had it been projected in 4K it would not have looked "better", just overly sharp for the people in the front and about the same to the rest of the crowd. I had already dialed down the sharpness in the camera because I find it too sharp with factory settings. For a few shots in the film I used a Panasonic LX100 (like a GH4 with a fixed lens). The 4K I shot with it was annoyingly sharp, had to dial it down in post to match the FS7. I find 4k useful for reframing, scaling, etc. in post, but otherwise I think the 6K-8K stuff is just marketing hype to keep us buying new cameras.
Click to expand...

You stated earlier you viewed all this on a 2K projector, so how can you make pronouncement about whether 4K would have looked better? The fact is, it does look better. Whether 4k downconverted to 2k looks better is another matter.

Also, you can't dial down sharpness in the FS7 if you are shooting in EI mode.
 
vasoline1.jpg
 
In-camera... On-camera...-At-camera... I can't be trusted with the stuff.

Expect death threats from a horde of Samyang users now :)
 
Personally, I'm with Grug on this one. I think the whole "Can't get Sony to look as good as Red" is totally blown out of proportion. I love what I'm getting out of the FS7 and CineEI. It looks amazing and very cinematic IMO.

I did order the Raven on the first day though, but probably for different reasons than most. I personally don't think that Red blows the FS7 out of the water in terms of a "cinematic" feel. Maybe it's a bit better, but certainly not by much at all.

Ironically with all this Red talk, if you look at the Panavision TV credits list and what camera was used, Sony F55 is used at least 3x as much as Red on their list of major TV productions.

http://www.panavision.com/TVCredits

I'm getting a Red just to have a different camera as some clients want Red and some want the FS7. They are "perceived" by clients as having different uses, whether this perception is fair is definitely debatable. I'm also getting it because where I live, it's very useful to know a Red well. Not that I want to be an AC necessarily, but just getting time on set as a DP or even an AC is always good, and the more you know, the more you work.

So for me, it's about learning a new camera system (Red) really well (like the way I know the FS7), expanding my skills and I'd probably pick up a few jobs that I wouldn't get by owning the Red as well. For better or worse, many producers just respond better to the word "Red."

The one I really want is the upcoming Scarlet Weapon, but at $6K for the Raven body there is absolutely zero reason to wait. All the accessories transfer so just sell the Raven for $4K when the Scarlet Weapon comes out at the end of 2016 or so. You loose $2K, which you would certainly make a number of times over by not having the Raven.

So yeah, in summary, not getting the Red because I think my images will be that much better (because they won't), but getting it to learn the Red system, expand my knowledge, make myself more employable and maybe get a few jobs because of the camera (I hope). And keeping the FS7 as well.

More pragmatic reasons I suppose.
 
Last edited:
gene_can_sing said:
Personally, I'm with Grug on this one. I think the whole "Can't get Sony to look as good as Red" is totally blown out of proportion. I love what I'm getting out of the FS7 and CineEI. It looks amazing and very cinematic IMO.

I did order the Raven on the first day though, but probably for different reasons than most. I personally don't think that Red blows the FS7 out of the water in terms of a "cinematic" feel. Maybe it's a bit better, but certainly not by much at all.

Ironically with all this Red talk, if you look at the Panavision TV credits list and what camera was used, Sony F55 is used at least 3x as much as Red on their list of major TV productions.

http://www.panavision.com/TVCredits

I'm getting a Red just to have a different camera as some clients want Red and some want the FS7. They are "perceived" by clients as having different uses, whether this perception is fair is definitely debatable. I'm also getting it because where I live, it's very useful to know a Red well. Not that I want to be an AC necessarily, but just getting time on set as a DP or even an AC is always good, and the more you know, the more you work.

So for me, it's about learning a new camera system (Red) really well (like the way I know the FS7), expanding my skills and I'd probably pick up a few jobs that I wouldn't get by owning the Red as well. For better or worse, many producers just respond better to the word "Red."

The one I really want is the upcoming Scarlet Weapon, but at $6K for the Raven body there is absolutely zero reason to wait. All the accessories transfer so just sell the Raven for $4K when the Scarlet Weapon comes out at the end of 2016 or so. You loose $2K, which you would certainly make a number of times over by not having the Raven.

So yeah, in summary, not getting the Red because I think my images will be that much better (because they won't), but getting it to learn the Red system, expand my knowledge, make myself more employable and maybe get a few jobs because of the camera (I hope). And keeping the FS7 as well.

More pragmatic reasons I suppose.
Click to expand...

Have you shot on the MX or Dragon sensor Reds?

I only say this because you stated you are looking forward to learning how to use one. If you haven't used one and learned the workflow inside out it is hard to appreciate how good the image quality can be if you work with it properly. Of course, it is equally easy to treat it like a regular camera and get it horrifically wrong - something a lot of people did in the past and then relayed their horror stories of working on Red to everyone else...

The point I have been making is that in a world of online/reality/zero budget drama/corporate/music promos etc the FS7 will do just about everything you need it to do. And do it well enough for most applications. It's only if you have a job where you are really trying to push the image to that next tier of production it becomes apparent that the FS7 image starts to not hold up as well. I am dealing with this now after shooting some commercial studio stuff for a large Beer company because I thought I could get away with not hiring a Dragon.

My old Red was a precision instrument that I tried to shoehorn into doing a lot of jobs it was not best suited to - ie run and gun reality/corporate/lifestyle stuff and it was an unwieldy pain in the arse for a lot of those jobs. But when you had the kit/crew/location/art direction/time and wanted to make something look perfect for the higher/highest end, it always delivered. The new super lightweight Weapon/Raven etc put them back on the table for me, even if they end up being a lot more expensive than the initial list price suggests.

On a personal level I am at a point where most of my bills are paid by doing the - not lower, but REGULAR - type of work, but I am on the cusp of getting more of the higher end stuff and would really like to push to do more of that. I don't imagine I'll sell the FS7 but there is certainly scope for something better in the not too distant future on my horizon.
 
Ben Scott said:
It's only if you have a job where you are really trying to push the image to that next tier of production it becomes apparent that the FS7 image starts to not hold up as well. I am dealing with this now after shooting some commercial studio stuff for a large Beer company because I thought I could get away with not hiring a Dragon.
Click to expand...

I respect the quality of work you bring Ben and trust your eye so I'd love to know more details on where you found it not to hold up for future reference myself in similar situations. Are you talking about really aggressive colour grading or image quality in general? I've never pushed the camera into a higher end arena yet but compared to a friends original Scarlet I would have used my FS7.
 
Kind of you to say, ad I wasn't trying to set myself up as any sort of authority on the matter but not only have I researched the shizz out of this stuff, I've owned both and put them through the mill on many occasions.

It's somewhat disingenuous of me to say the FS7 doesn't hold up because it's so good at what it is for, but the reasons why you wouldn't go pitch a Superbowl commercial shot on the FS7 are

1) Just a smidge too much noise when pushed for the top end, and it's not an organic sexy noise.
2) Harder (for me) to precisely zero in on a shot that has to be very exact. Shooting Slog, even with a LUT on a monitor, always feels like 'I THINK we got it, let's go back and check in the edit'.
3) The way it treats not just shadows, but anything in the first stop or two above the shadows can, compared to High end cameras, look like pixelated mush very very quickly. I have had this with perfectly exposed clothes my talent is wearing and whilst it wouldn't be an issue on youtube, is IS one for broadcast.

My most recent findings were based on shooting 240fps 2k to the 7Q, but it also holds true internal 4k 25fps recording too for me.
 
Thanks for sharing your experience. That makes sense. I'm not in the league where those things would matter yet but Its good to know limitations when pitching and putting together budgets.
 
Ben Scott said:
Kind of you to say, ad I wasn't trying to set myself up as any sort of authority on the matter but not only have I researched the shizz out of this stuff, I've owned both and put them through the mill on many occasions.

It's somewhat disingenuous of me to say the FS7 doesn't hold up because it's so good at what it is for, but the reasons why you wouldn't go pitch a Superbowl commercial shot on the FS7 are

1) Just a smidge too much noise when pushed for the top end, and it's not an organic sexy noise.
2) Harder (for me) to precisely zero in on a shot that has to be very exact. Shooting Slog, even with a LUT on a monitor, always feels like 'I THINK we got it, let's go back and check in the edit'.
3) The way it treats not just shadows, but anything in the first stop or two above the shadows can, compared to High end cameras, look like pixelated mush very very quickly. I have had this with perfectly exposed clothes my talent is wearing and whilst it wouldn't be an issue on youtube, is IS one for broadcast.

My most recent findings were based on shooting 240fps 2k to the 7Q, but it also holds true internal 4k 25fps recording too for me.
Click to expand...

But what about Sony RAW?
 
FrameFarmMedia said:
Thanks for sharing your experience. That makes sense. I'm not in the league where those things would matter yet but Its good to know limitations when pitching and putting together budgets.
Click to expand...

To be honest I am only occasionally in that league these days whilst it is an amazing camera for the money it would be crazy to expect it to play on that highest level...


This is the same sort of thing I have when people who haven't worked with the big boys keep telling me the BM studio and now Ursa is as good as them. They are like zinc batteries against the best alkaline ones. They can match up to a certain ceiling and then after that point they fall away very quickly.
 
Last edited:
JackCarter said:
But what about Sony RAW?
Click to expand...

I've not used it so cannot comment on it.

But seeing as the reality of what is coming out of the back of the FS7's raw output is the issue and not the 7Q which can work wonders, it seems an expensive experiment that doesn't address the fundamental problem of how much information is given over to detail in the lowest stops with a 100% linear output.

Edit: £7,000 to be up and running and that's without media. At this point there's other options I would consider that definitely give me the IQ I would need.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top