Sending the fs700 to sony for upgrade

Marino215 said:
Thanks Dan. What a great recorder. One question if I may. Does the odysseyQ have an internal fan? Reason I ask is when I mount my shotgun other recorders I've used (as a monitor) I pick up fan noise. Usually I just put the recorder towards the rear and never have any issues. It would be nice to use the device as a monitor for run and gun shots if that's possible. Thanks

Best,
Anthony
Click to expand...

Dear Anthony,

The Odyssey7 and Odyssey7Q are fan-less designs.

We very carefully control the generation of heat, and the removal of the heat that we do generate.

Our power draw is only 8 to 15 watts.

Our units are 100% silent.

Respectfully,


Dan Keaton
Convergent Design
 
Jusgorilla said:
Hi Dan

Apologies, I misled on the "foregoing 120fps in RAW" comment. I meant no "burst" 120 4K RAW, but I still think your CD Q7 option is fantastic, and a 7.7" diagonal screen is a super bonus.
I personally think RAW is a bit overrated and prefer the camera/recorder doing the de-bayering so I don't have to and I can skip a laborious step. Log 12bit 444 uncompressed is plenty and all we need IMHO.

Thanks Dan, you have been patient, informative and quick to respond. If your response is indicative of the policies of Convergent Design as a whole, I think the company is great.

I have begged the re-sellers here in South Africa to pre order me a 7Q for my F35, but I have yet to receive any confirmation of my place in the que, and I fear I might have to wait longer than I should.
Is there any way I can have peice of mind I will receive a 7Q in a timely fashion when it finally is released?

Many Thanks
Click to expand...


Dear Justin,

Thank you for your kind words. It is very rewarding to read what you have said.

Our South African dealers, work with our European, Middle East and African Distributor, Symbiosis.

If your pre-order, was sent by your dealer, to Symbiosis, there there is a good chance that you will get an early unit.

Of course, I cannot guarantee this 100%, so I hope you understand.

We have not assigned que numbers yet, so please understand that this is not a problem that your dealer has caused.

We are expecting to have a huge demand for our new products, and we are planning accordingly.

But, we do expect a backlog, one where we can't fulfill every expected order in the first month.

Thus, I do highly encourage everyone that wants an early unit to pre-order one from their favorite dealer.

If one waits to order and Odyssey7Q in August, then the backlog may get in the way of getting one right away.

Respectfully,


Dan Keaton
Convergent Design
 
epsom salt said:
from what i've gathered prices are in the ball park of $6000 for cd vs $11000 for sony's 4k solution. both of these options can be rented for cheaper.

and my apologies dan if i insulted the abilities of your very useful tool in my discussion with evil thought. i only meant to say, that spec wise, it's not able to do 4k raw at 60fps or 120fps bursts. but i am very grateful that you've come to sony's aid and made the 7q.
and while i have your attention, i was wondering if you had an option for the higher frame rates of 960 and 480fps? so, might there be a recording option that would boost the quality of those frame rates with the 7q?
Click to expand...

Dear Espom Salt,

No apologies necessary. I did not take offense, I want wanted to point out the differences carefully.

I have been writing that our Odyssey7Q with our FS700 extra cost option will be able to record 4K, uncompressed up to 30 fps.

I have neglected to point out that the upgraded FS700 has a 4K burst mode, which can record 4K at 120 fps for 4 seconds, into a buffer, then output this buffer into an external recorder. The same applies to the 480 fps and 960 fps modes.

We fully expect to be able to support these modes.

To the best of my knowledge, at this moment, our engineering team has not tested this yet, but I do not expect any problem.

We are very familiar with recording from the current FS700, which outputs 1080p60 in these modes, and our current Gemini 4:4:4 supports these modes.

(Please note that the Odyssey7 and Odyssey7Q are capable of recording 1080p60, and just a few other recorders support 1080p60.)

Thus, I am very confident we will be able to do the same with the upgraded FS700.

On the other hand, at this moment, I do not expect us to be able to boost the quality of the high-speed buffered modes. In these cases the camera controls the quality of these 480 fps and 960 fps modes.

Respectfully,


Dan Keaton
Convergent Design
 
Thank you

Thank you

Dan Keaton said:
Dear Anthony,

The Odyssey7 and Odyssey7Q are fan-less designs.

We very carefully control the generation of heat, and the removal of the heat that we do generate.

Our power draw is only 8 to 15 watts.

Our units are 100% silent.

Respectfully,


Dan Keaton
Convergent Design
Click to expand...

Super! Thank you Dan for the information. That's great news, though a proper viewfinder is nice I don't see it being effective for critical focus anymore. Especially shooting in 4k mode, the OdysseyQ seems perfect for that.

Best,
Anthony
 
I'm about to step into the Piraña pool with a couple of observations...

First, I think there is potentially a a legal breach in terms of the way the FS700 was advertised vis à vis the 4K raw recoding (recorder, update etc) and potentially we could force something from Sony in this regard. As to what we could get out of them... Well, I suspect the most they could be persuaded to offer is a complete refund (at this stage) - but I'm not sure i'd take that offer (or maybe I would, then buy a brand new 700...)

However, as Dan has intimated on numerous occasions: their agreement with Sony has crippled the capabilities of the 7Q in relation to the FS700. As I understand it, he's said the 7Q is physically capable of recording 4K Raw, up to 60fps (and probably in 120fps bursts) - but Sony won't let them do this as it could potentially hurt sales of the Interface unit and recorder (although, really, who on earth is going to buy them?!)

Personally, I think there might be room to strong arm Sony into dropping their objection. At the end of the day, they marketed the FS700 as a camera that could record 4K Raw to an external recorder (no interface). That option is still available, just not with a Sony product! If there was a breach of marketing rules, there seems to be a fairly simple way for Sony to avoid a lawsuit. So if someone knows a lawyer who might want to take this on as a class action suit....

Finally, I'm not sure if CD really 'stepped in' to save the FS700. I seem to recall Dan saying they've been working with Sony on this since before the FS700 was announced. It sounds like Sony's plan from the start was to have a cheaper 3rd party option available on the market from the out set - albeit one that would require the user to purchase an expensive licence from Sony (which is how Sony get their cut from this rather elegant solution). It's actually rather clever: they realised they lack the skill and experience to produce a neat little Raw recorder for their camera (that their customers would actually want to use) but saw potential to earn some decent cashflow by licensing the FS Raw codec to a third party.

Then, alongside it, they thought they could earn a few extra pennies by also having their own Raw recorder (that they were developing for the F5/F55 anyway) to record a slightly beefed up version of the FS700 output: to encourage further sales of the R5 to those companies that might own both an FS700 and an F5 (you're more likely to buy an R5 if it works with more than one of your cameras, right?)

However, I suspect that there was a mistake or miscommunication in Sony somewhere that meant they forgot to include the right hardware in the R5 design to handle the FS700 output - or the right hardware in the FS700 to output Raw in a form the R5 could understand (hence the hasty development of an 'interface' unit).

Which is to say: marketing had a great plan for the FS700/R5, but someone forgot to tell engineering! Gotta love these big copmanies!

Colin Elves,
DP/FS700 owner,
London, UK
www.colinelves.com
 
Colinelves said:
I'm about to step into the Piraña pool with a couple of observations...
Click to expand...

Some good points. Legally it's a tough call and i think Sonys solution might be costing them money because new hardware, shipping, service is probably more than $400 for a corporate. Witness how much the F3 slog update used to be.

However it is an interesting idea to see whether Sony can be lobbied to remove that RAW restriction but at the same time we don't know why or how, and i'm not that fussed about it anyway.

I'm curious whether anyone here will go down the Sony route - with interface and recorder and why? I can see someone who has an F5/F55 and 700 getting the interface but it's a massive investment and overkill really, there's a couple of observations:

- the output of the F5/F55 is 14 bit verses 12 bit
- the 4K stuff i've seen is quite noisy, probably a function of running ISO2000, so i think we'd always post process it perhaps down to 2K
- The 12 bit range is lovely, but the F5 appears to offer more (totally not quantative observation - does anyone have any exterior F5 RAW files?).

I think the 700 is much more suited to the CD solution than Sonys, which are really targeted at the next cameras up. I can't see it eating into Sonys sales of their recorder.

Dan mentioned that the CD will still record burst 4K which to be honest is probably all i'd ever want anyway and was great to hear.

So the only real differences are the filesize of a Sony RAW vs 16 bit DPX and the fact that you could choose to debayer a RAW differently.

The only outstanding question mark for me, with the O7, is the uncompressed nature of those 4K files, but that's something that could be addressed in the future. I'd happily take the current offering (and indeed have preordered it)

cheers
Paul
 
I couldn't just sit back and do nothing.

I couldn't just sit back and do nothing.

paulcurtis said:
Some good points. Legally it's a tough call and i think Sonys solution might be costing them money because new hardware, shipping, service is probably more than $400 for a corporate. Witness how much the F3 slog update used to be.

However it is an interesting idea to see whether Sony can be lobbied to remove that RAW restriction but at the same time we don't know why or how, and i'm not that fussed about it anyway.

I'm curious whether anyone here will go down the Sony route - with interface and recorder and why? I can see someone who has an F5/F55 and 700 getting the interface but it's a massive investment and overkill really, there's a couple of observations:

- the output of the F5/F55 is 14 bit verses 12 bit
- the 4K stuff i've seen is quite noisy, probably a function of running ISO2000, so i think we'd always post process it perhaps down to 2K
- The 12 bit range is lovely, but the F5 appears to offer more (totally not quantative observation - does anyone have any exterior F5 RAW files?).

I think the 700 is much more suited to the CD solution than Sonys, which are really targeted at the next cameras up. I can't see it eating into Sonys sales of their recorder.

Dan mentioned that the CD will still record burst 4K which to be honest is probably all i'd ever want anyway and was great to hear.

So the only real differences are the filesize of a Sony RAW vs 16 bit DPX and the fact that you could choose to debayer a RAW differently.

The only outstanding question mark for me, with the O7, is the uncompressed nature of those 4K files, but that's something that could be addressed in the future. I'd happily take the current offering (and indeed have preordered it)

cheers
Paul
Click to expand...

I have to say, as long as Sony keeps continuing their charade to cripple the FS700 it's seems as though a class action suit is the only logical choice. I hope Sony is listening, the last thing they would want is a class action suit. That's one sure way to kill off the FS700 in my opinion, I'd never purchase a camera that was under "litigation" because of false advertising. The press alone would detract from anything else Sony is doing. The truth is what they really offered us was the F5 and now they're just giving us a beefed up fs100.

Best,
Anthony
 
Colinelves said:
I'm about to step into the Piraña pool with a couple of observations...

First, I think there is potentially a a legal breach in terms of the way the FS700 was advertised vis à vis the 4K raw recoding (recorder, update etc) and potentially we could force something from Sony in this regard. As to what we could get out of them... Well, I suspect the most they could be persuaded to offer is a complete refund (at this stage) - but I'm not sure i'd take that offer (or maybe I would, then buy a brand new 700...)

However, as Dan has intimated on numerous occasions: their agreement with Sony has crippled the capabilities of the 7Q in relation to the FS700. As I understand it, he's said the 7Q is physically capable of recording 4K Raw, up to 60fps (and probably in 120fps bursts) - but Sony won't let them do this as it could potentially hurt sales of the Interface unit and recorder (although, really, who on earth is going to buy them?!)

Personally, I think there might be room to strong arm Sony into dropping their objection. At the end of the day, they marketed the FS700 as a camera that could record 4K Raw to an external recorder (no interface). That option is still available, just not with a Sony product! If there was a breach of marketing rules, there seems to be a fairly simple way for Sony to avoid a lawsuit. So if someone knows a lawyer who might want to take this on as a class action suit....

Finally, I'm not sure if CD really 'stepped in' to save the FS700. I seem to recall Dan saying they've been working with Sony on this since before the FS700 was announced. It sounds like Sony's plan from the start was to have a cheaper 3rd party option available on the market from the out set - albeit one that would require the user to purchase an expensive licence from Sony (which is how Sony get their cut from this rather elegant solution). It's actually rather clever: they realised they lack the skill and experience to produce a neat little Raw recorder for their camera (that their customers would actually want to use) but saw potential to earn some decent cashflow by licensing the FS Raw codec to a third party.

Then, alongside it, they thought they could earn a few extra pennies by also having their own Raw recorder (that they were developing for the F5/F55 anyway) to record a slightly beefed up version of the FS700 output: to encourage further sales of the R5 to those companies that might own both an FS700 and an F5 (you're more likely to buy an R5 if it works with more than one of your cameras, right?)

However, I suspect that there was a mistake or miscommunication in Sony somewhere that meant they forgot to include the right hardware in the R5 design to handle the FS700 output - or the right hardware in the FS700 to output Raw in a form the R5 could understand (hence the hasty development of an 'interface' unit).

Which is to say: marketing had a great plan for the FS700/R5, but someone forgot to tell engineering! Gotta love these big copmanies!

Colin Elves,
DP/FS700 owner,
London, UK
www.colinelves.com
Click to expand...


Dear Colin,

I would like to offer my perspective.

1. We are honored to be working this closely with Sony.

2. Our relationship with Sony is a big deal for us, and I get the impression that this is something that Sony rarely does.

Thus, we have to walk before we can run. We are very happy with the opportunity to take the 2K and 4K signals from the upgraded FS700 camera and do the best that we can, including recording 2K Raw, in Cinema DNG, in 12-Bit Linear, at 240 fps.

Yes, we would also like to be able to take the 4K Raw and record 4K Raw.

But, allowing us to work this closely with Sony took a lot of work. Many, if not most, companies are very protective of their intellectual property.
And we have to prove ourselves to be a worthy partner.

To put it as clear as possible, this is a big deal for us, and I feel that this was a big deal for Sony bringing in an outside company.

Thus, we do not fault Sony at all for placing this one restriction on our using the 4K output of their camera.

3. It is obvious that many are not happy with the $400 fee to upgrade their FS700's.

But, please consider that this fee is waived, if you purchase the Sony solution.

Also, Sony is really not charging for the hardware upgrade, nor the firmware, and not charging for return shipping.

The hardware upgrade significantly upgrades the internal processing of the camera and the HD-SDI and HDMI output circuitry.

Sony does charge the $400 fee if one purchases our recording solution, and we feel that this is fair to us.

4. The Sony interface unit is necessary to take the output of the FS700 and prepare it for recording to the R5 recorder.

Sony could have built a single device that had both the interface unit and R5 recorder in one external case.

5. I do not consider that we "Stepped In" to save Sony.

We were given the opportunity to build a recorder that would work with the FS700, so we did.

I understand that other companies were given this opportunity to do so also.

At the time, we were far along on our design for our next recorder, a Gemini 4:4:4 on steroids, with a 7.7" OLED Monitor.

We were asked if we could accept the FS700's output and record it. Our answer was quick and easy, as we knew how much processing power and Input/Output capabilities we were building into our new device.

6. I also know that our 4K Raw restriction is not due to Sony wanting to protect their R5 sales.

The R5 is still the recorder of choice for the very popular Sony F55, and has applications with the Sony F5.

7. Sony is working very closely with us and have been very prompt with our engineering questions as we were trying to develop our code to work with the FS700.

I hope everyone realizes that I am not attempting to be argumentative, I am just trying to provide my perspective.

Respectfully,


Dan Keaton
Convergent Design
 
First off, thanks Dan for always being so eloquent and responsive to these forums. It helps me put a lot of faith in CD and the work you are doing there. I look forward to using the 7Q at my first chance. I was on a shoot yesterday, actually, and found myself wishing I already had one to use.

Now, on this whole FS700 upgrade issue... Personally, when I researched and purchased my FS700, I came to the conclusion that I was buying a 1080p Super35 camera with Super Slo-mo abilities, that would have the ability some day at some additional cost to upgrade to a 4K-outputting camera. That's all I personally felt I was promised, and to be honest, that hasn't changed for me.

I am still going to be able to upgrade my camera to output 4K someday at some price. Now, we just have more details. On top of that, I'm personally thrilled that I have more than one price option to get 4K, with Sony's and CD's solutions on the table with various costs associated with each. I like having options, and I'm sure more options will come available over time.

The "4K-ready" concept of the FS700 that I liked was the somewhat future-proofing I got with it. I could buy one camera that could become more than what I bought it to be. And now that we have more information, I can make other educated decisions in the future as to which route I take to get 4K.

I, personally, do not feel lied to. Did Sony lay out precisely what was involved in the upgrade, no. But, to me, they barely gave ANY details, so I assumed they were still working out the details and I just had to wait and see. Still, as they promised, there is an upgrade coming someday for some price - and I look forward to making those decisions when 4K becomes a need for my business.

Please, those of you who are frustrated or angry with Sony, do not take my comments as "you shouldn't feel the way you do" - I'm not here to tell anyone they're wrong. I'm just giving my views on the current situation and how I look at the whole ordeal. I too am not thrilled about having to ship my camera across the nation, but that to me is just another cost of the upgrade (both in time and money) that I will have to include in my decision-making process.
 
Last edited:
Sony might have done well to have a voice in this community. I for one will always wonder who, why and how Sony felt it was a good idea or even necessary to build a solution so big and gangly. I can't imagine the F5/F55 owners are any less annoyed. The only entity's I can foresee purchasing the Sony solution are rental/production houses and wealthy people that want every toy.
 
brazzam said:
First off, thanks Dan for always being so eloquent and responsive to these forums. It helps me put a lot of faith in CD and the work you are doing there. I look forward to using the 7Q at my first chance. I was on a shoot yesterday, actually, and found myself wishing I already had one to use.

Now, on this whole FS700 upgrade issue... Personally, when I researched and purchased my FS700, I came to the conclusion that I was buying a 1080p Super35 camera with Super Slo-mo abilities, that would have the ability some day at some additional cost to upgrade to a 4K-outputting camera. That's all I personally felt I was promised, and to be honest, that hasn't changed for me.

I am still going to be able to upgrade my camera to output 4K someday at some price. Now, we just have more details. On top of that, I'm personally thrilled that I have more than one price option to get 4K, with Sony's and CD's solutions on the table with various costs associated with each. I like having options, and I'm sure more options will come available over time.

The "4K-ready" concept of the FS700 that I liked was the somewhat future-proofing I got with it. I could buy one camera that could become more than what I bought it to be. And now that we have more information, I can make other educated decisions in the future as to which route I take to get 4K.

I, personally, do not feel lied to. Did Sony not lay out precisely what was involved in the upgrade, no. But, to me, they barely gave ANY details, so I assumed they were still working out the details and I just had to wait and see. Still, as they promised, there is an upgrade coming someday for some price - and I look forward to making those decisions when 4K becomes a need for my business.

Please, those of you who are frustrated or angry with Sony, do not take my comments as "you shouldn't feel the way you do" - I'm not here to tell anyone they're wrong. I'm just giving my views on the current situation and how I look at the whole ordeal. I too am not thrilled about having to ship my camera across the nation, but that to me is just another cost of the upgrade (both in time and money) that I will have to include in my decision-making process.
Click to expand...

Right there with you. When I bought the FS700, I knew what I was buying: a 1080p cam with slo-mo. I wasn't going to let myself be disillusioned by thinking the 4K output was going to be some cheap solution. If you look at the prices of 4K cameras... you'd know it wouldn't be cheap to capture 4k.
 
For Dan Keaton and Mike Schell...
Just want to let you guys know I have an Odyssey 7Q on pre-order and my name in the queue with Sony for an upgrade. Like the features you're offering and the work you're doing.
 
Colinelves said:
I'm about to step into the Piraña pool with a couple of observations...

First, I think there is potentially a a legal breach in terms of the way the FS700 was advertised vis à vis the 4K raw recoding (recorder, update etc) and potentially we could force something from Sony in this regard. As to what we could get out of them... Well, I suspect the most they could be persuaded to offer is a complete refund (at this stage) - but I'm not sure i'd take that offer (or maybe I would, then buy a brand new 700...)
Click to expand...

Hilarious drama here.

Good luck in "suing" Sony for "false advertisement." I would love to see you carry that threat,. Please do post the court date (instead of just posting empty threats on the internet forums). FS700 was advertised as "4K ready" as it had a 4K sensor. There was never any promise that 4K would be free or cheap . You wouldn't have legal case even if the 4K upgrade was $50,000.

There was no binding agreement with Sony about the cost of upgrade when you bought the camera. They can charge $100,000 for the upgrade and you still have zero case, legally!

Ask a lawyer.

But please keep us posted on your court case!

As for CD coming to "rescue" Sony, another joke of the century! The reason Odyssey7Q works with FS700 because Sony wanted it to work with it! Had Sony chosen to not license FS700 RAW to CD (they didn't have to), you still would have zero legal case -- as Sony solution does record 4K, so legally they fulfilled their "4K ready" promise

.
 
Last edited:
evilthought said:
Hilarious drama here.

Good luck in "suing" Sony for "false advertisement." I would love to see you carry that threat,. Please do post the court date (instead of posting empty threats on the internet forums). FS700 was advertised as "4K ready" as it had a 4K sensor. There was never any promise that 4K would be free or cheap . You wouldn't have legal case even if the 4K upgrade was $50,00!

There was no binding agreement with Sony about the cost of upgrade when you bought the camera. They can charge $100,000 for the upgrade and you still have zero case, legally!

But please keep us posted on your court case!

As for CD coming to "rescue" Sony, another joke of the century! The reason Odyssey7Q works with FS700 because Sony wanted it to work with it! Had Sony chosen to not license FS700 RAW to CD (they didn't have to), you still would have zero legal case -- as Sony solution does record 4K, so legally they fulfilled their "4K ready" promise.
Click to expand...

alright sweet, so it looks like evil thought is leading the charge for the lawsuit! evil, just tell the law firm that we aren't happy because sony told us what we'd get in the beginning and then changed there story and price a year after they sold the cam to everybody. it might be a stretch but i'm sure there has got to be some tiny obscure bylaw out there that holds large corporations and their responsibilities to perform what they internationally advertise...

to those who aren't upset about the added costs and hardware, good i'm glad you didn't expect this. you probably don't have the same sick feeling in the pits of our stomach that some us do. and again, yes i understood 4k would be expensive but with the recent news, it just got quite a bit more expensive. so with all due respect, some of us did read the bold print before we bought the fs and expected this company to deliver their end of the bargain. that being said, i would gladly put my name on a class action suit against sony. and my guess is, that if evil thought did actually own the camera and or wasn't just connected sony somehow, his name would be on that suit too.
 
epsom salt said:
some of us did read the bold print before we bought the fs and expected this company to deliver their end of the bargain. that being said, i would gladly put my name on a class action suit against sony. and my guess is, that if evil thought did actually own the camera and or wasn't just connected sony somehow, his name would be on that suit too.
Click to expand...

Less talking and more action. I am still waiting for one of you guys to actually file the lawsuit and post the court date here. Come on guys, do you all just bark and never bite?
 
epsom salt said:
yes i understood 4k would be expensive but with the recent news, it just got quite a bit more expensive.
Click to expand...

Really? Since there was never any "advertisement" about the cost of 4K upgrade, how on earth are you going to argue (legally in court) that it is more expensive now? More expensive than what? More expensive that some unknown non-advertised cost?

Lets say the Sony lawyer concedes in court that they are willing to do the hardware upgrade totally free of charge, but the firmware upgrade would be $5000. Then what? How are you going to demand (legally under the law) that you are entitled to free firmware upgrade?
 
This thread has jumped the shark. I own the camera and was an early adopter. i read every ad and promotional piece countless times. I almost bought an AF100 or a Canon 5D MkIII. I bought the FS700 instead. How come I'm happy? Am I an idiot? Did I miss the part where Sony made all these promises of a 4K free firmware upgrade with a cheap recorder the size of a walnut? When I see threads like this I think that some people may have too much time on their hands...
I call this the "Lotto Winner Complainer's Syndrome"
"Congratulations you just won 5 million dollars!!!"
"Yeahhhh, but all those TAXES I have to pay, waughhh..."
Just shoot some great footage. If you get a better 4k solution for less money, by ALL MEANS please take advantage of that!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top