I for one would never wait on Canon again. They usually underwhelm and over charge. C100 Mark II is the perfect example.
FS7: Warning! FS7 Reds
- Thread starter samtheman
- Start date
I for one would never wait on Canon again. They usually underwhelm and over charge. C100 Mark II is the perfect example.
ReelWorksMedia
Well-known member
I agree with you...Canon does drive me nuts. There is one caviat for me...I like the image, workflow, thoughtfulness, and stability of their high end lines. They just always are skimpy on the features. That said...i like their color science and quick path to a great image. Saves time in post. Their stigniness is legendary though.
I don't know. I used to think the same about Canon color science, but I've seen several side by sides of the C300 vs FS7 and I have to say I like the FS7 color science better in both cases - better skin tones and richer colors.
ReelWorksMedia
Well-known member
You our very well may be right. Im a little leary about Sonys methodology in their menus and paths to getting that image. I love that you can get a great image from a c300 in seconds. I have no problem operating complex camera systems....I just "choose" simplicity because my production schedule is so intense...I have to push forward as fast as possible while getting to a masterful end result.
i just have a feeling that the FS7 workflow may drive me crazy in a fast pace environment...though the image it produces may be very nice. That said, I very much respect what the FS7 is...just not sure it's the proper tool for my current production path.
Doug Jensen
Carbonite Member
No, I just landed in Frankfurt on my way to Africa for a week. But even if I wasn't I wouldn't have time to shoot a custom test for you. I am not the least bit concerned about noise on the FS7.
Regardless if it's true or not that the FS7 colors are bad, this thread if full of highly defensive people fighting for a camera and making it difficult to read through and getting any objectivity from it.
The FS7 is great bang for the buck and I will most likely buy one. But I'm waiting for exact this reason. I have seen a few things I don't like and haven't seen anything that made me fall in love yet. It's a $8,000 camera and I'm sure there will be compromises. We know there are some in the construction and in some features. Maybe color is one as well or processing. Time will tell once the dust sets. But it's sure not a perfect camera. It's $8,000. It is what it is.
The FS7 is great bang for the buck and I will most likely buy one. But I'm waiting for exact this reason. I have seen a few things I don't like and haven't seen anything that made me fall in love yet. It's a $8,000 camera and I'm sure there will be compromises. We know there are some in the construction and in some features. Maybe color is one as well or processing. Time will tell once the dust sets. But it's sure not a perfect camera. It's $8,000. It is what it is.
eddavid
Carbonite Member
I don't think this thread will deter anyone from using the fs7. Again - echoed before - you can either shoot charts and do it the right way - or you can shoot some tests of your kids or in my case the world-famous canine artist Charlie Chicken and not really be able to draw real scientific conclusions of how a camera sees red, blue, green.
Same with the a7s. Until Samuel shot some color charts - that was when we could actually see that PRO gamma had more pleasing greens than S GAMUT. same with the fs7 - until I see charts - it doesn't matter to me what you shoot. And speaking of your appearance Doug - you do seem angry.
Online forums it's hard to really tell how someone acts thru their writing. Hence the Toronto Film Festival comment - I didn't win the special jury prize at this festival which is probably top 3 film festivals in the world for my little Charlie Chicken video. There would be a zero perecent chance of that ever happening, much or less that thing even getting into it. I guess everyone is just scimming these forums. No one is really reading anything.
Same with the a7s. Until Samuel shot some color charts - that was when we could actually see that PRO gamma had more pleasing greens than S GAMUT. same with the fs7 - until I see charts - it doesn't matter to me what you shoot. And speaking of your appearance Doug - you do seem angry.
Online forums it's hard to really tell how someone acts thru their writing. Hence the Toronto Film Festival comment - I didn't win the special jury prize at this festival which is probably top 3 film festivals in the world for my little Charlie Chicken video. There would be a zero perecent chance of that ever happening, much or less that thing even getting into it. I guess everyone is just scimming these forums. No one is really reading anything.
JPNola
Veteran
WARNING!!: The $8000 camera is not the $17,000 camera.
WARNING!!: The $8000 camera is not the $17,000 camera.
Wait, first you say this issue that merits a WARNING occurs in all gamma settings. Then you say that the standard gammas are usable. And you warn that I am locked out of the SLOG3 matrix settings that I have no desire to get into now or in the immediate future. Let's cut through all the "chroma noise", "color space", digital alchemist lingo. Is the Fs7 a lemon or not? Is the client that I just shot footage for in MPEG2 HD standard gamma going to come wailing back to me about some issue with the reds in the video?
I see that you pulled your youtube video warning about the issue. I hope that wasn't because of Sony's lawyers. :laugh:
WARNING!!: The $8000 camera is not the $17,000 camera.
Wait, first you say this issue that merits a WARNING occurs in all gamma settings. Then you say that the standard gammas are usable. And you warn that I am locked out of the SLOG3 matrix settings that I have no desire to get into now or in the immediate future. Let's cut through all the "chroma noise", "color space", digital alchemist lingo. Is the Fs7 a lemon or not? Is the client that I just shot footage for in MPEG2 HD standard gamma going to come wailing back to me about some issue with the reds in the video?
I see that you pulled your youtube video warning about the issue. I hope that wasn't because of Sony's lawyers. :laugh:
I've got a unproven theory that there is nothing wrong with this camera, just that new owners are finding out what we 5/55 people learned almost two years ago. There's about three different ways to make a fantastic image with a F but around three dozen ways to make a miserable one.
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
Im sure you are right.
Working out to use the camera smoothly is also a challenge that may be more of a problem.
(for example Luts popping on and off in different modes et al may push one to shooting in one of the three dozen manners!)
S
Ben Scott
Veteran
Not having had a Sony camera for about 10 years I've been pleasantly surprised by how many things the FS7 has gotten right and how easy to use it is.
It certainly has some quirks - some I expect to be addressed in firmware updates and some I expect to work around, but I can't think of another camera at this price point upwards that is this simple to use once you are familiar with it.
It certainly has some quirks - some I expect to be addressed in firmware updates and some I expect to work around, but I can't think of another camera at this price point upwards that is this simple to use once you are familiar with it.
paulcurtis
Veteran
Not really be on the forums in ages. This seems pretty similar to the FS700 as expected.
The reds are because the colour primaries that the camera is using natively aren't sRGB or REC709. The camera is producing better Reds than these default colourspaces can handle. So these reds are out of gamut and depending on how you are post processing them can become clipped and scaled in ways that end up with skewed colours.
On the FS700 this happens with the RAW output and you have to debayer in a colorspace that can accommodate these Reds, ProPhoto, BestRGB etc,. sRGB was always designed for stills and having really punchy colours and REC709 is quite limited in the Reds.
This is a useful resource
http://www.brucelindbloom.com/index.html?WorkingSpaceInfo.html
Which can show representations of the colour spaces.
How were these processed? What was the workflow, because if these reds are being generated in-camera then that could actually be a problem. But i'd have thought these would be SLog3 based and then i imagine that mistakes were made in post?
cheers
Paul
The reds are because the colour primaries that the camera is using natively aren't sRGB or REC709. The camera is producing better Reds than these default colourspaces can handle. So these reds are out of gamut and depending on how you are post processing them can become clipped and scaled in ways that end up with skewed colours.
On the FS700 this happens with the RAW output and you have to debayer in a colorspace that can accommodate these Reds, ProPhoto, BestRGB etc,. sRGB was always designed for stills and having really punchy colours and REC709 is quite limited in the Reds.
This is a useful resource
http://www.brucelindbloom.com/index.html?WorkingSpaceInfo.html
Which can show representations of the colour spaces.
How were these processed? What was the workflow, because if these reds are being generated in-camera then that could actually be a problem. But i'd have thought these would be SLog3 based and then i imagine that mistakes were made in post?
cheers
Paul
Hey Paul,
Great to see you on here. As you know, you and I were so back and for the on the FS700 + SLog2 reds (which were terrible).
This weekend, I meet up with with a colleague with just got an FS7. I brought my FS700 + 7Q and placed it side by side just to check the reds on the FS7. While no extensive test was done, the reds on the FS7 Slog3 look WAY BETTER than FS700 Slog2. They actually looked red instead of orange.
There might still be some quirks with red, but it's a huge improvement over the FS700.
paulcurtis
Veteran
Hey Gene
Did you shoot any RAW? I'd be willing to bet that the FS700 Reds in RAW would be similar to the FS7, drop me a line if you did.
I think you've seen the comparison matrix i did between the various approaches on the FS700 side and how different reds can be when done wrong? I don't have an FS7 or plan on one so i'm only guessing based on the 700.
The beginning of the thread doesn't really detail the post workflow but these skewed reds are most likely colourspace/colour primary issues. Whether they crop up in normal workflows i have no idea. Certainly if you're using Slog2/Slog3 and use the wrong LUT to interpret then that could lead to these kinds of colour shifts.
That lindbloom page shows how restrictive sRGB and REC709 colorspaces are and AFAIK sRGB appears to be the default that Resolve uses for example, unless you're in ACES or BMDLog spaces. I've stayed away from Resolve for that reason. However if you took footage shot on the FS7 into Resolve in ACES mode with the appropriate Slog3 IDT then i would guess that the colours would look really good.
As i said i'm second guessing here and no way to test
cheers
Paul
Nope, since when do lawyers come for someone's opinions. I solved the problem through a custom file and didn't want to negatively affect someone's business. If you actually saw and read my other threads and Vimeo links, I mentioned that it's an "amazing camera" and that "I'm in love" with it. Standard and hypergammas don't treat the image the same, but it defeats the purpose of having a "cinema camera" if one is stuck with the standard modes. If I wanted to shoot MPEG HD for broadcast, then the pmw200 is perfect for that. Maybe it was a batch of cameras that had this problem and mine is one of them. Having used an F5, the image is similar in certain modes.
Last edited:
JPNola
Veteran
Thanks for the input on the Fs7, sam.
There are obviously some emotions in play what with purchasers of the Fs7 being defensive regarding early criticisms of the camera and some F5 owners being bothered by inferences that the Fs7 is an F5 for only $8K. Bottom line- they are two different cameras each with their own strengths and weaknesses. It will be interesting to see what Sony does with the next generation of the F5.
If I could I would own both the Fs7 and the F5. The nice thing here is that the two can be used for 2-camera interviews and they will match reasonably well.
Again, I appreciate the experiences and expertise you share here with everyone. Happy shooting!
There are obviously some emotions in play what with purchasers of the Fs7 being defensive regarding early criticisms of the camera and some F5 owners being bothered by inferences that the Fs7 is an F5 for only $8K. Bottom line- they are two different cameras each with their own strengths and weaknesses. It will be interesting to see what Sony does with the next generation of the F5.
If I could I would own both the Fs7 and the F5. The nice thing here is that the two can be used for 2-camera interviews and they will match reasonably well.
Again, I appreciate the experiences and expertise you share here with everyone. Happy shooting!
You're welcome, yes there are obvious differences between the two with each having its own advantages:
-The FS7 has a power zoom lens that costs around $2500 where the F5 would need Sony's zoom for about $10k or the Cabrio for like $40k
-The FS7 can be shoulder mounted easier with the pre-packaged handle, the F5 would need a grip and a shoulder pad to do the same
-The F5 offers 16bit RAW if needed, the FS7 is at 12bit
-The F5 has a 4:4:4 SR Codec but only in HD, the FS7 is 4:2:2
-The FS7 is made for a one man operation, the F5 can do the same but with many additional accessories
-The FS7 has an easier EF mount compatibility, the F5 does too but it is quirkier
-The FS7 can be used easier for run and gun situations
-The FS7 and F5 use the same sensor according to various sources, also a similar menu
-The FS7 has internal 4k out of the box, the F5 needs a paid update for that
-The F5 is about $20k for an operational package, the FS7 is $7k for the body only or around $10k with the powerzoom
I have used both and they're amazing cameras, it comes down to one's budget and needs.
Last edited:
