FS7: XDCA-FS7 Extension unit discussion

J

jshbckr

Veteran
Just got mine, figured I could make a topic where we talk about how you're using it, keep updated on camera firmware for ProRes, Odyssey7Q firmware updates for RAW out, etc.

Right off the bat, I have to say I'm pretty disappointed with one of my initial discoveries:
4ju9+


Now, maybe there will be a firmware update to address this, but it's looking like we can't change the internal recording while sending out 4K RAW. I understand why the FS700 was limited to 1080p internal while sending out RAW because that's the best the camera was capable of recording. But it seems like we should be able to record compressed 4K internally as a backup to our 4K RAW output. 1080p works great if I just want proxies but I would prefer a 4K option for redundancy.

I'm starting to feel like this camera came bundled with a lot of "gotchas"... This is one that all of us figured would just be a given (recording 4K internal while sending out RAW) but of course there had to be a gotcha. Fingers crossed that a firmware update will change this.
 
"....bundled with a lot of gotchas"

Has there ever been a camera release that this has not been the case? Especially with Sony... These types of gotchas should be very much expected
 
Last edited:
ReelWorksMedia said:
"....bundled with a lot of gotchas"

Has there ever been a camera release that this gas not been the case? Especially with Sony... These types of gotchas should be very much expected
Click to expand...

I suppose. There are just things I never expected to be gotchas. Oh, waveform doesn't work when the LUT is on? The camera records UHD but suddenly can't when you're sending out RAW? They seem like the things people talk about before hand and say "well, of course it will do XYZ, why in the earth wouldn't it be able to do that?" and then voila, Sony finds a way.
 
Trade all the quirks...for a bit of resolution...guess it's up to each individual to determine how important resolution really is to them.

To me...it's important to get all the elements of my workflow right. I have no problem spending more to get that...or just waiting until the right situation comes along. If I could spend $15k + on a camera that has a lot of solutions for a fast, solid, production workflow... You will make the money back in labor and project income.
 
Last edited:
Liam Hall said:
Hey, at least you've got 4096 x 2160.
Click to expand...

Which I had on the FS700+7Q.

I know not everyone is coming from the FS700 to the FS7. Obviously it's still a nice bump up in specs for the camera itself. And if something were to happen where I couldn't shoot 4K into the 7Q (or I didn't want to use the 7Q) I can still capture UHD to just the camera. That's a good option/backup plan. But it just perplexes me that it's not an option to do UHD internal + RAW out.
 
jshbckr said:
Which I had on the FS700+7Q.
Click to expand...

Sure but FS700 + 7Q was only 12-bit RAW signal downgraded to whatever codec you chose.

Needless to say however that I feel your pain. Many F5/F55 owners have uncovered a full page of gotcha's too, some quite serious and while some initial problems were addressed others will probably never be.
 
I'm wondering if that's a data issue? For the FS7 to send out 4K to another device and record 4K internally, is that too crazy on the processor?

I'm wondering, on the F5, can you send out 4K RAW to the R5 and record 4K to XAVC? If so, that's probably intentional crippling by Sony on the FS7 (which I can understand to a point since it's so much cheaper).
 
starcentral said:
Sure but FS700 + 7Q was only 12-bit RAW signal downgraded to whatever codec you chose.

Needless to say however that I feel your pain. Many F5/F55 owners have uncovered a full page of gotcha's too, some quite serious and while some initial problems were addressed others will probably never be.
Click to expand...
Is the RAW signal on the FS7 16-bit? I thought it was an identical stream as the FS700.
 
yes its an identical stream to FS700 (12-bit) sorry for the confusion. I thought we were talking about simultaneous 4K RAW with R5 and 4K XAVC internal. Which by the way the F55 will do, and probably the F5 with the 4K paid internal upgrade.

It leads me to believe (although i could be wrong) that with R5 on the F7S you can do 4K internal and 4K RAW. Anyone try this yet?
 
starcentral said:
yes its an identical stream to FS700 (12-bit) sorry for the confusion. I thought we were talking about simultaneous 4K RAW with R5 and 4K XAVC internal. Which by the way the F55 will do, and probably the F5 with the 4K paid internal upgrade.
Click to expand...

OK, so it's probably an intentional crippling due to pricing.
 
starcentral said:
yes its an identical stream to FS700 (12-bit) sorry for the confusion. I thought we were talking about simultaneous 4K RAW with R5 and 4K XAVC internal. Which by the way the F55 will do, and probably the F5 with the 4K paid internal upgrade.

It leads me to believe (although i could be wrong) that with R5 on the F7S you can do 4K internal and 4K RAW. Anyone try this yet?
Click to expand...

Doubtful. The camera has no way of knowing if you're using an Odyssey7Q or an R5. Once the XDCA is installed, it's just a BNC output for RAW (i.e. no direct connection interface like the F5/55 have for the R5). I'm really hoping this is an oversight or something they will change. They still have to release the firmware updates for Slog2 and ProRes. You'll find me crossing my fingers but not holding my breath.
 
True, I guess there "has" to be some differences between the XDCAM and CineAlta line.. one would sorta hope anyway, the FS7 has already spread the line quite thin. :huh:
 
All the "4K" marketing and labeling aside, I am of the mind that the Fs7 is really made for shooters such as myself. I shoot 150-200 jobs a year and I have never had anyone request 4K. I see the Fs7 as a Super35 version of the EX3 that does 180 fps, has S-Log and XVAC, in a body that is more weather resistant than that of the EX3. Sony's pairing of the Fs7 with a kit lens much like the kit lens paired with the EX3 backs that up. So does the semi-shoulder mount form factor that is closer to the EX3 than it is to the F5.

For much of my shooting, a small form factor, light weight, and "low-profile" is premium. I didn't purchase the Fs7 for 4K capability. I more purchased it for Super35 in a diminutive, documentary-style form factor. I was tired of the difficulty of shooting run & gun with a C300. I was really, really tired of trying to shoot run & gun with a Canon 5D.

The Sony Fs7 is clearly aimed at the C300, a camera that beat Sony to the punch in the sub-$15k Super35 niche. I think if you purchased the Fs7 in choosing between the Fs7 and the C300 you won't be disappointed. If you purchased the Fs7 in choosing between the Fs7 and the F5 you will likely be disappointed.

You purchased a Porsche Cayman. You didn't purchase a Porsche 911 ( F5 ) or 911 Turbo ( F55 ). Be realistic about it's capabilities. It has arguably better handling but it's power is purposely limited so as not to compete too directly with it's elder sibling.
 
JPNola said:
All the "4K" marketing and labeling aside, I am of the mind that the Fs7 is really made for shooters such as myself. I shoot 150-200 jobs a year and I have never had anyone request 4K.
Click to expand...

i think it depends on what you work in. For my TV network jobs lately, they want 4K as much as possible. For my own projects, I didn't care for 4K until I started using it. It's like a drug and I prefer it for every project now. The ability to crop in is invaluable IMO.
 
gene_can_sing said:
i think it depends on what you work in. For my TV network jobs lately, they want 4K as much as possible. For my own projects, I didn't care for 4K until I started using it. It's like a drug and I prefer it for every project now. The ability to crop in is invaluable IMO.
Click to expand...

+1 Gene having all those extra pixels is great for cropping and post stabilisation on a 1080 delivery.

Initially I thought I'd be shooting 1080 but now I'm sticking to 4k for everything that doesn't need HFR.

Loving this camera so far.
 
gene_can_sing said:
i think it depends on what you work in. For my TV network jobs lately, they want 4K as much as possible. For my own projects, I didn't care for 4K until I started using it. It's like a drug and I prefer it for every project now. The ability to crop in is invaluable IMO.
Click to expand...

Indeed, it does depend upon your client base. The results of this recent survey find that 23% of major UK production companies have shot in 4k in the last year and 33% say they expect to be shooting in 4k in the upcoming year-

http://www.4kshooters.net/2014/08/1...cameras-editing-and-grading-software-in-2014/

The 23% figure regards whether the companies have shot anything in 4k in the past year. It doesn't reveal what percentage of their production has been in 4k in the past year. If they only shot one production in 4k in the past year then they would respond that they have shot 4k in the past year. What percentage of production is in 4k? Going by the linked survey I would guess that it is about 15% for "major" production companies. If you look at all video production- corporate production, industrial video production, sports productions, wedding videos, legal productions, local commercials, web-only production included- I would guess the amount of production that is shot in 4k is around 5%.

Now, the percentage of 4k production will undoubtedly increase over the coming years. Although, that said I personally have no desire for a 4k tv and I was recently speaking with members of the camera dept. on a major film shooting 5K who felt that 4k had a "fad" element to it as far as consumer tv sets that is not unlike the brief 3D fad. Their opinion was that while 4k is desired for feature films and 4k has many benefits for post production such as the ability to crop, most people are perfectly happy with tv content in 1080 HD. Quoting a CNET article-

"While 4K resolution makes perfect sense for huge theatrical screens, its benefits are less visible on TVs at home, watched from normal seating distances.

"There was a huge, noticeable leap from standard definition to HD, but the difference between 1080p and 4K is not as marked," said researcher Dave Lamb of 3M Laboratories. He added that "4K is at the point of diminishing returns," but said there could be some benefits for screens over 55 inches."

My point was that while the Fs7 may shoot in 4k the camera is most aimed at the 1080 HD Canon C300 market, imo. Seems the 4k ability was really more of an after thought, more of a way to further attempt to kick the c300's butt. I think the initial objective of the Fs7 was to offer an S35 1080 HD camera in the sub-$12k market. Thus I don't knock the Fs7 for any of it's 4k shortcomings that I see as "lagniappe".
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top