Marino215

I love this camera, nice review Andrew.  I just wish it excited me more.  whats up with the SDI?  why cant it send a RAW signal without the breakout box? not a deal breaker but why? why Sony?  the fs700 can send the signal, for the price of the fs7 all dressed up I think i'd rather own the F5. But I have a feeling we're gonna see the F6 soon maybe even better than the F55. hopefully canon can answer, at least they stick with their cameras longer than a year 1/2, certainly a better investment. 

So you really like the Fs7 Andrew? That says a lot, of course I see why. It's a well made, well thought camera with a proven image. When do you think we'll see the higher end offerings with an a7s type sensor? I have to admit, my brother has the a7s and I see if it had just a little more power, perhaps higher bit depth, faster processor it could far exceed the image coming out of the fs700 and maybe even the F5. Lowlight alone it beats everything else. To me an fs7 type camera with the enhanced dynamic features from the a7s I think would excite me more. And one last thing it would be nice if a camera that didnt need an exspensive break out box to tap Into the RAW signal. Even the fs700 can force a 4k signal straight out of the SDI. For me it was a typical "Sony what the heck" moment. Thoughts? Thanks

The only question I would ask is why dont we have an A7s type lowlight/ low noise sensor that shoots 12 bit RAW ProRes dnxhd, 120 fps 4k camera with built in nd, in an c100 body? Take the best features and wrap it up into one camera. If Red can do it I'm positive Canon or Nikon can do it too for way less money

Is the fs700 still viable? I think so. It's an $7700 camera new. Used $57/6100 plus odyssey 7q $4500. License and media included. That's around $10 grand for 240fps 2/4k RAW, 4k ProRes (soon), 120fps 4k (Burst) with a great monitor. With the f7s you need that interface for RAW and that's $2500 on top of an $8000 camera plus $4500 for 7q. It's $3500/$4000 more than the fs700. It's worth it for better internal codecs, better build etc etc etc but doesn't make the fs700 obsolete by any means. It's still a 4k RAW HFR decent lowlight slog 2 camera. It's gotta be worth something.

very nice, hope its 14 bit out like the f5, dreamy would be 16 bit, but at this price there's a good chance I'm dreaming. I hope it at least has the A7s sensor or close  

Looks great. Congrats

Congrats!

Very intriguing, can only imagine what Sony has up their sleeve for the big dogs. The future looks bright :)

Would be nice if they can correct the major barrel distortion.

That's why you gotta take what these hired "filmmakers" say with a grain of salt. You'll never get the real low down until someone like Andrew and some others point it out. I got excited too about the A7s too, then I heard it was only 8-bit, then realized it was still only 8-bit even in 4k with a recorder and then a price gets tossed around, $4100.00 USD and now this rolling shutter issue. It's a speciality cam, lock it down and shoot in the dark if you absolutly have to and you'll do fine with it. If you take to heart what these showcase filmmakers say, you'll be kicking yourself down the road. Hey if it was under 2 grand I wouldn't even write this post but after hearing what they'd like to charge I had to chime in.

I guess we gotta wait for the a99 announcement for internal 4k but jeez with 1080p looking that good in the dark i can think of a hundred scenarios where it can come in handy. For Stanley Kubrick lowlight the 7s could be a great specialty cam for extra dark scenes, with ultra fast glass it might be fun.

When you can buy a 4K cell phone, but not a 4K DSLR, something is seriously wrong.  The camera market tanked in 2013.  It's really simple.  The camera companies are not innovating.  You can't keep selling the same old thing year after year, and expect people to buy it. 
 
Michael

I agree on DSLRs not having 4k but as far as cell phones go thats called the 4k race to the bottom. I see the 4k consumer trend having small sensors and the pro versions equipted with a s35 sensor. The consumer won't care and but the pro will appreciate it. There's going to be as many variations on 4k as there are with 1080, I wouldn't look to cell phones setting any standards.

Enjoyed the read, well worth the wait. Good info on shooting in video mode, makes sense. Forget the cost, rigged up on a jib or dolly in a studio setting it sounds like it'll be hard to beat. Maybe that's why they call it a production cam, studio production? But with adequate light this cameras a winner in any environment. I like the way images move on this camera, it's very cinematic to me. And for the price, it's certainly something to consider. Not to sound like a jackass but I'm excited to see what BM has up its sleeve in versions II and III. Does seem like there's a lot of room for improvements. Thanks

Oh and that image looks like the Sony 4k fiber link for the f series cameras.

https://www.abelcine.com/store/Sony-CA-4000-4K-Live-Fiber-Adapter-for-PMW-F55/

$27000. Lol

This looks like the start of a new bridge where professional grade technology meets the consumer. There has to be a point in time where technology plateaus and all sides meet up with one another. At least in regards to 4k, how much worse do they need to make the consumer version so it won't compete with their high end professional version? As sensors improve the hardware that plays the media needs to improve. I'm not saying there won't be 500 dollar cameras and 20,000 dollar cameras I just wonder will it ever settle like 1080p? The hierarchy is evident now, still no perfect camera but when you want he best we can pretty much figure it out. The new releases coming soon should almost be as good if not better then the best right now, if it's not then why would we buy it? As sensors now can resolve an image better than our own eyes can see, I imagine the new task at hand now is to invent better processors, storage solutions and tv sets. There's a bigger difference in price than the actual image comparing the bmcc to the Alexa. I'll take the image out of the Alexa any day but for a $2000 camera, come on! I guess that's my point, still a ways away but the gap is closing quickly.

I would think twice before shooting with this or any device resembling a gun, especially on the streets of Philadelphia.

Spray tan? Are you using a bad monitor? Have you checked your gamma/saturation settings? Bad dye job? You sound like those blog girls that review make ups and chanel purses. Dont get me wrong, but im a man, and I like to see what the camera can show.
 
When im testing a camera, im not searching for good makeups, im looking for what the camera can capture, including bad skin texture, if the skin is like that.
 
If you are in Africa, shooting an old dude that has been under the sun his entire life, would you like to see a soft-baby skin? Please...
 
Thats not a topic about getting a job on a commercial - and let me tell you, the amount of bad commercials these days is HUGE. Maybe because those producers think like you? Anyway, thats a topic about what the camera can capture.
  
Yes, I can se his grading being used on a vodka commercial, but I cant see it selling the camera. When reviewing a camera, they should show everything, not hide skin problems. His skin is blue/green and its glowing with no texture. She looks like an alien. Is it better than a tan? We are not looking at a models portfolio, we are looking at a camera sample. If the model has a bad makeup or a bad skin, the camera needs to show it.
 
And let me tell you another thing guys. If a guy is a pro, it doesnt mean that everything he does looks good. Being a pro only means that you get paid to do something. Please, dont be a fanboy, unless you are getting paid to do it. We are all grown up guys. Being a fan boy is not pretty, if you are a big boy.
 
Those pro gradings look bad, and im pretty sure that every final consumer will think that.
 
Film convert tools and LUTs are a lost cause - and they are the main reason why most prosumers hate Blackmagic cameras. All of those videos look surreal. They are like bad impressionist art. People like to see what their eyes can see.
 
People post bad gradings, with only shades of mid-grey, compressed highlights, bad colors and color casts and use the excuse that its a "filmic" look. ITS NOT!
 
Here is a comparison between film and digital. So stop using that "filmic look" excuse! Its just a grading made by a person with a doubtful taste!
 

Maybe I sounded harsh and I apologize and there's nothing wrong with your grade, tbh it's impressive you got so much out of it. However its a little too rich for my blood. What I should have articulated better was, with my experience when you see an angle where the actor may not look as flattering in one shot as she does in another you don't accent the negative feature in the grade. They hide the negatives all the time with diffusers, soft light, slight out of focus etc etc. It was apparent, they way her head was tilted it showed a substantial amount of wrinkles on the forehead, I was always taught to hide that stuff. Again not to sound harsh, your grade accented it. No big deal, I felt compelled to respond, I can see your point but you could've left the fanboy comment out. Ha

I think that the main problem is the way that the "pros" grade the footage. They always grade the videos with a soft look, a lot of glow and washed out colors. It looks like they like to recreate that old damaged-film look.
 
I dont know, maybe thats because im young, but I dont like things that look old. Whats the point of buying a high end camera if all of your videos will look like that? I understand doing that once in a while, to create a "look", but every time? And when you are "reviewing" a camera, you need to show its potential, and the videos posted by those guys are not the best way to do that.
 
Here is an example. This first image was graded by James Miller. Most people wouldnt buy a camera that creates that kind of look.
 

 
And here is the same video graded by me. Why cant they post videos with natural looking colors and sharp details?
 

James did what any professional would do in that situation and that's to make the very pretty actress even prettier. No offense I'd hire the actress based off her top print than the bottom print you did. Maybe a jersey shore spinoff i'd consider it. But seriously I'm not trying to be vicious, anyone who follows James tests knows he pushes the image in every direction and sometimes that's what the grade calls for. In this case it's probably just a matter of taste. But always try to make your talent look better than they appear. You get a lot more work that way.

There's no holy grail lens, some may be better than others. This whole "filmic" thing is stale...what you're noticing is how this lens resolves detail off the sensor. No matter how it's sliced or diced in camera you're gonna get back what is captured. I think what you're expecting is totally wrong. From what I saw so far this lens will capture the very best as well as the very worst of what the sensor is capable of. To me thats a great lens. No doubt this seems to be a quality set of glass and I bet if it were the baby Hawks you'd be saying the same thing. "It's not filmic"...well wrong. Actually what you mean to say is "cinematic" and there's a lot more that goes with that than a lens can offer. Just my 2 cents, I think it's unfair to blame to a lens when in all actuality you should be blaming the sensor or one better, just blame yourself.

This could either be some really good news or some really bad news. I'm gonna stay optimistic and Im happy it's shipping. I guess we'll see some footage soon enough. Thanks

Please clarify if you can. Its my understanding that 4k 8-bit 420 scaled down to 2k can create a 10 bit 422 file? I've read a couple times that 4k 10-bit 422 can be scaled to 12-bit 444 1080p. If that's the case, with it's improved low light capabilities makes this camera an amazing camera for photo journalists, reporters, B cam on high end jobs, underwater, just a fabulous all around doc tool. Would I seek investors, hire big actors, have a big crew etc with this camera being my A cam? No, of course not. Shorts? Why not. My point is how far we stretch or even downscale the image its all there for us one way or the other. Yes most drool over affordable, quality 10-bit out of the box but in this day and age with affordable post prod tools, with a little work we can get there. If you absolutely need 4k and 4k only get a Red, f55 or wait for the BM. If I understood it correctly,(I pray I did) for me that would be even more amazing than the 4k itself. Thanks

Panasonic didn't miss on anything. They heavily improved the GH3, it's a no brainer for journalist, high quality video and stills. What this release tells me is that a AF101 successor is right around the corner. Panasonic is smart IMHO, I bet we'll see a GH4, AF200 and the anticipated Vari Cam in 2014. I suspect what you're looking for you'll be happy once NAB rolls around. Coming out with a new AF series, 4K, 10 bit, higher frame rates along with the new Vari Cam could make Panasonic the new Blackmagic. Sonys not gonna beat down the F5, Canon has the c500, nothing from Nikon, Blackmagic needs to deliver before anything else, and sadly I haven't seen any normal decent footage from the DB yet, so the markets ripe. It's a great transition into 4k, terrific offering but the Gap is too wide between the GH4 and Vari cam, I think we'll all be happy this spring. I'll end with saying this review was one the best I've read in a while. Thanks

Yeah of course you can. Now good luck making 100 charts to go with it :)

Haha, an Andrew Reid multi camera shoot out im sure would surpass all others. It'd be worth the price of admission alone.

Not sure if I'm interpreting this post correctly but you can slice and dice this list up a 100 ways depending on the particular job. For instance you have the 5d higher than an F3 with slog. On a doc job, under various scenarios I feel you'll get a better image out of the f3 than the 5d. A more controlled situation you maybe right. Plus (with the odyssey) I like the fs700 over the red one MX any day. 240 fps 2k RAW, 4k compressed (soon). 12 bit 444 1080 off the 4k signal. Ive seen it and it lokks like a differnt camera, great image. For narrative, commercial it's a different story, maybe you should've put a 35mm film camera before the Alexa if only image quality was your focus? I enjoyed the read but think choosing the right camera for a job boils down to more than just the image.

So has Arri reached critical mass?
 
And why the Cinema EOS cameras cropping up in such top flight productions? The image isn't as good as the Alexa!

$$