BenEricson

40 minutes ago, Sekhar said:

Show me how HD produced with BMMCC is better than HD from 4K shot by NX1 (which I presume is what you're implying here), and I'll agree. I've seen some real crappy video from BMMCC that looks like mush compared to video from NX1, but may be I just saw the wrong video. There is a technical case to be made for shooting in RAW that will save you in post for some extreme exposures, but again this seems more like an academic issue than something that you have use for regularly in real life. Certainly not with controlled lighting. Again, please show specific and real life examples of how BMMCC is better than NX1, and I'll change my opinion. I mean this sincerely, not being sarcastic.

There's not much content shot with the BMMCC yet. There is tons of very black magic pocket footage however. The color it can produce is just on a different level.

1 hour ago, Ed_David said:

The interpoliation of frames - how it combines them and yes, sensor readout - but the smoothness of a frame into the next. 

That to me seperates cameras just as much as other things such as skintones.  

The C300 has a blockiness and harshness to it, to me that doesn't feel organic.

Cameras I feel are organic in motion is the Canon 1dx, digital bolex, and blackmagic micro camera.

The FS7 and the Ursa Mini 4.6k also feels blocky and unnatural.  

There is a science behind it all that I don't understand, I just know what I like unfortuately.

Not to discredit these cameras - I have seen amazing things out of them.  I just have a particular aethestic.  

To me the C300ii looks different than other cameras I have used, I wonder if this is improved. How did you feel about the motion on the F3?

50 minutes ago, Shield3 said:

Ben, what CP do you use for the c300?  I have been using Wide DR on the c100 and just adjusting contrast basically in post and have been thrilled so far.

It is the MKii, so C-LOG2 Bt709. It does something nice to the skin and the room in the highlights is really nice. You should try some C-LOG and download the LUTS canon has available. I think the WIDE DR looks really really nice myself. C log could work for wide shots with a need for a lot of range.

5 hours ago, Billysurf said:

Thanks pablo!  Do you know if IS is supposed to work with the metabones ultra and canon 24-105?

Yeah, it will work. A kit lens may be more compact. Another nice lens is the Canon 35mm F2 IS. I would say any lenses with IS will be best for this type of setting.

I have been using the C300 Mkii a ton the past few weeks. 

First two are FS700/7Q footage, the second is C300ii. The Canon just produces punchy colors that look cinematic. I really want to like the Sony stuff, but have struggled a lot with the FS700/7Q. That FS7 footage seems to look reasonably close to what I get out of the Canon though.

I know VICE grades everything, so I wonder about that as well. I could do a direct side by side of the FS700/7Q and the C300ii, but probably not exactly what people are looking for.

The C100 also does REALLY well in mixed lighting/indoor lighting. You don't need a super high DR, so I would imagine it is perfect for this sort of thing. 

The c100ii is really underrated in my opinion. It just looks so nice.

7 hours ago, gnomesteel said:

The more I read about the C500 the more I want one. Might try to rent one for a day or two to figure out all the quirks. One answer I can't seem to find online is the audio workflow with the 7Q. @Andrew Reid, do you know how that works? I'm assuming XLR into the C500 which passes it through to the 7Q over SDI. 

Yes, it passes through. Same goes for the FS700/7Q. I use the C300mkii at work and the image is absolutely amazing. It's just beautiful to look at. I believe the C300ii and C500 have a comparable image.

20 hours ago, Vladimir said:

Just decided to upgrade to a7sii and then meet this thread (things will never be simple again ). Now i cant go any further before ill compare downscaled 4k 8bit 4:2:2 and 10bit from F3. Can anyone help me and provide some footage from F3? Google it but have no results. If someone has 60fps footage that would be totally great...

Ed David might have some. He used to shoot with it a lot I think. 

10 minutes ago, Oliver Daniel said:

I would buy the C500 if only I didn't have to have the very expensive and rather large Odyssey on top. It's not a small camera once you add that. This is what stopped me getting FS700 and FS5. 

Exactly. Without a recorder, you're better off with a c100mkii... 

1 hour ago, gnomesteel said:

I am seriously considering the C500 plus a Convergent recorder as our next camera. We're a small crew, and we've always been a couple years back in the latest gear. Still shooting on the R1MX, and for our needs it makes a great image. Only problem is it's so darn heavy. Almost bought an F5, and really looked hard at the FS7, but I'm not a fan of Sony's color. Just something off about it to me. FS7 is cheap enough to get away with it, but the menu and other ergonomics are awful to me. Anyway, I've seen some truly beautiful footage from C500's. Hard to think that it won't hold up for several more years. 

I am considering as well. It's such a pro looking image. Wish the recorder wasn't so large. 

30 minutes ago, mercer said:

After using Raw 3:1 for a few days I have come to a couple conclusions... The IQ seems to be considerably better than ProRes and it seems like it handles noise better than ProRes. In fact, I have found that you don't necessarily need to ETTR to protect shadow noise. Has anyone noticed the same things?

I shot a ton of stuff with the histogram right in the middle with the pocket/pro res. The image looks great, the Sony FS700/7Q, you kinda need to peg the histogram to the right or the image just gets so noisy and gross. 

I do think well shot RAW when you have a ton of time to process just ends up looking better, but the struggle/time/work flow can end up ruining the creative process. 

I'm curious if you can get smooth camera zooms at a slower rate with this camera. Been looking at this for a while. Seems like a nice grab and go camera...

Some nice test footage.

https://vimeo.com/134619668

I love how the F3 image looks. Seems like it has some magic to it, a bit like the pocket but with less hassle. (Internal ND, XLR audio.)

2 hours ago, bunk said:

another shot this time with ColorCorrection. BTW something weird happend The skateborder is way darker in the picture above than in the uploaded file. Uploaded it again, first one how it should have been second one the cc version. Note to admin: If a post has a quote you can't edit it later on.

 

This is probably my favorite look out of the lot. Close to canon in a  lot of ways. A nice light blue sky, nice looking skin as well. 

6 hours ago, Liszon said:

That first image with the girl standing in front of the river, I think it's just a matter of a few unfortunate circumstances. When I checked that in 4K the focus seemed off, the highlights were clipping a bit and there's some ghosting around them too. Hard to pull a decent grade on it. Actually it is always hard to work with skin tones if they are in the shadows with a strong back light.

That lens is actually a vintage 50mm 1.4 Olympus Lens. It was all the way open so looks kind of soft. I wanted to get away from the super super sharp look. Also, you basically have to expose your shadows to at least 20 IRE, anything below that will result in a ton of noise. The 4k/60p is probably my favorite thing from this camera. 

If I get time, I can post some more footage. This is my favorite looking FS700/7Q footage. I think he shoots raw...

https://vimeo.com/121079207

C100 with auto focus… 

Remember, you're shooting action, but you're still just trying to get shots. Same way you would shoot a baseball game. You don't try to follow the ball around the field. You just need a series of shots to tell the story.

16 hours ago, Dimitris Stasinos said:

I have to disagree with this. Not with the fact that you don't like the look, this is clearly a matter of taste and many people don't like sony's colors. But with the "blows it away" thing. i would agree if were talking about it's internal codec where the image (especially when shooting slog) brakes apart when you try to bring it on par with Canon. But with a Shogun or an Odyssey device there is no look that can't achieve with this camera. I can ensure you that i had a really hard time to make the opposite: to match the 5d iii with Sony and bring up those silky ugly skintones which everyone hates (i totally understand this) but i kinda like them...I guess a more talented colorist can do this though...

I get what you're saying. The FS700 is really nice to use because of the slow motion, internal ND, XLR, and the 4k. The sony FS7 seems to nail color a lot better and there's some magic cameras like the Sony F3 that just have beautiful color. I use the c300ii at work, the 5D raw for personal stuff, and I just recently picked up a micro cinema camera as well. The only camera I struggle with color wise is the FS700. It doesn't matter how flat the image or how many bits I am supposedly getting...

The first frame below is 4K FS700, the second is 1080p Black Magic Micro. I just can't get a film look out of the Sony. It always makes skin look too white, and if I warm up the scene, everything gets murky looking.

I have some 4K footage currently uploading if anyone is interested in grading it, I would love to see your results.

That being said, the Sony FS700/7Q is not a bad investment. I doubt the value will drop too far below what it is currently. It is probably good for another 4/5 years, which is insane because it's already 4/5 years old.

Edit: Link to raw footage if anyone wants it. A bunch of 4k/60p in various lighting.

https://we.tl/xE0joWj5Tw

On May 30, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Kristoferman said:

Hey everyone,

I'm looking for a mid range zoom that's suitable for video for $1000 or under.

I'm looking for something like a 28-70/35-105, even a 35-75 might do. I would prefer it to have manual aperture and of course the manual focusing has to feel good and be usable. 

I know vintage zooms aren't usual that well regarded but it seems that new zooms never have manual apertures so that's concerning.

I've been looking at

Contax zeiss 28-85 f3.5-4 : big and not a constant aperture. Otherwise appears to be pretty nice.

Contax Zeiss 35-75 f3.5 : good size, smaller filters than the 28-85. But obviously a limited range.

Pentax 35-105 f3.5:  interesting range. Cheeeeap. Seems pretty decent optically.

Vivitar  Series 1 28-90 f2.8-3.5: can't find a lot of info but seems interesting. Not constant aperture.

Tokina 28-70 f2.6-2.8: pretty well regarded, no?

An AF 28-70 f2.8: any of these suitable for video work? Let me know! 

 

I'd appreciate any and all suggestions. Some weird , overlooked Soviet lens? Sure!

Cine zooms are a bit out of my price range. $1000 tops. Prefer 500 or less. Thanks everyone!

 

A used Canon 24 - 105 is a really nice all around lens. You can use this for a variety of shoots, really goo for documentary shooting with the IS. F4 is a bit slow so it really shines in outdoor settings. The Sigma 18 - 35 is good as well. 

It really depends what camera. If you're shooting handheld or on a rig, image stabilization will be huge.

45 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

1D C clear winner as it is much cheaper used!

But no auto focus or 60p. There's not even any 30p at 4k!

2 hours ago, Liszon said:

Hey Ben,

I would be very interested in seeing some original 4K raw files since I might be in the market for an FS700 in the future.

If you would be so kind to upload something I would really appreciate it.

Totally. The HQ might be too big, but I can send you some Pro Res LT S-LOG 2 stuff for you to play with tomorrow. 

On May 28, 2016 at 3:48 PM, John_Harrison said:

Hello all! 

So I've been seeing some FS700's going for pretty low prices on ebay, and I was wondering what the EOSHD community's thoughts on the camera. Now I've actually used this camera a fair bit along with the Odyssey 7Q, and I am very impressed with the quality coming out of the camera. I mean 4K 60P Raw/ProRes and 2K 240P Raw... what's not to love? 

But I'm just curious, how does this camera hold up in 2016? Now we have the Ursa Mini, Fs5, RED Raven, and we have releases from Kinifinity and Craft Camera (maybe??) right around the corner. How does this camera hold up against the competition? I'm not really interested in the high frame rates or 4K or even Raw for that matter, just the quality of the final image, I'd be happy with a camera that shoots 2K 10 bit ProRes (which incidentally the fs700 does) How does the Color, Dynamic Range and Low-light sensitivity compare to other cameras on the market? 

Pros:

4k, Internal NDs, XLR audio, 120fps/4k, Continuous 4k/60p, 7Q is a beautiful monitor on set, price. 

Cons:

Sony color, ergonomics, size, and weight.

I've used this setup a lot over the last year. I'm just not a fan of the color it produces. You will have a hell of a time getting the colors to get to look like canon. A 5D3 raw will destroy this setup in color. I actually borrowed it recently from work and shot a few test shots. If you want I can send you some 4K files to mess around with. The quality and lack of noise when exposed correctly is really nice.

All that being said, a c100 will look better for an interview most of the time. Added resolution, sharpness, or high frame rates will not make the colors look better. 

https://vimeo.com/165244135

23 hours ago, Taranis said:

If anyone had the chance to try both, how does the FS700 RAW color science look like compared to the 5D3 RAW?

5D3 blows it away. It's nearly impossible to get a saturated commercial look out of the FS700. You can get a nice grade, or something interesting, but you won't get that canon look. 

7 hours ago, IronFilm said:

I asked a very very similar question a tear ago:

 

"Is a Sony PMW-F3 worth it in 2015?"

 

& my answer is yes it has been! :-)

 

So I'm sure a FS700 can also be a smart choice in 2016 if it fits your needs.

The F3 actually produces really really nice, cinematic looking color. The FS700 can't even come close to the F3...

On May 26, 2016 at 6:11 AM, jgharding said:

Yeah I use Canon too as they're great to use and the footage looks brilliant. Indeed I sold an RX10 ii and got an XC10 precisely because of what you describe.

Exactly. You can talk specs all day, but the XC10 produces a better image than the RX10, same with the C100ii vs the FS5. 

On May 26, 2016 at 3:40 AM, squig said:

slashCAM are dreaming. The Micro has less usable DR than the 5D MK3 raw which is rated at 11.7 stops by DXOmark. It's also clear that the Micro is slightly noisier than the Pocket.

The C300ii says 15 but there is serious noise issue.

The 5D3 in my experience has higher DR than the pocket or micro, just because it is so clean in the shadows. It's pretty amazing...

2 hours ago, jpfilmz said:

In camera sharpness test.  There was a slight error with the video clips.  The first 4 clips are with sharpness to the max and is too sharp...but the rest is with sharpness set at +4.  This should put to rest the idea that this camera is a soft 4k camera.

 

Looks really nice. How smooth are you able to get zooms on this camera? Is it possible to get a motorized zoom look?

The color and detail is really nice, the quality of the lens shows when it is pointed towards a blown out light source. This could depend on the f stop, etc, but wide open towards the sky doesn't look so hot.

2 hours ago, Luke Mason said:

This was shot entirely using 1080/60p with C-Log on 1DC, with proper handling, it's nowhere near "pure shit".

 

Exactly. It is proven time and time again that color is more important than sharpness. It would be sharper with the A7S, but the color would be "pure shit."

On January 26, 2016 at 3:51 AM, Jimmy said:

4K is only via SDI on FS700.. The raw to ProRes mode on the 7Q is a thing of beauty.

The colors on this camera are extremely difficult to work with. The footage is amazing in every other way. 4k/120fps is so nice to have. Lowlight is great as well.

On January 26, 2016 at 4:34 AM, Jimmy said:

AFAIK, the SDI is only outputting a raw signal (in 4K mode), which the PIX wouldn't be able to read to convert to ProRes... OQ7 or Atomos seems the only options.

I think the OQ7+ is on offer at $1800 with SSDs, so your budget of $7500 should accommodate it? (FS700 is only $4000 new).

All that said though.... If you are going down such a route, i'd hang back to see how the FS5 raw output looks... (Though I think it is unlikely Sony will give 4K 120fps bursts, like the FS700)

You can get the whole FS700/7Q kit for around 5k if you look around. The setup is large and not a huge fan of the color. It takes a lot of work to get it a nice place.