Gregormannschaft Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 Hey folks.I'm flying to LA next month to do a corporate BTS shoot. It will be the 3rd one I've done for this company and now I have a pretty open budget. I shot the first two with the Sony A7s, and I was relatively happy with the results but you can still tell it's shot on a lower tier camera. I'd like to give this newer film a more professional aesthetic. We had folks visit our offices a few months back and shoot on Arri Amira. I can't stretch that far, but was thinking about the Sony FS7. I'd like to shoot in 4K and downscale it to 1080p delivery. Only problem is, I've never used the camera before and am a little nervous about shooting a project with a camera I've never used before. Does anyone have any advice about this?I've looked at a few video walkthroughs and reviews to get a better idea of how to set it up. I'm a little bit more concerned about equipment.I'd like to handheld shots, does anyone know if it's useable out of the box?I guess we'd need to buy XQD cards. Would 128GB be sufficient for about an hour of 4k footage?Would I be able to lock it down on my Manfrotto tripod? Would I need a new baseplate? Can I screw in my shitty cheap one?The other option was hiring an Atomos Shogun, but I think we'd also still need to buy media for that. And a rig or cage, I guess, to secure it to the camera. And quality wise, would the FS7 still blow it outta the water?Any tips/advice would be greatly appreciated. 1tkman 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronChicago Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 FS7 is nice, but the menu system is pretty bad, and it's not ideal for situations where you're under the gun and have to move fast. The camera has to shut down and reboot to change any major settings. If it's a corporate shoot where you have time to setup for each shot then yeah, I'd say it's a good option. Gregormannschaft and 1tkman 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregormannschaft Posted October 8, 2015 Author Share Posted October 8, 2015 FS7 is nice, but the menu system is pretty bad, and it's not ideal for situations where you're under the gun and have to move fast. The camera has to shut down and reboot to change any major settings. If it's a corporate shoot where you have time to setup for each shot then yeah, I'd say it's a good option.Cheers, thanks for the advice. The shoot is a sit down interview all set up and with plenty of time, some roaming office shots and broll - so the menu system shouldnt be a problem.I've never rented a camera before, equipment sure, but not a camera. Likely we should buy our own media, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richg101 Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 Hey folks.I'm flying to LA next month to do a corporate BTS shoot. It will be the 3rd one I've done for this company and now I have a pretty open budget. I shot the first two with the Sony A7s, and I was relatively happy with the results but you can still tell it's shot on a lower tier camera. I'd like to give this newer film a more professional aesthetic. It'll more than likely be your lens choice rather than the camera that is determining how professional the aesthetic is. The image jump from the a7s to the fs7 wont be worth the extra expense. spending the rental costs on some proper lenses, with no zooms, and no canon L series lenses, and particularly not the 24-70! AT ALL will immediately make the image look more professional. An Amira is all for nothing if the user is fitting canon lenses on there and imparting the look of an everyday news photographer lens set. The fact that glass hasn't been brought into your criteria is a very clear indicator of where you need to focus your attention IMO. Gregormannschaft 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregormannschaft Posted October 8, 2015 Author Share Posted October 8, 2015 It'll more than likely be your lens choice rather than the camera that is determining how professional the aesthetic is. The image jump from the a7s to the fs7 wont be worth the extra expense. spending the rental costs on some proper lenses, with no zooms, and no canon L series lenses, and particularly not the 24-70! AT ALL will immediately make the image look more professional. An Amira is all for nothing if the user is fitting canon lenses on there and imparting the look of an everyday news photographer lens set. The fact that glass hasn't been brought into your criteria is a very clear indicator of where you need to focus your attention IMO.Thanks for the feedback, this is helpful. I was planning on using the Canon 24-105mm L lens. This is a bad choice because...they lack character? Are overly sharp? Philip Bloom (not the benchmark, just happened to watch his FS7 review to plan) uses Canon L lenses and his footage looks pretty good. 1tkman 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Hughes Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 Thanks for the feedback, this is helpful. I was planning on using the Canon 24-105mm L lens. This is a bad choice because...they lack character? Are overly sharp? Philip Bloom (not the benchmark, just happened to watch his FS7 review to plan) uses Canon L lenses and his footage looks pretty good.I personally like the look of Canon lenses. The clean, modern look appeals to me (depending on the project). The 24-105, however, is probably the lowest tier L lens they have. I think renting a set of primes would really do you well. 24, 50, and 135 (or 85) would be a solid combo. The FS7 is not that bad to use. There are certainly much better designed cameras and menu systems, but once you wrap your head around where everything is (and set up your user menu), it's workable. It can definitely shoot solid handheld out of the box, but can get to be a little painful after hours and hours of shooting on your shoulder. I've been working on a show recently that has the Zacuto recoil built onto the FS7 and it's been a dream to shoot with. Recording times for XQD cards. You could lock it down on a manfrotto tripod, but you'd want to keep and eye (or hand) on it at all times. If you do decide do go with the FS7, I highly recommend renting this Master class by Doug Jensen. It's a hefty $85, but you get six hours of detailed lessons on how and why to set up the camera in certain ways. I watched the whole thing before starting the show I'm on and was up and running with the FS7 right away. 1tkman and Gregormannschaft 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richg101 Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 It's not the fact that canon lenses are too clinical, boring or overly sharp. It's the fact that they've been used for decades by working photographers, and have the 'look' of a 'working photographer' rather than a 'working cinematographer'. If they'd been used extensively for motion picture then we'd associate them with motion picture, however their look cries out 'working photographer turned videographer'. I imagine if Philip Bloom remade himself into a true motion picture cinematographer, and was booked to shoot Ridley Scott's next film he'd be looking at lenses that can only be obtain via rental means (rather than a god to the still photographer turned videographer crowd- which has been very profitable for him as a businessman). You get a lot more cinematography masterclass bookings from FS7 owners with a set of Ef-L lenses and a speed booster than you do from the guys who simply specify cooke, panavision or arri lenses - most of which are optically inferior to Canon L lenses. shooting s35mm crop mode and using some old Lomo oct18 primes (clean) will command a lot more of a motion picture aesthetic. and a 28, 35, 50 and 75mm set + Emount to OCT18 adaptor can be had for less than the cost of the 24-105! Gregormannschaft 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Policar Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 It's not the fact that canon lenses are too clinical, boring or overly sharp. It's the fact that they've been used for decades by working photographers, and have the 'look' of a 'working photographer' rather than a 'working cinematographer'. If they'd been used extensively for motion picture then we'd associate them with motion picture, however their look cries out 'working photographer turned videographer'. I imagine if Philip Bloom remade himself into a true motion picture cinematographer, and was booked to shoot Ridley Scott's next film he'd be looking at lenses that can only be obtain via rental means (rather than a god to the still photographer turned videographer crowd- which has been very profitable for him as a businessman). You get a lot more cinematography masterclass bookings from FS7 owners with a set of Ef-L lenses and a speed booster than you do from the guys who simply specify cooke, panavision or arri lenses - most of which are optically inferior to Canon L lenses. shooting s35mm crop mode and using some old Lomo oct18 primes (clean) will command a lot more of a motion picture aesthetic. and a 28, 35, 50 and 75mm set + Emount to OCT18 adaptor can be had for less than the cost of the 24-105! I don't see it. The "look" of lenses is subtle, so much so that I recently confused Summiluxes on a project I'm posting on for S4s, and I normally can tell. (The bokeh and lack of distortion should have been a sign, but it was a short spot in relatively deep focus.)What makes the difference is the lighting and compositions. A lot of Nikon and Canon glass (and Leica glass) has been rehoused–even by Panavision–and used on major features. When I shot Canon glass against Angenieux higher end zooms the biggest difference was mechanics and the second biggest was actually a quite major advantage in the Angenieux wide open.That said the skill-set of a videographer and a photographer are closer-matched, so the correlation does exist between those favoring photo gear and giving a "wedding photo" look, but that correlation has more to do with style than with how lenses render. That's a very very subtle distinction. 1tkman 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregormannschaft Posted October 8, 2015 Author Share Posted October 8, 2015 Love this place, thanks for all the help guys. Nick, I'll download that guide you recommended. The rental price for some Zeiss CP.2 prime lenses aren't too bad. I might use a 85mm and a 35mm for the day. I also have an old vintage lens, not sure if it will resolve enough detail for 4k but I'd love to give it a shot. It's an old 50mm 2.8 Jena lens...plenty of problems with it but always felt it adds a lot of character.And regarding the rest of the lens conversation, I'm pretty damn unexperienced. Have only done self funded doc work and some corporate shoots. So it's probably right that I have the videographer look going on. 1tkman 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenEricson Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 C300 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronChicago Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 It's not the fact that canon lenses are too clinical, boring or overly sharp. It's the fact that they've been used for decades by working photographers, and have the 'look' of a 'working photographer' rather than a 'working cinematographer'. If they'd been used extensively for motion picture then we'd associate them with motion picture, however their look cries out 'working photographer turned videographer'. I imagine if Philip Bloom remade himself into a true motion picture cinematographer, and was booked to shoot Ridley Scott's next film he'd be looking at lenses that can only be obtain via rental means (rather than a god to the still photographer turned videographer crowd- which has been very profitable for him as a businessman). You get a lot more cinematography masterclass bookings from FS7 owners with a set of Ef-L lenses and a speed booster than you do from the guys who simply specify cooke, panavision or arri lenses - most of which are optically inferior to Canon L lenses. shooting s35mm crop mode and using some old Lomo oct18 primes (clean) will command a lot more of a motion picture aesthetic. and a 28, 35, 50 and 75mm set + Emount to OCT18 adaptor can be had for less than the cost of the 24-105! I totally know what you mean. Go to flickr, or pinterest and look at wedding photos, family photos, headshots. They all look the same b/c they're shot with a 5D and an L lens. 1tkman 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richg101 Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 I don't see it. The "look" of lenses is subtle, so much so that I recently confused Summiluxes on a project I'm posting on for S4s, and I normally can tell. (The bokeh and lack of distortion should have been a sign, but it was a short spot in relatively deep focus.)But Summilux's and S4's are aimed at exactly the same user base. Comparing the Summilux's or s4's to the canon and you will see a difference. Lighting, camera technique, etc are obviously going to have an impact. But that's something as forum members we have no control over on this project. Let's assume the thread starter knows how to light, compose and expose, as well as direct. it then becomes important to talk about details relating to gear choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Members Mattias Burling Posted October 8, 2015 Super Members Share Posted October 8, 2015 Dont know much about the camera, but some about the lens.Not a fan of the 24-105 look, its just to sharp. Even this picture shot with Fuji iso200 film looks less filmic than most lenses But if you like the more clean look its great with a nice range and good stabilisation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Volker Schmidt Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 I don´t agree with the negative statement about Canon Lenses, especially about the 24-70mm in richg101s post. It makes no sense to write fingers to the bone about matters of taste, but I think there are a lot of readers who don´t know this lens and so it hurts a bit... In my Eyes this is the best Zoom lens I´ve ever used!But as I said, that means nothing:), it´s just an opinion... Vimeo is a good tool to get an impression, but I think, the best is to make tests under exact the same conditions! Otherwise opinions may tend to Romanticism. I have sold my 24-70 years ago, bought a lot of primes, test them finally in comparison with a borrowed 24-70 and came back on it. - with the conclusion that this lens got the best color rendition and the most pleasing overall rendition/image of all my lenses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oliver Daniel Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 Love this place, thanks for all the help guys. Nick, I'll download that guide you recommended. The rental price for some Zeiss CP.2 prime lenses aren't too bad. I might use a 85mm and a 35mm for the day. I also have an old vintage lens, not sure if it will resolve enough detail for 4k but I'd love to give it a shot. It's an old 50mm 2.8 Jena lens...plenty of problems with it but always felt it adds a lot of character.And regarding the rest of the lens conversation, I'm pretty damn unexperienced. Have only done self funded doc work and some corporate shoots. So it's probably right that I have the videographer look going on. I'd go for the C100 Mk II. I've used the Sony FS7 a lot and if you're using Slog3 + Monitor LUT's there's quite a steep learning curve - might be a risky one if you're just throwing it in there without the prior experience.The C100 Mk II is reliable, light, produces lovely images and is simple to use straight out the box. Not 4k, but it's a downscale to 1080p anyways. AaronChicago 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dafreaking Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 I hope you are going to use lights/modifiers if you aren't using natural (day) light. It's key to get a better look no matter what one says. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronChicago Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 I'd go for the C100 Mk II. I've used the Sony FS7 a lot and if you're using Slog3 + Monitor LUT's there's quite a steep learning curve - might be a risky one if you're just throwing it in there without the prior experience.The C100 Mk II is reliable, light, produces lovely images and is simple to use straight out the box. Not 4k, but it's a downscale to 1080p anyways. Yeah man C100 ii is something you can pick up and play with for 5 minutes and then shoot great looking images. Just DO NOT go below 850 ISO. I learned the hard way recently when a beige wall with a backlight had banding that I couldn't fix. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j.f.r. Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 I shot the first two with the Sony A7s, and I was relatively happy with the results but you can still tell it's shot on a lower tier camera. Sony A7s is definitely a great camera and you're definitely not using it to it's full potential if you feel that way. My first suggestion would be to rent some nice glass such as Zooms, Macro, etc. Canon L lenses are fine so are the Sony E lenses as well. Also you can rent a 4K recorder such as the Ninja Assassin and record 4K Pro Res that would definitely bump up your source footage. The next step up from Sony A7s would be Blackmagic Ursa which definitely has a lovely image, but be careful as you would definitely not be able to "run and gun" with the camera like you would with the Sony A7s due to not being as low light sensitive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregormannschaft Posted October 8, 2015 Author Share Posted October 8, 2015 Interesting idea about the C100. I really, really like the look folks have got from the FS7 but the C100 could be an interesting option. I've used the first one once in a shoot and not had great results though.To give you guys an example, Google did a developer story at our office. This was the result which, although not great to watch, is pretty beautiful. They used an Arri:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Iw7Tg_afKkThis was my behind the scenes video for an Apple Watch game we put together pretty last minute. My second ever corporate shoot, shot last minute with the A7S. Again, not great to watch, and it looks 'alright' but nowhere near the first video. Looking to shoot the second video more handheld which should give it a little more energy...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1w4Gf97q2oUAnd I know, in hindsight the interviewees were speaking way too fast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 For what you describe: rent a Canon C100II or C300 (whichever available). With native IS glass it's simply unbeatable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.