Not that thrilled my FS700

[Julie Hill]

I've been shooting on 5d mk II's since they came out and still not sick of the look. I shoot mainly weddings and now that everyone is using these cams, I thought I'd add the FS700 to my arsenal purely for the super slo mo capability.

After shooting about 4 weddings with it now (just b-roll shots not as a main cam), I cannot stand the look of the image. It looks just like the EX1 to me (which is what we used before the 5D). Highlights are completely blown out and the colors just aren't what they are with the canon. And of course they wouldn't be but thought I could get it at least close by messing with the picture profiles and stuff.

I definitely need more time to play with the settings and I'm sure that will help but the main thing is the lens. I've been using the kit lens because apparently I bought an adaptor for my canon lenses that doesn't allow you to control the aperture (making it useless): MTF Services Ltd Canon EF To Sony E Mount Adapter. It looks like the only option that DOES allow you to control the aperture is the Metabones adaptor but there's a wait list for it. omg.

At this point, I'm considering selling it unless ya'll can talk me out of it. Any other options for adaptors that would work with my canon lenses that I could get immediately AND... would it even help??? If the image isn't going to change much even with the addition of a good lens then there's no point really.

[Chris Medico]

There is no viable option other than the Metabones adapter if you want to control the iris of EOS lenses.

I've not tried to match the look of the FS700 to a Canon dSLR in camera yet. I don't know how close you can get but you should be able to get reasonably close.

On the highlights you need to look at your PP settings and make sure you have them set up correctly. If you are using CINEGAMMAs you have to expose them correctly which may be a good bit differently from what you are used to on the Canon cameras. From my experience I am not seeing blow out highlights on my FS700 but I am used to the Sony gammas since I also have a F3.

Operating it is going to be different from your Canon cameras.

[Olof Ekbergh]

Sorry to hear you don't like the 700.

I think you could easily sell it.

It does make a huge difference with better faster lenses, like the Canon L's. For one thing they are much crisper than the kit lens. Also the kit is very slow so your SDOF will be very limited. Bear in mind that the 5DmkII is a full frame and the 700 like the 7D is a C size imager, so less SDOF.

As far as looks, pic profiles go there are tons of settings you can alter, try starting with the still setting it is a lot like a 5DmkII standard setting. Now I don't use that in the 5D I use a fairly flat setting in the 5D as well, it is better for grading.

The best way to figure out your pp is to read up on the different recommendations on the WEB like Abel Cinetech recommendations for the FS100. You may also want to get the Vortex training DVD for the FS100, the 100 is very similar to the 700, but the 700 does have some advantages in gamma curves etc. There will soon be many recommendations for the 700 as well.

You need to set up and configure the camera on a good reference monitor. A pro SDI evaluation monitor is the best but a good plasma is OK as well. If you have scopes it will make it much easier if you know how to read them. maybe you can find a friend with this setup.

It does take a while to figure it out, but it is worth it.

I have just started to set my camera up and here is some more boring slomo, had to do it.

It was shot using the metabones on a Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS L and a Canon 100-400 4-5.6 IS L, and a 24-70 f2.8 L my favourite lens.

I like the look, it was slightly graded and this is what I used as a profile (it is not all that saturated), I crushed the blacks a little and saturated the mids a bit that is all.

The settings in the camera were:
Black level 0
CineGamma 4
Black Gamma High -7
Knee Manual 95% Slope +2
Color Mode ITU709 Matrix, Level +8
Color Level -4
Color Phase -1
Color Depth R+1 G-1 B0 C-1 M+1 y-1
Detail Level -4

700 Slomo on Vimeo

[Alister Chapman]

If you highlights are blowing out I think you need to address why. The FS700 has similar if not more dynamic range than the Canon 5D, so the highlights should not be blowing out significantly more than a 5D would. If anything the FS700 should do a better job of handling highlights than the Canon. One thing to check is that you edit application is not clipping the highlights at 100%and not allowing superwhites.

So if highlights are blowing out, what happens if you lower the exposure a little?

As for the lens, this isn't a Sony issue, it's a Canon one as Canon only have electronic control on their lenses. The MTF adapter you purchased can be used with Canon fit lenses that have manual iris rings like the Samyang lenses, but as it is a dumb adapter it won't control electronic lenses. MTF do make an adapter that will control lenses with electronics iris, the system is called MTF Effect, you have to buy a control box and then a lens adapter to suit you camera as the system can be used on many different cameras, it is however considerably more expensive than the Metabones : https://www.lensadaptor.com/adaptors...&camera_fit=31

Changing the lens is not going to cure your highlights issue or the look of the pictures. The standard lens is actually quite sharp and produces a good image, it's just not very fast and the focus control is tricky. But the image stabilisation is excellent and the autofocus actually works pretty well, especially the face tracking.

There are 6 different picture profiles built into the FS700 that give different looks to the pictures. You should try these or perhaps look at this profile that I created that gives what I believe to be avery pleasing look. : XDCAM-USER.COM • View topic - NEX-FS700 Neutral Profile to match F3 Neutral.

[Frank Glencairn]

If you are not on a Mac, here is an "heads up" article I did yesterday - you might just using the wrong codec.

Differences in Adobe Premiere highlight handling, using the Black Magic codec Frank Glencairn

Frank

[Alister Chapman]

Cinegamma 2 will stop any clipping issues as this keeps the recording levels "broadcast safe" and contrary to popular belief there is no loss of dynamic range using Cinegamma 2 instead of Cinegamma 1, just a fewer bits less of data.

If you want to use REC-709 you can set the Knee to manual, knee point to 90% and slope to -4 this will keep you broadcast safe or with Standard Gamma Knee point at 87.5 and slope -3.

[Kris Koster]

I'm almost inclined to agree with Julie (OP) as the pining I had for the 700's high-speed capability slowly subsides. Although the FS700 is still in my list to buy (the Steadicam Scout or Zephyr is first), admittedly I'm starting to go off it as time progresses.

Of course what drew me to it in the first place was the slow motion feature. High speed acquisition has been a fascination of mine for 20 years and I fell in love with my old Casio Exilim EX-F1. The stuff I could get off that, even for all its negatives - artifacting, low bit rate and fixed lens - I could still do wonders with it in post. And I believe we are close, I really do, to getting cameras that can match high speed very well for a price lower than the Phantoms.

Whilst the slow motion capability is what peaked my excitement for the 700 (and believe me, I was extremely excited about it) - Admittedly I've never been a huge fan of the image.

I own a 5D mark III and worked for years with the 5D2. That image is what I believe is closest to a truly beautiful cinematic look. Although I'm not an engineer and I don't profess to have anywhere near the same technical expertise of someone like Alistair (my background is predominantly as a director). What I do know is what looks artistically right to my eye.

So why my reservations? Maybe it's just me, but I can sometimes see artifacting in the 700. Worse is that it also seems to be prone to banding, often seen in gradients like blue skies. I saw it in Alistair's lightning video in another post, but I see it in other videos shot with the 700 too. Then there is just 'the look' - You know what I mean... What you can't place your finger on, it's just how you come to know footage taken by one camera against VT taken from another. Different cameras have a picture that possess the 'X-Factor' and some do not.

The FS700 is an exceptional camera and I appreciate that, but the image from the Canon has the 'X-Factor' for me. For all its faults and the fact it doesn't do high frame rates, I know I can rely on it to give me the look I want that my clients like to see.

Maybe I'll rent one for a bit...

[Alister Chapman]

Originally Posted by Kris Koster

I own a 5D mark III and worked for years with the 5D2. That image is what I believe is closest to a truly beautiful cinematic look........
.........So why my reservations? Maybe it's just me, but I can sometimes see artifacting in the 700. Worse is that it also seems to be prone to banding, often seen in gradients like blue skies. I saw it in Alistair's lightning video in another post, but I see it in other videos shot with the 700 too.

I can assure you that there are far far fewer artefacts in footage from the FS700 than a 5D. You can't truly judge the quality of any camera from youtube and vimeo clips. Part of the reason you are probably noticing banding with the FS700 is because of it's excellent dynamic range and highlight handling which gives highly compressed online codecs a hard time.The Canon DSLR's tend to exhibit less of this because the crushed/stretched nature of the images tends to kill many gentle gradients and the lower resolution means less subtle details to encode so the codec is less stressed. An un modified Canon DSLR produces an image that crushes blacks and artificially boosts reds. This can be a pleasing image as it looks high contrast and the extra red warms everything up which we tend to find more pleasing than cooler looks. If that is the look you prefer than maybe you should stick with the Canons, but if you do decide to do more grading work or shoot in more challenging conditions then the FS700 will provide a better blank canvas to work with.

[Kieran Steele]

Ablecine have released some downloadable profiles including a 5d look :)

I'll be giving it a go

Sony FS700 Scene Files from AbelCine | CineTechnica

[Chris Norman]

Originally Posted by Alister Chapman

I can assure you that there are far far fewer artefacts in footage from the FS700 than a 5D. You can't truly judge the quality of any camera from youtube and vimeo clips. Part of the reason you are probably noticing banding with the FS700 is because of it's excellent dynamic range and highlight handling which gives highly compressed online codecs a hard time.The Canon DSLR's tend to exhibit less of this because the crushed/stretched nature of the images tends to kill many gentle gradients and the lower resolution means less subtle details to encode so the codec is less stressed. An un modified Canon DSLR produces an image that crushes blacks and artificially boosts reds. This can be a pleasing image as it looks high contrast and the extra red warms everything up which we tend to find more pleasing than cooler looks. If that is the look you prefer than maybe you should stick with the Canons, but if you do decide to do more grading work or shoot in more challenging conditions then the FS700 will provide a better blank canvas to work with.

The best examples of digital footage I've seen online have come from Alexa, C300 and the new BMC camera. These cameras capture high dynamic range and a lot of subtle detail but somehow seem to translate really well to compressed online codecs of Vimeo & youtube. Perhaps the examples I'm thinking of we're particularly well shot and graded.

[Noa Put]

The best examples of digital footage I've seen online have come from Alexa, C300 and the new BMC camera.

The very first user videos are starting to appear on vimeo from the bmc camera, one video I saw looked quite bad, soft images, weird color and if they would have told me it was shot on a handicam and a canon dslr I would have believed it. A second on I saw looked the oposite, nice warm colors, a lot of fine detail, a high dynamic range and to my eye something that had a "cinematic" feel to it. So same camera, different operator. I think it all comes down to the person behind the camera that knows how to get the most from the camera but also knows how to colorcorrect right and knows what the right workflow is to get the best results out.