gene_can_sing

Black Magic is quickly becoming the Walmart of camera companies. How many models to they have now? 6 or 7? That's a lot of models for only making cameras in the last two years, none of which function at 100% capacity. My friend bought the 4K BM, we tested it and got all the known sensor issues and he smartly re-sold it while it's still "Hot." Yeah, it has a nice color science and yes it's cheap, but those factors are definitely well below reliability, which is the number one consideration on any paying job. From our tests on the 4K BM, it's definitely not ready for any paid job. It's fine for art / fun / non-paid projects, but the sensor issues make it too risky for anything serious.

I do kind of wish it were like a 2.5K sensor or something that gives you a little extra crop over HD. Not saying it needs to be 4K, but that extra little wiggle room can be really nice.

"Adobe have the best debayer for raw around. I still convert my 5D Mark III and Blackmagic Cinema Camera raw files from DNG to an editable format in Adobe After Effects because the end result looks better than DaVinci Resolve." - Andrew Reid.   Hi Andrew, I'm about to start working with RAW since the 7Q recorder (I believe it's Cinema DNG) is finally out for the FS700. I know nothing about working with RAW. In your statement above, are you just using basic After Effects to convert your DNG to an editable format?   My questions are   1) What editable format are you converting to? Pro-Res possibly? 2) Are you using a Plug-In within After Effects to convert the RAW? If so, is there a Batch convert option which is pretty important. For my experience, After Effects is generally a 1 clip (non-batch) type of deal which would obviously be a pain for lots of clips.   Thanks for any info.

On the surface this update might not seem like much, but you're getting S-Log 2 which sets the DR at an easy useable 13+ stops, probably closer to 14 and clean 20,000 ISO to see in the dark. I did the update and am amazed by S-Log 2, which is decent even on the internal codec.   Plus, it opens the door to the Convergent Design 7Q recorder coming next month. 4K at 10 bit 4:2:2 up to 60fps, 2K RAW up to 240fps, HD 10 bit 4:2:2 at 120 fps and HD 10 bit 4:4:4. Then the S-Log 2 will really shine as it needs 10 bit to be really effective. I've notice that with the internal 8 bit, the codec cannot take a lot of saturation without breaking up, otherwise it grades decently.   But yeah, twenty 4K cameras coming soon. That's really exciting. Maybe the FS700 with the 7Q will become the B-Cam as I prefer no recorder. Someone needs to just make an FS700 like camera (Internal NDs, high frame rates, great DR, ENG form factor and super lowlight) with a solid internal codec (BMC style). Priced under $10K, and that will change everything.

Hey Sean, Not to disrespect or anything, but I checked out your Trick or Treat movie and that just screamed video. Not sure what camera it was but that made the FS700 look like Kodak 35mm film. As for impressing a network client? I'll take it if they keep giving me work.

FS700 with a wimpy image? I hardly think so Andrew. You used it for 1 night and you make such a quick judgement without really getting to know the camera?    Here's a much more accurate review of the FS700 by Rick Burnet, who has used the FS100 extensive since it was first release and knows more about the FS100 than just about anyone I know of. He knows the FS100 inside and out; and shoots good work with it very regularly.   ------------   Rick writes:   "Okay, just got done with two full days of shooting the FS700 in the woods. I can say WITHOUT ANY DOUBT that the FS700 colors with the CINE gamma are absolutely better than the FS100 in every way. I am literally blown away with the latitude and highlight handling I am getting. Everything I shot was just spot on for the color I wanted. I left the white balance on 4700K and never needed to change it.   One really interesting thing for me is that there is so much detail in the blacks when I am exposing for skin. We had a 5Dm3 with us as well shooting and it was interesting to see how much more latitude we were getting on the FS700. I will say this though, we went from a 7D to 5Dm3 and the difference between both was really easy to see. Th 5Dm3 was holding A LOT more detail. The colors out of it were a more crushed obviously than the FS700.   I can't believe I waited so long to get the FS700.   Sensitivity does seem to be a bit less than the FS100, but nothing I care about. It's still SO clean.    Latitude in the CINE modes is amazing. Wow, there is A LOT of detail in the image. More than I expected.    For those with an FS100 that are not terribly happy with the colors, if you love everything else about the FS100 then I can say, it's worth the leap. I don't see that "Sony" look that I've seen on other cameras. My shots are EXTREMELY neutral meaning that the colors look completely natural. (I think I set saturation to -2).   I still contend that the FS100 has some heavy sensitivity to red, which is now gone."   ------------   Like Rick, I have had a similar experience with the FS700. It has a very nice image, and also, the motion jitter that comes with the FS100 is gone as are sensor reflections.   The thing with the FS700 is that it does NOT have a nice pre-graded look unlike the Canons and the BMC which have an excellent stock profile. The FS700 needs to be shot in the Cinegamma profiles, which are excellent, but flat-ish and need grading for every shot. The FS700 stock profiles are horrible and should not be used. If you like to grade, it's a great camera. If you like a nice out of the camera look, it's not the camera for you.   Don't believe us? Here's a few videos from the FS700 that really show it's true potential when avoiding the stock profiles   https://vimeo.com/63439928   James Vernon says he just shot it with Cinegamma 4 with mostly stock settings and just did a pretty basic grade in After Effects   https://vimeo.com/63336544   This was shot with the S#ity Sony Kit lens. Show really how unique a feeling you can elicit from this camera with the slow motion, and unlike the BMC, you can shoot into the sun.   https://vimeo.com/58754398   A spot I shot, nothing really fancy, just simple grading   https://vimeo.com/48711717   Just some dailies from a music video I shot. Unprocessed footage from the camera.   Check out my URL for a quite a bit of FS700 stuff. It's a legit camera for sure.   www.builtbyUgene.com   I just DP'd 3 spots for the SyFy Channel (Major cable channel in the USA) and the client loved the FS700 footage. I've shot stuff for other channels like Bravo as well, and every time the clients love the footage they are getting   There's so much good stuff shot with the FS700. The biggest downfall of the FS700 is that it is associated with the FS100 which has a pretty bad aesthetic IMO - weird colors, bad highlights, strange motion, clinical and sterile looking. The FS700 fixes all that and you would know that if you spend more than a few hours with it. For me, I couldn't even care less about 4K RAW. RAW is such a huge workflow killer. Great in theory, but in reality, dealing with it in post is expensive and time consuming just because of the gigantic storage space.   The internal codec isn't super great, but it's pretty good, certainly as good as the GH3 and you can't stop raving about how great that camera is. Before you proclaim a camera as great or a total failure, you should spend some real time with it. You shot with the FS700 briefly and proclaimed it a failure. You haven't even shot with the BMC 4K, yet judging by all the coverage you give the camera, you've already deemed it a success and are hyping the hell out of it before anything is really even know about it.   All I'm saying is spend real quality time with the equipment if you are going to write about it.

For me, I hope the next camera that BMC comes out with is more versatile and production oriented. They have the picture science down, but for my needs I would much prefer something that had a good EVF which is essential to my style of shooting since I do a lot of handheld and non-tripod stuff. Maybe something that looks like a smaller version of the Sony F5 which has great ergonomics with the incredible adjustable LCD / EVF combo which I love. A better form factor, removable battery, high frame rates like 120fps of 240fps, something a bit more self contained that the current iteration and I would gladly pay $8000 for it. Essentially, a high end BMC.

Come on. GH3 with Twixtor vs FS700? There is NO comparison. I've used Twixtor countless time with DSLRs and it sucks big time compared to real slow motion. Twixtor has to be shot in a very specific way in order for it to work well. There's tons of limitations with Twixtor. As for FS700 vs FS100, hearing from people who own both on DVXuser, a majority prefer the image of the FS700. The FS100 might have the low light, but the Cinegammas on the FS700 make it a much better camera. The highlights and colors are just hugely improved right out of the box. I've chatted with people who tweaked their FS100 profiles for an entire year before getting decent skin tones and highlights. FS700 is good to go right out if the box. I would take a 5D3 over the FS100 which is why I never bought the FS100, but I like the image out of the FS700 and its a very different camera than the FS100. Sure they are similar in hardware, but the Cinegammas make them very different beasts.

Metabones is an incredible company. I had the Metabones EOS to NEX adapter Mark I and it was good, but the Mark II was incredible piece of engineering. Rock solid and even does IS. Now this? I wish all companies thought like Metabones and strove to break the barriers. I'm trying to make myself feel better by telling myself that this adapter can live along side the original Metabones Mark II (which is does if you need longer reach), but damn.... I want this thing.   Does anyone else see the irony in this? Canon lenses now have more functionality on Non-Canon bodies. You cannot do this with the C300 or the C100 because of the flange length. Canon gets foiled again.

When this camera was announced in Nov of 2011 (a long time ago in tech), it seems really cool. But now, it just feels kind of dated. So many options came out in 2012 there no real reason to hack the 1D-X, much less buy a 1D-C. Especially with the Sony F5 coming out, Canon is going to get smoked.

I did a little back to back movie sneaking yesterday at the theater. First I saw The Hobbit, then I when and saw Skyfall.   I thought the Hobbit was an OK movie. the 48fps was definitely noticeable as it made the movements really crisp. But that's not what bothered me the most. I thought the first half of the film which was shot in more naturalistic outdoor settings looked really mediocre. Not sure if it was the grading, but the treatment looked really crushed and the image lacked an organic feel. The color mediocre at best. Certainly nowhere near as good looking as the original LOTR which was shot on 35mm film.   Not sure if that had to do with the RED Epic or the just post choices, but what ever it was, the outdoor shots didn't look great that's for sure. Ironically enough, I thought the latter half of the movie when it was mostly CG / green screen work that the film looked a lot better.    Right after I went and saw Skyfall which was shot on the Alexa. It seriously looked so much better than The Hobbit, better dynamic range, better color and just more organic feeling. Once again, not sure if it was the camera or just the post choices.   So yeah, ultimately, it wasn't the 48fps that really bothered me, it was more the really blah looking image that came from the EPIC that bothered me. Once again, could have been the DP and post choices and not the camera.

I am blown away by the image, but this statement is so true. The 2.3x crop factor is a huge draw back that very few BMC fans boys mention. 2 weeks ago, I shot a music video that took place primarily in a car. We had to use a Tokina 11-16 on an FS700. On the 16mm end, it was tough to fit both people in. With a 2.3x crop factor, it would have been impossible to get those shots. I'm not a wide angle shooter at all, in fact I generally prefer longer lenses. With that said, there have been numerous times where I had to pop on the Tokina 11-16 or else the shot just would not have worked because of crazy tight spaces.   I think the real revolution will come when BMC comes out with the Super 35mm version with some higher frame rates. Then the S#!T will really hit the fan. But this camera is an great start.    After using the FS700 with it's high frame rates which is amazing for projects like music videos, artistic pieces, B-Roll for docs and sports, I just cannot go back to a camera that only shoots 24fps, which is fine for narrative, but 24fps is just too limiting once you've had a taste of high frame rates and the amazing drama and sexiness that is created, especially when done correctly and not gratuitously.    For me, I would gladly sacrifice some image IQ for a super 35mm or wider sensor and high frame rates.

I would trust a study like this a LOT more if it did not come from Sony, who obviously has a huge vested interest in 4K. I remember reading another article about 2 years ago by a more independent source, and they concluded that in a regular sized theater, you would have to be sitting in the first 6 rows to really notice the difference in 4K.

[quote name='EOSHD' timestamp='1351163261' post='20271'] C300 / C500 / 1D C are all going to be completely smoked by what Sony have up their sleeve. Stay tuned. [/quote] Seems like it has more to do with F5 hype, which is way out of most peoples budget. If Sony was smart, they would upgrade the FS and the F3s codec to 50mb 4:2:2 in the XDcam flavor. Then it would take out the C300 easily because the FS cameras are way cheaper. Seem like the FS700s 25mps internal codec is outdated since the GH3 and BMC offer equal / better codes for way less money. Sony needs to step up their existing cameras, and not just released a million new cameras like what they've been doing.

This camera was revealed almost a year ago and it's stil not out. At first, it seemed kind of groundbreaking, but since then, there are a number of better options IMO for much lower prices. Canon fails once again.